The concept of compactness has become a constant in discussions about modern football tactics, particularly when it comes to defensive structures and out-of-possession blocks that many teams employ.
Even though it is quite a commonly used word, and it is quite simple terminologically, compactness is way more complex in terms of the influence it directly has on the game.
Connections between the opposing players are keys that open up many doors in football, making compactness one of the main elements of the two-way game that we witness today, as it affects numerous segments and phases during matches.
The first part of this tactical theory analysis series will break down the main principles of compactness, pointing out the exact meaning of the phrase, along with showing how it influences defending parts of the game, talking about how this concept differs regarding the orientation of teams.
Also, I’ll try to examine the benefits and flaws of compactness through plenty of examples from matches, including talk about multiple other tactical terms.
In this tactical analysis, I’ll break down the influence of compactness on both attacking and transitive phases, as well as how it affects pressing and counter-pressing access along with all of its flaws.
What is Compactness In Soccer?
Compactness is nowadays often used by coaches and pundits, players, fans, football analysts, and guys who are just passing by the TV when the game is live on air.
All of them are, more or less correctly, referring to the structure of one team, lines and bonds between the players that make them look united, mostly when out of possession.
The truth is that compactness influences the offensive phase of the game as much as it does with defending because links between the players don’t disappear no matter which part of the game is in progress.
Mentioned connections are equally important in and out of possession, and they matter as much even when the players are poorly bonded.
Therefore, the point is that compactness is not only related to defensive actions.
This analysis will focus on the topic of defensive compactness, as the offensive one is equally important and warrants examination in a separate piece.
Although there would be some words on the attacking influence, the main idea is to break down the entire concept of the defensive compact game.
Then, what is the definition of this term?
Most of the authors, analysts, coaches, and experts who wrote about this topic before me agree that compactness is a space-related concept that highlights the distances between one team’s players.
In other words, compactness is the idea of players from one team maintaining the largest possible distance between themselves, while keeping links between each other that will keep them in control of the space they occupy and the actions inside their occupied structure.
And that’s the fact, no matter the phase of the game.
That means that teams are compact when they succeed in creating the well-linked formation that will help them control the pitch, the ball, the opponent, or whichever will allow them to be ready to react in the right moment.
The tactical theory emphasises compactness by teams staying linked both horizontally and vertically, maintaining their lines in terms of formational lines (defensive line, midfield line, and attacking line on the horizontal axis) and in terms of the lines on the vertical axis (defender-midfielder-striker lines).
As I said, the teams can be seen as compact when they manage to create strong bonds between their own players who are at optimal distances from each other, retaining the quality of connections with their teammates and controlling the space, both individually and as a unit.
In the picture above, it is very roughly shown how compact sides position in the out-of-possession phases of the game.
The distances between the players of the Blue team are the greatest they can be to maintain their shape stability and close down potential passing lanes, thereby limiting progressive play and individual efforts from the opponents.
The defending side is compact on both axes and can
