These days, the most popular in-possession structure used in football is the box midfield as elite coaches tend to rely on it, looking for numerical, qualitative, and positional superiority (positional play) on the pitch.
The box midfield shape, which can be done statically and rigidly, for example through 3-4-2-1 or 4-2-2-2, has become popular in a more dynamic manner to have a central superiority.
This season witnessed the revival of Manchester City as Pep Guardiola relied on the 3-2-2-3.
Before him, Roberto De Zerbi introduced a unique variation of the box midfield that made Brighton a significant challenge.
Jürgen Klopp made a tactical tweak by inserting Trent Alexander-Arnold more centrally during deep phases of play.
Additionally, Unai Emery was trying something new after his oversight of Aston Villa which has made them one of the best teams since he took charge.
Amidst the diverse approaches employed by these managers, a common objective unites them: how they structure the box midfield with different dynamic movements.
So, this tactical analysis aims to delve into the box midfield mechanisms, examining tactics via various examples from Aston Villa and Liverpool.
The box advantages
Before driving deeper into the tactical theory’s examples, it can be said that the formation in football no longer exists, but rather the system, which is not built on a static state, but rather a dynamic, changing form, that allows dynamic positions’ changing from one point to another which creates space and provokes or confuses the opponents.
Indeed, the advantages of the box midfield are not limited to that it gives many a numerical superiority (4 vs 2 or 3 opposition’s midfielders) and a positional advantage, which helps in midfield dominance and possession, but it also gives two players in the most dangerous and least crowded areas on the field (Half-Spaces), which naturally provokes the opponents players to move diagonally to confront them.
This takes place not only higher behind the opposition’s midfield but at the beginning of the box, where the first line forces the opponent to choose between defending the depth, which opens the wide lanes, or leaving the depth exposed (the dynamic movements from the initial set-up increase this confusion).
For the dynamics aspect, the initial positioning of the players, who can move horizontally, vertically, or diagonally to create spaces, diagonals, and diamonds requires the opponents or the whole defensive structure to adapt in different ways.
Furthermore, the benefits extend not only to the central areas but also to the flanks.
By effectively filling the box with players, teams have the potential to overload the flanks, which allows the wide triangles on the side and opens room for fluid positional interchanges and dynamic movements.
Th
