Relationism and its Functional Play have been a source of much discussion in the tactical world of football, and now, a year since the global rise of Fernando Diniz, significant progress has been made in outlining this tactical style and what it means for the future. With such a distinct alternative being introduced, the overwhelming dominance of Positional Play in today’s game became clear, if it wasn’t already. Upon this reflection, and now with a counter perspective, the tactical landscape can perhaps enter a new age, one of Tropicália, or a fusion of ideas.
With globalisation, the cultural lines have blurred and as a result, football has often looked the same from Brazil to Cameroon, as Juanma Lillo claimed. While today’s global football has very strong demands, the underlying culture is still there. This recent reflection can perhaps open a path to awaken this cultural side and deepen our interaction with football through fusions.
As it has been throughout history, ideas and concepts will travel between countries, but naturally, the difference in culture will develop these in a unique way. This difference is not limited to the distinct national cultures but also contexts. The indispensable human side of football means two games will never be the same, and two teams will never be the same. By accepting this and rejecting the notion of a “correct way to play”, fusions can (continue to) pave the way to the future.
This article aims to outline Functional Play, with a special look at the Jogo Funcional, which has characterised Brazilian football since the 1940s. Functional Play is a game of functions, whereas Positional Play is a game of positions. After first exploring the dance between the abstract and the player, we will take a complete dive into the game of functions, detailing the tactics and putting them alongside the game of positions. Continuing to compare the two, we will take an extensive look into the symptoms of each game.
The purpose of this article is to contribute to the landscape of writing on the macro side of tactics, with a scope on history, culture, and philosophy. While we acknowledge the processes and methodologies which ultimately make every team unique, the tactics – the abstract – serves to provide a direction, at least on the pitch.
The Abstract and the Player
Before jumping into the Jogo Funcional, it is important to understand the dance between the abstract and the player. This duality, at least personally, can be helpful in illustrating the nature of football. While the player here embodies all kinds of factors, from physical and mental to technical and sociocultural, the abstract is the conceptualisation of football, the systems and the tactical ideas.
Moreover, the player (human) can be seen as a complex universe in itself. This universe is constructed of many interconnected worlds, all holistically existing and developing. Take the psychology of the player, for instance, with the conscious, the subconscious, and even the unconscious. These are constructed by events and factors from all throughout the individual’s life. These events and factors have been guided by cultural, economic, historical, sociological, physiological, and countless more factors.
The psychological dimension affects the actions and behaviours of the player - but these actions and behaviours are constrained by the player’s cognitive (mental), physical, and technical abilities. Similarly, these are also all interconnected, essentially a continuous reflection of each other. A player’s technical ability and style may be a response to his physiology, or in another instance, limited by his cognitive ability. In other words, the individual (player) is an incredibly complex package.
With 22 individuals on the pitch, the interconnected network of factors working to dictate the game becomes infinite. With such a nature, the translation of abstract systems and ideas onto the pitch becomes limited to the players. Essentially, abstract ideas and tactics only exist through the players.
This concept can be further illustrated by Jonathan Wilson in his famous Inverting the Pyramid, where he claims, “however sound the system, success on the field requires compromise between – in the best case, stems from a symbiosis of – the theory and the players available.”
Similarly, in his recent The Mutants, Jamie Hamilton argues that “the irremovable human aspect of football renders any tactical paradigm as always-already incomplete – no system can ever be total.”
With this dance as a fundamental truth, we can begin to explore Functional Play. Not as the ultimate truth or the correct way to play, but as an alternative model. The objective of this article is simply to outline this tactical style, with a nod to its historical, cultural, and philosophical dimensions. Additionally, by placing it alongside the positional game, its symptoms and nuances can perhaps become more clear.
Game of Functions
The historical trace is more fun than it is linear but exploring it could paint a simpler picture of its fundamentals. After being introduced to the Scottish passing game by Jimmy Hogan, the Danubian school arguably birthed the modern game. Its branches, particularly through the Hungarians, expanded and influenced nearly every famous footballing country.
With the Aranycsapat, Hungary’s “Golden Team” of the 1950s, this influence became imprinted in the history of football. In the “Match of the Century”, the side led by the likes of József Bozsik, Ferenc Puskás, and others defeated England, the creators of football, in a humiliating 6-3. The following year, the Hungarians once again brushed the English aside, this time by a 7-1 score. While the 1952 Olympics were conquered, the Aranycsapat fell tragically short in the final of the 1954 World Cup, losing 3-2 to West Germany.
Nonetheless, the roots the Hungarians had planted all over the world had become symbolized by the immortal Aranycsapat. While the Danubian school provided the initial blueprint for Holland’s Total Football, it can also be linked with Brazil’s Jogo Funcional, particularly through Dori Kürschner. The mysterious Hungarian provided the spark at Flamengo, but it was his assistant and later replacement, Flávio Costa, who began the game of functions.
The WM system was transformed into diagonais (diagonals), and while the 4-2-4 is the most appropriate label, it is not so much about tactical numberings and their symmetries. In fact, it was the asymmetries from the diagonals that characterised this game – the players were positioned at different heights in relation to their teammates.
As Húngaro highlighted in detail, the development of this system can be illustrated in waves. The first wave was constructed by Flávio Costa, and in 1958, it was finally solidified as Vicente Feola guided Brazil to their first World Cup title. The second wave came with the eternal Seleção of 1970, under the guidance of the legend Mário Zagallo. Finally, Telê Santana was the architect of the third wave in 1982. The context, from wave to wave, continuously changed, and the system developed and adapted as the years went by. A clear example is the aftermath of England’s World Cup triumph in 1966, where the game increased in speed and physicality. At the core, however, Brazil’s model always remained a game of functions.
In the Brazilian context, it had a clear identity. The diagonals and their escadinhas (little staircases) were the clear characteristics. In this 4-2-4, the structure was constructed by functions. Functions were the north star, not positions. It became less about where you are, but how you are moving and relating to others.
The Brazilian 4-2-4 contained the fundamental values of Brazilian culture. The asymmetry is the perfect symbol, but it also valued the “malandro”, the individual, the talent, and the flexible order – as described by the Húngaro. The game of functions became the perfect fusion between the Brazilian way and the theory.
Brazil’s history beautifully portrays the game of functions, but it is not exclusive to the five-time World Cup winners. As highlighted, the Brazilian context and culture took it in its direction. However, the functional game can be extracted and dissected, and with it, new paths can emerge in today’s football.
The game of functions can be likened to a play, executed by the characters, each with their own function (role), dialoguing and interacting with each other. In Brazil, language played a key role in defining these roles, and we can use the functions of the 1958 side to explore this.
Typically, one fullback would participate more actively in possession, especially in his venturing movement, whereas the other was more likely to retain his position and support from behind. Centrally, one player was a simple central defender while the other was called “the fourth defender”. In the early days, when the WM was transitioning into the 4-2-4, this player was the midfielder who would drop to become the other centre-back. In Hungary’s Golden Team, this player was József Zakariás. For the Seleção, it was initially José Carlos Bauer in 1950, and in 1958, Orlando Peçanha. In this role, the fourth defender had a more articulative role than his counterpart. This duality at the centre-back position is a perfect example of how the diagonals begin to emerge, and of course, the style of each player corresponded to their function.
In the volantes section (defensive midfield), one of the two – usually opposite of the attacking fullback – would be the “first midfielder”, tasked with protecting the backline and advancing with simpler and shorter passes. The other (segundo volante, second midfielder) would be the architect, tasked with articulating the attack and being the playmaker. The falso-ponta (false winger) was exactly that, dropping deeper to compose the midfield, create diagonals, and more. The ponta-de-lança was the Brazilian 10, the sharp individual player with mobility and interactions (tabelinhas). On the wing, opposite the attacking fullback, there was the ponta original (traditional winger), the dribbler who more often than not remained wide, usually receiving in 1v1 scenarios. Finally, the nine was the homem da área (man of the box) who, while capable of dropping to interact, was crucial in the box.
Now, this is the Jogo Funcional performed by Brazil. The functions relate to Brazilian culture. Players are born into these roles, with these characteristics. Additionally, some of these roles, particularly in relation to the system, corresponded to the football played at the time, and in today’s game would require readjusting. This is where a lot of the praise for the Fluminense of Diniz comes from, his ability to reinvent the Brazilian functions in today’s football. So, in this specific game of functions, culture and history play key roles. What about others?
Argentina’s functional game is different, and when put alongside the Brazilian game, the true essence of Functional Play can be seen. It has many similarities to Brazil's, particularly due to historical, cultural, and geographical factors. However, the functions are different. The Argentinian 10 is different from the Brazilian 10. The carrilleros in the 4-3-1-2 are different from Brazil’s volantes. There is an element of garra (will) which characterizes the Argentinian style.
This is where we can begin to understand the fundamentals of the functional game. The functions are the ones responsible for creating the system or the structure. Here, the structure is not necessarily a linear and symmetrical construct. Brazil’s 4-2-4 structure was clearly non-linear, with the functions naturally creating structural tendencies. As a consequence, it was a more fluid and emergent structure. In summary, the structure through which the team plays is created by the functions, not the positions.
Malmö FF are the important fusion, they exemplify how the game of functions can translate into other cultures and contexts. Henrik Rydström’s side has a clear identity; they tend to dominate possession with a more controlled, patient, short-passing approach. Structurally, the functions are the guiding factors. The right-back Joseph Ceesay has a very opposing function from the left-back Gabriel Busanello, both working to make up the collective structure. The reason Malmö are such an important piece to the puzzle is how unprecedented it is. The functional game is embedded in the history of Argentina and Brazil, but in Sweden, Henrik constructs his game of functions directly from his players, and in today’s global football, it can be the blueprint for future functional systems.
On the other hand, in the positional game, the structure is made up of positions. In comparison to the functional, the fundamentals behind the construction of the structures are distinct. Of course, there is the individual in the collective and yes, there is fluidity and movement. Holland in 1974 with Johan Cruyff is the prime example. It is Total Football, where “all systems should be familiarised, one with the other, in such a way that their combined impact and interaction can be appreciated as a single complex system.”. While this was said by the architect Aldo van Eyck, it perfectly portrays the game of positions. The fullback can participate in the attack – given “somebody else is covering up”. Rinus Michels continues, “When you see they have the mobility, the positional game of such a team makes everyone think ‘I can participate too. It’s very easy.’”
This collective clockwork is at the heart of the game of positions, and in that, it is fundamentally different from the game of functions, where such clockwork is absent. With functions as the guide, the environment is naturally more fluid, unstable, and spontaneous. On the other hand, when positions guide the team’s behaviour, there is a more stable and symmetric environment.
Symptoms and Interactions
With a fundamentally different nature, each game has its own symptoms. First, it is important to note that, while the game of functions has a distinct framework from the game of positions, solutions will inevitably cross over. The basic tactical advantages, both from an individual and a collective standpoint, will naturally be present in both games. As Cano Football’s Dismantling the Pyramid article claims, “Football is football.” The inverted fullback may appear in both games, for instance, and finding a free man behind the opponent is a universal part of football. However, as we have seen throughout this article, the tactics from a macro perspective are fundamentally different in each game.
The player’s interaction with space is the first example. In a game of functions, players are more likely to approximate fluidly and spontaneously. On the contrary, a positional game will occupy the spaces more rationally. Whereas in a positional game, the structure may seek to occupy the five vertical lines and pin the opposition’s backline, in an effort to stretch the defensive organisation and open passing lanes to progress, the functional structure is less stable. This fundamental difference in the nature of the structure has numerous consequences, but let’s stay with the player’s interaction with space.
In the clip featuring Napoli below, the three central midfielders can be found in approximation, along with the left-back and the left-winger. They seek to progress through short passes and interactions, in this case, a tabelinha (one-two). Piotr Zieliński, the more attacking midfielder, could look to move away, stretching the defensive block and decongesting the space near the ball. However, the functional framework allows for more unstable and emergent structures. Zieliński’s function, which is to seek interactions and support the wide players and Victor Osimhen, essentially a mobile creative outlet in a more advanced position, is superior to his position. In this case, he moves close to Kvaratskhelia and supports the Georgian’s individual talent.
These differences become more transparent in the comparison below. Rather than observing an individual’s movement, the comparison provides a more collective lens. Malmö’s game of functions constructs a more shapeless and unstable structure, while Man City’s positional game creates a very stable and expansive environment. There is fluidity in both, but the environment in which this fluidity occurs is different.
Another symptom can be seen through the aspect of symmetry. A trademark feature of some functional sides is the tilt, where a significant number of players shift entirely to one side of the pitch. This creates the typical unstable functional structure, perhaps as clear as possible. Take a look at Dorival Júnior’s São Paulo below. The side’s structure, especially through the false wingers, creates a very asymmetric structure in possession.
On the other hand, again looking at Man City, the positional game offers a more symmetric shape. This is often done through maximum width, where there is a player in each wide channel. Additionally, the half-spaces, at least initially, are balanced. In this structure, the defensive organisation can be stretched, creating a more clear context to progress but also a very safe one in case of a loss, since the spaces are rationally occupied.
Obviously, football is not chess, and the players move dynamically. However, the positions are the guide for this movement, and as a consequence, there is greater stability in the structure. This segment of Barcelona’s game of positions clearly illustrates this, as seen below.
The functional game is not the overwhelming asymmetry caused by the tilt, nor is it the approximation and agglomeration. These are merely symptoms, but it is not the game itself. Luciano Spalletti’s Napoli was a good example, where although the structure was guided by the individual functions, they did not have an overwhelming tilt as seen in the likes of Fluminense or Malmö.
With the functions as the guide for collective behaviour, they inevitably had more structural fluidity and mobility. This is clearly seen in the instances where the three central midfielders shifted entirely to one wide channel, or where Kvaratskhelia ended up on the right wing. Perhaps due to the methodology and style of Spalletti, or maybe due to the cultural context, the tilts weren’t as overwhelming, and the approximation wasn’t as significant. Nonetheless, at its core, the side was guided by individual functions rather than positions.
In a side guided by positions, the symptoms are different. Of course, there is room for individual roles and mobility, but the structural framework from which these happen is more stable and linear than the functional game. John Stones in Pep Guardiola’s Man City is a prime example. The English centre-back occasionally looked to move into the midfield, behind the first line of pressure. In the UEFA Champions League final, he even played as an outright central midfielder in a diamond midfield. However, this mobility is guided by positions. The 3-2 shape in the rest defence is an obvious example, but the 4-2 with Ederson in the build-up is another. There is a positional clockwork in place, constructing a stable and often symmetric environment. One is a game of positions, while the other is a game of functions.
To further understand this clockwork, it is worth looking at rotations – a key part of the game of positions, as Michels claimed. Take the former Barcelona youth coach, García Pimienta, and his current Las Palmas side. In this specific instance, the left winger drops deep into the left half-space. As a result, the central midfielder on that side moves up into a higher position, while the left-back pushes up into the wide channel left behind.
In another example, the movement between Xhaka and Trossard in Arsenal’s left wing can further illustrate these rotations. After passing the ball out wide to Trossard, Xhaka, from the half-space and middle third, makes a sharp run into the final third before moving to the wide channel as Trossard dribbles the ball inside. This simple rotation between the two Gunners serves to illustrate the positional game, where it is about the player’s position rather than the function he is performing. This nature is the core idea behind Total Football, where everyone is involved.
Additionally, it is once again clear that mobility and fluidity do exist in the positional game. These must not be confused with the game itself; it is merely a symptom of the game, or in this case, both games. However, the nature of each game provides a different environment for these symptoms.
Finally, the nature of interactions provides another interesting perspective to explore these games. As explored, the game of functions paves the way for more structural mobility, increasing the asymmetry and approximation among players. With it, the interactions increase.
In the game of positions, the ball moves to the players. In the game of functions, the players move to the ball. This duality, perhaps exaggerated, paints the basic picture. Take the graphic below, which initially illustrates the game of positions. With a more stable and symmetric structure, the spaces are dominated and the lanes between the defenders have increased. The ball does the travelling, not the players.
On the other hand, in more functional structures, the spaces decrease but the interactions increase. The players can move to the ball, or at least move more freely to perform their functions. Because the functions hold superior importance to the positions, the game has different symptoms, it has a different nature.
Continuing to reference the graphics in Albert Morgan’s article, the video below provides an animation, highlighting how the interactions can increase as a result of approximation and unstable positioning. Again, these two are merely the symptoms of the game of functions, not the game itself.
That is not to say, of course, that the game of positions is predictable. With the human being irremovable from the game, there will always be an element of chaos and unpredictability, the game will always be dynamic and alive. There is individuality, fluidity, and mobility in the game of positions, as we have explored in the rotations, for example. However, with the positions being superior to the functions, there is greater stability in the nature of the game.
Going back to the abstract and the player, two systems are never the same. As seen with Napoli, two games of functions can look very different. Not even Fluminense and Malmö play the same exact football, there is no such thing. Culture, style, principles, methodologies, and especially humans will always create unique systems, whether they are functional or positional.
Nonetheless, understanding the game of functions can provide an alternative to today’s tactical landscape, which is dominated by the game of positions. With the game of functions being introduced more widely in today’s context, fusions can emerge and take this idea into different routes. To finish this concept with an ancient quote, “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.”