Pairs & Combinations Part 1: Central Midfielders

[llama3]

This is the first of a 4-part guide into the pairings and combinations that make up your team and tactics. These guides will cover the following:

• Central Midfielders
  
• Central Defence
  
• Wide Men
  
• Strike Partnerships

So, onto the Central Midfielders guide...

Introduction

The aim of this guide is to help people come up with a logical selection of instructions when selecting the roles for their team. This will advise on some of the aspects and issues to consider when you select the roles and duties for your team. The guide is in 4 parts, but these parts all relate to each other, and cannot be considered in isolation. A Striker's role is closely linked with the midfielders behind him, and the wide men, which in turn affects the responsibilities of the full backs which can again knock on to a central midfield pairing's instructions, etc etc. The central midfielders have a massive responsibility in the team, and depending on your formation, have very different demands. For instance, the central pairing within a 4-2-3-1, will be much more defensive than the trio in a 4-3-3. So, onto the discussion...

The Pairing

This section assumes you have a 2-man central midfield pairing - in either the DM or MC strata. This pairing will often be outnumbered in football, and as such is required to do a lot of jobs:

• Protect the defence
  
• Link play
  
• Create chances
  
• Support attacks high up the pitch.

As you can tell, its a lot for 2 men to do. Without doubt, the first aspect that must be achieved is to have some protection for the defence in the centre - this means that 1 of your 2 central midfielders will almost certainly need to be given a defend duty. If you do not, it will be too easy for opposing teams to simply waltz unchallenged through the centre of your team, at pace, giving your central defenders little realistic chance of stopping them. Having a player who sits and protects the defence is essential. Some appropriate roles for players who sit and protect include:

• Central Midfielder (Defend)
  
• Defensive Midfielder (Defend)
  
• Anchorman (Defend)
  
• Half Back (Defend)
  
• Deep Lying Playmaker (Defend)
  
• Deep Lying Playmaker (Support)

You may notice the exclusion of a Ball-Winning Midfielder - he should only be paired with an above indicated sitting midfielder, as a Ball-Winning Midfielder does not hold position, and this can significantly expose your team. He can be very effective defensively when paired with another more disciplined player, and does provide late support to attacks too, although he is hardly creative and can be simply industrious. The Deep-Lying Playmaker (Support) you will see is included in that list, as he can bring the ball forward, but ultimately still holds the ball up and holds position, but he can link play and create chances too. His forays forward with the ball are fairly rare, but can expose the team when these break down - he also sits higher up the pitch, and is more likely to break position to challenge an opponent, so should be considered carefully before using as your most disciplined player. A Regista simply does not suit the role of most-disciplined player, and must be paired with someone who will sit and protect - therefore a Ball-Winning Midfielder is unlikely to provide good positional cover due to that tendancy to go searching to win the ball.

The part of such a pairing is a more variable role, as this player is required to try and link play, create, and support attacks, which is not exactly an easy job. He can be a runner, designed to link play and provide a passing option, or late surge further up the pitch, or he can be a passer, aimed more at keeping the ball moving, and provide a through-ball or creating a chance. The issue without having an outright direct attack-minded player in the midfield, is that you will leave 1 player to perform all defensive duties, and both are likely to become quite isolated from each other too, meaning it is harder to hold possession or build meaningful attacks.

The most appropriate options for the sitter/runner role in the pair are the following:

• Central Midfielder (Support)
  
• Defensive Midfielder (Support)
  
• Regista (Support)
  
• Box to Box Midfielder (Support)
  
• Advanced Playmaker (Support)
  
• Ball-Winning Midfielder (Support)

The Ball-Winning Midfielder as discussed above, has more licence to push and hassle high up the pitch with a partner who sits in behind to keep hold of the ball. You will notice as well the lack of a Deep Lying Playmaker (Support) from the list - he does not make enough forward runs to seriously support the attack. As part of a 3-man midfield he will be very well suited, but as part of a 2-man system, it will simply isolate your attack from midfield support. Finally to note, the Defensive Midfielder (Support) can be a very effective runner from deep, and still provide support in the final third of the pitch, a very useful player in a counter-attacking system, yet he still retains an excellent defensive position, and can form a formidable pair with a disciplined sitting midfielder.

The Trio

Midfield trio's are in the vast majority of cases built around a "2 and 1" triangular set up, with the single player at the base protecting the defence, or at the head, spearheading the attack. A flat midfield trio reduces passing options considerably, the only real benefit is making your midfield harder to play through. So otherwise I would stick to a triangular set up. The formation plays a large part in what is required of your central midfielders (in a pair, or in a trio), but the 2 variants of the triangle require different set ups.

The "AM" Triangle

The "AM" Triangle consists of DM-DM-AM or MC-MC-AM - they are fundamentally the same, but the DM's provide better protection in front of the defence, and the MC's provide better pressing of the opposition, as they are stationed higher up the pitch. This midfield set up consists of 2 more defensive players, and a more attacking player. In almost all central midfields, you will require at least 1 defend duty, and 1 support duty - the addition of a 3rd duty means you can choose generally to have another support duty or an attacking duty (the attacking duty is probably better for the balance of your team - the sheer fact you have 3 central midfielders means your attack is often more isolated, and depends more on midfield support - so the extra forward runs are important).

If you refer back to the 4 general duties of a central midfield, you can specialize them a little more by spreading the tasks around. Your AM is a good bet for supporting attacks, and creating chances - so you can have a specialized holding player, and a linking player. You can provide a solid base to protect your defence and begin attacks with this pair, and it can be a little more defensive than in a 2-man midfield. You could set it up as follows:

• Central Midfielder (Defend)
  
• Deep Lying Playmaker (Defend)
  
• Anchorman (Defend)
  
• Half Back (Defend)
  
• Defensive Midfielder (Defend)
  
• Ball-Winning Midfielder (Defend) - as long as partnered with a DLP(S) to cover position.

with:

• Central Midfielder (Support)
  
• Deep Lying Playmaker (Support)
  
• Regista (Support)
  
• Ball-Winning Midfielder (Support)
  
• Box to Box Midfielder (Support)
  
• Defensive Midfielder (Support)

and in the AM position:

• Advanced Playmaker (Support/Attack)
  
• Trequartista (Attack)
  
• Enganche (Attack)
  
• Inside Forward (Support/Attack)
  
• Attacking Midfielder (Support/Attack)

Note, I would recommend the "Attack" duties in the AM position to help the balance of your team. But that is not to say the support roles won't work either - this depends on your set up.

So there is a way of providing adequate defensive cover, support in linking the play, and possible overloads in the final third, and overall creativity. With a balanced central midfield. As I touched upon earlier in the article though, you need to consider how each role and duty affects the other positions. If you play with a Central Midfielder on an "Attack" duty, then you will need to sacrifice an "Attack" duty in the forward line (either STC or AMR/L positions) in order to balance the movement, and create link ups.

The "DM" Triangle

The "DM" Triangle is an invert of the "AM" Triangle, based with a single holding player in a good defensive position at the bottom, and 2 more creative players in the MC strata, aiming to support the attacks more. You can have an interesting "false" holding player too, and have the real defensive player sitting in the MC strata, a dummy that you cannot use in the "AM" Triangle. This would consist of having a support role in the DM strata, and a defensive role in the MC strata. Once again, a mix of a defend, support & attack duties would help balance your midfield to achieve your 4 aims.

You could set up in the following ways:

• Anchorman (Defend)
  
• Half Back (Defend)
  
• Regista (Support)
  
• Ball-Winning Midfielder (Defend)
  
• Defensive Midfielder (Defend/Support)
  
• Deep Lying Playmaker (Defend/Support)

with:

• Central Midfielder (Defend/Support)
  
• Box to Box Midfielder (Support)
  
• Deep Lying Playmaker (Defend/Support)
  
• Advanced Playmaker (Support)
  
• Ball Winning Midfielder (Defend/Support)

Pick 1 defend duty and 1 support duty, in either position, then add 1 more player from below, as your creative outlet.

• Central Midfielder (Attack)
  
• Advanced Playmaker (Attack)
  
• Box to Box Midfielder (Support) *if you are insistent you do not want an attack duty, then a Box to Box Mid will at least get forward most out of the Support duties.

This will again help your balance your midfield. Meeting your 4 aims.

Conclusion

Your central midfield has to provide defensive cover as a first priority, but this does not mean you can neglect the forward runs, link play & chance creation needed too. You need to pick roles to cover all of these. It is harder to cover them all effectively in a simple pair, so defensive cover is the first priority, as creativity/forward runs can come from the flanks instead, but the defensive cover cannot be replicated on the flanks instead, so is essential. A 3-man midfield is generally more effective in a triangular shape, with a balance of duties. It is easier to meet all 4 aims with this type of set-up. Your duties will knock-on to other positions though.You cannot afford to have an AMC and STC both on an Attack duty, and the AMR/L as well, it will isolate your attack, so balance Attack and Support and Defend duties through different strata in your team to create the movement and structure to help your team.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/363078-Pairs-amp-Combinations-Part-2-Central-Defenders

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/366560-Pairs-amp-Combinations-Part-3-Strike-Partnerships

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/367124-Pairs-amp-Combinations-Part-4-The-Wide-Men

[blast126]

The advanced playmaker makes more sense on a 4-4-2, because on 4-2-3-1 the AMC will be the playmaker, a trequartista or advanced playmaker.

On 4-2-3-1 I will use a deep lying playmaker and ball winning midfielder if chose to play defensively. Case decide to play more offensively I will use a central midfielder support instead of a ball winning midfielder.

On a 4-4-2 to play defensively deep lying playmaker / ball winning midfielder. To play offensively central midfielder support / advanced playmaker.

[ShirazS]

Really really good guide, well done dude!

This has been saved as a PDF for future reference

[Cleon]

Another great thread mate

Are you planning on doing a series of these for FM14 too in 1 thread perhaps? I think it could become a good reference point especially for those new to the game or struggling.

[llama3]

Another great thread mate

Are you planning on doing a series of these for FM14 too in 1 thread perhaps? I think it could become a good reference point especially for those new to the game or struggling.

Perhaps - time dependant. But possible.

[RTHerringbone]

Great stuff. Very logical and easy to follow.

[thomit]

In your last example, the "DM triangle" as you call it - you say to pick your "attacking" piece of the trio as either a CM/attack or a AP/attack. Well, this depends highly on what kind of player you've got. You see, a AP/attack for example, will be told to rwb often. Even using a shout like "play through defence" will not alter this. So that it will depend on if the player in question actually is any good at rwb. If not, it's better to play a AP/support (if you want to have a playmaker in central midfield), or a CM/attack if your playmaker is elsewhere, or you don't have/use one.

Otherwise; all good. My midfield trio ("DM triangle") consists of a DM/defend, a BBM and a AP/support ... the latter on support precisely because of that point I made. I play tactics where I want to limit the rwb's, and encourage through-balls and runs without ball. Another usefull combination would be DM/defend, CM/Attack and AP/support. I use a BBM in there, just because I have one of the very few midfielders in the game that is particularly good in that role. Good BBM's are extremely rare.

[poobington]

In an AM triangle I would be interested to see what your views are on a trio consisting of a CMd, a DLPd and an AMa. The football played is very direct, with the AM pushing up to play almost like a second striker. At times though I do find myself conceding sloppy goals.

[sweep17]

Nice work op looking forward to next installment. Any thoughts on a midfield diamond.

[Mark.]

Another top notch thread Llama3.

I like your advice on using a BWM. I play a DM triangle with a DLPd for the DM and a BWMd in the MC line. Would you recommend a DLPs instead or BWMs? I feel that I want the DLP staying back more in cover as the BWM is fairly reckless. I find it very effective with the BWM getting forward, scores a lot of goals on these forward runs.

[soccer.joel]

Good thread. I like the CM(S) and DLP(D) and AP(A) in the AM position in a 4-2-3-1

[Bpz73]

I'm actually using a 4-1-4-1 with a trio organized like this: DLP Support (in DM position) BWM Defend (in the middle, MC) and an AMC\AP (change depending on opposition tactic) on attack. AMC and DLP are on the same line (central) while the BWM is on the right. It works fairly even if is not perfect (and takes ages to reach an acceptable level of familiarity with the tactic). I score a lot but i tend to struggle a little if my morale drops or my players are less than 100% fit. Demanding setting.

FB\s---------DC-----DC-------FB\a

-----------------DLP\s------------

W\a-------BWM\d-----------------

-----------------AMC\a--------IF\s

-----------TM\a------------------

Balanced. Control or Counterattack, depends on the situation.

[allyc31]

Great thread!!!

If there is one thing i struggle with when it comes to setting up tactics it's this.

Very much looking forward to part 2!

[Fabian Jonsson]

Excellent article, and I'm pleased to note that all my tactics I use right now follow the rules.

One thing that you don't touch upon, perhaps because it's obvious, but that I think you can't stress enough, is the fact that you can't play any combination of players in midfield just because you have a reasonable role/duty distribution. You NEED to play the right combination of players as well!

In my current Oxford City save (we're in the Premier League, so it's not lower league stuff) I use a 3-5-2 tactic with the following midfield combination

DM - DLP/D

MC - AP/S

MC - CM/A

and it works excellent. However, it is extremely important to realize what you ask of your players. Specifically, in that setup your DM will be responsible for playing your team out of pressure, as he will be the player "tying the diamonds together". Therefore, it's of vital importance that he has great composure, decisions, first touch and passing. I started out this season playing more of a destroyer type player in that position, but having read the article linked above, I decided to play a youngster that is much better on the ball (a Busquets type of player), and the team works much much better as a result. To some it's obvious, to me it wasn't.

Just throwing it out there.

[Shakes]

I disagree about the flat midfield - I feel it's the optimal configuration in a 3-5-2, as it pushes 2 of the trio wider and helps cover the flanks. I don't think you lose passing options, if you set your roles up right you still get the same sort of triangle happening as you would with the guys on different strata, eg give the middle guy a CMd role for a DM style triangle.

[Fabian Jonsson]

I disagree about the flat midfield - I feel it's the optimal configuration in a 3-5-2, as it pushes 2 of the trio wider and helps cover the flanks. I don't think you lose passing options, if you set your roles up right you still get the same sort of triangle happening as you would with the guys on different strata, eg give the middle guy a CMd role for a DM style triangle.

I agree that a flat midfield trio is better at helping defend the flanks. However, that usually comes at a price, namely you give up space through the middle. In my opinion, unless my team concedes way too many goals from crosses, I rather see the opposition playing down the flanks.

[Cleon]

I agree that a flat midfield trio is better at helping defend the flanks. However, that usually comes at a price, namely you give up space through the middle. In my opinion, unless my team concedes way too many goals from crosses, I rather see the opposition playing down the flanks.

I completely agree with this too.

[llama3]

In an AM triangle I would be interested to see what your views are on a trio consisting of a CMd, a DLPd and an AMa. The football played is very direct, with the AM pushing up to play almost like a second striker. At times though I do find myself conceding sloppy goals.

Well as stated/suggested/hinted in the thread - 2 completely defensive players provides no support to the forward lines - your DLP could go on a support role, he has reduced forward runs so he isnt going to get caught out of position, but he can help bring the ball into midfield and provide an extra passing option.

Nice work op looking forward to next installment. Any thoughts on a midfield diamond.

Midfield diamond - pick at least 1 of each duty, and follow the combinations above that work together (i.e. don't play 2 ball-winning mids etc).

Another top notch thread Llama3.

I like your advice on using a BWM. I play a DM triangle with a DLPd for the DM and a BWMd in the MC line. Would you recommend a DLPs instead or BWMs? I feel that I want the DLP staying back more in cover as the BWM is fairly reckless. I find it very effective with the BWM getting forward, scores a lot of goals on these forward runs.

Don't play 2 defend duties, change 1 to support. Either BWM or DLP, depends what you want to do. Perhaps BWM as a support player considering he already contributes to your goalscoring.

[yonko]

IMO, a BWM (D) is better paired up with a DLP (D) rather than a DLP (S) in an "AM" triangle trio.

[llama3]

IMO, a BWM (D) is better paired up with a DLP (D) rather than a DLP (S) in an "AM" triangle trio.

What makes you say that? Be interested to know. Because I feel that it will create a large gap between your MC's and your AM, especially if your AM is on an Attack duty. At least a DLP brings the ball forward rather than sitting without any offensive intention. If you have 2 more defensive players then 1 has to be able to at least link with the midfield, a DLP(D) does not do that very well.

[poobington]

Well as stated/suggested/hinted in the thread - 2 completely defensive players provides no support to the forward lines - your DLP could go on a support role, he has reduced forward runs so he isnt going to get caught out of position, but he can help bring the ball into midfield and provide an extra passing option.

Midfield diamond - pick at least 1 of each duty, and follow the combinations above that work together (i.e. don't play 2 ball-winning mids etc).

Don't play 2 defend duties, change 1 to support. Either BWM or DLP, depends what you want to do. Perhaps BWM as a support player considering he already contributes to your goalscoring.

But to use a real life example, West Brom seem to employ the usage of two defensive CMs to good effect. As far as support ting the forward line is it even necessary?

In my system I have a DLFs an AMA and two wingers with Normal wide instructions. This quartet is very fluid and it would seem that any interference from deep would just see the CMs get in the way.

I will try the DLPs and see how it goes but it would be interesting to hear your thoughts about the similarities with West Brom

[llama3]

IMO West Brom play Yacob as a DLP(D) and Mulumbu brings the ball forward into the midfield as a DM(S) - they are 2 nominally defensive players who do defensive work - but they still can support the midfield and link play though. The link is vital, otherwise you end up with only flanks or long balls as viable ways of linking defence to attack.

[ShirazS]

I agree completely. Holland had this problem in Euro 2012 when they played Nigel De Jong and Mark Van Bommel in Defensive Midfield.

Both played defensively so there was no link to the front and the team was split into 2 halves (4 attackers and 6 defenders).

[poobington]

IMO West Brom play Yacob as a DLP(D) and Mulumbu brings the ball forward into the midfield as a DM(S) - they are 2 nominally defensive players who do defensive work - but they still can support the midfield and link play though. The link is vital, otherwise you end up with only flanks or long balls as viable ways of linking defence to attack.

The DMs is a good shout will give that a go.

At the moment I have an attacking WB who tends to provide diagonal supporting runs into the midfield. Whilst this does provide the link, it also leaves me defensively suspect and susceptible to counter attacks.

[yonko]

What makes you say that? Be interested to know. Because I feel that it will create a large gap between your MC's and your AM, especially if your AM is on an Attack duty. At least a DLP brings the ball forward rather than sitting without any offensive intention. If you have 2 more defensive players then 1 has to be able to at least link with the midfield, a DLP(D) does not do that very well.

I said that because with Defend duty a DLP will offer better defensive protection next to a BWM (D). I agree that in this case the AM would need to have a Support duty, preferably as AP (S). A Trequartista could also work in the AM position.

Another way to make it work offensively is to have the AMR/AML (whomever is on the same side as the DLP) on Support duty.

[llama3]

Do you find any problems with passing options or having enough options in final third?

[yonko]

Do you find any problems with passing options or having enough options in final third?

Not at all. One way I made it work was by using my AM as AP (S). The players I was using were Bender, Sahin and Gundogan on my Dortmund save in which I experimented and changed a lot of set ups with the 4-2-3-1 formation. I was also using AMR as Winger (A), AML as IF (A) and ST as CF (S).

Another way I made it work was by using both AMR and AML in supporting roles, Winger and Inside Forward respectively. The AM was given AM (A) role and the striker was still CF (S).

In the beginning I started using a DLP (S) next to the BWM (D), but then changed to DLP (D) and IMO it was working better, especially defensively and against better teams.

[Sanford&Son]

Thumbs up great stuff (man known formerly as brick_tamland)

[hero362]

Do not you play a role that does not suit them according to the style tactics?

[poobington]

Right I've given both suggestions a go and so far nothing seems to provide the same ammount of defensive stability as two defensive minded CMs. Maybe I'm implementing it wrong so I ma have to post in the Understand your tactic thread.

[Shakes]

I agree that a flat midfield trio is better at helping defend the flanks. However, that usually comes at a price, namely you give up space through the middle. In my opinion, unless my team concedes way too many goals from crosses, I rather see the opposition playing down the flanks.

I actually switched to a flat line originally because I was unhappy with my defense through the middle, that the flanks got defended better was a bonus! I found when playing a DM the defense was prone to getting disorganised when the DM had to step up. Having the DM pushed up to CM to begin with left less space between players (line of 5 vs line of 4) so less area for each to cover and less disorganisation. Yes, it does leave some space in behind, but if you're playing with 3 at the back and have a sweeper/middle CD who makes good decisions when to come forward it doesn't hurt you as much as the more organised midfield helps you.

At least that's my experience, playing many seasons with a flat midfield in a 3-5-2 I found most goals came from crosses, set pieces and especially long balls over the top, very rarely I found teams able to exploit the space between lines. I can't vouch for it as part of a 4 man defense (where a CD stepping out into the DM area leaves you much more exposed), but if you're running a 3 man defense I think it's certainly an option you should strongly consider.

[llama3]

This has been updated for FM14 now.

[dsch]

Has anyone seen improvement in how the defensive double pivot works in a 4-2-3-1? I remember we had trouble getting 2 DMs to get far enough forward, and 2 CMs always left the back line horribly exposed.

[Cleon]

Has anyone seen improvement in how the defensive double pivot works in a 4-2-3-1? I remember we had trouble getting 2 DMs to get far enough forward, and 2 CMs always left the back line horribly exposed.

2 DMC's got forward fine and supported on both FM12 and FM13.

[yonko]

Cleon, how about 2 MC's getting back in FM14? Is that better now or still the same as in previous FMs?

[tartarus1260]

Any thoughts on a narrow 4-man midfield - either a diamond (4-1-2-1-2) or 3 central midfielders and 1 DMC or AMC?

I often use these types of formations to start with if I'm at a club without any decent wide players.

Defensively these formations have a weakness against attacks down the flanks so my midfield setup depends on how my full/wing backs are instructed to play. If I have full backs with attack roles I'll tend to play 2 defensively minded midfielders, one support and one attack. If my full backs are playing more defensively I'll give 2 midfielders support duties.

[MisterX]

and in the AM position:

Advanced Playmaker (Support/Attack)

Trequartista (Attack)

Enganche (Attack)

Inside Forward (Support/Attack)

Attacking Midfielder (Support/Attack)

The inside forward is not available for the amc position... Did you mean the shadow striker? Since you do not notice that role.

[Macon]

The guide was originally written for FM13 - and in that, you can play inside forwards at AMC.

[ajsr1982]

I know the answer in real life terms, but in the match engine, what is the difference between a BBM and a CM?

[alinp]

I know the answer in real life terms, but in the match engine, what is the difference between a BBM and a CM?

Think "Jordan Henderson"

[llama3]

A CM sits in that central band, and the BBM covers from his own penalty area to the opposing penalty area. They do what they say on the tin basically. Mister X this part was written for FM13 and is not updated yet. The essence is the same though. Common sense application will suffice.

[ajsr1982]

Think "Jordan Henderson"

I'd rather not! On a serious note though, being a Liverpool fan and a central midfielder, I watch Henderson closely, and I wouldn't consider him to be a BBM. More of a CM. He has either played as what I would consider a CM-A, a CM-S or a tucked in DW for Liverpool this season. I'm not doubting his energy but he's generally played ahead of a midfield two of Lucas (DM-D) and Gerrard (DLP-S).

I genuinely don't think there are too many BBMs in the game today, and the only one that immediately comes to mind is Ramires at Chelsea. Needless to say, I think the differences are marginal, but I was wondering how this translates to FM. Would expect to essentially see the same average position but with extended movement vertically? What about in terms of shooting/passing/creativity?

[llama3]

I would agree with Ramires, great shout as a BBM. Khedira at R. Madrid is a good shout too, although I feel he often starts from a deeper position (more DM(S)) - but displays a lot of the characteristics of 1.

[Lathund]

Any thoughts on not using a defensive role in a 3-man midfield? The reason I'm contemplating this is that I like playing with a DLP/Regista, and I'm reluctant to use DLP (d) as I feel that the player isn't involved enough then. I want something akin to Tugay (Being a Blackburn Rovers fan, he's one of my favourite players ever) or a Pirlo (For those of you not so familiar with the maestro), and I want to accomodate my awesome newgen Gregorio Santorum.

I'm using a 4-1-2-2-1 (i.e DM, 2xCM, AM L/R). Logic says I should just play a CM (d) if I want a sitter or a BWM (d) if I want someone pressing a bit further forward, but I'm reluctant for a few reasons. The CM (d) just sits in the lap of the DLP, giving up space elsewhere. The BWM (d) I haven't tried as much, but I don't really have the player to suit the role. I do have some defensively sound CMs, but they lack in Aggression/Bravery. I just also don't like the idea of a defend CM in front of a support DM, it feels like they sit in the same space. The DLP (s) already has quite defensive positioning, so would it perhaps be enough if I had a CM (s) with instructions to run with ball rarely and hold position to perform the defensive duties?

[11v11]

i agree, I play 3 MC's on a 4-3-2(wingers)-1, defensively my wide MC's engage in pressing opposition wingers with my f-backs. the middle mc, being right in the middle picks up a lot of lose ball, make a lot of interceptions, tackles and blocks off though balls. the same mc also covers for any wide mc going wide towards the opposition winger. I find it defensively, it is more impressive than having a DM instead because that mid-mc gets so involved in the game and also adding width to defence where I find two MC's are just too narrow unless designed around a counter attacking plan. I could have a player with high on stamina yet dropping below 70% in condition eventhough he does not have highest pressing. that player dominates passing as well.

I remember playing against Chelsea, my mid-mc was so involved in the game Chelsea changed their tactic from 4-1-2-2-1 to a 3-1-3-1-2, having an mc exactly where mine was. staggering the three mc's in possession do provide passing options especially in width and providing a multi terrace of passing options. only disadvantage is it on quick attacks it is not as effective. I like it because it provides a very efficient defend to attack ratio, it could defend width and center like a 4-4-2 wide-mids, defend central strong yet provide sound attacking options. it is definitely the ultimate tinker-man option

[TerryThick]

Good guide and some interesting comments which i will probably addapt into other tactics

I currently play a 4-3-1-2 formation but i am using my 3 in the midfield as MCL attacking playmaker(attack) MC deep lying playmaker(support) MCR attacking playmaker(attack) and the AM as terquartista(attack) using man mark as i found zonal too open and its quite suprising ,i do make lots of chances but its open to counter attack mainly because i`m using wingbacks (support) for width ,altho one of my tactics is to drop an Anchor man to sit in and protect my defence against the big teams which seems to balance it out

[Schotsmannetje]

I never realized that a BWM actually supports the attacking play too, and leaves his position exposed at times. Thanks for clearing that up. See, you learn something new everyday!

I play with 5 central midfielders:

MC (BMW/def) MC (CM/sup)

AMC (Tre/Att) AMC (AP/sup) AMC (Tre/Att)

With fullbacks looking for overlap to ensure that the striker gets enough crosses. Yes this formation leaves you exposed sometimes when the opposition counter-attacks, but when you have a quality squad and want to dominate, this formation can be very succesful. Albeit that the fullbacks and the MC (CM/sup) fatique very quickly. Mind you, this formation gives you a lot of nice combination football if you use short passing. Very pleasing to the eye.

But after your guide I will reconsider my two MC's. I think I will change my MC (BWM/defend) into MC (DLP/defend).

[mangelito]

Any thoughts on not using a defensive role in a 3-man midfield? The reason I'm contemplating this is that I like playing with a DLP/Regista, and I'm reluctant to use DLP (d) as I feel that the player isn't involved enough then. I want something akin to Tugay (Being a Blackburn Rovers fan, he's one of my favourite players ever) or a Pirlo (For those of you not so familiar with the maestro), and I want to accomodate my awesome newgen Gregorio Santorum.

I'm using a 4-1-2-2-1 (i.e DM, 2xCM, AM L/R). Logic says I should just play a CM (d) if I want a sitter or a BWM (d) if I want someone pressing a bit further forward, but I'm reluctant for a few reasons. The CM (d) just sits in the lap of the DLP, giving up space elsewhere. The BWM (d) I haven't tried as much, but I don't really have the player to suit the role. I do have some defensively sound CMs, but they lack in Aggression/Bravery. I just also don't like the idea of a defend CM in front of a support DM, it feels like they sit in the same space. The DLP (s) already has quite defensive positioning, so would it perhaps be enough if I had a CM (s) with instructions to run with ball rarely and hold position to perform the defensive duties?

I have a midfield trio without a defend duty in a assymetric setup. A DLP-S in the DM slot (slightly to the right), a BTB midfielder in the CM slot (slightly to the left), and a AP-A in the AMC slot (slightly to the right). Works well for me so far. The whole formation almost is assymetric though and compliments the midfield. I hope to write a post about it soon. In my setup the BTB-midfielder is the key. If he doesn't have the right attributes to go up and down the pitch the whole formation fails.

[SJ234]

I would love to create a double pivot in front of an DMC where they take turns to get forwards. Any ideas? as I have struggled to implement it

[llama3]

Maybe a Box to Box Midfielder and an Advanced Playmaker - a BBM has the roaming capabilities, whereas the AP will be sitting in holes and will attack space if its available?