Spot the holes in this one?

[GC28]

I seem to be struggling to score much as I've seen others have problems with i might put it down to personnel but most posters say it's always tactics so any advice would be good!

I change my instructions dependent on oppositions weaknesses but try and keep it as simple as possible.

I also don't want to use more than one playmaker role am i right in that?

I have also taken a simple minimalist approach to opposition instructions.

I have a large number of attempts on goal with not many on target..

crop 1 tic by gic28, on Flickr

2013-11-03_00010 by gic28, on Flickr

2013-11-03_00009 by gic28, on Flickr

2013-11-03_00006 by gic28, on Flickr

[vrig]

Your defence looks decent so hooray! I tend to avoid BBM as a role unless I have a terrific player for it, as they go walkabout if they aren't cut out for it.

To the scoring issues - it looks like a case of too many attacking duties. IF(a) is gonna look to score, W(a) will be about 50/50 and the poacher will do no creative work whatsoever. Maybe try changing your IF to a support role(might help your goals conceded down that flank as well.

I've never gotten a lone poacher to work and they move around disconnected from the rest of the team without a dedicated creative strike partner. Maybe having him as an AF or even a deeper forward would help?

I also find it a little strange that you have "exploit the right flank" on when you seem to be more creative down the left flank.

[GC28]

Thanks for the quick reply I'll give it a go,

The right flank is set like that because it was a weakness in the opposition,

am i doing the wrong thing by changing those instructions match by match?

[Cleon]

People always struggle with this formation because they don't realise what the important areas are in the shape. You need to make sure that your MC's are more holding type of players than players who attack. The reason for this is because if they don't hold position then you have no central midfield and the opposition will just walk straight through it. Using a box to midfielder means he will like to support attacks and defend. However when he goes forward this leaves a gap and any quick counter attacks will cause you serious hard. The BWM will close down heavily and always be running about, so again he isn't always central and will cause the same kind of problems I mentioned before.

Your wide attackers also offer very little in the way of defensive duties. You are playing quite an aggressive game having both of them on attack duties. Especially down the right hand side due to the RB also being attacking, this can cause you to be exposed when they venture forward. you need to make sure that both wide players track the oppositions fullbacks or wide players. If they don't then you'll find lots of issues.

Now on the attacking side of things - You use a poacher as the lone striker which means he isn't very mobile. So unless you have pin point accuracy from crosses or passes then he will struggle in games when he is marked 2v1. He stays on the shoulder of defenders and prefers to play close to the 6 yard box which means everyone else in the team needs to do the creative thinking and create the space for him, this isn't happening currently for you. The poacher isn't a good role for a lone striker and throws up inconsistent results due to his lack of movement and creating space. They are very easy to mark. I'd think of changing it to something more suited like a DLF attack or AF.

If you want to use an AP support as the creative player in the side then you need to ask yourself how best can he use the ball when he has it. So you need to look at the players positions around him and make sure he has passing options and movement both alongside and in front of him as this will allow him to be creative and do the types of killer passes you want.

[GC28]

My changes and usual opposition instructions...

Changing mentality really brings down the familiarity down!!

2013-11-03_00013 by gic28, on Flickr

2013-11-03_00014 by gic28, on Flickr

2013-11-03_00015 by gic28, on Flickr

[OBK1]

So Cleon, for the CMs, you would suggest perhaps a Dlp(s) and a CM(d) or maybe even no specialist role but two generic CM:s?

[lam]

GC,

I hope you don't mind me point put but Cleon gave you four points after you had asked someone to pick holes..... you changed one of them. Do you expect him to answer again?

Do you think a BWM is holding?

[GC28]

I uploaded the wrong picture, my bad!!

Have now changed it!

[DreamsDefined]

I uploaded the wrong picture, my bad!!

Have now changed it!

It looks better now, especially your balance on the flanks. But like lam mentioned, get rid of the BWM otherwise you'll have the same problem as before. I'd suggest one of those two MC's have a Defend duty. I have the same formation set up as Roma atm, and I've got a DM(d) to protect the two CB's, and a DLP(s) to provide some link through the middle. Unsold on the DLP though as we can get overrun in the middle if he gets dragged upfield on occasion. Going to experiment with a DLP(d).

Also some of your shouts are counter-intuitive... clear ball to flanks with retian posession and shorter passing is the obvious one. Hassle opponents might drag your formation out of shape too, which could be an issue as I can imagine the BWM charging upfield to close down a forward, your CM then closes down a wide player and then BAM... a few opposition runners through the middle and you're carved open. Might want to experiment with removing that. Depends what type of defensive game you want to play.

Just another thought... Exploit the Flanks might be unnecessary actually. The formation naturally has play focused out wide as that's where all the runners are. You might be limiting your players too much.

[etcetera]

There was a thread by someone a while ago (don't remember who) who detailed his setup through duties first then roles later. I think he ran a 4-2-3-1 with balanced mentality.

The gist of his setup was this.

-One fullback on attack and one fullback on support.

-In front of the attacking fullback is a support winger (not role, position), and vice versa.

-The CM on the attacking FB side would be a holding midfielder of some sort.

-The CM on the supporting FB side would have some license to move forward.

-If the forward was on attack (excluding treq), the AMC would be support, or vice versa.

The idea of this setup on balanced philosophy is to produce an evenly balanced team in terms of mentality and forward movement. There is always a player overlapping or providing support behind. The roles themselves weren't particularly important since the mentality and and movement structures were already defined.

I would suggest you tried his suggestions and tailor your roles to your current players. I think you can easily play with a BWM even on support if his partner is able to hold midfield. Whether you want to do that against the likes of PSG is another question.

[max787]

In FM13 I has a very successful 4-2-3-1 with PSG which in 5 years resulted in 5 league wins in a row, 3 CL wins, and 1 french cup win. Granted, I had a world class team and loads of money, but the tactic itself was very good.

Very fluid

Control

sweeper keeper support

Full back automatic

Central defender defend

Central defender defend

Full back automatic

Central midfielder defend

Central midfielder defend

Winger support

Attacking midfielder attack

Winger support

Target man attack (Advanced forward worked well too, I just happened to have a player well suited to TM).

The very fluid style and the control mentality meant that it was quite compact, the defence pushed up and the CMs remained disciplined so there was no gap between the D-line and the midfield. The duties also seemed quite coherent for a 4-2-3-1, shielding CMs, supporting wide players (who offer a bit of protection down the flanks), and an attacking pair through the middle. Having the AM on an attack duty also means that the lone striker doesn't get isolated despite having an attack duty.

[GC28]

There was a thread by someone a while ago (don't remember who) who detailed his setup through duties first then roles later. I think he ran a 4-2-3-1 with balanced mentality.

The gist of his setup was this.

-One fullback on attack and one fullback on support.

-In front of the attacking fullback is a support winger (not role, position), and vice versa.

-The CM on the attacking FB side would be a holding midfielder of some sort.

-The CM on the supporting FB side would have some license to move forward.

-If the forward was on attack (excluding treq), the AMC would be support, or vice versa.

The idea of this setup on balanced philosophy is to produce an evenly balanced team in terms of mentality and forward movement. There is always a player overlapping or providing support behind. The roles themselves weren't particularly important since the mentality and and movement structures were already defined.

I would suggest you tried his suggestions and tailor your roles to your current players. I think you can easily play with a BWM even on support if his partner is able to hold midfield. Whether you want to do that against the likes of PSG is another question.

Thanks for all your help guys managed to get myself into the champions league spot, but my worry now is that this formation might be found to be too vulnerable against the bigger sides in Europe any suggestions for a tactic for that?

maybe this...

But does playing two Playmakers have a bigger downside....

2013-11-04_00004 by gic28, on Flickr

So maybe this is better and more sturdy?

2013-11-04_00002 by gic28, on Flickr

But maybe not a fluid mentality??

And you are right I've not beaten PSG once yet 2-0 is probably my best result!

[GC28]

It looks better now, especially your balance on the flanks. But like lam mentioned, get rid of the BWM otherwise you'll have the same problem as before. I'd suggest one of those two MC's have a Defend duty. I have the same formation set up as Roma atm, and I've got a DM(d) to protect the two CB's, and a DLP(s) to provide some link through the middle. Unsold on the DLP though as we can get overrun in the middle if he gets dragged upfield on occasion. Going to experiment with a DLP(d).

Also some of your shouts are counter-intuitive... clear ball to flanks with retian posession and shorter passing is the obvious one. Hassle opponents might drag your formation out of shape too, which could be an issue as I can imagine the BWM charging upfield to close down a forward, your CM then closes down a wide player and then BAM... a few opposition runners through the middle and you're carved open. Might want to experiment with removing that. Depends what type of defensive game you want to play.

Just another thought... Exploit the Flanks might be unnecessary actually. The formation naturally has play focused out wide as that's where all the runners are. You might be limiting your players too much.

Thank you I'm going to try with less of the instructions this coming season and report back!

[GC28]

There was a thread by someone a while ago (don't remember who) who detailed his setup through duties first then roles later. I think he ran a 4-2-3-1 with balanced mentality.

The gist of his setup was this.

-One fullback on attack and one fullback on support.

-In front of the attacking fullback is a support winger (not role, position), and vice versa.

-The CM on the attacking FB side would be a holding midfielder of some sort.

-The CM on the supporting FB side would have some license to move forward.

-If the forward was on attack (excluding treq), the AMC would be support, or vice versa.

The idea of this setup on balanced philosophy is to produce an evenly balanced team in terms of mentality and forward movement. There is always a player overlapping or providing support behind. The roles themselves weren't particularly important since the mentality and and movement structures were already defined.

I would suggest you tried his suggestions and tailor your roles to your current players. I think you can easily play with a BWM even on support if his partner is able to hold midfield. Whether you want to do that against the likes of PSG is another question.

Thanks,Support Winger confused me as a position do you mean that type of player?

"-The CM on the attacking FB side would be a holding midfielder of some sort." This makes perfect sense and was obvious, And I didn't think of it!!

2013-11-04_00005 by gic28, on Flickr

[max787]

Thanks,Support Winger confused me as a position do you mean that type of player?

"-The CM on the attacking FB side would be a holding midfielder of some sort." This makes perfect sense and was obvious, And I didn't think of it!!

2013-11-04_00005 by gic28, on Flickr

A ball winner is not a holding player. You can't have 2 support roles in central midfield in a 4-2-3-1, it won't work and your midfield will constantly expose your defence.

A BWM doesn't really make a difference when you select "hassle opponents" as a shout though, it sets D-line and closing down to 20, you're going to lose all shape anyway.

[GC28]

Ok I see, It seems like these team instructions are almost not needed, whenever I set one, I get told about the problems with it, Should I just focus on roles?

I thought a BWM would give me both a little creativity and distribution as well as a screen for the defense, what role and duty do you suggest?

[max787]

A BWM isn't a holding player because he doesn't "hold" his position, he presses aggressively and chases after the ball, often vacating his position in order to do so.

CMd or DLPd are good. DLPs + CMd would probably be a good replacement for your current CMs + BWMs pairing. With a fluid system creative freedom is fairly high throughout the team, so don't worry about the CMd being overly conservative with the ball, his distribution will often be short, but he'll still occasionally go for the longer or more ambitious ball if he sees it.

[grimslaa]

I think you need to get a better understanding of what each role for your midfield players means and how they relate to each other. There is a good series of threads on this forum about partnerships throughout the team which may be of some use for you.

You may also benefit from trying to get a fuller understanding of what you're trying to do in your tactic. How do you want your team to defend? Does the style of football you want to play work with your defensive ideal? Do the players you have suit the style you want to play?

[GC28]

Yeah I've struggled with tactics the last few years!

Thanks for all the advice, One last thing that didn't get answered

Playing with more than one playmaker, Either AP or DLP

Does it work?

[difran8]

People always struggle with this formation because they don't realise what the important areas are in the shape. You need to make sure that your MC's are more holding type of players than players who attack. (...)

I am not sure that the defensive vulnerabilities you highlighted is the only reason people are struggling with 4-2-3-1. This is one of the few formations that have , fm-wise, so little movement upfront. Those 4 are usually isolated, dont make correct runs, and the last resort, Fullbacks, are usually very late to join the attack

Whenever i'm playing this i feel like i have 4 players against an entire team : the only chance to score is from an individual effort / dribble and a perfect cross. My players are disorganized and far from each other.Oh how many times have i tried to find a satisfactory way of playing 4231Denmark to no avail :confused:

[Cleon]

I am not sure that the defensive vulnerabilities you highlighted is the only reason people are struggling with 4-2-3-1. This is one of the few formations that have , fm-wise, so little movement upfront. Those 4 are usually isolated, dont make correct runs, and the last resort, Fullbacks, are usually very late to join the attack

Whenever i'm playing this i feel like i have 4 players against an entire team : the only chance to score is from an individual effort / dribble and a perfect cross. My players are disorganized and far from each other.Oh how many times have i tried to find a satisfactory way of playing 4231Denmark to no avail :confused:

Believe me it is. From the formations I've seen people post on this subject over the last year its clearly that only a very small minority have the midfield set up correct to offer any defensive shape and cover in the centre. And people wonder why they get hit with counter attacks

[max787]

One last thing that didn't get answered

Playing with more than one playmaker, Either AP or DLP

Does it work?

Yes.

However, in FM14 you can't designate one single playmaker, so playmaking duties will be split 50/50 between them.

[etcetera]

By support winger I meant a support role on the player in the AMR or AML position sorry.

In regards to BWM, sure he's not a holding player, but you can play him with one.

Here's my interpretation of holders and non holders

Holder

CMd, DLPd

Non-holder

B2B, APs/a, CMs/a, BWMs

Fuzzy

DLPs, BWMd

DLPs and BWMd are more difficult to classify since the former holds position on defence and the latter holds position on offense. There was a thread back in the days of FM10 detailing a 4-2-3-1 with a DLPs and BWMd that was very successful for many people. Obviously the game's changed but there was stability in that sort of setup.

Even though you can make it work, whether you want to depends on your personnel. I personally like to use a CMd with a playmaker because I like to have a technically proficient player playing higher up the pitch. But if you have a partnership of a khedira and alonso like Madrid last season you might want a physically imposing player higher up.

[lam]

What I always find interesting and I guess it kinds of links with what Cleon says.... this formation is also very effective 'deep' ie two DM's. Now if two DM's work, doesnt it make sense that the two MC's in what has been posted here would/should work as defensively minded players.

What is the harm in simply trying either two CM(D)'s or even one CM(D) and another DLP(D/S) and see how it pans out.

If you're in doubt try and start with a fairly static tactic, this way, when you watch games, you should be able to see the space and the instruct players to use it, however when you start with tactics that has everyone wandering around it is often very hard to work out who is not in position at the right time. Sure, you can see who should have been where the opposition received the ball, but is that where the play started or did it start two passes ago.

If in doubt, start safe and then become more expansive.