M L/R vs AM L/R

[liamboye]

Hi,

I have some thoughts and questions about M L/R vs AM L/R and hope this thread can spark some debate.

Reading various forums I learnt that wide men in M L/R strata can offer about the same going forward as wide men in AM strata whilst also providing better defensive cover.

Putting theory into practice in the game, this assumption seams to be quite right in my tactics.

I'm playing 4-4-1-1 with a WM(a) acting as an IF(a) and it works well.

Now, my problem is that there are very few players who are natural M (L/R). Does it make sense to re-train my AM (R/L)'s to the M(L/R) strata?

I also have a theory that the 4-4-1-1 works as I play a short passing style.

If you want to play a direct/counter style my assumption is that you should choose a Wide pair in the AM Strata as they would receive more direct passes high up the pitch with a "head start" on the opposition midfield.

I want to create a direct, defensively solid strategy as my plan B. Following my own theory, I should then have wide men i AM strata, but this would again sacrifice the defensive solidity that I want in my counter attacking strategy.

What would you guys suggest?

[thomit]

I don't see a big difference, to be honest. The latest match engine makes wide AM's defend just about the right amount. If anything, putting them in the ML/MR positions makes them too defensive (tracking back too deep) in my view.

I'm playing a 4231 wide with Arsenal, and I don't see a problem with any lack of defensive work of either of my wide AM's, not even the one who's on attacking duty.

[Double0Seven]

ML/R track back a lot. I even bought a player who was specially trained into that position. It was your typical striker but trained him in defensive stats too. He has 14 tackling and 11 pos which isn't bad for a ML/R. I have even seen them defending the space a wing back leaves behind when needed. They are also great going forward. He scored 30 goals for me.

[Jambo98]

I am a big fan of the ML/MR, simply because it is a far more accurate representation of how most teams really play. The AML or AMR is in effect a striker. Its Ronaldo or Messi or even Alexis Sanchez. Not Silva or Hazard or Tadic.

This is reflected in the player types who are able to play AML/R and not ML/MR. They are generally the striker types. Indeed almost all will also be able to play in the ST spot. True wide men are usually at least "competent" in the MR or ML slots.

In terms of too defensive, if you look at my 451 thread, the Liverpool example has Coutinho and Lallana scoring plenty and assisting even more. It has to be part of a wider system.

[liamboye]

Jambo,

I would not argue that wide men in a ML/MR strata are too defensive at all. I often find that as they attack the ball from deeper areas, they might even find more space and score more goals. As I mentioned in the OP, I often use a 4-4-1-1 with some nice results.

Would you train your Silva/Hazard/Tadic to become accomplished in MR/ML?

[Double0Seven]

Of course. If you want them to play there retrain them. I'm also sure Hazard and Tadic are already accomplished wide midfielder.

[Jambo98]

As long as they are at least competent in the position, i wouldnt bother with retraining.

[Atreides78]

I've been using a 4-2-3-1 with two inside forwards but am thinking about changing this to a 4-4-1-1 for the extra defensive structure it provides as has been discussed on here many times.

I'm interested in what roles would be essentially replicate the attacking behaviour of the inside forwards as ML/MRs? Do wide midfielders on attack cut inside automatically or would they benefit from the PI 'Cut inside with ball'? Likewise what about wide midfielders on support?

Also, how will the PI 'get further forward' affect the defensive role. For example, if I move an AMR to MR but add the instruction 'get further forward' how much of an effect will this have on his position and his level of tracking back?

By far and above my greatest weakness last season was overlapping full-backs that my inside forwards didn't track overloading the defence and pulling my players out of position to make space.

[mrw072]

I use counter attacking tactics a lot now and always play with an ML and MR. The ML as an out and out winger, and the MR as a wide playmaker. I find that if I put them both on attack duty my left winger bombs down the pitch and really attacks the full back. Whereas the MR always cuts into the middle of the field and often plays as a central midfielder. He scores goals too - which is a bonus! I think if you want to play with wingers acceleration/dribbling and flair are good attributes to look at!

Neither of them seem to do too much defensive work, but I feel that as I've put them as ML/MR I can switch them to a defensive role without too much difficulty! Or that's the plan!

[liamboye]

I've been using a 4-2-3-1 with two inside forwards but am thinking about changing this to a 4-4-1-1 for the extra defensive structure it provides as has been discussed on here many times.

I'm interested in what roles would be essentially replicate the attacking behaviour of the inside forwards as ML/MRs? Do wide midfielders on attack cut inside automatically or would they benefit from the PI 'Cut inside with ball'? Likewise what about wide midfielders on support?

Also, how will the PI 'get further forward' affect the defensive role. For example, if I move an AMR to MR but add the instruction 'get further forward' how much of an effect will this have on his position and his level of tracking back?

By far and above my greatest weakness last season was overlapping full-backs that my inside forwards didn't track overloading the defence and pulling my players out of position to make space.

Hi,

In my 4-4-1-1 I use WM(a) and WM(s) as Inside Forwards. I would definitely reccomend to Use PI "Cut inside with ball" if you want wide men in M (R/L) strata to perform as inside forwards.

On my WM(s) I use the "Get further forward" PI as well. Still helps out defensively.

A question for you: What roles du you use for your AMC and Striker?

[Atreides78]

This is an area I'm also planning to change this season as I've had a CF(a) and an AP(s). The CF has been ok but my AP has not been performing well, also partly due to tripping over my BBM in terms of space. I'm thinking of changing to a CF(s) and a T(a) or something like that. What setup have you been using?

[Lilah]

In a 4-2-3-1 with an inside forward or two, it seems natural that the AMC would be a playmaker. In a 4-4-1-1, I often see people use the AMC as the scorer (as in DLF + SS). If you're using WMA/S as inside forwards, would you still have the AMC be a playmaker? I've always played 4-2-3-1 as a playmaker and 4-4-1-1 as a scorer, but this thread is giving me second thoughts.

[liamboye]

In a 4-4-1-1 or 4-2-3-1 I usually set up with a holding midfield pair of a CM(d) and a DLP(s). In the AMC slot I use a APL(a) as I feel that the player tend to drop too deep with a support duty in this position. My stirker is a DLF(a) who gets involved in the game and gets in the box as well.

[peleJunior]

In a 4-4-1-1 or 4-2-3-1 I usually set up with a holding midfield pair of a CM(d) and a DLP(s). In the AMC slot I use a APL(a) as I feel that the player tend to drop too deep with a support duty in this position. My stirker is a DLF(a) who gets involved in the game and gets in the box as well.

Do you find that the APa doesn't track DMs though? I find the positioning of AMCs a little strange so far this version. I think APa pushes too high, it should be his dribbling that moves him up the pitch in my opinion not his starting position which should be much deeper.

[liamboye]

Do you find that the APa doesn't track DMs though? I find the positioning of AMCs a little strange so far this version. I think APa pushes too high, it should be his dribbling that moves him up the pitch in my opinion not his starting position which should be much deeper.

I agree. I'm finding it difficult to find a optimal role for my AP. On Support, I think the gap between AP and striker gets to big, and with AP(a) my biggest problem is that he stays too high when we defend and the shape looks more like a 4-4-2 to me. I know there's an option to go with a SS - F9/DLF(s) combo, but again, this would look too much like a 4-4-2 in defensive pfase.

I will definitley continue to experiment to find the right combination for me.

[peleJunior]

I agree. I'm finding it difficult to find a optimal role for my AP. On Support, I think the gap between AP and striker gets to big, and with AP(a) my biggest problem is that he stays too high when we defend and the shape looks more like a 4-4-2 to me. I know there's an option to go with a SS - F9/DLF(s) combo, but again, this would look too much like a 4-4-2 in defensive pfase.

I will definitley continue to experiment to find the right combination for me.

Yeah I agree with that. Hopefully it's something that's remedied in the new patch.

[Kawee]

I thought roaming playmaker resolve this issue. The RPM drops deep to pick up the ball, but also keeps up with play and turns into an advanced playmaker in the final third.

[Jambo98]

The RPM cant be played in the AM strata though, so possibly the resolution to a different problem

I guess it is about what "shape" you want your formation to create. The 4411 is probably a very good translation of what the 4231 really looks like. If you pause the game in attacking phases and attacking transition, i would wager it would very much like a 4231 shape on the pitch.

That said, i think there is still a bit of an issue with attack and suport duty in the AM/ST strata. If you have a support striker and an attacking AM, you will frequently find your striker 10 - 15 yards deeper than your AM when you attack.

I suppose it would be quite unusual to have a "number 10", which is very much what an AP(a) is, operating behind a support type of striker in real life? You might play one behind a very mobile striker, but the AP is not one who is likely to go beyond the line much so it would be an unusual setup. Perhaps a CF(s) who is very mobile laterally is more common.

[spaced33]

In my experience, the F9 drops quite deep in defence and I usually see him drop deeper than an AMCa. This would then look like a 4-4-1-1 on defence.

[liamboye]

Thank you for advise.

I tried with a CF(s) in front of AP(a). Still think the CF(s) drops too low, though. During build up play, it looks like he drops lower than the AP(a), so Will Probably re-visit the AP(s) - DLF(a) combination and try to make this work somehow.

For me, a ACMa - F9 is not an option. My ACMs are creative, Playmaker types, so I want them to play to their strenghts, which is to create chances rather than finish them off.

[bababooey]

I think that you need to also take into account what your striker / amc is doing (or if you play 2 strikers, or no strikers). In other words... the AML/AMR are going to be a part of a partnership with your other forwards. So you can really benefit from something like, as an example: IF-A and CF-S. So in that case the striker acts as a #10 while the IF-A acts as the #9. With ML/MR you lack the ability to create those kinds of partnerships. Although perhaps a wide playmaker is an option there? I haven't used that role at all so I can't comment on it. I've read that the attack duty WPM sits quite high up the pitch.

[peleJunior]

I think that you need to also take into account what your striker / amc is doing (or if you play 2 strikers, or no strikers). In other words... the AML/AMR are going to be a part of a partnership with your other forwards. So you can really benefit from something like, as an example: IF-A and CF-S. So in that case the striker acts as a #10 while the IF-A acts as the #9. With ML/MR you lack the ability to create those kinds of partnerships. Although perhaps a wide playmaker is an option there? I haven't used that role at all so I can't comment on it. I've read that the attack duty WPM sits quite high up the pitch.

I disagree about ML/R and STs not forming partnerships and combinations. I see it on most of my saves!! My 4411 set ups always has these combinations, my centre players are told to run wide and my ML/Rs told to cut inside, they constantly interact with each other due to the spaces that there dribbling opens up.