Asymmetric 4-2-3-1

[jcw163]

Morning,

Apologies if this has been looked at elsewhere, I had a little scout around but couldn't see anything so going to pitch in here.

People may have seen previously that I was trying to find a way to play an Advanced Forward as the lone striker in a 4-3-3 (4-1-2-2-1) and was worried about disconnection from midfield, as often a lone striker is used with a support role to ensure good link up play. Unfortunately (for me and my mighty Sampdoria team) this did not work brilliantly. Myself and other users in the thread surmised this may be as the AF has "dribble more" as a default, and the striker I was trying to use was a more physical type. After some experimentation I am now playing the same shape, but with a TMa as the lone striker. This is working ok, particularly as the presence of playmaker roles stops the team from always looking to hit it long to the target man.

The basic role\duty layout at the moment is as follows (4-3-3, right to left)

GKd

FBs

CDd

CDd

FBa

DMd

RPMs

CMa

Ws

APa

TMa

In this system the wide Advanced Playmaker is causing havoc, the winger is continuing to put in a solid supply of crosses (we have a very good crosser on the right wing, so I am loathe to change this role) and the TM is getting some goals, more than he did before so all is going well in that regard. In addition we currently have the 2nd best defence in Serie A for the second season running (behind only Juve), meaning I don't want to touch the defence too much.

Unfortunately my issue is still support to the striker. Nowadays not so much in terms of getting chances to him, but in helping him if he cannot score, and trying to find a second avenue for goals as, at the moment with wingers\playmakers, nobody else is really getting on the scoresheet that often (The APa gets a few, as many as one would expect, but he is primarily a creator). The theory was for the CMa to get forward and chip in with a few goals, but he's very rarely beyond the striker or in the box where he could threaten.

As a result I am considering tweaking the 4-3-3 to an Asymmetric 4-2-3-1 in the following fashion

1) Move Ws from AMR to MR.

2) Move CMa from MC to AMC and play him as an AMa

This would leave the overall tactic looking like this

GK :- GKd

DR :- FBs

DL :- FBa

DC :- 2 x CDd

DM :- DMd

MR :- Ws

MCr :- RPMs

AMCl:- AMa

AML:- APa

ST :- TMa

My main query here is a general "What do people think to this shape?" question, but more specifically the following:

1) Will an AMa score goals AND be involved when we lose the ball, or will he sit too high with the ST, effectively leaving us with too many men left up when the opposition attack

2) Will the AMa cause problems by taking up space for the APa, considering they are playing AMCl and AML

3) If yes to the above, would playing the AMa at AMCr help, given we would then need to put the RPM at MCl, meaning they may have the same clash with the APa.

As always all constructive comment and opinion welcomed.

[Guest]

I use and love the assymetric formation. What are the rest of the tactics and ti's? I tried a variety of roles but eventually settled on an inside forward on the aml slot and ap at the amcl slot. I actually use an advanced forward in my assymetric.

[summatsupeer]

A more typical async formation is:

Ignore the roles + duties as its work in progress and a different style to yours.

It's basically a 433 but with a MC moved forward and the wide player on the same side moved deeper. This offers a similar balance rather than having the attacking strata players on the same side created a big space behind them.

[jcw163]

@Crazy_Ivan - TIs etc not really an issue at the moment as they are set up for the existing 4-3-3 so could be tweaked if the new shape works ok. I left the Advanced Forward role alone because my main ST simply does not have the dribbling attribute required, so was constantly running into blind alleys. By having the TMa with playmakers I am able to take advantage of his strength and pace, while avoiding using his poor passing and dribbling stats too much.

@summatsupeer -

This offers a similar balance rather than having the attacking strata players on the same side created a big space behind them.

This is really the crux of the issue. As, like you, my AML would be coming off the flank, I was wary of playing the MC on the same side, as I use effectively a box to box role (In fact the MC in question was a BBM, but has been moved to RPM to try and get them to take the game by the scruff of the neck a bit more if you see what I mean), however if the AML is coming in off the flank I don't want the box-to-box midfielder trying to take up the same positions.

Are you finding that Ramsey gets in the way of Cazorla or Sanchez in this shape? This is my chief concern, ideally I would want the shape to be as in your screenshot but not at the expense of hampering the performances of the AML and MC, who are probably my 2 best creative players.

[summatsupeer]

@summatsupeer -

This is really the crux of the issue. As, like you, my AML would be coming off the flank, I was wary of playing the MC on the same side, as I use effectively a box to box role (In fact the MC in question was a BBM, but has been moved to RPM to try and get them to take the game by the scruff of the neck a bit more if you see what I mean), however if the AML is coming in off the flank I don't want the box-to-box midfielder trying to take up the same positions.

Are you finding that Ramsey gets in the way of Cazorla or Sanchez in this shape? This is my chief concern, ideally I would want the shape to be as in your screenshot but not at the expense of hampering the performances of the AML and MC, who are probably my 2 best creative players.

I can't remember any issues with the IF-S and BBM getting in the way of each other. My IF is usually wider than the BBM, they only really "cross" each other when the IF cuts inside dribbling but they don't really "get in the way" of each other. If anything i'd say they support each other.

[jcw163]

Good to hear, going to go with that shape then and see what happens, ty for the input

[burdinho]

A more typical async formation is:

Ignore the roles + duties as its work in progress and a different style to yours.

It's basically a 433 but with a MC moved forward and the wide player on the same side moved deeper. This offers a similar balance rather than having the attacking strata players on the same side created a big space behind them.

really like that setup...