4-3-2-1 Balance

[Matty99]

Wanted to do one final save before FM20 comes out & decided on Schalke, looking at the players at the club they seem suited to a 4-3-2-1 so that's what i've gone for.

The idea is a possesion based, pressing tactic but also able to counter when the opportunity arises, but just after a bit of advice if the below setup is balanced enough to do this and not leave myself open to counters while also being creative enough to actually score goals which is something i've found hard to do so far in FM19.

 

[Experienced Defender]

56 minutes ago, Matty99 said:

 

56 minutes ago, Matty99 said:

if the below setup is balanced enough to do this and not leave myself open to counters

Solely in terms of roles and duties, this setup looks well-balanced from a defensive perspective. However, you also need to make sure that both your CMs are defensively reliable players, because these two positions are vital in a 4231 (they are literally the backbone of the entire system). They need to be as good in helping the defense as they are in supporting the attacks. So pay attention to their positioning, tackling, work rate, teamwork, stamina, anticipation... 

 

1 hour ago, Matty99 said:

The idea is a possesion based, pressing tactic but also able to counter when the opportunity arises

In that case, I would suggest some tweaking of your setup of roles and duties. Also keep in mind that you are playing on the Balanced mentality, which is a good starting point, but will see your players less willing to take risks than they would be under a higher mentality. For that reason, I would prefer the DLP on support duty. So this is one possible way to set up roles and duties without making too big a change to your original setup:

PFat

Wat                  AMsu               IFsu

BBM       DLPsu

FBsu/WBde       BPD       CD       FBat

SKde/su

This would allow you to have a natural overlap on the right flank (via the combo of IFsu and FBat). The reason I opted for the winger on attack duty instead of IF is the role of your striker (PF on attack duty). If you played a DLF on attack (or trequartista), then having IF on attack would make more sense because these creator roles tend to make more space for the IF cutting inside. But simpler roles such as poacher or PF on attack generally work better when paired with an attacking winger on one flank and supporting IF on the other.

[scwiffy]

Nearly there. I'd mirror most things Experienced Defender said but a combination of raising mentality to control (which you should) and high defensive lines means that DLP-D will actually work better than DLP-S IMO as he will find and exploit space better behind squeezed opposition. DLP-D is also amazing if playing out from the back.

I'd also add that wingers aren't great for possession based systems due to their tendency to cross. I'd much prefer a Treq. WBs work better than FBs with Treq so I'd change that too. I'd experiment swapping BBM-DLP positionally and watch to see what works best with the rest of the team

[Matty99]

22 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

Solely in terms of roles and duties, this setup looks well-balanced from a defensive perspective. However, you also need to make sure that both your CMs are defensively reliable players, because these two positions are vital in a 4231 (they are literally the backbone of the entire system). They need to be as good in helping the defense as they are in supporting the attacks. So pay attention to their positioning, tackling, work rate, teamwork, stamina, anticipation... 

 

In that case, I would suggest some tweaking of your setup of roles and duties. Also keep in mind that you are playing on the Balanced mentality, which is a good starting point, but will see your players less willing to take risks than they would be under a higher mentality. For that reason, I would prefer the DLP on support duty. So this is one possible way to set up roles and duties without making too big a change to your original setup:

PFat

Wat                  AMsu               IFsu

BBM       DLPsu

FBsu/WBde       BPD       CD       FBat

SKde/su

This would allow you to have a natural overlap on the right flank (via the combo of IFsu and FBat). The reason I opted for the winger on attack duty instead of IF is the role of your striker (PF on attack duty). If you played a DLF on attack (or trequartista), then having IF on attack would make more sense because these creator roles tend to make more space for the IF cutting inside. But simpler roles such as poacher or PF on attack generally work better when paired with an attacking winger on one flank and supporting IF on the other.

Thanks for the feed back, has given me some ideas to think about, would a winger on attack possibly be too high up to find space to run into considering 4-2-3-1 is a very top heavy formation?

 

8 hours ago, scwiffy said:

Nearly there. I'd mirror most things Experienced Defender said but a combination of raising mentality to control (which you should) and high defensive lines means that DLP-D will actually work better than DLP-S IMO as he will find and exploit space better behind squeezed opposition. DLP-D is also amazing if playing out from the back.

I'd also add that wingers aren't great for possession based systems due to their tendency to cross. I'd much prefer a Treq. WBs work better than FBs with Treq so I'd change that too. I'd experiment swapping BBM-DLP positionally and watch to see what works best with the rest of the team

Would swapping the winger for a treq leave me a bit exposed to counters? considering they don't offer much defensive cover.

[Experienced Defender]

51 minutes ago, Matty99 said:

would a winger on attack possibly be too high up to find space to run into considering 4-2-3-1 is a very top heavy formation?

Well, a winger on attack duty will actually have more space available than an IF on attack would, especially in a system such as 4231. But the key reason I opted for the winger on attack (and not IF on attack) is - as I already explained - your decision to use PF on attack as the lone striker.