How would you go from a flat 4-4-2 in defence to a narrow 4-4-2 diamond in attack? Both guidance and discussions appreciated

[OJ403]

Evening all,

Before I get into the main post I'll just point out that I've concluded my main questions at the end of the post as well as my main ideas detailed in good depth throughout. So if you'd rather skip to the end for my main queries/discussion points and skim through the body then feel free. I may or may not have rambled abit... 

I think I'll properly open with some context for clarity. So I'm managing my club Derby County, we're currently in season 1 hovering around upper mid table and the play off places, which is largely as I expected. The only addition I've made is central defender Ricardo Ferreira on a free plus the obvious impending of Wayne Rooney in a few weeks (I'm in mid December) plus a tidy budget of 9ish million. I'm setting up in a 4-1-3-2 narrow inspired by many systems from both the real life and FM words (namely FM Grasshopper's Gallardo system). However, I'm not looking for help with that system as it works well in most games except for against the bigger sides in the division and teams who play an attacking (not necessarily mentality just the general approach) 4-2-3-1. Obviously the goal is promotion to the Premier League be it sneakily this season or next more realistically and I'm aware that Ill probably face more of these challenges moving forward, leading me nicely into the main topic of this post.

So as the title suggests I'm trying to create a tactic that will defend as a flat traditional 4-4-2 but attacks as a 4-4-2 with a narrow diamond midfield (or in other words 4-1-2-1-2/4-1-3-2/4-3-1-2 or any of the variations on the general theme), as per my main system. The logic is a flat 4-4-2 has more defensive solidity than a diamond midfield due to better coverage of the flanks (where we regularly get exposed against stronger sides and the 4-2-3-1 to the extent a weak Wigan side battered us 5-0 earlier in the season which to board are still abit stroppy about) and its compact shape. However, I'm still looking to maintain the overall diamond midfield shape when we attack as this is how I want us to play with the ball. I've trailed a vague system in parts of a few games to moderate success, however I'm reluctant to start with it as its only a rough concept and nothing more so its "successes" have only been as damage limitation of lost causes and maintaining 1-1s and 0-0s. As a result, I've come here to see if anyone has had success with this kind of a tactic for me to take as inspiration to apply to my own and to see if we can formulate a form of plan together. So without further delay here's my first idea:
Apologies for the lack of a proper FM screenshot but I'm not on the game right now but this is what it looks like. The idea is that the midfield diamond is formed roughly as follows:
Obviously it won't form such a "perfect" diamond, but this is the general plan. Looking at it now I'm thinking an IW-A may occupy the "10 space" as opposed to the "8 space" in the picture so perhaps a WP-A or modified WM-A, potentially even any of the three roles on a support duty. And the striker roles are as yet undermined, feasibly theres no need for them to be different from the AF-A (Jack Marriott backed up by Rhian Brewster) and DLF-S (Martyn Waghorn backed up by Chris Martin) combination I use in my regular system, however which side they'd feature in the 4-4-2 above is a discussion point for sure.

So thats the roles and duties and now for the TIs. I can't recall them exactly but as I've said its all a rough idea anyway, I'm thinking as follows:
 

In Possession:
• Shorter passing (we're still looking for a purposeful possession gameas per my 4-1-3-2)
• Width? (Maybe standard maybe narrow? I'm leaning towards standard to start but narrow may encourage the RM and LB into the narrow diamond shape)
• Underlap left? (To encourage my LB into the diamond, although as per width I'll start without)
• Overlap right? (To encourage my RM into the diamond, although as per width I'll start without)

In Transition:
• Counter (as per our main 4-1-3-2)
• Take short kicks (as per our main 4-1-3-2 as we look to play out from the back but I'm not keen on forcing the ball to be "played out of defence" due to our defence not being perfect technically, however they're competent enough to receive it short. This has worked well in my main 4-1-3-2 too so either its a fluke or my logic is sound)

Out of Possession:
• Higher defensive line (as per our main 4-1-3-2)
• Offside trap (as per our main 4-1-3-2)

PI wise we're looking at a split block with our two strikers and our two wide midfielders (not my more attacking midfielder, the LCM on the picture, as although it could be argued he ought to be in the block I have two issues with him being included. 1 - it'd compromise our compact defensive shape, the main attraction to the 4-4-2 in defense. 2 - Wayne Rooney will be playing this role soon and he's not really up to a press at his age, although in the long term this position could be included if it needs adding in later). I'd also debate roaming PIs for the two "8s" and the "10" of the diamond to encourage them into it, although I think I'll start without it to see if they do it naturally and add it if and where its it needed.

So I think I've gone on enough, realistically I wouldn't blame any of you if you haven't made it this far as I've said quite a few words to say at the least! I just wanted to provide enough detail so that it was really clear what the plan is and why and what my thinking is thus far and why, which I feel I've probably done although queries are more than welcome if anyone needs any clarification with anything. So in summary these are my main questions:
• How would you form a midfield diamond in possession but a flat 4-4-2 out of it, in terms of roles, duties, TIs and PIs?
• Have you heard of such a system be employed in real life or by yourself/others in FM? If so any screenshots/descriptions/resources/references/etc would be greatly appreciated
• What are your thoughts on my plan for the system? Does it work as a plausible tactic irrespective of the formation of the diamond? Does it make sense in terms of forming the diamond? And would you make any tweaks to who forms the diamond and/or the tactic as a whole?

Anyway this really is the end of my post for now. Sorry for the amount I've gone on way way longer than I intended and probably needed.

Cheers all

[Enzo_Francescoli]

It sounds like something that Atletico Madrid plays this year. I think I made a post about it a few weeks ago. Watched a lot of their games.

I've been trying to replicate it on FM, but the wide players in the 442 won't come inside enough to form a clear diamond in possession. The closest I got went something like this:

WP(a)            CAR(s)                 DLP(d)                 WM(s)

The WM is told sit narrow and cut inside. Wingbacks on overlap. TI: narrow width.

Another try was an assymetrical one which will more or less keep the 442 shape on defense:

IW(a)

                     CAR(s)                                              WM(s)

                                                   DLP(s)

Again, the IW doesn't quite move into a No.10 position as much as I would prefer, but I kind of liked this one, especially with high pressing. It could totally kill the opponent's build-up on their right side.

Yet another option could be to use an F9 as the tip of the diamond, but I have so far been experimenting only with the midfield shape.

[OJ403]

39 minutes ago, Enzo_Francescoli said:

Yet another option could be to use an F9 as the tip of the diamond, but I have so far been experimenting only with the midfield shape.

This could well be an option, you could then use a customised WM-A to act abit like a raumdeuter, I think Ive seen this coined a raumdeeper in the past.

In my head one of my central midfielders plays the 10 and my IWB on his side and the opposite winger comes inside as the 8s on the side of the diamond. Another thought I've since had would be to use an IWB on both sides as the 8s then my two central midfielders as the 10 and the holder. However, I'm definitely going to try what I posted initially next time I'm on the game. Thanks for the advice mate it seems like we're on the same page.

Also, you say Atletico play in this sort of a way. Would you happen to be aware of any good analysis or examples of where this has happened? If not don't worry but if you have that'd be fantastic

Cheers mate

[Enzo_Francescoli]

You can of course see by watching them play. There's some analysis online, quite a bunch I guess, these are good, for example:

 

 

 

https://www.coachesvoice.com/tactical-analysis-atletico-madrid-2-juventus-2/

 

They sort of used this against Liverpool yesterday, but after the early goal, they went defense first, and then substituted Lemar (the tip of the diamond) at half time.

 

Your idea with the IWB looks intereseting. Strictly speaking, it's not a midfield diamond, but may be easier to set up in FM. Do tell how it looks in the game.

[Experienced Defender]

On 19/02/2020 at 01:59, OJ403 said:

I'm setting up in a 4-1-3-2 narrow

 

On 19/02/2020 at 01:59, OJ403 said:

How would you form a midfield diamond in possession but a flat 4-4-2 out of it, in terms of roles, duties, TIs and PIs?

Example:

F9      AF

DLPsu    CMat   CAR

HB

    WBat     CD      CD       CWBsu

GK/SK

  When it comes to TIs and/or PIs, it really depends on the team you manage and style you want to play.

 

[OJ403]

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Example:

F9      AF

DLPsu    CMat   CAR

HB

    WBat     CD      CD       CWBsu

GK/SK

  When it comes to TIs and/or PIs, it really depends on the team you manage and style you want to play.

 

Thanks for the input but as I stated in my opening post:

On 19/02/2020 at 00:59, OJ403 said:

I'm setting up in a 4-1-3-2 narrow inspired by many systems from both the real life and FM words (namely FM Grasshopper's Gallardo system). However, I'm not looking for help with that system as it works well in most games

Such that I'm not looking for help or tweaks with that system. And for context of who I'm managing:

On 19/02/2020 at 00:59, OJ403 said:

I'm managing my club Derby County, we're currently in season 1 hovering around upper mid table and the play off places, which is largely as I expected. The only addition I've made is central defender Ricardo Ferreira on a free plus the obvious impending of Wayne Rooney

As stated in both the title and my opening post the system I'm looking for advice on is the flat dull boring traditional 4-4-2, where in possession we see the formation of a narrow diamond in the midfield area. I provided a few screenshots (albeit not of the game as I haven't had chance to be on it since posting) of the my first draft of such a system.

 

Cheers for the input mate, the 4-1-3-2 you suggested looks sound and actually isn't too dissimilar to the one I use to good effect, I'm just not looking for help with that tactic. Sorry if my post caused confusion, I hope I've cleared the situation up and if not please say

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, OJ403 said:

the system I'm looking for advice on is the flat dull boring traditional 4-4-2, where in possession we see the formation of a narrow diamond in the midfield area

Okay, sorry  

On 19/02/2020 at 01:59, OJ403 said:

Really not sure, as I haven't thought about it before. But let's say this could be something I would give a try first:

CFsu     AF

WMat    CAR    CMat    WMsu

IWBde     CD      CD     IWBsu

Again, not sure if that's really it, so take it with a pinch of salt 

[OJ403]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

CFsu     AF

WMat    CAR    CMat    WMsu

IWBde     CD      CD     IWBsu

Honestly mate don't be sorry its fine honestly. I did go on abit in my opening post so its easy to see how you could misinterpret what I was getting at. If anything its a sign of how much there is spinning round my head 😂😂

And thats also not a million miles from my first draft tbf. Hopefully I should have chance to get on tomorrow once I've got some personal stuff out the way. Do you have any views the TIs I posted in my original post? For context, I go with shorter passing, counter, short kicks (as in goalkeeper distribution), a higher defensive line (by one) and offside trap in my usual tactic. The others I suggested are possibilities that may aid the 4-4-2 and the "diamond"

[Experienced Defender]

30 minutes ago, OJ403 said:

Do you have any views the TIs I posted in my original post? For context, I go with shorter passing, counter, short kicks (as in goalkeeper distribution), a higher defensive line (by one) and offside trap in my usual tactic

From the perspective of the narrow diamond midfield you want to achieve when attacking, I would start with just 3 instructions:

- balanced mentality 

- shorter passing (to keep the players closer together)

- distribute to CBs and FBs 

That's how I would start before making small gradual tweaks (if needed). 

[OJ403]

That all makes sense but I have one question

12 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

distribute to CBs and FBs 

Without wanting to understate but simply why? How would this help achieve the "diamond"? Or is it just cause you think it'd be effective to the tactic as a whole? 

[Experienced Defender]

31 minutes ago, OJ403 said:

Without wanting to understate but simply why? How would this help achieve the "diamond"? Or is it just cause you think it'd be effective to the tactic as a whole?

Both. Basically, it's a "surrogate" of sorts for the Play out of defence (which you yourself said want to avoid due to your defenders' lack of technical skill anyway). Plus, if you used the play out of defence TI, it would encourage your midfield to drop deeper in the early stage of attacking build-up, which in turn can positionally disrupt the diamond shape you want to achieve. So these are basic reasons why I opted for distribution to CBs and FBs as preferable to playing out of defence.  

[sejo]

2 ore fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

CFsu     AF

WMat    CAR    CMat    WMsu

IWBde     CD      CD     IWBsu

I like the idea of a diamond defending in a 442 but... I don't understand where is the diamond here, I mean, who is the low vertex (the playmaker/defensive one), the CAR? Will he drop down? And what about the PI of the WM?

Thanks!

Edited February 22, 2020 by sejo

[OJ403]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

So these are basic reasons why I opted for distribution to CBs and FBs as preferable to playing out of defence.  

Makes sense really and in terms of distributing to centre backs it matches my main 4-1-3-2. But I have to ask why full backs too? If there is indeed a reason.

1 hour ago, sejo said:

I like the idea of a diamond defending in a 442 but... I don't understand where is the diamond here, I mean, who is the low vertex (the playmaker/defensive one), the CAR? Will he drop down? And what about the PI of the WM?

In @Experienced Defender's response I'd imagind the IWB-D is the base, the CAR-S and the IWB-S are the 8s on the side and the CM-A is the 10 at the tip. Then the two WMs would be the wide players on the outside. Although thinking about it now I'd be inclined to ask why WMs and not wingers?

On 19/02/2020 at 00:59, OJ403 said:

 

In my original post the diamonds formed as follows, mainly because it suits the players I have at my disposal better. It also provides more variety on the flanks in theory: on the right the deep player (the RB) goes wide whilst the advanced player (the RM) cuts in but on the left the deep player (the LB) cuts in and the advanced player (the LM) goes wide.

[sejo]

37 minuti fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

In my original post the diamonds formed as follows, mainly because it suits the players I have at my disposal better. It also provides more variety on the flanks in theory: on the right the deep player (the RB) goes wide whilst the advanced player (the RM) cuts in but on the left the deep player (the LB) cuts in and the advanced player (the LM) goes wide.

So in attack should your team go like this?

------- GK ----------

------ CB CB -------

------- DLP ---------

----- IWs - WMa ----

------- CMa --------

Ws --------- WBs

-------- F F ---------

If it's correct, which kind of player would you use for the WM left? A winger or more an IW/IF? And why do you use a WM/AP on attack? Thank you

Edited February 22, 2020 by sejo

[OJ403]

31 minutes ago, sejo said:

------- GK ----------

------ CB CB -------

------- DLP ---------

----- IWs - WMa ----

------- CMa --------

Ws --------- WBs

-------- F F ---------

Yep so in the picture below this is what I'm aiming for ought to play out like this in my head:

34 minutes ago, sejo said:

which kind of player would you use for the WM left? A winger or more an IW/IF? And why do you use a WM/AP on attack?

And I'm confused as to what uou mean by this? Out wide I cannot select either an IF or an AP as I'm not playing my players in the AM strata as that'd mean my formation is an incredibly unstable 4-2-4. Instead my wide men are in the midfield strata in a 4-4-2 meaning my options are as follows:

• Defensive Winger (D or S)

• Winger (S or A)

• Inverted Winger (S or A)

• Wide Playmaker (S or A)

• Wide Midfielder (D, S, A or auto)

Incase the options are confusing you as admittedly it may be unclear the first role in each position would be my first choice (so take my MCL or example this would be CM-A), then the next one would be second (so MEZ-A) then third and fourth and so on. I've attached my tactic as it would appear on the tactics screen in game for context:

Does this answer your question? Or have I misunderstood?

[sejo]

Ok so you have two wide players (your WBs and your Ws). Is there a reason why you chose the IW on attack instead of support?

[radenje]

there is no role that will make normal midfielder move higher up the pitch to act like no.10 and form the diamond. You can somehow try to replicate it with MEZ(a) but still it won't be the same as player in this offensive number 10 spot 

[sejo]

8 minuti fa, radenje ha scritto:

there is no role that will make normal midfielder move higher up the pitch to act like no.10 and form the diamond. You can somehow try to replicate it with MEZ(a) but still it won't be the same as player in this offensive number 10 spot 

So do you think we are wasting our time? I'm not sarcastic, it's a true question!

Edited February 22, 2020 by sejo

[radenje]

10 minutes ago, sejo said:

So do you think we are wasting our time? I'm not sarcastic, it's a true question!

Yes. I tried to replicate Donny Van De Beek from Ajax when they played 4-3-3 on paper but this transformed into 4-2-3-1 with Donny Van De Beek moving so high and act like number 10. Vidal does the same in Barcelona, they play 4-3-3 but almost everytime they have ball he goes higher up the pitch and act like second striker or smth, basicly - stays in this #10 area near the striker. I tried everything, different roles (box-to-box, CM on attack duty), player traits, player instructions, different mentalities and the closest thing to this was MEZ(A) but it still wasn't the same. So I don't think you can replicate this movement and make your central midfielder in flat 4-4-2 or 4-1-2-3 act like number 10 and move higher up the pitch and be the apex of this diamond. You can try with wide midfielders or wingers (wide playmaker or trequartista) or maybe IWB (A) 

[sejo]

2 minuti fa, radenje ha scritto:

You can try with wide midfielders or wingers (wide playmaker or trequartista) or maybe IWB (A)

How?

[OJ403]

26 minutes ago, sejo said:

Ok so you have two wide players (your WBs and your Ws). Is there a reason why you chose the IW on attack instead of support?

Mainly penetration purposes if I'm honest. I don't want my ML on attack as my MCL is also on attack and my LB (IWB-S) leaves his position so we'd also be exposed. But mainly for penetration and runners from deep.

26 minutes ago, radenje said:

there is no role that will make normal midfielder move higher up the pitch to act like no.10 and form the diamond. You can somehow try to replicate it with MEZ(a) but still it won't be the same as player in this offensive number 10 spot

Obviously I haven't fully tried this as yet but I have to dispute your claim. Obviously he will not sit exactly as a 10 else he'd be a 10 not a "false 10", if you will. I've had experiences in the past in all 3 CM slots (LCM, CM and RCM where) where players act abit 10ish. My whole logic is alluding to a vague sort of diamond shape with the ball and not a rigid diamond else that is what I'd use to start with. By starting in a more robust defensive shape (also one with more natural width, which is a key weakness of the diamond) and moving into a diamond we become a multitude of things:

• less predictable due to movement off the ball (into the "diamond")

• less predictable due to more runners

• we have more space to exploit due to our movement dragging defenders out of position

• due to the asymmetry of our diamond on the picth (you may argue its more a parallelogram or a rhombas) our players have easier forward passing options as our players pop up between the oppositions vertical lines

If I wanted an exact 10 I'd use an out and out diamond or another shape with one, but if I did we'd have none of the things listed above.

Although I appreciate your input as as stated all advice is welcome and appreciated

[sejo]

5 minuti fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

Obviously I haven't fully tried this as yet but I have to dispute your claim. Obviously he will not sit exactly as a 10 else he'd be a 10 not a "false 10", if you will. I've had experiences in the past in all 3 CM slots (LCM, CM and RCM where) where players act abit 10ish. My whole logic is alluding to a vague sort of diamond shape with the ball and not a rigid diamond else that is what I'd use to start with. By starting in a more robust defensive shape (also one with more natural width, which is a key weakness of the diamond) and moving into a diamond we become a multitude of things:

 

I like that! Any specific PI?

[dejarik]

Have you tried with 2xIWB and a DLPd plus a CMa in central midfield?

[OJ403]

13 minutes ago, sejo said:

I like that! Any specific PI?

Not as yet no. The player in question will be Wayne Rooney for now, so I'm thinking a plain old AP-A to try and encourage the ball to him through to play maker ball magnet thing. I'd probably avoid telling him to move into channels as I want the opposite really - the channels would incite movement to the wide, I want him to come inside even further a touch. Id be tempted to tell him to roam and nothing more. Potentially dribbling or risky passes and so on depending on who the player is. Moving forward with the save obviously Rooney will move into an old aged pensioner's home and I intend to recruit a more dynamic exciting midfielder (I also have Jason Knight coming through the ranks whos an option) and move my holder to a DLP-D from CM-D due to personal preference. At that point I'd probably make my "false 10" a plain CM-A and add PIs accordingly.

Similarly you could also describe my LB and my RM as "false 8s" as this is the area of the pitch they move into when we have the ball to form our diamond.

17 minutes ago, dejarik said:

Have you tried with 2xIWB and a DLPd plus a CMa in central midfield?

Unfortunately not yet no. The central midfielder situation I've discussed above and moving forward I'm inclined to agree with your central midfield duo. The main reason for not using dual IWBs, or at least to start with, is this:

2 hours ago, OJ403 said:

It also provides more variety on the flanks in theory: on the right the deep player (the RB) goes wide whilst the advanced player (the RM) cuts in but on the left the deep player (the LB) cuts in and the advanced player (the LM) goes wide.

Without knowing your knowledge of our players at Derby (they're my club in real life so I have good knowledge) I have two promising full backs: Max Lowe and Jayden Bogle, both of whom are slightly more suited to going on the outside than the in. However, they're both relatively blank canvases so as to speak so could be adapted to suit an IWB role moving forward. However, as I said above, I fear this would make us slightly one dimensional movement wise out wide.

Although I would try it for sure, in this instance I'm assuming you'd suggesting the winger role out wide? And do you think this would form a "diamond" better?

[sejo]

10 minuti fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

I'd probably avoid telling him to move into channels as I want the opposite really - the channels would incite movement to the wide, I want him to come inside even further a touch. Id be tempted to tell him to roam and nothing more.

Is this specific for Rooney or for the n10 role? Because the MEZ has "move into channels" set to default

Edited February 22, 2020 by sejo

[OJ403]

12 minutes ago, sejo said:

Is this specific for Rooney or for the n10 role? Because the MEZ has "move into channels" set to default

The whole 10 role. As I stated I see a channel movement into a wider area, not what I want from my 10. So the role in general tbh. Although as tweaking progresses the MEZ could be an option, albeit not my first choice

[sejo]

3 minuti fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

The whole 10 role. As I stated I see a channel movement into a wider area, not what I want from my 10. So the role in general tbh. Although as tweaking progresses the MEZ could be an option, albeit not my first choice

Thank you, I'll try to experiment and report you soon

[OJ403]

9 minutes ago, sejo said:

Thank you, I'll try to experiment and report you soon

Cheers mate really appreciated. Hopefully I'll be able to do the same into this week and I'll be able to provide some evidential conclusions myself rather than the hypotheses I've thrown about

Also make sure to use your own ideas and interpretations of whats been said as opposed to directly copying mine and others as this won't help anyone learn or develop. By all means take ideas from us all, I for one know I will be, but make it your interpretation. Your comments are also highly appreciated, I've found it really useful to discuss my ideas and take on others and in actual fact many of the things I've said tonight have been inspired and the thoughts have been initiated by the comments made. So thank you to you too.

Good luck and keep us posted!

Cheers mate

[nidhar.ram]

I would probably go with something like this.

 

To get the 4-3-1-2 shape in transition, your players will have to need good off the ball and full tactical familiarity to achieve this.

Also, I am wondering if the tempo needs to be slower plus hold shape after winning the ball,, just so that it gives players time to move to their intended positions.

Basically my TI's would be,

Balanced mentality, Play Out of Defence, Shorter Passing, Lower Tempo, Be More Expressive ( to compensate for lower tempo & shorter passing), Hold shape

Let me know what you think of this.  

 

[sejo]

Where can I find the pass map of my team to read properly every role? Like this:

Edited February 23, 2020 by sejo

[OJ403]

58 minutes ago, nidhar.ram said:

Also, I am wondering if the tempo needs to be slower plus hold shape after winning the ball,, just so that it gives players time to move to their intended positions.

The slower tempo I can see and support as a possibility. I'm wary this would make us too predictable and passive, however it would undoubtedly increase the amount of time the diamond has to form. So there's fors and againsts that, its definitely in the back of my mind.

And regarding hold shape its a TI I can't get my head round ever wanting to use tbh. Why would I want to tell my side not to attack the opposition when they're most vulnerable? Although again I can see the point and fully agree with it about the formation of the diamond, its just not for me as a TI choice.

And I like the roles and duties combinations too, particularly how you've varied the movement on the flanks. However, I would question why you've thought of an IWB-D, particularly the defend part. Surely this would make him sit more in line with the DLP-D as opposed to as an 8? I also find your choice of an attack behind a support out wide on the right interesting and probably would aid the diamond formation and the attacking threat immensely from a width perspective.

 

33 minutes ago, sejo said:

Where can I find the pass map of my team to read properly every role? Like this:

If I'm honest mate I'm not 100% sure what you mean. The average positions screen are found on the match analysis screen and something like the image you've posted lands in my inbox a few days after the game showing key pass combinations and average positions. I don't know if anyone else has any ideas what @sejo's getting at?

[sejo]

1 ora fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

If I'm honest mate I'm not 100% sure what you mean. The average positions screen are found on the match analysis screen and something like the image you've posted lands in my inbox a few days after the game showing key pass combinations and average positions. I don't know if anyone else has any ideas what @sejo's getting at?

I've found it, thanks.

I'm struggling to find a good forwards partnership, any ideas?

[OJ403]

20 minutes ago, sejo said:

I've found it, thanks.

I'm struggling to find a good forwards partnership, any ideas?

No need to thank me honestly its fine

And that would depend on many things:

• who your managing and how good you are relative to the rest of the league

• who your strikers are

• the rest of your roles, duties, TIs and PIs

Let us know all of these things and we'll see what we can do. But for context I use Jack Marriott and Martyn Waghorn as an AF-A and DLF-s respectively. Off the top of my head they've got 8 and 11 goals respectively. You can view their profiles here: https://fmdataba.com/20/c/2350/derby-county/

[sejo]

6 minuti fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

And that would depend on many things:

• who your managing and how good you are relative to the rest of the league

• who your strikers are

• the rest of your roles, duties, TIs and PIs

I've won Serie A for the first time and now I'm starting the new season:

[OJ403]

Well its safe to say your boys are just a bit better than mine...

In my head in this "false diamond" the focus is on the strikers (or at least one) to score most of the goals, with other plays expected to chip in here and there. Obviously you may see this differently and please say if you do but I'm really struggling to see who's scoring your goals. Both your forwards are dropping off and linking the play with few players running beyond. So I'd make sure one (not both) is looking to attack the back lines. Out of interest whats your rational with using two support duties?

1 hour ago, sejo said:

 

Looking at Imaz first I see he "likes the ball played into his feet". Based purely off this alone I wouldn't encourage him to be the runner and instead I'd want him as the link man (admittedly this goes against my system as Marriott has this issue but were currently undergoing retraining to remove it). Imaz also looks like an exceptional footballer with his passing and technique. I'd consider the following, in this order:

• DLF-S

• T-A

• CF-S

1 hour ago, sejo said:

 

Di Lorenzo looks much more straight forward as a guy. I'd want him to score goals and not much else. Obviously he looks capable as a link man but I wouldn't go any further, whilst on the other hand Imaz could play either role exceptionally. Anyway back to Di Lorenzo, hes good running with and without the ball, getting into spaces and scoring goals. So this ones fairly simple to me: I'd be 99% sure I'd use an AF-A. I'd avoid CF-A as this role seems to not really do anything in particularly in my experiences, he doesn't work hard enough to be a PF and I'd only consider a P-A as a back up role should he be having a quiet game.

So in summary I'd line up with Di Lorenzo on the left as an AF-A and Imaz on the right as a DLF-S, with the possibility of tweaks according to what you see in games.

1 hour ago, sejo said:

 

I've also noticed your using double playmakers in the middle. Simply, why? Whats your logic there? I'd be concerned that this may mean that the strikers don't actually see enough ball and the play isn't incisive enough so thats something to watch out for too.

Really the major things from my reply to consider are as follows:

• why the two support duties up top?

• why the two playmakers in the middle? It'd also be interesting to hear what those players are good/bad at too or see their profiles

• and I didn't mention this in my post, but theres more to your strikers scoring goals than their roles and duties. If the system around them doesn't help them (as I alluded to with the dual playmakers) then they'll probably struggle. Theres also more to strikers than scoring goals, but obviously this is plan A for them

• oh and your strikers are bloody tasty! 😂😂

[sejo]

2 ore fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

I've also noticed your using double playmakers in the middle. Simply, why? Whats your logic there? I'd be concerned that this may mean that the strikers don't actually see enough ball and the play isn't incisive enough so thats something to watch out for too.

Really the major things from my reply to consider are as follows:

• why the two support duties up top?

• why the two playmakers in the middle? It'd also be interesting to hear what those players are good/bad at too or see their profiles

• and I didn't mention this in my post, but theres more to your strikers scoring goals than their roles and duties. If the system around them doesn't help them (as I alluded to with the dual playmakers) then they'll probably struggle. Theres also more to strikers than scoring goals, but obviously this is plan A for them

• oh and your strikers are bloody tasty! 😂😂

Ok, the screenshot of tactic was outdated, I'm using CMd + MEZa (or CMa). I like the football we play but still in trouble with my strikers (I think it's just the ME): the 2 support duties was just an attempt!

Another doubt regards the wide left midfielder: IW? WPM? I don't know which kind of player I should use...

UPDATE: strikers don't score, no CCC, no possession... Di Lorenzo has yet to find his first goal, wtf??

Edited February 23, 2020 by sejo

[Experienced Defender]

On 22/02/2020 at 20:47, OJ403 said:

But I have to ask why full backs too? If there is indeed a reason

For safety reasons only. I personally prefer to give the keeper more options to pick from, so that he could always choose the option that is optimal in a given situation. If CBs are under pressure, he can distribute to a fullback. And vice versa. 

[OJ403]

2 hours ago, sejo said:

Another doubt regards the wide left midfielder: IW? WPM? I don't know which kind of player I should use...

I mean that really depends on the specific player in question. What is he good at? And how is he doing in the tactic as a whole? And with regards to forming the diamond?

2 hours ago, sejo said:

UPDATE: strikers don't score, no CCC, no possession... Di Lorenzo has yet to find his first goal, wtf??

Well this doesn't sound ideal at all. Has this been the case all season or is it a recent development? As in the lack of CCC and possession? And how are your results? What are you actually seeing when you watch games? Any stand out issues and successes?

2 hours ago, sejo said:

 

And you've also got the strikers the opposite way round to as I suggested in terms of roles and duties. I suggested Di Lorenzo on the left (which you have) but as an AF-A, with Imaz on the right as a DLF-S. Whys this? Obviously theres no saying I'm right in what I said earlier I'm just intrigued.

[sejo]

14 ore fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

And you've also got the strikers the opposite way round to as I suggested in terms of roles and duties. I suggested Di Lorenzo on the left (which you have) but as an AF-A, with Imaz on the right as a DLF-S. Whys this? Obviously theres no saying I'm right in what I said earlier I'm just intrigued.

Just a mistake when I set the formation

 

14 ore fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

And you've also got the strikers the opposite way round to as I suggested in terms of roles and duties. I suggested Di Lorenzo on the left (which you have) but as an AF-A, with Imaz on the right as a DLF-S. Whys this? Obviously theres no saying I'm right in what I said earlier I'm just intrigued.

Simply every game is the same: nothing happens (literally) with very few highlights; if I'm lucky I win 1-0 (goals are not coming from strikers or beautiful play, just long shots and free kicks), if I'm not, the opponent wins with just 1 or 2 shots at the goal.

Look, I've made an experiment playing vs Chelsea in Champions League, group stage. I've played the match 3 times no matter about result:
- first time I lost 1-0 dominating (5 CCC, 62% possession, Chelsea 0 CCC, my strikers 6,2/6,3 ratings)
- second time I've lost 2-0, Chelsea totally dominated my team (we had just 3 shots on goal, we didn't keep the ball)
- third time it was 0-0 without any emotions at all by both teams.

Of course I used every time same tactic, formation and team talks. I assume the ME is just random, because I know of course result can be different no matter if I use the same setup (it's football, not math), but it's totally unrealistic first to dominate the opponent, second to be outclassed, last to have the most boring game in football history.

I love the way we try to find beautiful realistic setup for our teams, without any boring exploit, but at the end it seems to me there is no sense at all, we just waste our time: all we should do is put 3 strikers ahead and find a hole in the ME. The worse is I cannot really understand how SI could release a patch without testing it. I think I'll go back to FM18

Edited February 24, 2020 by sejo

[OJ403]

Sorry fot the delayed response mate, its been a busy day off the field and unfortunately I didn't manage to get any game time in at all. Hopefully tomorrow will be the day...

And none of that sounds ideal at all. Although it is crucial to remember that we are developing not just a tactic but a football identity here, so a few hiccups (and even a few full on wretching fits) are completely expected and realistic. If you didn't expect this than I'd have to question how you've achieved much at all...

Admittedly this isn't the best match engine in a while (in fact its probably my least favourite in a while but that's not too relevant), but to entirely blame it is simply ridiculous. I 100% acknowledge it isn't great but both myself and clearly yourself (being as you've got a Serie C side I'd never heard of til I googled them to become Serie A champions), not to mention all the other people on the forums and the wider community as well as those who aren't active online who've also been successful. Every issue is down to a multitude of things, as per real football. One thing you've said I strongly disagree with is this:

10 hours ago, sejo said:

It's totally unrealistic first to dominate the opponent, second to be outclassed, last to have the most boring game in football history

Is unrealistic though? I'm not sure what your knowledge of Derby and the Championship are in real life and without running the risk of seeming obsessed with us I'd highly recommend you look into our results and games against Leeds both regular season and play offs and reconsider your original claim. Might I also reference the Istanbul Miracle (obviously this is one game, but of two very different halves) and I'm sure there's multiple other examples, their just off the top of my head. So therefore, of course the

10 hours ago, sejo said:

ME is just random

because

10 hours ago, sejo said:

it's football, not math

You said it yourself. Going back to this again

10 hours ago, sejo said:

totally unrealistic first to dominate the opponent, second to be outclassed, last to have the most boring game in football history

and

10 hours ago, sejo said:

Simply every game is the same

Well which one is it? It can't be both surely?

 

Apologies if I've come across flippant in any of this but I'm seriously confused by your sudden change of heart. Yesterday we were being all constructive and bouncing ideas off eachother, with the very valued inputs of others, but now you seem to have completely given up and lost interest. Why? Whats changed?

Sorry if I've come across harsh or a bit of a b*llend here but I'm just saying what I feel you need to here

[sejo]

13 ore fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

Sorry fot the delayed response mate, its been a busy day off the field and unfortunately I didn't manage to get any game time in at all. Hopefully tomorrow will be the day...

 

Don't worry at all mate

 

13 ore fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

Is unrealistic though? I'm not sure what your knowledge of Derby and the Championship are in real life and without running the risk of seeming obsessed with us I'd highly recommend you look into our results and games against Leeds both regular season and play offs and reconsider your original claim

It's totally different: you have met your opponent several times in different moments, it's logic that they will change something to face your team (as probably you do). I've just re-played a match where IA of course behaved literally the same. So if my game plan leads my team to DOMINATE (not to play just better but to dominate), it means it's correct. Football can be unpredictable, true story, but not random.

At the end: I have a great team underperforming without a good reason and If I look for help here in the forum, I just bump into the same tactic without any "brilliant touch" (that's why I really appreciated your suggestion about the false diamond).

Just my opinion though. Cheers!

Edited February 25, 2020 by sejo

[OJ403]

2 hours ago, sejo said:

At the end: I have a great team underperforming without a good reason and If I look for help here in the forum, I just bump into the same tactic without any "brilliant touch" (that's why I really appreciated your suggestion about the false diamond).

Genuinely thanks mate. That last bit actually does mean quite a bit. I fully see where your coming from about the similarity of tactics suggested which is why too I don't post all that often. Admittedly these tactics that people suggest they suggest for a reason they lack that wow factor that really makes you sit up and take notice. We all want to be Pep Guardiola not Eddie Howe, in terms of inventiveness and excitement these tactics tend to lie closer to the Eddie Howe end of the spectrum. Although obviously they're still good and effective it's just abit beige. Hence why now I've started this thread on this "false diamond" for people to come and think outside the box (or diamond as it were) and try and create something as a collective. Unfortunately I've not been able to keep up my side of the bargain recently as reality has kept me too occupied to find any game time so apologies for that. However as we speak I'm loading up my laptop to have a decent session in this afternoon/evening and I'll report back later, assuming your still up for it?

And any pointers on the successes and failures of the system and the formation of the diamond are very much appreciated

[sejo]

2 ore fa, OJ403 ha scritto:

assuming your still up for it

I'm in!

[OJ403]

5 hours ago, sejo said:

I'm in!

Well thats what we like to hear 😁😁

So I did manage some play time tonight, I managed 3 games. Unfortunately I was dim and forgot to take screenshots of anything that happened, however I can remember what happened generally:

First up was Charlton at home. They played the conventional diamond and completely blocked off all space in the middle. We won 1-0 with a goal from a corner. We dominated the first half and at half time I made tweaks, which was probably ill advised. We dropped the left overlap and went narrower and thinking about it this was daft as there was no space in the middle. Charlton dominated the second but we clung on for a 1-0. Key things I noticed was a lack of inside movement from my left midfield into the 8 position as hypothesised by @radenje here, albeit referring to the 10 position although the general movement is the same:

On 22/02/2020 at 20:53, radenje said:

there is no role that will make normal midfielder move higher up the pitch to act like no.10 and form the diamond. You can somehow try to replicate it with MEZ(a) but still it won't be the same as player in this offensive number 10 spot 

In this match my left sider played as an IW-A told to roam and close down more (in a split block). Overall the signs were good and I enjoyed the interaction between my right side (STR: Waghorn, DLF-S. MCR: Huddlestone, AP-A. MR: Holmes, W-S. RB: Bogle, IWB-S)

 

Next up was Barnsley and the arrival of Wayne f-ing Rooney!! I kept everything the same and didn't tweak during the game except for two things. I changed Rooney from the AP-A to a RPM-S as he wasn't getting into the game and on the ball enough. This was a situational tweak and I highly doubt it will become the main but time will tell. I also gave my LM (IW-A) the instructions to sit narrower as the Charlton trends continued. This made no impact at all. However, the performance was pleasing again: we won 2-1 with our goal from a defensive brain fart that you simply cannot account for. 

 

Next was Middlesbrough in the FA cup. The first half was good and same again. We led 1-0. I began the second half and after about 10 minutes I paused it to eat some food. Turns out I forgot to press pause and the whole game played out and we drew 1-1. Bit annoying won't lie but these things happen.

 

So this is how we're lining up at the moment:

The only roles I'm unhappy with are the IW-A as hes largely failed at everything I've wanted from him and has been entirely ineffective. This role and the duty too could change to literally anything. We've just entered the January window so recruitment is very much on. Any player could join of any type. We will see how this goes...

I've also been a shade disappointed with our top scorer Waghorn as the DLF-S too, however hes not been the most consistent so at this moment thats what I'm putting this down to.

 

So now onto TIs:

• In possession were passing shorter and overlapping on the left. These have been on. Narrowness has been experimented with and I'm unconvinced so far. I'm tempted to add an underlap on the right as I've mentioned in previous posts.

• In transition were countering and the advice of @Experienced Defender has been heeded as we now distribute to centre backs and full backs. This is less successful with the IWB as he comes in too far often, but with the left WB-S this has been really useful in a quick turn around into the channels for Marriott (AF-A, STL) to chase down.

• Out of possession its as mentioned previously. Higher d-line and an offside trap. Simple but effective. Pressing is triggered through the split block mentioned in an earlier post (strikers and wide midfielders). However, we look vulnerable on when the opposition break and I'm unsure how to fix this, probably making this where I need most help.

 

So the major take aways from this post are as follows:

• I'm incredibly unreliable when it comes to remembering to take screenshots...

• The left midfielder/false 8 has been difficult to implement so far. Recruitment pending its possible the he may become a tweaked plain WM on support or attack, in a role I may coin an in-inverted winger or thd "reverted winger", essentially the opposite of an IW in terms of PIs (sitting narrow but dribbling wide). You could liken such movements to a mezzala I suppose. Although intentions are to persist with the IW-A for now.

• Max Lowe's been underwhelming as our left WB-S. Not bad just underwhelming considering he was such a key part of our 4-1-3-2 previously. Although I suspect his influence is being curbed by the failing IW-A in front of him. I suspect fixing that role will resolve this slight issue.

• We're vulnerable when the opposition counter centrally, particularly in the space between our midfielders and defenders both vertically and horizontally. We're definitely capable of the higher line and offside trap as we've used them effectively all season until this point and I'm at a loss as to how to mitigate this before it costs us dearly.

• The right sides nigh on perfect, or at least the biggest positive. The interaction of the 5 outfielders (if you include Ferreira at centre back) had been nothing short of exceptional and exactly what I'd hoped for in terms of the diamond and dynamic movement and interplay. I'd go a good 8.5 out of 10, if not a 9 out of 10.

• And Rooney's a major difference as expected. His superior qualities and abilities are so clear to see and I feel as though the "false 10" is the real x-factor player in the system and is reminiscent of the true playmaker of old whos job was simply to make play happen and not much else. He's the lynchpin that holds out right hand side (and the system) together with 1 goal and 2 assists in 1 and a half games.

[sejo]

This is how I'm playing right now, but I'm struggling: yes I am first but the way we play is poor and strikers have always very poor ratings. Plus I have the same LM issue: IW or WPM, he seems to be out of the context.