Inverted winger & inside forward in 4231

[yorkie87]

Anyone had any joy with either of these roles in a 4231? Find whoever I play there to be very inconsistent. Mainly just running straight into defenders. 

[Zemahh]

39 minutes ago, yorkie87 said:

Mainly just running straight into defenders.

Well, they're both roles with Dribble More instruction locked in, meaning the player needs to be capable of beating his man regularly. If you want a more team-oriented build-up, Wide Midfielder is a better choice.

Besides that, roles shouldn't be looked at in isolation. Maybe he ends up dribbling himself into trouble because he has no passing options close by? Or his mentality is too high (e.g. Positive + IW-At = Very Attacking), meaning he's taking too much risks?

You'll need to post your tactic and player's profile for more.

Edited May 30, 2020 by Zemahh

[zyfon5]

1 hour ago, yorkie87 said:

Anyone had any joy with either of these roles in a 4231? Find whoever I play there to be very inconsistent. Mainly just running straight into defenders. 

Hi inverted wingers are one of my favourite roles in this year's FM. I have also use a 4231 with two inside forwards before in FM18 which has produced some beautiful attacking plays. As have been mentioned, inverted wingers and inside forwards have dribble more as their default instructions so you will need a very technical player with some pace to play these roles effectively. They will also need players around them to take advantage of the space created due to their dribbling movements or else they risk being isolated. General tips: both roles will utilize a lot of space so make sure you don't have too many players near them to open up the space required for them to dribble around. 

[yorkie87]

How do you get players around them to take advantage of the space they create whilst not having too many players near them to open up the space they require?

[Experienced Defender]

Speaking specifically about the 4231, I would either avoid playing an inside-oriented role (IF/IW) on both flanks - because I don't want to create a jam in the middle where there already is the AMC - or would at least play them on different duties. In the latter case, I would make sure my fullbacks are played in roles that can provide enough attacking width. On the side of my support-duty IW/IF, I would look to have a naturally overlapping fullback role (in a 4231 that would be FB on attack duty) with a holding CM (ideally DLP) who should both provide defensive cover and help recycle possession when needed,

[HanziZoloman]

My right footed right IFa just scored the winner against Celtic (which I have not beaten so far) after a crossing of my left FBs

great man! That’s it! 
 

edit: wrong thread .. sorry .. there is another inverted thread ..

Edited May 31, 2020 by HanziZoloman

[daveb653]

On 31/05/2020 at 02:11, Experienced Defender said:

Speaking specifically about the 4231, I would either avoid playing an inside-oriented role (IF/IW) on both flanks - because I don't want to create a jam in the middle where there already is the AMC - or would at least play them on different duties. In the latter case, I would make sure my fullbacks are played in roles that can provide enough attacking width. On the side of my support-duty IW/IF, I would look to have a naturally overlapping fullback role (in a 4231 that would be FB on attack duty) with a holding CM (ideally DLP) who should both provide defensive cover and help recycle possession when needed,

@Experienced Defender mind if I ask why a FB over a WB? Is it for the extra defensive stability provided form a FB? Just curious as I thought a wing back would more readily overlap, but by putting him on support you wouldn't lose to much defensive-ness. I actually prefer he FB A role, I was jus curious as to why you chose it, everydays a school day   

[Britrock]

This is my current formation which uses both of them. The full backs provide the width with almost constant overlaps (I always try to train my FBs to have get further forwards). The IF and IW are constantly getting on the end of each other's, or the WB's, crosses. In the league and the Libertadores, my starting IWs has 7 goals in 8 starts and my IFa has 8 goals in 10 starts.

[Experienced Defender]

8 hours ago, daveb653 said:

@Experienced Defender mind if I ask why a FB over a WB?

Because it's a top-heavy system without a DM, so I don't want to undermine my defensive solidity with an overly attack-minded fullback. But in a 4123 wide - as a more balanced system - WB on attack could be an option. Of course, it's just my personal approach, but it does not mean that you have to follow it. 

 

8 hours ago, daveb653 said:

Just curious as I thought a wing back would more readily overlap, but by putting him on support you wouldn't lose to much defensive-ness

Yes, WB on support instead of FB on attack can also work. As always, depends on what exactly you want to achieve.

[daveb653]

10 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Because it's a top-heavy system without a DM, so I don't want to undermine my defensive solidity with an overly attack-minded fullback. But in a 4123 wide - as a more balanced system - WB on attack could be an option. Of course, it's just my personal approach, but it does not mean that you have to follow it. 

 

Yes, WB on support instead of FB on attack can also work. As always, depends on what exactly you want to achieve.

Thought as much  thanks.