352

[Lam3r]

Cleaned up in my save using the usual 41221 so I am looking at trying something different moving forward. Presuming you had suitable and capable players, anyone see any glaring errors here or any roles they think should be changed?

Looking to play a high press but with the central CB on cover for a change rather than employing an offside trap - inspired by Coady at Wolves. Tempo set by the Regista (which may end up being a DLP, cos well Regista's are hard to come by!). Bit of everything from the BBM with the Mezzala linking up wide with the LWB. Would like most goals to come from the strikers.

 

[Experienced Defender]

27 minutes ago, Lam3r said:

Presuming you had suitable and capable players, anyone see any glaring errors here or any roles they think should be changed?

Honestly, a midfield consisting of a regista, BBM and mezzala looks pretty shaky defensively for my liking. Changing the BBM into a BWM on support or a carrilero and switching the mezzala's duty to support would make it not just more stable defensively but also better in terms of space creation in attack.

The rest of roles and duties look okay to me  

When it comes to instructions, I would definitely avoid narrow defensive width when already using a narrow formation (either standard or wider). 

27 minutes ago, Lam3r said:

Looking to play a high press

Well, I am not sure that a high-pressing style is a good idea in a bottom-heavy formation like yours. Actually, you seem to be trying to mix a bit of everything, which usually leads to a lack of tactical identity. 

[Lam3r]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Honestly, a midfield consisting of a regista, BBM and mezzala looks pretty shaky defensively for my liking. Changing the BBM into a BWM on support or a carrilero and switching the mezzala's duty to support would make it not just more stable defensively but also better in terms of space creation in attack.

The rest of roles and duties look okay to me  

When it comes to instructions, I would definitely avoid narrow defensive width when already using a narrow formation (either standard or wider). 

Well, I am not sure that a high-pressing style is a good idea in a bottom-heavy formation like yours. Actually, you seem to be trying to mix a bit of everything, which usually leads to a lack of tactical identity. 

Hmm some food for thought. TBH never deployed a Regista so not quite sure how AWOL he will be at times. Switching to a DLP probably makes sense given the hold position instruction on both defend and support?

Which in theory gives a bit more license to the two in front...

The mezzalla was on attack purely because the WB on that side is on support. Not a fan of both Wingbacks being on the same mentality, seems bad for variety to me.

Narrow made sense in my head as with 3 cb's i thought it would force the oppo into crossing.

[Experienced Defender]

22 hours ago, Lam3r said:

TBH never deployed a Regista so not quite sure how AWOL he will be at times

Regista is a nice role, but it requires not just defensively reliable teammates around him to cover for him defense-wise but also the player himself really needs to be very good both technically and mentally (certainly more so than an ordinary DLP). 

 

22 hours ago, Lam3r said:

Switching to a DLP probably makes sense given the hold position instruction on both defend and support?

DLP is definitely a less risky role than regista, especially if the player is not good enough to play as a regista. I don't know who is your regista, but you always need to be careful whom you assign any role to. In other words, do not give any role to any player and do not insist on using fancy exotic roles just for the sake of having them. Make sure each role is given to a player with suitable attributes (relative both to the role itself and your tactic as a whole). 

 

22 hours ago, Lam3r said:

The mezzalla was on attack purely because the WB on that side is on support

Okay, but keep in mind that you play in a narrow formation, that WB on support is an attack-minded role despite the support duty and you have an attack-duty striker in front of the mezzala. On top of that, mezzala as a role is already attack-minded by default. Remember, a greater number of attack duties does not automatically make you dangerous in attack. Many people make this exact kind of mistake. 

 

22 hours ago, Lam3r said:

Not a fan of both Wingbacks being on the same mentality, seems bad for variety to me

Well, they are not both on the same mentality. The RWB is on attack duty. Although in certain systems having both WBs on the same (support) duty can work very nicely, but that's another story. 

 

22 hours ago, Lam3r said:

Narrow made sense in my head as with 3 cb's i thought it would force the oppo into crossing

Well, it will encourage them to cross more (if that's what you want). But keep in mind that it will also put too much of a defensive burden on your wing-backs as the only wide players on their respective flanks.