Help me please my fussy chairman please.

[av3ry]

I've got a challenge here...

I am trying to make a tactic that would satisfy the chairman's preffered playing style and this is what I have come up with so far...

I think I might have found a few flaws already looking at this. "Play out of defence and Slightly more direct passing" sounds a bit of a contradiction and could confuse the defenders.
Maybe change the AF to a TF and be even more direct?

Let's see what you guys think.

[Bellyfish]

Higher line of engagement + prevent short GK distribution is going limit the ability to play counter-attack football. You're encouraging the opponent defence to stay in their half and hoof it long, leaving no space to counter into.

AF is going to be isolated. Either change him to a TF/DLF or consider a supporting AM to thread balls to him. 

Play out of defence and direct football can work, see this thread about it. 

I imagine what those cultures are asking for is some sort of low-block counter attacking tactic. You sit back, win the ball and then ping it over the defence for your AF to run onto and score. 442 could meet those cultures for example.  

As direct football and counter attacking cultures are of low importance I'd personally ignore them, achieve the other goals and try and neogiate them out at the next opportunity. 

[Draakon]

On 20/08/2022 at 11:15, Bellyfish said:

AF is going to be isolated. Either change him to a TF/DLF or consider a supporting AM to thread balls to him. 

True, but in counter-attacks it might work well if he's running for the balls behind the line and he has enough space to run into. That's something I would test and see if it works out or not.