The Pragmatist - Let's Build a 3-4-1-2 / 5-2-1-2 WB + Other Thoughts

[bababooey]

Pragmatist: (Noun) "One who adheres to or professes the philosophy of pragmatism; more loosely, an opponent of rationalism and absolutism in philosophy; a supporter of the experimental method of reasoning in philosophy; a supporter of empiricism, but, unlike other empiricists, one who judges by consequences rather than by antecedents."

You could call this brand of football "anti-philosophy." You could refer to it as being a balanced, or perhaps even boring, fence-sitting rationalism. In my view, the point of playing the game is to win. I want to win as many games as possible. I do want to be entertained, but not if that completely interferes with winning. Not only that, but I don't believe a team should play the *exact* same way in every match (looking at you Pep and Jurgen). There is a reason why Carlo Ancelotti has 4 Champions League's under his belt. He's willing to adapt. He's the ultimate pragmatist.

 

Establishing Principles

- The players you have are *always* more important than your "system."  In my first season with Inter, we will be rolling with a 3-4-1-2 / 5-2-1-2 WB formation because that suits our team the best. In the future, I would prefer to use something like a 4-3-3 or maybe a 4-3-1-2, but there's no point in doing that when your players are fit to a tee for the 3-4-1-2.  This also applies to the style of play, not just the formation. At Inter, we have world-class players at nearly every position. They're capable of doing nearly anything that they're asked to do.

-Tactically, we need to have multiple plans. There is no point in sitting back against teams that are terrified of you. There is also no point in trying to play a super high press against a team that is easily capable of breaking it. So we're going to utilize the new "block" instructions. Luckily for us, there are 3 tactical slots available, and 3 "block" choices available...  So, we're going to set up a tactic with each of the 3 blocks: high, medium and low. By establishing 3 blocks, we should become proficient in playing multiple styles within our overall approach. Contrast this approach with the common approach of saying: "screw it, we will press high for 90 minutes EVERY SINGLE GAME." 

- The majority of our passing should be short, but we also want to include some element of long passing. If your passing is always the same length, you become too predictable.  Remember, balance. 

- We want to build from the back and attack with patience. I hate squandering opportunities by giving the ball away easily. You worked hard to win the ball back, you should work hard to keep it! On the other hand.... you don't want to be so deliberate that you get caught in possession or never take a chance.  Again: balance.

- We will never be afraid or ashamed to sit back and protect a lead, or approach a game with a "defensive" posture. I cannot stand the idea that you must always attack and be the aggressor. There is also a physical benefit to being willing to sit back more often. Your team will exert less energy because they're not asked to run like headless chickens for 90 minutes, game after game after game after game. If you're winning 3-0, do you really need to keep the high press? Maybe if you're terrified that your team cannot defend its own territory.

The Mid-Block

Call it the "standard" approach, call it balanced, call it whatever you want. For me, this is a good starting point for a lot of matches. What we want to do here is create a zone of compression in the middle of the field. That means, rather than closing down high up the pitch, we allow some space to the opposition. We want them to make it to near the halfway line, and then we start to win the ball back. We do not want to sit too deep here, because it may be completely unnecessary.

Why haven't I selected all of these options on the right side? Because they are not necessary for this current approach. So, will I end up selecting some of them in a high press? You bet. In a low press? Yep! But for this mid-block, it's not really necessary. The only thing I've decided to go with here is a higher defensive line (because of space compression) and to trigger the press more often. That's it.

In transition, I want us to actively attempt counter-attacks as well counter-pressing. The reason is simple. We've got the players that can pull this off in almost all circumstances, but we still need balance. If we were playing a high press, I would NOT attempt to counter, and if we were playing a low-block, I would NOT attempt to counter-press.  See what I mean? 

In possession is kind of a different animal. It's, in my opinion, less important than the out of possession instructions for truly defining the approach. We have smart players at Inter who will make decisions according to what they see unfolding on the pitch. So sometimes they might not play the shortest pass, or go wide. That's fine with me. But these instructions are a rough guide to what I want to see...  We have a pretty narrow formation up top, and so it's going to be important to utilize width to give balance. So we play wider. I want us to take our chances with more care, so we work the ball into the box. I also want us to play out of defense, so we add that. Simple, easy and effective.

The High-Block / High Press

The ideal approach to take when you are heavily favored to win, facing a team that is afraid, or etc. Any team that is unwilling to give you space on the break, basically. So you have to take it from them.

Ok so, we've selected new instructions here. The overall approach isn't vastly different... we still want to pass shorter and play out of defense. We still want to press, but this time we want to press high up the pitch and completely dictate the game. The mid-block has now changed to "high press"  Allow me to explain the choices here...

We've stuck with triggering the press more often, this should be self-explanatory. We've also stuck with the higher defensive line, also self-explanatory. Furthermore, we've added "set up more" which is akin to the old "use offside trap." The goal with that, is to compress space and prevent fast wingers or strikers from easily running through us. They still might do it anyway. But it's better, in my opinion, to use this here, especially because we've got phenomenal center backs who read the game well. Next, we've told the team to "trap outside."  My thinking here, is that when we press high like this, we become vulnerable in the middle of the pitch. Why? Because we're playing with 2 strikers and an AMC. I expect all 3 to be aggressively closing down and not in an ideal position to recover the ball. That leaves us with the 2 central mids to cover a lot of space in behind.  Not ideal!!  So, we take advantage of the touchline on either side, which acts as an invisible defender. We also are using a 3 center back system, and that means the outside center backs can step out to combine with our wingbacks + the touchline to squeeze the opponents and box them in.  If we force the other team to use the wide areas, we also "split" the responsibilities of the central mids. This is great because I don't want them having to cover the entire width of the field. So if one of them is drawn to a side, they've got numerical superiority w/ help from their teammates + the touchline.

In transition, we've removed "counter", kept "counter-press", and added "hold shape." This has multiple reasons. The first is that when you press very high up, there is way less space to counter-attack into. So why would you try to do that? It's like banging your head into a brick wall. The second reason, is that I want the team to create chances in a methodical way, not rushing to immediately build another attack and potentially lose the ball. Finally, this feels like a combination that is practical. We want to continue to apply pressure and win the ball back in a dangerous area, but we also want to be cognizant of the risk we're taking. Holding shape allows the players a second to catch their breath and build another attack.

In possession, we haven't changed anything.

The low-block

Our final tactical approach is the low-block. As you'll see below, we've made some significant changes, as this "style" is definitely the farthest deviation from what we would typically do. However, this style of play is entirely necessary for the overall approach, and shouldn't be treated as some sort of last-ditch "break glass if emergency" thing. Get comfortable using a low block! It's worth it.

Okay so, obviously we've set the line of engagement to "low block" and, notably, we've adjusted our formation to a 5-3-2 / 3-5-2.  We don't need an AMC in this set up, in my opinion. So I've simply dropped the AMC into central midfield.  We've lowered our defensive line to "standard" because this shape is already suited to compressing space (a key element of defending), and we don't want players running in behind.

We've added "get stuck in" because while defending like this, I think it's important to be forceful in the tackle. You're allowing the other team closer to your goal, so you should be more forceful when attempting to win the ball back. Harder tackling can work WONDERS at handling tricky but weak / scared players. That 7 bravery AMC who has excellent first touch might end up getting stretchered off. Bully for us.

We've also changed our trap to "trade inside." The reason here, is because when teams are in the attacking third, they will generally look to overload in wide areas. I don't want to allow that. I'm not so worried about players coming at us in the middle, because the space is well protected, and we've got 3 central mids + 3 central defenders to protect us.

Invite crosses is an instruction I've yet to try in FM23. I'm hoping that it works the way I *think* it will work, which is that it will help us preserve our shape and not close down like headless chickens. We have dominant central defenders who can outjump and outhead almost anyone. So... let them cross the ball. We will handle it. If this instruction doesn't work the way I want, I can always remove it. Stop crosses might be needed in certain situations, but I doubt it.

In transition you'll see we've added "counter" but that's it.  I don't think counter-press is a wise choice here, for (hopefully) obvious reasons. I also don't see the point in choosing "regroup" unless we are being absolutely battered. In that case, consider using it situationally. But otherwise, I feel like maybe it's too passive of an approach to regroup combined with the lower line and all that.

In possession I want to keep it SUPER SIMPLE. I have smart players who make good choices. Why should I dictate to them exactly what to do? The only thing we really want to focus in on is crossing early to help start those counters, and get the ball up to our dangerous strike pair. I'm not too worried about any of the other instructions. In my mind, they're all fairly situational. If I think we're vulnerable down the flanks, maybe we try to play narrower, for example. Or, if I think we can exploit the flanks, maybe we'll do the opposite. You get the point.

Opposition Instructions

If you're not utilizing oppostion instructions, you're missing out on a powerful tactical option. My approach is to keep it simple (shocking, right?)

It's so easy to do this.  On your tactics screen, click on "opposition instructions" and change it to POSITIONS. This is important because you're adjusting the opposition instructions for EVERY position, not based on specific players. So it applies all the time.  You must keep an eye on this though!  Here is the pattern we're looking for...

Goalkeeper:  weaker foot

DLR: show to foot opposite of the flank they're on.  Show DL on to right foot, and etc.

DCLR: show to foot opposite of the side they're on. Show DCL to right foot, and etc. 

DC: (middle center back in a 3) show to weaker foot

WBLR:  Show to foot opposite of the flank they're on.  Same thing as the DLR. 

DM + DMCL + DMCR:  show all to weaker foot.

CM + CML + CMR: show all to weaker foot.

ML + MR: show to opposite foot, same as the wide defenders + wingbacks

AMC + AMCL + AMCR + STC + STCL + STCR: show to weaker foot

AML + AMR:  this one is different, show to the flank they're on.  AML shown to LEFT foot, AMR shown to RIGHT foot. The reason here is that *most* players who playing in these positions are looking to cut inside. The AI will try to utilize the "stronger right foot" on the left flank and vice versa for these types of players. It's common sense.  So showing them wide is usually a smart idea.  YMMV.

As for closing down and tight marking and tackling strength? This really just depends on so many factors.... 

Look, if the player in question is weak (poor bravery, poor strength, poor composure, etc) then hard tackling them is a fantastic choice. Now, if the player in question is Mbappe, maybe think carefully about this. If your team is poor at tackling, you could be asking for trouble. So know your matchups.

When deciding who to close down more, I would be careful with this. The reason is that you're basically creating a magnent that draws in your players. If the other team has like 1 REALLY good option for passing, I'd say go ahead and close that guy down all the time. If they have multiple threats, maybe don't use it. You'll have to learn this on your own, and get a feel for it. There is no "right or wrong" way here. Just be careful with closing down more than 1 or 2 guys. You'll be pulled out of position really quickly...   ***exception to the rule ***  when playing a high press, it may be smart to close down the other team's entire back line. It's a risky move, but it can be hugely beneficial if you've got the right matchups. 

When deciding whether to tight mark someone, you've got to consider your matchups again. I sound like a broken record, but it's true.  There is no point in tight marking if your players can't handle the matchup. Asking a defender with 8 marking and 6 pace to tightly mark a guy with 15 pace and 14 technique is just asking for trouble.   HOWEVER.   Tight marking can be extremely useful when you use it correctly.

Think about teams who only have 2 wide players, such as my own Inter team here.  If you tight mark those 2 wide players, you can really impact the opponent's ability to use width, and trap them in the middle of the pitch. Now, you might get burned, but sometimes you gotta just try stuff.  Another good example is tight marking an AMC when your shape doesn't utilize a DMC.  The reason here, is to ensure that one of your players is keeping an eye on their AMC, who is usually a playmaker. If you have a DMC in your formation, this is not necessarily required.  Perhaps the best way to use this, is against slow strikers who are great in the air. It's self explanatory.

Another thing you can do is tight mark players in a pressing trap situation. So like, if you tight mark central players, you increase the impact of the pressing trap (wide). When you tight mark, you reduce the time and space the opponent has. Combine this with a pressing trap in the right way, and you've got a defensive secret sauce!

Final word on this part.... opposition instructions apply to ALL 3 slots in the tactics creator. So, it might be best to only set up the weaker foot part there, and then adjust the rest on matchday.

Choosing Rules and Duties

This is the part I struggle with the most.  So I dont think these roles are set in stone.

This is the role + duty selection for the mid block AND the high press approach.  The idea here is to create a stable platform that is versatile enough to break teams down. That's the tricky part, right? Balance. You don't want to have everyone creating chances and nobody defending, or vice versa.

The back 3 is something I'm not really comfortable with, because I think it's kind of negative to have 3 center backs. But Inter are tailor made for this, so I'll use it until I change the squad in the future. I've decided to utilize a ball playing defender on the left of defense, because Bastoni is a natural left foot, and a fantastic BPD.  Simple!  Skriniar is an elite CD, with a lot of athleticism. A perfect choice to be the other "outer" center back because he needs to be able to close down on the right flank. The middle center back is much more of a "win the arial duels" kind of player. I don't need him to be an elite athlete because he's playing between 2 really good athletes.

The wingbacks in this system HAVE to provide the width. I'm not using any sort of mezzala or carrilero who will drift wide at all times. Nobody else is doing the job of creating width. So, these guys have to do it. I have them set to "attack" because it's really important that they get further forward help us dominate control in the final third. I don't want to be too passive, either. Especially when playing in the mid block, it's important to have guys making those forward runs consistently.

The central midfield pairing is set to Box to Box + DLP defend.  My thinking here is perhaps overly simplistic but....  Nicolo Barella is my favorite player in the world right now. He's the perfect midfielder. He can do it all. I don't assign anyone this role except for the most elite players in the world.  Next to him is the DLP-D, which in our case is Brozovic. A perfect fit IMO because of his tactical awareness and premier passing + tackling. In this sytem, I think having a player hold his position centrally is really important because we do have a number of guys bursting forward. You could argue that having 3 center backs is enough cover, but I would respectfully disagree in this situation. 

The top of the formation is a simple trident of AM-S, CF-S and PF-A.   The AM-S is such a customizable role. In our case, we've got Hakan Calhanoglu who is technically brilliant, but physically average. What I see with him, is a player who is better off being in the hole, than bursting forward. Plus, I've got two strikers, so I don't need the AMC to be the main goal threat, like an SS or AM-A.   He's also a weird combination of being technically gifted, but a below average dribbler.  I think his technique is 16, and his dribbling is 11.  That's crazy!  So, the AM-S role is ideal.  We can instruct him to dribble less, but also shoot more or roam from position. So many possibilities.

The strike pair is Martinez and Lukaku.  Two VERY different players in terms of size, but both are excellent overall.  Lukaku is, in my mind, an ideal supporting player because he's technically capable, and physically dominant. He's also mentally strong, which helps.  Martinez is, in my opinion, a poacher with the brain of an attack dog.  He's extremely aggressive and fast. I don't need him creating anything but chaos. Closing players down, and putting the ball in the back of the net.  That's it.  PF-A is perfect for him.

Will these roles work well together? I don't know! I hope so.  They suit the players well, which is important, but they do also need to work in harmony...

But what about the low block???

So in the low block approach, we shift our shape to a 5-3-2, moving the AMC back into central midfield.  I feel like an AMC in this system would be less than ideal, as I already have 2 strikers who are elite.

What I'm thinking here is that we need to make a few changes. The goalkeeper becomes a standard GK-D.  No need to sweep.  The interior center back becomes a no-nonsense center back because in this low block, we need to be very careful in that part of the pitch. I don't want the ball to be in that zone for any longer than it must. The outer center backs retain their normal duties because of their ability level.

The wingbacks remain on attack. Without their width, we're screwed. 

We want to make sure the flanks are covered so, aside from the outer center backs stepping out, we also have a carrilero and mezzala.  Now, I'm not expecting the mezzala to be some sort of defensive rock, but he's another body and that helps. We don't want to be too defensive.  Remember, balance!   A simple CM-D in the middle because I felt that the playmaker role would encourage too much passing towards the middle. I don't want that. I want our passing to go mostly out wide. We could add "play wider" or "exploit left/right flanks" instructions, too.

The striker combination changes a bit here. The idea is that we want to utilize the physical ability of Lukaku combined with the raw pace of Martinez. Sort of like a classic "big man small man" 2 striker combo. I don't see the point of using them both on attack, nor do I think it makes sense to have both drop deeper.  Balance!

Finally.... Mentality - Saving the least important part for last!

I sort of loathe team mentality. It feels so vague to me!  Here is how I approach it....

In the grand scheme of things, team mentality is like setting the amount of risk you want to allow in your approach. The higher you crank it up, the more risk your players will take.

So, if we apply that logic to the tactics in practice, we want to use the balanced mentality for the mid-block, a positive mentality for the high-press, and a cautious mentality for the low-block.

This gives us 3 unique systems of play within our overall approach.  Switching between these 3 plans seems like a realistic way of approaching tactics, in my view.  Look at what France has done in this year's world cup. They attack with a high press system, take the lead, and then sit deep and counter into space. That's being pragmatic!

Final Thoughts

I hope this helps people with creating tactics. I am by no means an expert. I am a reasonably successful player of the game, and I've done a fair bit of reading and video watching. But that doesn't mean I'm right!!!

I genuinely don't know if this thing I've created will even work. That's the fun of it. Throw things against the wall, and see what sticks. I believe it's logical, and sound, but.... you never know!

I'd like to give credit to @Rashidi for inspiring this post, because his videos on YouTube (bustthenet) are immensely helpful and he's a great dude. 

Cheers folks. 

 

[Cam NBH]

Excellent post! 

[frukox]

10 saat önce, bababooey said:

Pragmatist: (Noun) "One who adheres to or professes the philosophy of pragmatism; more loosely, an opponent of rationalism and absolutism in philosophy; a supporter of the experimental method of reasoning in philosophy; a supporter of empiricism, but, unlike other empiricists, one who judges by consequences rather than by antecedents."

You could call this brand of football "anti-philosophy." You could refer to it as being a balanced, or perhaps even boring, fence-sitting rationalism. In my view, the point of playing the game is to win. I want to win as many games as possible. I do want to be entertained, but not if that completely interferes with winning. Not only that, but I don't believe a team should play the *exact* same way in every match (looking at you Pep and Jurgen). There is a reason why Carlo Ancelotti has 4 Champions League's under his belt. He's willing to adapt. He's the ultimate pragmatist.

 

Establishing Principles

- The players you have are *always* more important than your "system."  In my first season with Inter, we will be rolling with a 3-4-1-2 / 5-2-1-2 WB formation because that suits our team the best. In the future, I would prefer to use something like a 4-3-3 or maybe a 4-3-1-2, but there's no point in doing that when your players are fit to a tee for the 3-4-1-2.  This also applies to the style of play, not just the formation. At Inter, we have world-class players at nearly every position. They're capable of doing nearly anything that they're asked to do.

-Tactically, we need to have multiple plans. There is no point in sitting back against teams that are terrified of you. There is also no point in trying to play a super high press against a team that is easily capable of breaking it. So we're going to utilize the new "block" instructions. Luckily for us, there are 3 tactical slots available, and 3 "block" choices available...  So, we're going to set up a tactic with each of the 3 blocks: high, medium and low. By establishing 3 blocks, we should become proficient in playing multiple styles within our overall approach. Contrast this approach with the common approach of saying: "screw it, we will press high for 90 minutes EVERY SINGLE GAME." 

- The majority of our passing should be short, but we also want to include some element of long passing. If your passing is always the same length, you become too predictable.  Remember, balance. 

- We want to build from the back and attack with patience. I hate squandering opportunities by giving the ball away easily. You worked hard to win the ball back, you should work hard to keep it! On the other hand.... you don't want to be so deliberate that you get caught in possession or never take a chance.  Again: balance.

- We will never be afraid or ashamed to sit back and protect a lead, or approach a game with a "defensive" posture. I cannot stand the idea that you must always attack and be the aggressor. There is also a physical benefit to being willing to sit back more often. Your team will exert less energy because they're not asked to run like headless chickens for 90 minutes, game after game after game after game. If you're winning 3-0, do you really need to keep the high press? Maybe if you're terrified that your team cannot defend its own territory.

The Mid-Block

Call it the "standard" approach, call it balanced, call it whatever you want. For me, this is a good starting point for a lot of matches. What we want to do here is create a zone of compression in the middle of the field. That means, rather than closing down high up the pitch, we allow some space to the opposition. We want them to make it to near the halfway line, and then we start to win the ball back. We do not want to sit too deep here, because it may be completely unnecessary.

Why haven't I selected all of these options on the right side? Because they are not necessary for this current approach. So, will I end up selecting some of them in a high press? You bet. In a low press? Yep! But for this mid-block, it's not really necessary. The only thing I've decided to go with here is a higher defensive line (because of space compression) and to trigger the press more often. That's it.

In transition, I want us to actively attempt counter-attacks as well counter-pressing. The reason is simple. We've got the players that can pull this off in almost all circumstances, but we still need balance. If we were playing a high press, I would NOT attempt to counter, and if we were playing a low-block, I would NOT attempt to counter-press.  See what I mean? 

In possession is kind of a different animal. It's, in my opinion, less important than the out of possession instructions for truly defining the approach. We have smart players at Inter who will make decisions according to what they see unfolding on the pitch. So sometimes they might not play the shortest pass, or go wide. That's fine with me. But these instructions are a rough guide to what I want to see...  We have a pretty narrow formation up top, and so it's going to be important to utilize width to give balance. So we play wider. I want us to take our chances with more care, so we work the ball into the box. I also want us to play out of defense, so we add that. Simple, easy and effective.

The High-Block / High Press

The ideal approach to take when you are heavily favored to win, facing a team that is afraid, or etc. Any team that is unwilling to give you space on the break, basically. So you have to take it from them.

Ok so, we've selected new instructions here. The overall approach isn't vastly different... we still want to pass shorter and play out of defense. We still want to press, but this time we want to press high up the pitch and completely dictate the game. The mid-block has now changed to "high press"  Allow me to explain the choices here...

We've stuck with triggering the press more often, this should be self-explanatory. We've also stuck with the higher defensive line, also self-explanatory. Furthermore, we've added "set up more" which is akin to the old "use offside trap." The goal with that, is to compress space and prevent fast wingers or strikers from easily running through us. They still might do it anyway. But it's better, in my opinion, to use this here, especially because we've got phenomenal center backs who read the game well. Next, we've told the team to "trap outside."  My thinking here, is that when we press high like this, we become vulnerable in the middle of the pitch. Why? Because we're playing with 2 strikers and an AMC. I expect all 3 to be aggressively closing down and not in an ideal position to recover the ball. That leaves us with the 2 central mids to cover a lot of space in behind.  Not ideal!!  So, we take advantage of the touchline on either side, which acts as an invisible defender. We also are using a 3 center back system, and that means the outside center backs can step out to combine with our wingbacks + the touchline to squeeze the opponents and box them in.  If we force the other team to use the wide areas, we also "split" the responsibilities of the central mids. This is great because I don't want them having to cover the entire width of the field. So if one of them is drawn to a side, they've got numerical superiority w/ help from their teammates + the touchline.

In transition, we've removed "counter", kept "counter-press", and added "hold shape." This has multiple reasons. The first is that when you press very high up, there is way less space to counter-attack into. So why would you try to do that? It's like banging your head into a brick wall. The second reason, is that I want the team to create chances in a methodical way, not rushing to immediately build another attack and potentially lose the ball. Finally, this feels like a combination that is practical. We want to continue to apply pressure and win the ball back in a dangerous area, but we also want to be cognizant of the risk we're taking. Holding shape allows the players a second to catch their breath and build another attack.

In possession, we haven't changed anything.

The low-block

Our final tactical approach is the low-block. As you'll see below, we've made some significant changes, as this "style" is definitely the farthest deviation from what we would typically do. However, this style of play is entirely necessary for the overall approach, and shouldn't be treated as some sort of last-ditch "break glass if emergency" thing. Get comfortable using a low block! It's worth it.

Okay so, obviously we've set the line of engagement to "low block" and, notably, we've adjusted our formation to a 5-3-2 / 3-5-2.  We don't need an AMC in this set up, in my opinion. So I've simply dropped the AMC into central midfield.  We've lowered our defensive line to "standard" because this shape is already suited to compressing space (a key element of defending), and we don't want players running in behind.

We've added "get stuck in" because while defending like this, I think it's important to be forceful in the tackle. You're allowing the other team closer to your goal, so you should be more forceful when attempting to win the ball back. Harder tackling can work WONDERS at handling tricky but weak / scared players. That 7 bravery AMC who has excellent first touch might end up getting stretchered off. Bully for us.

We've also changed our trap to "trade inside." The reason here, is because when teams are in the attacking third, they will generally look to overload in wide areas. I don't want to allow that. I'm not so worried about players coming at us in the middle, because the space is well protected, and we've got 3 central mids + 3 central defenders to protect us.

Invite crosses is an instruction I've yet to try in FM23. I'm hoping that it works the way I *think* it will work, which is that it will help us preserve our shape and not close down like headless chickens. We have dominant central defenders who can outjump and outhead almost anyone. So... let them cross the ball. We will handle it. If this instruction doesn't work the way I want, I can always remove it. Stop crosses might be needed in certain situations, but I doubt it.

In transition you'll see we've added "counter" but that's it.  I don't think counter-press is a wise choice here, for (hopefully) obvious reasons. I also don't see the point in choosing "regroup" unless we are being absolutely battered. In that case, consider using it situationally. But otherwise, I feel like maybe it's too passive of an approach to regroup combined with the lower line and all that.

In possession I want to keep it SUPER SIMPLE. I have smart players who make good choices. Why should I dictate to them exactly what to do? The only thing we really want to focus in on is crossing early to help start those counters, and get the ball up to our dangerous strike pair. I'm not too worried about any of the other instructions. In my mind, they're all fairly situational. If I think we're vulnerable down the flanks, maybe we try to play narrower, for example. Or, if I think we can exploit the flanks, maybe we'll do the opposite. You get the point.

Opposition Instructions

If you're not utilizing oppostion instructions, you're missing out on a powerful tactical option. My approach is to keep it simple (shocking, right?)

It's so easy to do this.  On your tactics screen, click on "opposition instructions" and change it to POSITIONS. This is important because you're adjusting the opposition instructions for EVERY position, not based on specific players. So it applies all the time.  You must keep an eye on this though!  Here is the pattern we're looking for...

Goalkeeper:  weaker foot

DLR: show to foot opposite of the flank they're on.  Show DL on to right foot, and etc.

DCLR: show to foot opposite of the side they're on. Show DCL to right foot, and etc. 

DC: (middle center back in a 3) show to weaker foot

WBLR:  Show to foot opposite of the flank they're on.  Same thing as the DLR. 

DM + DMCL + DMCR:  show all to weaker foot.

CM + CML + CMR: show all to weaker foot.

ML + MR: show to opposite foot, same as the wide defenders + wingbacks

AMC + AMCL + AMCR + STC + STCL + STCR: show to weaker foot

AML + AMR:  this one is different, show to the flank they're on.  AML shown to LEFT foot, AMR shown to RIGHT foot. The reason here is that *most* players who playing in these positions are looking to cut inside. The AI will try to utilize the "stronger right foot" on the left flank and vice versa for these types of players. It's common sense.  So showing them wide is usually a smart idea.  YMMV.

As for closing down and tight marking and tackling strength? This really just depends on so many factors.... 

Look, if the player in question is weak (poor bravery, poor strength, poor composure, etc) then hard tackling them is a fantastic choice. Now, if the player in question is Mbappe, maybe think carefully about this. If your team is poor at tackling, you could be asking for trouble. So know your matchups.

When deciding who to close down more, I would be careful with this. The reason is that you're basically creating a magnent that draws in your players. If the other team has like 1 REALLY good option for passing, I'd say go ahead and close that guy down all the time. If they have multiple threats, maybe don't use it. You'll have to learn this on your own, and get a feel for it. There is no "right or wrong" way here. Just be careful with closing down more than 1 or 2 guys. You'll be pulled out of position really quickly...   ***exception to the rule ***  when playing a high press, it may be smart to close down the other team's entire back line. It's a risky move, but it can be hugely beneficial if you've got the right matchups. 

When deciding whether to tight mark someone, you've got to consider your matchups again. I sound like a broken record, but it's true.  There is no point in tight marking if your players can't handle the matchup. Asking a defender with 8 marking and 6 pace to tightly mark a guy with 15 pace and 14 technique is just asking for trouble.   HOWEVER.   Tight marking can be extremely useful when you use it correctly.

Think about teams who only have 2 wide players, such as my own Inter team here.  If you tight mark those 2 wide players, you can really impact the opponent's ability to use width, and trap them in the middle of the pitch. Now, you might get burned, but sometimes you gotta just try stuff.  Another good example is tight marking an AMC when your shape doesn't utilize a DMC.  The reason here, is to ensure that one of your players is keeping an eye on their AMC, who is usually a playmaker. If you have a DMC in your formation, this is not necessarily required.  Perhaps the best way to use this, is against slow strikers who are great in the air. It's self explanatory.

Another thing you can do is tight mark players in a pressing trap situation. So like, if you tight mark central players, you increase the impact of the pressing trap (wide). When you tight mark, you reduce the time and space the opponent has. Combine this with a pressing trap in the right way, and you've got a defensive secret sauce!

Final word on this part.... opposition instructions apply to ALL 3 slots in the tactics creator. So, it might be best to only set up the weaker foot part there, and then adjust the rest on matchday.

Choosing Rules and Duties

This is the part I struggle with the most.  So I dont think these roles are set in stone.

This is the role + duty selection for the mid block AND the high press approach.  The idea here is to create a stable platform that is versatile enough to break teams down. That's the tricky part, right? Balance. You don't want to have everyone creating chances and nobody defending, or vice versa.

The back 3 is something I'm not really comfortable with, because I think it's kind of negative to have 3 center backs. But Inter are tailor made for this, so I'll use it until I change the squad in the future. I've decided to utilize a ball playing defender on the left of defense, because Bastoni is a natural left foot, and a fantastic BPD.  Simple!  Skriniar is an elite CD, with a lot of athleticism. A perfect choice to be the other "outer" center back because he needs to be able to close down on the right flank. The middle center back is much more of a "win the arial duels" kind of player. I don't need him to be an elite athlete because he's playing between 2 really good athletes.

The wingbacks in this system HAVE to provide the width. I'm not using any sort of mezzala or carrilero who will drift wide at all times. Nobody else is doing the job of creating width. So, these guys have to do it. I have them set to "attack" because it's really important that they get further forward help us dominate control in the final third. I don't want to be too passive, either. Especially when playing in the mid block, it's important to have guys making those forward runs consistently.

The central midfield pairing is set to Box to Box + DLP defend.  My thinking here is perhaps overly simplistic but....  Nicolo Barella is my favorite player in the world right now. He's the perfect midfielder. He can do it all. I don't assign anyone this role except for the most elite players in the world.  Next to him is the DLP-D, which in our case is Brozovic. A perfect fit IMO because of his tactical awareness and premier passing + tackling. In this sytem, I think having a player hold his position centrally is really important because we do have a number of guys bursting forward. You could argue that having 3 center backs is enough cover, but I would respectfully disagree in this situation. 

The top of the formation is a simple trident of AM-S, CF-S and PF-A.   The AM-S is such a customizable role. In our case, we've got Hakan Calhanoglu who is technically brilliant, but physically average. What I see with him, is a player who is better off being in the hole, than bursting forward. Plus, I've got two strikers, so I don't need the AMC to be the main goal threat, like an SS or AM-A.   He's also a weird combination of being technically gifted, but a below average dribbler.  I think his technique is 16, and his dribbling is 11.  That's crazy!  So, the AM-S role is ideal.  We can instruct him to dribble less, but also shoot more or roam from position. So many possibilities.

The strike pair is Martinez and Lukaku.  Two VERY different players in terms of size, but both are excellent overall.  Lukaku is, in my mind, an ideal supporting player because he's technically capable, and physically dominant. He's also mentally strong, which helps.  Martinez is, in my opinion, a poacher with the brain of an attack dog.  He's extremely aggressive and fast. I don't need him creating anything but chaos. Closing players down, and putting the ball in the back of the net.  That's it.  PF-A is perfect for him.

Will these roles work well together? I don't know! I hope so.  They suit the players well, which is important, but they do also need to work in harmony...

But what about the low block???

So in the low block approach, we shift our shape to a 5-3-2, moving the AMC back into central midfield.  I feel like an AMC in this system would be less than ideal, as I already have 2 strikers who are elite.

What I'm thinking here is that we need to make a few changes. The goalkeeper becomes a standard GK-D.  No need to sweep.  The interior center back becomes a no-nonsense center back because in this low block, we need to be very careful in that part of the pitch. I don't want the ball to be in that zone for any longer than it must. The outer center backs retain their normal duties because of their ability level.

The wingbacks remain on attack. Without their width, we're screwed. 

We want to make sure the flanks are covered so, aside from the outer center backs stepping out, we also have a carrilero and mezzala.  Now, I'm not expecting the mezzala to be some sort of defensive rock, but he's another body and that helps. We don't want to be too defensive.  Remember, balance!   A simple CM-D in the middle because I felt that the playmaker role would encourage too much passing towards the middle. I don't want that. I want our passing to go mostly out wide. We could add "play wider" or "exploit left/right flanks" instructions, too.

The striker combination changes a bit here. The idea is that we want to utilize the physical ability of Lukaku combined with the raw pace of Martinez. Sort of like a classic "big man small man" 2 striker combo. I don't see the point of using them both on attack, nor do I think it makes sense to have both drop deeper.  Balance!

Finally.... Mentality - Saving the least important part for last!

I sort of loathe team mentality. It feels so vague to me!  Here is how I approach it....

In the grand scheme of things, team mentality is like setting the amount of risk you want to allow in your approach. The higher you crank it up, the more risk your players will take.

So, if we apply that logic to the tactics in practice, we want to use the balanced mentality for the mid-block, a positive mentality for the high-press, and a cautious mentality for the low-block.

This gives us 3 unique systems of play within our overall approach.  Switching between these 3 plans seems like a realistic way of approaching tactics, in my view.  Look at what France has done in this year's world cup. They attack with a high press system, take the lead, and then sit deep and counter into space. That's being pragmatic!

Final Thoughts

I hope this helps people with creating tactics. I am by no means an expert. I am a reasonably successful player of the game, and I've done a fair bit of reading and video watching. But that doesn't mean I'm right!!!

I genuinely don't know if this thing I've created will even work. That's the fun of it. Throw things against the wall, and see what sticks. I believe it's logical, and sound, but.... you never know!

I'd like to give credit to @Rashidi for inspiring this post, because his videos on YouTube (bustthenet) are immensely helpful and he's a great dude. 

Cheers folks. 

 

Great post, mate! Well-written

[deorvd]

I'm glad to see someone's making tactic with my fav team. I always used 3 atb in FM since Conte took over Inter until last month because it seems like it's really hard to defend well after seeing countless comical errors (I've been playing touch for Nintendo Switch so AI might be different there). So I'm back to 433/4231, but looking forward to your progress 

[bababooey]

5 hours ago, deorvd said:

I'm glad to see someone's making tactic with my fav team. I always used 3 atb in FM since Conte took over Inter until last month because it seems like it's really hard to defend well after seeing countless comical errors (I've been playing touch for Nintendo Switch so AI might be different there). So I'm back to 433/4231, but looking forward to your progress 

I can't speak to how the game plays out on the Nintendo Switch, that might be something worst asking in a different forum.

As for the comical errors, do you mean like... players getting caught in possession? That seems to be a major part of this match engine regardless of the standard of players you have, tactics, etc.

[bababooey]

Okay so a little update.  We're doing very well but here is something I need to watch for, and possibly make changes.....

What you'll see here, is the building phase starting deep in our own third of the pitch. 

Notice how we have this like... line of players all near or on the halfway line?  That means we've basically got a "split" in the team with the 3 center backs + 2 center mids tasked with keeping the ball and advancing play. The other 5, are basically waiting to get released by a long pass, OR, hopefully someone drops deep and links up play.

This is a potential problem for us because I don't like seeing that huge gap, and I didn't think that the wingbacks would get SO far foward so quickly on a balanced team mentality (attacking duty). 

What we ended up doing here, is cycling possession between the B2B, DLP and CB's.  That isn't what I want to happen for too long. 

After a little bit, the CF-S (Lukaku) drops deep into that red circle and recieves the ball.  He turns, and launches it forward for the PF-A (lautauro martinez) who gets on the end of it, and dribbles into the opponents box.

So, you know ultimately we were able to progress the ball into attack, but it was definitely not the smoothest or simplest way of doing it. 

Edited December 15, 2022 by bababooey

[frukox]

8 dakika önce, bababooey said:

Okay so a little update.  We're doing very well but here is something I need to watch for, and possibly make changes.....

What you'll see here, is the building phase starting deep in our own third of the pitch. 

Notice how we have this like... line of players all near or on the halfway line?  That means we've basically got a "split" in the team with the 3 center backs + 2 center mids tasked with keeping the ball and advancing play. The other 5, are basically waiting to get released by a long pass, OR, hopefully someone drops deep and links up play.

This is a potential problem for us because I don't like seeing that huge gap, and I didn't think that the wingbacks would get SO far foward so quickly on a balanced team mentality (attacking duty). 

What we ended up doing here, is cycling possession between the B2B, DLP and CB's.  That isn't what I want to happen for too long. 

After a little bit, the CF-S (Lukaku) drops deep into that red circle and recieves the ball.  He turns, and launches it forward for the PF-A (lautauro martinez) who gets on the end of it, and dribbles into the opponents box.

So, you know ultimately we were able to progress the ball into attack, but it was definitely not the smoothest or simplest way of doing it. 

Do you notice how deep your DLPD is? He is just sitting in front of the backline while watching the game from the front seat:) I think you need him higher up the pitch for a smoother transition.

[bababooey]

1 minute ago, frukox said:

Do you notice how deep your DLPD is? He is just sitting in front of the backline while watching the game from the front seat:) I think you need him higher up the pitch for a smoother transition.

Yes, totally forgot to mention the most obvious part!   My original thinking we that we needed someone to hold position in central midfield, because of how aggressive our wingbacks are.

But........ on the other hand....  in the "mid block" / balanced approach, it's becoming clear we can afford to have him on support, and possibly even change his role.

[frukox]

4 dakika önce, bababooey said:

Yes, totally forgot to mention the most obvious part!   My original thinking we that we needed someone to hold position in central midfield, because of how aggressive our wingbacks are.

But........ on the other hand....  in the "mid block" / balanced approach, it's becoming clear we can afford to have him on support, and possibly even change his role.

You already have three players behind so it's less risky to play him further up the pitch because he will act as the fulcrum of the team influencing attacking plays with late runs and dictate the game from deeper areas of the pitch which will give you more support in the middle of the park.

[bababooey]

18 minutes ago, frukox said:

You already have three players behind so it's less risky to play him further up the pitch because he will act as the fulcrum of the team influencing attacking plays with late runs and dictate the game from deeper areas of the pitch which will give you more support in the middle of the park.

It also helps that it's Brozovic, who is one of the best midfielders in the world 

I've changed his duty to support, and hopefully that will work well.

[The3points]

You could also make the CAM an AP with come deeper for ball ppm, so they help the midfield

[bababooey]

So we've played 7 league matches, and a couple of champions league too. We're doing really well.

Here is a snapshot of our team analytics.... 

I'm very pleased with what I'm seeing here. There are a few things that do stand out.

1.  Our shooting % has been poor.  We have some really high quality strikers, so this will likely work itself out. BUT.... it could also be a tactical issue.

2.  Our "pitch tilt" is phenomenal. I'm really, really happy with that. It's what we want to see.

3.  Maybe we can take better advantage of our heading ability. We are a team that, as you see on the chart, heads the ball fewer times but does so very successfully.

4.  Related to point number 1, our attacking efficiency hasn't been where I'd want it.  We have some aggressive players who like to shoot from far out, so maybe we need to reign that in a bit.

5.  Notice that we gain possession fewer than the league average. This is not a problem (at least, I don't believe it is) so long as we are responsible in possession. It's the result I would expect to see. The more we have of the ball, the less need there is to constantly win it back. It's just common sense.

6.  "Considerably fewer defensive actions" - this is awesome.  This indicates we aren't putting our defense under too much stress. The less work they do, the better.

[aderow]

8 hours ago, bababooey said:

Okay so a little update.  We're doing very well but here is something I need to watch for, and possibly make changes.....

What you'll see here, is the building phase starting deep in our own third of the pitch. 

Notice how we have this like... line of players all near or on the halfway line?  That means we've basically got a "split" in the team with the 3 center backs + 2 center mids tasked with keeping the ball and advancing play. The other 5, are basically waiting to get released by a long pass, OR, hopefully someone drops deep and links up play.

This is a potential problem for us because I don't like seeing that huge gap, and I didn't think that the wingbacks would get SO far foward so quickly on a balanced team mentality (attacking duty). 

What we ended up doing here, is cycling possession between the B2B, DLP and CB's.  That isn't what I want to happen for too long. 

After a little bit, the CF-S (Lukaku) drops deep into that red circle and recieves the ball.  He turns, and launches it forward for the PF-A (lautauro martinez) who gets on the end of it, and dribbles into the opponents box.

So, you know ultimately we were able to progress the ball into attack, but it was definitely not the smoothest or simplest way of doing it. 

Honestly that's one of the reasons I've ended up settling on WB-s. Just gives my CBs and holding players a few more passing options when trying to play out of the back. As you also mentioned, changing the DLP to support duty is another possibility as I'm sure that would have drift a bit further forward into that gap.

[frukox]

8 saat önce, bababooey said:

So we've played 7 league matches, and a couple of champions league too. We're doing really well.

Here is a snapshot of our team analytics.... 

I'm very pleased with what I'm seeing here. There are a few things that do stand out.

1.  Our shooting % has been poor.  We have some really high quality strikers, so this will likely work itself out. BUT.... it could also be a tactical issue.

2.  Our "pitch tilt" is phenomenal. I'm really, really happy with that. It's what we want to see.

3.  Maybe we can take better advantage of our heading ability. We are a team that, as you see on the chart, heads the ball fewer times but does so very successfully.

4.  Related to point number 1, our attacking efficiency hasn't been where I'd want it.  We have some aggressive players who like to shoot from far out, so maybe we need to reign that in a bit.

5.  Notice that we gain possession fewer than the league average. This is not a problem (at least, I don't believe it is) so long as we are responsible in possession. It's the result I would expect to see. The more we have of the ball, the less need there is to constantly win it back. It's just common sense.

6.  "Considerably fewer defensive actions" - this is awesome.  This indicates we aren't putting our defense under too much stress. The less work they do, the better.

So somewhere on the pitch the way of support your midfield might be wrong as you want your main striker to score for fun because space will be created for him with a system focused on his goalscoring. Therefore, I'd consider some changes for the midfield duo as a start.

Edited December 16, 2022 by frukox

[deorvd]

11 hours ago, bababooey said:

I can't speak to how the game plays out on the Nintendo Switch, that might be something worst asking in a different forum.

As for the comical errors, do you mean like... players getting caught in possession? That seems to be a major part of this match engine regardless of the standard of players you have, tactics, etc.

Things I found like players stop closing down players or just stand still and the further player comes to press the one who has the ball instead, defenders watching long balls or through balls past next to them without moving and when the opponents have the ball, they start moving. Defenders always act weird here on switch, but I didn't have problems with scoring.

I'd suggest you to have some support duties in midfield area to help in build up if you're using play out of defence. I assume the two WBs, Nico and Hakan will go high up further pitch leaving your defenders only option to pass the ball is to Brozovic. From what I experienced, changing his role to DLP support in this case only gives him more passing range that'd make him do more long balls when everyone's out of reach.

[bababooey]

10 hours ago, frukox said:

So somewhere on the pitch the way of support your midfield might be wrong as you want your main striker to score for fun because space will be created for him with a system focused on his goalscoring. Therefore, I'd consider some changes for the midfield duo as a start.

So what I've done since then, is change the AM-S to AM-A + CF-S to TF-S.  We're now scoring goals like gangbusters.

The thinking here was, the AM was too often uninvolved in the final third. That can't happen in this type of setup. We have 3 center backs, so by definition we're already a bit more defensive than the standard LB-CD-CD-RB team.  I needed to make sure that AM got more involved, and with an attack duty, he not only gets involved more, but he still contributes to defense.

The CF-S to TF-S was basically just done because my players for that spot are Lukaku and Dzeko. I want to use their physicality, and also hide their weaknesses (dribbling, etc.) 

[bababooey]

10 hours ago, deorvd said:

Things I found like players stop closing down players or just stand still and the further player comes to press the one who has the ball instead, defenders watching long balls or through balls past next to them without moving and when the opponents have the ball, they start moving. Defenders always act weird here on switch, but I didn't have problems with scoring.

I'd suggest you to have some support duties in midfield area to help in build up if you're using play out of defence. I assume the two WBs, Nico and Hakan will go high up further pitch leaving your defenders only option to pass the ball is to Brozovic. From what I experienced, changing his role to DLP support in this case only gives him more passing range that'd make him do more long balls when everyone's out of reach.

So far I've had no issues with the DLP-S + B2B combo.  Changing form DLP-D to DLP-S was a wise move, so far!

[frukox]

13 dakika önce, bababooey said:

So what I've done since then, is change the AM-S to AM-A + CF-S to TF-S.  We're now scoring goals like gangbusters.

The thinking here was, the AM was too often uninvolved in the final third. That can't happen in this type of setup. We have 3 center backs, so by definition we're already a bit more defensive than the standard LB-CD-CD-RB team.  I needed to make sure that AM got more involved, and with an attack duty, he not only gets involved more, but he still contributes to defense.

The CF-S to TF-S was basically just done because my players for that spot are Lukaku and Dzeko. I want to use their physicality, and also hide their weaknesses (dribbling, etc.) 

It's great to see you solve your scoring and transitioning problems. I only have one caveat left for your system. You may find space in front of opposition defence a bit limited against teams sitting deep as you committed another early attacker to your transitions. Just watch out;)

[JoOSTAR]

5 hours ago, bababooey said:

So far I've had no issues with the DLP-S + B2B combo.  Changing form DLP-D to DLP-S was a wise move, so far!

Did you change DLP-D to DLP-S and AM-S to AM-A and CF-S to TF-S in both the mid-block and high-block tactic?

[bababooey]

On 16/12/2022 at 16:50, JoOSTAR said:

Did you change DLP-D to DLP-S and AM-S to AM-A and CF-S to TF-S in both the mid-block and high-block tactic?

Yes, in both of those. So far, so good.

[bababooey]

On 16/12/2022 at 11:29, frukox said:

It's great to see you solve your scoring and transitioning problems. I only have one caveat left for your system. You may find space in front of opposition defence a bit limited against teams sitting deep as you committed another early attacker to your transitions. Just watch out;)

Yeah, I'm pondering if this is a system I want to use long term. I've never been a huge fan of 3ATB / 5ATB.    We are excellent defensively but I'm feeling like we could score more goals.

[frukox]

3 dakika önce, bababooey said:

Yeah, I'm pondering if this is a system I want to use long term. I've never been a huge fan of 3ATB / 5ATB.    We are excellent defensively but I'm feeling like we could score more goals.

What are you planning to do, then?

[bababooey]

Just now, frukox said:

What are you planning to do, then?

Short term, I'm thinking that I need to make this more of a possession-based approach.  Changing the TF-S to something else. Using more overlapping runs from WB's. 

Long term, my favorite shape is 4-3-3 DM.  I love being able to balance out the roles in a 3-man midfield, AND we just sold De Vrji because he wouldn't accept being a squad player, so we will reduce the number of center backs at the club...

[frukox]

8 dakika önce, bababooey said:

Short term, I'm thinking that I need to make this more of a possession-based approach.  Changing the TF-S to something else. Using more overlapping runs from WB's. 

Long term, my favorite shape is 4-3-3 DM.  I love being able to balance out the roles in a 3-man midfield, AND we just sold De Vrji because he wouldn't accept being a squad player, so we will reduce the number of center backs at the club...

4-3-3 is great for ball retention with the right roles. I'm looking forward to seeing your new system:)

[bababooey]

16 minutes ago, frukox said:

4-3-3 is great for ball retention with the right roles. I'm looking forward to seeing your new system:)

Yeah. I just lost the milan derby (kind of unlucky, a few small tactical issues) and honestly I'm thinking that a 4-3-1-2 might be the ideal shape for the rest of this season. We can press high, which we're VERY good at, and retain possession in the opposing third. Plus, it's a shape I love, and it's a classic Italian thing.

[frukox]

3 dakika önce, bababooey said:

Yeah. I just lost the milan derby (kind of unlucky, a few small tactical issues) and honestly I'm thinking that a 4-3-1-2 might be the ideal shape for the rest of this season. We can press high, which we're VERY good at, and retain possession in the opposing third. Plus, it's a shape I love, and it's a classic Italian thing.

I know how to set up a really good one. Love that shape, as well. You can control most of the matches with that formation easily.

[bababooey]

20 minutes ago, frukox said:

I know how to set up a really good one. Love that shape, as well. You can control most of the matches with that formation easily.

That's the plan for now.

It would be criminal to play a system that doesn't utilize two natural strikers when you've got Lukaku + Martinez + Dzeko, etc. 

So my 4-3-3 vision will take a back seat until that changes.

[frukox]

6 saat önce, bababooey said:

That's the plan for now.

It would be criminal to play a system that doesn't utilize two natural strikers when you've got Lukaku + Martinez + Dzeko, etc. 

So my 4-3-3 vision will take a back seat until that changes.

Those dudes definitely merit this kind of formations with complete midfielders and full-backs behind. Hard to find but when you do, awwwwhh😂

[lennon67]

7 hours ago, frukox said:

I know how to set up a really good one. Love that shape, as well. You can control most of the matches with that formation easily.

How would you set it up? 

[frukox]

52 dakika önce, lennon67 said:

How would you set it up? 

1) A goalscorer role

2) A role up front to link-up play with midfielders behind him

3) A creator between midfield and strikers, like in the old Italian football

4) The left or right central midfielder getting forward to increase presence around penalty area

5) The central midfielder dedicated to protect the central channel

6) Full-backs to provide width and protect wings as it's a formation without wingers.

7) If possible, a central defender comfortable with the ball at his feet to play deep diagonals to players in front of him

8) A technical goalkeeper to ease playing out from the back as well as to play direct balls to the players up the pitch to bypass opposition high press at times

Controlling games is possible with high-blocks and/or possession-style football. The better suited your players are for this style the higher chance of a successful system it has.

Edited December 21, 2022 by frukox

[BadAss88]

9 hours ago, frukox said:

1) A goalscorer role

2) A role up front to link-up play with midfielders behind him

3) A creator between midfield and strikers, like in the old Italian football

4) The left or right central midfielder getting forward to increase presence around penalty area

5) The central midfielder dedicated to protect the central channel

6) Full-backs to provide width and protect wings as it's a formation without wingers.

7) If possible, a central defender comfortable with the ball at his feet to play deep diagonals to players in front of him

8) A technical goalkeeper to ease playing out from the back as well as to play direct balls to the players up the pitch to bypass opposition high press at times

Controlling games is possible with high-blocks and/or possession-style football. The better suited your players are for this style the higher chance of a successful system it has.

TF-S   AF-A
TQ-A
MEZ-S   DLP-S
WB-A                            WB-A
CD-C   BPD-S   CD-C
SK-S

Something like this?

[frukox]

50 dakika önce, BadAss88 said:

TF-S   AF-A
TQ-A
MEZ-S   DLP-S
WB-A                            WB-A
CD-C   BPD-S   CD-C
SK-S

Something like this?

Not bad, mate. However, I was talking about a 4-3-1-2 but anyway:) Let me see...I'd take a closer look at how your defenders defend space and whether two playmakers close to each other is beneficial to the system or not. To put it another way, they shouldn't blunt your attacking effectiveness by slowing down play too much and you can only know it by watching your transitions.

[BadAss88]

51 minutes ago, frukox said:

Not bad, mate. However, I was talking about a 4-3-1-2 but anyway:) Let me see...I'd take a closer look at how your defenders defend space and whether two playmakers close to each other is beneficial to the system or not. To put it another way, they shouldn't blunt your attacking effectiveness by slowing down play too much and you can only know it by watching your transitions.

I was just interpreting your post.. I myself was experimenting with a 3-4-1-2 influenced by last years Domenico Tedesco's RB Leipzig..but didn't find great success with it in FM23 as I don't get much out of the AMC.. So now I'm switching to a 3-1-4-2, currently experimenting with this formation:

TF-S   AF-A

MEZ-S   BBM-S
WB-A       RGA-S       WB-A
WCB-S   CD-D   WCB-S
SK-D

[bababooey]

So let's keep this thread on the rails if possible. If you want to start a thread about your own tactics, please do so.

Here is the 4-3-1-2 that I've switched to.

The reason was two-fold... 

1.) I much prefer standard 4 at the back systems

2.) I wanted to keep using 2 strikers AND not use any wingers / wide forwards

So far, this has been deadly. Some of the goals we've scored were almost walked into the net (my favorite type). 

I have added a few specific player instructions, which could change depending on the circumstances....

The left wing back (Gosens or Dimarco) has been instructed to cross from deep.

Both the left + right wing back's have been told to aim crosses at the center. This should help us get the ball into dangerous areas consistently.

The left wing back has been told to dribble less + cross more often.  The idea here, is that I want to have a degree of unpredictability in our crossing. The left side wingback is more conservative with their movement, but willing to play crosses from deep. The other sided wing back will look to stretch play and get up to the byline before swinging in a cross.  This creates a conundrum for the defense because they've got to consider crosses from deep AND crosses from up high. This stretches play both vertically and (to a lesser extent) horizontally. 

One of the reasons I love this system is that it suffocates the opposition if they cannot cope with our passing and high press. We went away to Atalanta (who are a big title rival) and smashed them. They had almost no shots and very little possession, despite being one of the strongest attacking teams in Serie A. When we play them again at home, I expect to crush them again.

Of course, I don't want to play this way for the entire 90 so.... going back to the original post here, we will have a "cool down" version of this where we sit in a mid block (maybe a deep block), remove the higher pressing, and look to waste time and see the game out.

[BadAss88]

@bababooey I thought it was a general discussion thread about the 3-4-1-2 tactic, didn't know it was ment to be only about your tactic..

EDIT: And was it possible to buy Lukaku in season 2 or did you loan him for another season?

Edited December 21, 2022 by BadAss88

[bababooey]

7 hours ago, BadAss88 said:

@bababooey I thought it was a general discussion thread about the 3-4-1-2 tactic, didn't know it was ment to be only about your tactic..

EDIT: And was it possible to buy Lukaku in season 2 or did you loan him for another season?

I'm currently in March 2023 so, I have not made it that far yet. I suppose it's going to depend on the transfer budget for next season. I've hardly spent any money, outside of a loan for Cataldi.

Lukaku is probably going to cost a ton, and there is no "future fee" in his loan deal, unfortunately.

[nick1408]

Hi @bababooey - sorry to drag this up again but I am trying to do something similar to you (well, at least your 3-5-2) - same league but different team. I've gone with Hellas Verona. I don't have the out-and-out quality Iner Milan has but there are similarities - I have a truckload of targetmen with plays with back to goal plasyer traits, I have a decent-enough playmaker in Veloso and I have big, tall (albeit slow) centrebacks.

 

I do have a couple of questions:

• I get why you have used opposite foot for the full backs in the opposition instructions but if you are inviting crosses would this not be better of being left off altogether? AMR/AML is a different story like you said but the full backs I can see an argument to let them flick in some poor crosses as they are typically the lesser-skilled at crossing compared to wingers.
• I wouldn't have thought your mid-block was anything other than a basic framework (sans-player instructions) but I am starting to get the feeling that it may work better for Inter than Verona. I'm looking for a mid-table finish but seem to be struggling against those sides around the same spot as me. As I am typically using the mid-block should I consider being a bit more attacking versus teams around me? You do allude to the player quality at Inter but I don't see why this couldn't translate lower down the table.
• I've added a couple of instructions like Float Crosses and  Aim Cross Centre for the full backs. Would you consider this overkill? Also, would you lower tempo with a lesser quality team? I find that there is less pressure on the ball in Italy so have been playing around with tempo to try and cover for some bad passing/movement.

Edited January 3, 2023 by nick1408

[bababooey]

On 02/01/2023 at 19:46, nick1408 said:

Hi @bababooey - sorry to drag this up again but I am trying to do something similar to you (well, at least your 3-5-2) - same league but different team. I've gone with Hellas Verona. I don't have the out-and-out quality Iner Milan has but there are similarities - I have a truckload of targetmen with plays with back to goal plasyer traits, I have a decent-enough playmaker in Veloso and I have big, tall (albeit slow) centrebacks.

 

I do have a couple of questions:

• I get why you have used opposite foot for the full backs in the opposition instructions but if you are inviting crosses would this not be better of being left off altogether? AMR/AML is a different story like you said but the full backs I can see an argument to let them flick in some poor crosses as they are typically the lesser-skilled at crossing compared to wingers.
• I wouldn't have thought your mid-block was anything other than a basic framework (sans-player instructions) but I am starting to get the feeling that it may work better for Inter than Verona. I'm looking for a mid-table finish but seem to be struggling against those sides around the same spot as me. As I am typically using the mid-block should I consider being a bit more attacking versus teams around me? You do allude to the player quality at Inter but I don't see why this couldn't translate lower down the table.
• I've added a couple of instructions like Float Crosses and  Aim Cross Centre for the full backs. Would you consider this overkill? Also, would you lower tempo with a lesser quality team? I find that there is less pressure on the ball in Italy so have been playing around with tempo to try and cover for some bad passing/movement.

Hi Nick,

Verona is a big challenge, for sure. So I wish you the best of luck with that.  I'll address your points here in order.

1. You make a good point there. I guess I didn't consider the combo of inviting crosses + wrong footing those players, but at the same time, I would also say that "invite crosses" would usually end up being used sparingly, depending on the situation. It's an instruction that I'm still not really sure about what it does "under the hood".  Maybe others in the forum know more about this.

2.  I think that any team can use any system BUT that does come with a huge caveat...  if you're asking Verona to play a mid-block, you just have to determine if the players have the attributes to do it well and consistently.

Over time, I think any team can be molded into shape. There are many threads on here from people who have implemented a style of play / system at a club, similar to like Ajax or Barcelona, etc. etc. 

I think this is a challenge where the difficulty scales w/ the level of club you're at. Smaller clubs are going to have a tougher time adapting and changing, whereas huge clubs like Real Madrid have the talent to do pretty much anything you ask.

3. Float and aim center seems sensible if you're trying to get balls into the box / into the path of the target forward. But, I think you can select "cross to target forward" so that might be a better option..

I don't think it's overkill at all, but that depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

4. Tempo is a weird thing...  I would not necessarily link it exclusively with the level of talent at a club. That seems like a fool's errand.  I would instead look to use tempo much like any other team instruction, where the goal is to outline a style of play.

So... (generally) possession-based systems will utilize a lower tempo because it makes players prioritize keeping the ball. 

If you look at the preset tactics that come w/ the game inside the tactical creator, you can see how FM's developers use tempo.  "Wing play", "route one" + "direct counter" all use a higher or slightly higher tempo.  Tiki Taka, meanwhile, uses a lower tempo. So you can see the differences there.

 

Hope that helps!

[nick1408]

4 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Hi Nick,

 

....

 

Hope that helps!

Certainly does - thanks for the reply.