[(FM21) Gustavo Potterini’s Fondazione Tre: 5-2-3 | 3-4-3 (OK it's really Graham Potter)]

Interesting last night vs Newcastle.  Reviving a classic, the W-M.

 

[(FM21) Gustavo Potterini’s Fondazione Tre: 5-2-3 | 3-4-3 (OK it's really Graham Potter)]

Just discovered this thread having not been on the forums for a while and I have to praise CaptCanuck as I've been doing the same quietly in the background since FM20.  What I've ended up with is almost identical with a few shape variations and tactical variations to suit the way Potter flexes shape in game. 

1.  moving a CB forward into DMC to make a 4-1-2-2-1 

2.  moving the 3 forwards into AM(S), PF, PF  5-2-1-2  

3.  both of the above, to a 4-1-2-1-2 

 

Tactically, there are a few differences which are more due to some of the issues I see with the way Potter plays at Brighton - so although this may not be true to FM, I think it's true to the ethos.

In Possession

For the Final Third I use "Low Crosses".  I want to rely on the mobility and movement of the strikers rather than lump balls in.  This helps to get the ball in quicker rather and also helps with limited aerial ability.   (To this end I also set the WBs PIs to cross Near Post, to avoid the Keeper)

For Approach Play I do not "Focus Play Through The Middle"     just tried it with and without and felt I was able to progress the ball faster without opting to focus play in this way. I want faster front to back and this I felt was slowing us down a bit.

 

In Transition

When possession has been won, I "Counter".  I find that otherwise transitions aren't seized upon quite as effectively,

  

Out of Possession

On the tackling side, I don't often see players go to ground, so I have opted to "Stay on Feet"

Also the team work hard and are "More Urgent" in their attempts to recover the ball/get back in shape

 

 

[Quickfire Questions and Answers Thread (Tactic and Training Questions Only)]

Hopefully a simple question.  It seems that no matter what I try, when playing against 2 CBs, 1 centrally positioned Striker is more effective than 2 side by side of any type.  Is there anything I can do to encourage a 2 striker formation to create space as effectively?  It seems counter-intuitive that I should have more success with one striker than with two.  BTW I play almost exclusively LLM so the quality of strikers is pretty shoddy

[Quickfire Questions and Answers Thread (Tactic and Training Questions Only)]

Not sure this counts as a simple question but...

I play a 4-1-2-3 DM Wide (with and DM and AML & AMR) as I like the defensive discipline and protection from the DM and the ability to retain possession. When i come up against teams with the same formation I find it very difficult to break them down (for the same reasons). What do you guys do against 4-1-2-3 DM Wide?

[Quickfire Questions and Answers Thread (Tactic and Training Questions Only)]

Hi all. Not sure where best to place this so thought here might be good. I'm sure we've all had these scenarios and I'm just curious how you folks manage to turn round games where everything seems to be going well except for putting the ball in the net.

Take a recent game of mine, 30 mins in, I'm 1-0 down and they have had 3 CCC - not good. The opposition forward is quick and getting to much space in behind my CB so I drop the defensive line and put some opposition instructions on to close him down. The opposition have exactly 0 more chances in the match as I've taken their main threat out of the game. I then contrive to hit every single chance and half chance I create over the bar or straight at the keeper. Tactically I think I've got it sorted defensively but I'm struggling to turn tactical superiority into victory. Any recommendations?