playerblair

I made this tactic and I am pretty satisfied with every role other than the DM, I don't know what he should specifically do so I just used DM(d) to cover all bases. However, this also means it pretty hard to used the data hub to judge his performances as, other than headers won, there are no significant strengths. Is this fine or to be expected and do you think the DM(d) role good for this tactic? Note: By design most of the ball progression from the back will come from the BPDs who have the dribble more PI

I have through the thread and I have realised that my understanding of the pressing traps instructions were wrong. I had thought that trap outside would make the team narrower to stop the opposition from playing through the middle. Now that I know what they truly do I will look to trap inside like you suggested. Thanks for the help.

Interesting, I didn't think that WB would be waiting for WCB to overlap, always though it would be the CM waiting the the run of the WB. Part of the plan was to fill the midfield physical player + a trigger press & tight marking on MC, so that if the opposition dared to progress centrally we could win the ball back. Also, I don't have play for set pieces on in the screenshot but I intend to fully utilise set piece recruit tall and ariel dominate CB. This way crosses coming from wide areas, via trap outside, could easily be dealt with. I'll also give this a try. I imagine the CAR won't try to become a 10 like a BBM or MEZ will.

I am currently experimenting in versus mode with this 5-3-2 and tbh I am quite happy with the tactic, it defends well and creates chances. However, a common theme is the LWB attacking contributions being dwarfed by the RWB. I am aware the RWB has more of support system with the F9 and MEZ, and having the LCM as a CM(s) is intentional to avoid him becoming an AM in possession so we not to open on the counter. Using as WCB(s) on that side is something I have tried to support him more,but there is no difference. Should I just accept the LWB as it is since the tactic works well anyways?

Idealy i would like to defend as 4231, this is the reason I have used BBM because like you said they will comeback on defense. But in possession id like them to operate higher so that both the BBM and AP act as creators and supply short through ball to both IFs and AF. However, the BBM doesn't have the impact I would like them to have and I feel a role on attack duty wouldn't commit to the defensive side of the tactic, and a playmaker will drop to deep get in the way of the IWB.

I have created this 4231 which turns in a lobsided 343 box midfield. I have feel that the BBM is a passenger, but an sort of playmaker get in the way of the IWB(s). What would you suggest?