Read about bielsa/3 man defence on zonal marking now have a question

..this didn't seem like it should be added to the excellent "back 3 now viable" thread because it deals with numerous tactics.

i'm building a team full of spirit and bottle, looking at great mental stats and a couple of times i've come back from 3 goals down so something's working........

anyway, i'm currently switching between a 3232 and a 3421.

HOWEVER i have the players for a 433 when desirable.

just like to know when "desirable" would be?

i read on zonalmarking.com how the 3-man defence is less popular now becuase against 4231 you have redundant DCs.

personally i don't really see that problem, but hey.....

when WOULD i decide to switch to a flat back 4 in games? what sort of situations would make that an "astute tactical move" and maybe against which formations? thanks!

Against a lone/3 man forward formation. i.e personally i wouldnt play it against a 4-2-3-1, or a 4-3-3

The reason you wouldnt is because you cbs would have to stretch to cover the wide forwards, effectively leaving your central defender one one with the opposition forward, or they would stay central, leaving your flanks exposed to any wide overload

sorry, you mean you wouldn't play THREE at the back against 4231 or 433?

Now this is from a real football perspective, since I don't have any experience playing 3 at the back in FM12. I'm not sure if it's relevant for the game, but you might still find it interesting.

Playing 3 at the back is the best against 2 striker teams; mainly 4-4-2 and 4-3-1-2. Then you can man mark both the strikers and still have a spare man acting as a sweeper. The issue comes when playing against a team with only one central striker, and especially 4-3-3 variants with wide strikers.

Against a 4-3-3, either you spread your back 3 over the width of the pitch to mark the strikers, which generally makes you very vulnerable, or you mark the wide strikers with your wing backs. If you have your wing backs drop deeper you get a 5vs3 at the back, which will leave you short somewhere else on the pitch; most likely your central midfield. This is very bad, at least in real life, since it allows the opponent to easily maintain possession and avoid being pressed in the midfield.

There is also an issue with starting play from the goalkeeper, where all three defenders are marked, forcing a long kick down the middle.

So most of the teams who play with three at the back (Udinese, Napoli, Chile national team) have a plan B involving a back four when playing against single striker teams; Udinese usually plays 4-4-1-1 instead of 3-5-1-1 and Bielsa prefers something similar to 4-2-1-3 instead of the 3-3-1-3. Napoli is pretty good at switching between a back three and a back four during the game, where one of the wing backs drops deeper and the centre back on the opposite side moves out to play fullback, like in the game against Udinese a couple of days ago.

Now this is from a real football perspective, since I don't have any experience playing 3 at the back in FM12. I'm not sure if it's relevant for the game, but you might still find it interesting.

Playing 3 at the back is the best against 2 striker teams; mainly 4-4-2 and 4-3-1-2. Then you can man mark both the strikers and still have a spare man acting as a sweeper. The issue comes when playing against a team with only one central striker, and especially 4-3-3 variants with wide strikers.

Against a 4-3-3, either you spread your back 3 over the width of the pitch to mark the strikers, which generally makes you very vulnerable, or you mark the wide strikers with your wing backs. If you have your wing backs drop deeper you get a 5vs3 at the back, which will leave you short somewhere else on the pitch; most likely your central midfield. This is very bad, at least in real life, since it allows the opponent to easily maintain possession and avoid being pressed in the midfield.

There is also an issue with starting play from the goalkeeper, where all three defenders are marked, forcing a long kick down the middle.

So most of the teams who play with three at the back (Udinese, Napoli, Chile national team) have a plan B involving a back four when playing against single striker teams; Udinese usually plays 4-4-1-1 instead of 3-5-1-1 and Bielsa prefers something similar to 4-2-1-3 instead of the 3-3-1-3. Napoli is pretty good at switching between a back three and a back four during the game, where one of the wing backs drops deeper and the centre back on the opposite side moves out to play fullback, like in the game against Udinese a couple of days ago.

thanks that made perfect sense, yes if i have my wide midfielders (in FM wingbacks and wide midfielders take up EXACTLY the same positions when defending) marking wingers, then yes i'll have too many men back and less people in the middle of the park i guess.

will take some time to get my head around all this!

sorry, you mean you wouldn't play THREE at the back against 4231 or 433?

Yep I wouldnt play a back 3 against those formations

i have an urge to test that theorum!