An Insight into the 'Modern 433'

[by 'an' insight, I mean 'my' insight. I like to play in a specific manner, although that is not to say I can't offer help on the shape in general.]

In recent years teams across the world have adapted to use what is known as a 41221, 451 or even a 433. It has become a staple of European football since its creation thanks to its versatile ability - capable of doing anything imaginable; be it solid defending, fluent attacking, beautiful football, control-based play, it really is one of the most versatile shapes in football today. The popularity of the shape makes it one people often try to master but that can often be easier said than done.

When I read the tactics sub-forum, one of the most troubled formations for most players to master is the modern 433. It is not an easy tactic to master - whilst it can be solid defensively, it is not always easy to get right going forwards. The ability to balance the attacking duties and defensive responsibilities of eleven men is often easier said than done, especially when it comes to the 433.

I have been playing FM for a number of years now (since FM08) and have developed a fairly good understanding of tactics and the ME. I have often found success primarily using the 433 described. It is a wonderfully efficient tactic and one every manager should contemplate using, even if it is as a Plan B or Plan C. Every team is capable of playing how the manager envisions they should as long they have the players to fill the positions. But enough chat, there's plenty of that to come. I'll crack on to the more important stuff...

The Shape

The modern 433 is comprised of a flat back four, a midfield pairing with a more withdrawn third midfielder sitting slightly deeper than both, a focal point up front in the form of a lone striker and then on either flank you have the wide men, who can make or break your formation. That is basic and everyone knows this.

However, the choices here are important. No one position is anymore important than others, but having a faltering attack is going to cost you big time in the competitive nature of any league. Getting your attack spot on is a hugely important aspect and as such, you need to assess what you want your wide men to do and look to have them achieve that... Being the versatile formation that it is, you have basically one of three choices for your wide men: 1. Both running to the byline and playing crosses; 2. Both cutting inside and looking to get into goal; 3. One cutting inside and one running to the byline and keeping width. Once you settle on this, you can decide what you want your fullbacks to do, your striker to do, and then your central midfield trio can be designed later.

Personally, I like to have my wide players cutting inside in this shape because a lone striker can often be isolated and end up with nobody to turn to or a pass to seek out. Having the midfielders push high up the pitch also helps this potential problem and gives the striker a direct supply route from deeper on the pitch and also allows them to find men backwards if there's nowhere to go forwards - sometimes restarting an attack is the best thing for the team.

In order to set up a competent midfield, you will (generally speaking) be advised to have a solid defence stalwart capable of breaking down every opposition attack they can; an engine-like midfielder capable of getting forward, getting back, winning the ball and seeking to assist in attacks where possible; and a midfield maestro, a true creator, someone capable of linking it all together and being a centrifugal force of the team.

If you read any of the stickies of the Tactics section you will see that they often recommend a variety of duties (Attack, Support, Defend) in order to keep a mixture of runs between the lines and to make your team more dynamic, threatening and unpredictable. I find this is good advice and as such, it is worth using at least one support fullback and one attack fullback across your defence.

All that's left to address, then, is your striker. Arguably the most important player in an attack sense, he should be designed to create goals, score goals, link-up the midfield and attack, draw space for others to exploit... basically, he should be able to do it at all. No easy task, as you can imagine.

So with all of that in mind, here is how I imagine the tactic that I have in mind to work out.

The LB is there to support whilst the RB is designed to get high up the pitch and deliver crosses (something not many will be able to deliver in this system due to the nature of the wide men cutting in). The defensive midfield will stay back at all times to prevent any potential counter attacks. One of the wide men will be a more direct threat to the opposition whilst his opposite teammate will be there more to supply and there will be less expectation on scoring goals from this member of the team. Both central midfielders will be asked to get forward, one for scoring and supporting purposes, the other for creation purposes. The striker (highlighted in yellow) will be given freedom to do whatever they want to do as long as they accomplish that within the yellow circle... I want him high up the pitch (still dropping deep, but not so deep as to make him almost a central midfielder) basically.

But before you settle on the roles, you first have to ask the question - How do I want my team to play?

A very broad question but the most important one of all. The first requirement of any manager is to know the style he wants to play and then set about achieving that with shouts, roles, instructions and so on.

I want to play aggressive football, aiming to win the ball back whenever we lose it. To help with that, we will press up the pitch as high as possible because this way there is less space for the opposition to use immediately close by and that will encourage opposition mistakes. When we have the ball, an attacking, stylish brand of football with short passes is preferable. I want us to look to get into goal as frequently as we possible can but that may not always be possible so this places further importance on us having to win it back quickly because there is a good chance we will also lose the ball fairly regularly.

How do we translate all of this into FM tactics, you ask? In my opinion, this is how...

Why those roles?

GK - Goalkeeper/Defend - Self-explanatory. I want my goalkeeper to stay on his line and make saves. No more needs to be said really.

RB - Fullback/Attack - I want to see the RB overlapping the AMR and supporting him whilst also looking to get in decent crosses. Having said that, I still want my RB to be defensively solid. I feel that FB/A offers better defensive cover than either a WB/A or CWB/A and so I have gone for the FB/A because defensive stability should never be compromised.

LB - Wingback/Support - Like my RB, I want to have my LB be defensively solid. At the same time, I do not want him to be purely focussed on defence and so a Wingback role will grant him the freedom to get forward enough to support my AML properly. One great little thing I have noticed in my time playing FM14 is that a WB/S absolutely loves to get into the opposition's third and play beautiful through balls for the man he is supporting. An additional method of playing in the AML is always welcome.

RCB & LCB - Central Defender/Defend - self-explanatory. I don't want them to be doing anything but keeping men out of our box and to stop them from scoring goals.

DM - Anchorman/Defend - In order to fully protect the defence, the Anchor of the team is required to stay back, shield the defence, play simple passes to those around him and generally be focussed solely on defence. He is essentially a CB in this system.

MCL - Advanced Playmaker/Attack - as I explained above, this is the creator of the team. The man who brings it all together and makes it all work. With an AP/A I want him finding space in the centre of the pitch and spray passes around. This is the most appropriate MC role available.

MCR - Box-to-Box Midfielder - The Engine. I want to see my player getting high up the pitch but also dropping back to defend. I want him to score goals when he can, make assists when he can and run himself into a coma if he can. He should be a non-stop runner and someone willing to give his all for the team.

AML - Inside Forward/Attack - I want to see this player making a bee-line for the goals. Goals, goals, goals should be all on his mind. But if wants to chip in with the occasional assist, that's lovely too. The IF/A can function both as a secondary striker from out wide and that is what I hope to achieve here. He is also able to play in crosses when appropriate and look to play in others around him, so he mustn't be too selfish.

AMR - Inside Forward/Support - the opposite of his opposite teammate, essentially. I want the AMR to sit deeper and link the defence, midfield and attack all together, I want him to play dangerous passes and support anyone he can. If he can get into scoring positions (which is bound to happen due to him being in an advanced area) then I expect him to score, it's just that the onus isn't on him to deliver in this sense.

STC - Trequartista/Attack - the focal point. CF/S or DLF/S is also an option here, but I believe that the Trequartista provides attacking movement, creative passes and goalscoring prowess better than any other role available. It is more complete than any other role available in my humble opinion.

Why Those Shouts?

Shorter Passing - Short passing encourages a more stylish brand of football and makes it easy for us to control the game (not in terms of having more possession but simply in terms of not losing possession frequently). A shorter passing style makes it less likely for us to give the ball away assuming these passing options are close by.

Pass Into Space - This shout makes us dangerous. Whenever we see space, we will look to exploit it. Certain players will be instructed to roam (I'll get to PIs later in the thread) and it will hopefully give us an attacking edge in order to get into the opposition's box more frequently and hopefully score more goals.

Work Ball Into Box - you cannot play stylish football if your team is shooting from 30 yards every chance they get. Self-explanatory. I hate long shooting.

Play Out Of Defence - this encourages the defenders to look for their passes instead of blootering the ball into touch whenever they get it. It is simply to make my defenders more comfortable when the ball gets passed to them, something which should be a fairly regular occurrence.

Much Higher Defensive Line - as explained earlier, I want to win the ball back as often as possible. Crushing the space into the opposition's half will be easier accomplished with this shout. It will also make us a more competent attacking threat and that is something I definitely want to encourage. It means there is more cohesion between defence, midfield and attack.

Hassle Opponents - as I also explained earlier for this, I want the ball back quickly when we lose it. Hassling the opponents makes this easier. It is important because of this to have hard workers who also know how to tackle. Self-explanatory shout really I suppose.

Standard Mentality - All of the mentalities automatically have default implications on your tactic, for example Attacking encourages a higher tempo. I don't like this and so I use a Standard Mentality. It allows completely control over the team's instructions and that is something which appeals to me.

Balanced Fluidity - Much like above, the other options have connotations on the overall team and I'm not a fan of that, although I do sometimes favour a Fluid approach in order to enhance creativity and attacking play. By and large I stick to a Balanced fluidity, though.

Why Cardiff?

I suppose one other point for explanation is the question above... It's simple, really. I have always been of the belief that it is possible to accomplish anything and succeed with anyone provided you have the right tactics. With a Media Prediction of 19th, Cardiff are not expected to accomplish much and in fact the board only wants me to avoid relegation. Personally I think that if my tactics work as they should, I will get into the top half. Adventurous? Perhaps. Possible? Definitely.

Over the course of this thread I will try to take you through my tactical thinking and decisions and show whether or not my reasons for such decisions work and whether I can be successful playing like this (I know I can because I have been very successful playing similarly with Aston Villa). The purpose of the thread, therefore, is simple - to try and show how to create a balanced and successful 433.

---

The Tactic So Far

I am still in the early stages of using this tactic but as you can see, I have it working very well and generally getting results that aren't expected of a side like Cardiff. It is absolutely vital that the striker is capable of doing everything, prior to signing Jordan Rhodes (between the 0-0 with Sunderland and the victory over Liverpool) we didn't look like we would ever score. With him leading our line we've been fantastic going forwards and only failed to get going in the Arsenal game (which is a tough game for any team, nevermind a 'relegation side').

Bit of work to be done defensively, conceding too many for my liking (mainly setpieces tbf) but that can easily be attributed to a very high line with slow defenders. We're too easily broken against. I'll get it right, this is just at the beginning.

Be interesting to see how you get on. I'll be following your progress. I usually try 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 but may consider 4-3-3 in the future

Love using this formation ever since Mourinho came into English football and showed how successful this could be. Will be following with interest this thread as to be honest I have never got it totally right in FM14, and gave up using it with my Man Utd team a few seasons back.

Just as a side note, interesting you have signed Jordan Rhodes as he also went to Cardiff (has since moved to Liverpool) in my save and he didn't do bad there, top scorer in the Premiership for 4 out of the 5 seasons he has played there:

Anyway, off topic. Back on it - will keep an eye on this, good luck.

Absolutely cracking thread of the formation I just cannot help returning to. Ill be really interested to see how it goes for you.

A couple of questions:

1) Are you getting enough support from your two MCs? I find this is always the hardest bit to get right with this formation. Does the AP-A attack the box enough?

2) Are you playing Rhodes as a Treq? I've been using him as a CF-A to try and be more of a spearhead to the attack - does he get forward enough as a Treq?

Cheers guys

Absolutely cracking thread of the formation I just cannot help returning to. Ill be really interested to see how it goes for you.

A couple of questions:

1) Are you getting enough support from your two MCs? I find this is always the hardest bit to get right with this formation. Does the AP-A attack the box enough?

2) Are you playing Rhodes as a Treq? I've been using him as a CF-A to try and be more of a spearhead to the attack - does he get forward enough as a Treq?

1. So far there's plenty of support. The AP/A is often around the edge of the box when we are attack the final third which is obviously a good place for him to be. The B2B is slightly deeper (which surprises me somewhat, although I prefer that both don't bomb into the box) but does make late runs when necessary. I am struggling to get the B2B involved more than any other role so far, I've not really had anything in the way of goals nor assists (one goal so far iirc) from the B2B, but I will tweak the role and hopefully get it working. It's a role I love the concept of but have never really got to work in FM unless managing Yaya Touré. And Arron Gunarsson is not Yaya Touré

2. I am indeed. I'm finding that he is always in vaguely the right position. I could perhaps do with him being more forward when we are in a good crossing position (although Rhodes has scored two headers from crosses and hit the bar twice so far already). However at the same time I have tried out many roles in the lone striker of a 433 and never found anything which drops quite as deep as the Trequartista or gotten as high up at times either. Whilst a DLF/S or DLS/A will drop deep, they will often make late runs from deep, whereas the freedom of the Trequartista means that he will do whatever he likes. It relies on intelligent play from the striker which is why I think it's the one position you need a truly top class player in. You can wing the other positions with sub-standard players but if you don't have a quality striker you're going to struggle to get others into play and to score goals with him.

I have had great success on a previous save using Aleksandar Mitrovic (and Carlos Fierro as his back-up) as a Trequartista in a 433 as the lone striker. Mitrovic was deadly at times and basically produced what Rhodes is producing for me now but on a season-long level (which is obviously no easy feat).

Only 1 wee thing... does your BBM not run into your IF(S)? Would it not be better to have him on the other side, with an AP(S) (or DLP(S) playing in the space behind the IF(S)?

It isn't something I've had issue with, not yet anyway. As I said in an earlier post, I find the B2B is deep at times and when he has made late surging runs, he's usually through the centre whereas the IF/S is off to the right side of the pitch (right-central).

I've made a slight switch to the B2B, I need to try and get him more involved in all aspects of play. Currently trialling him as BWM/S set to "Get Further Forward" hoping that he'll still support plenty.

Nice thread mate. this is easily my fav formation just so reliable and there is so much to play around with in it. I am currently trying a bit of a variation as I want an extra man central in the AMC zone.

EDIT: Just saw your bit about the B2B to a BWM. Last year I actually had a lot of success with a BWM(D) with get further forward, or run from deep or whatever the PI was.

I'm adapting my Liverpool "5-1" tactic (which IMO flips sides to yours, i.e. Attack up the RHS, but otherwise very similar) with an AP(S) at MCL and CM(A) at MCR.

With Aston Villa I played with my formation flipped but the roles were still very similar.

BWM/D isn't available with Gets Further Forward unfortunately, makes things that little bit more difficult to manage because that style of play would be wonderful.

BWM/S with GFF isn't making a great deal of difference to my attacking play. If anything things feel a bit harder going forward, but defensively we feel a bit more solid - emphasised by us just getting a clean sheet at Goodison in a 0-1 victory

who says the game isn't realistic!!

4-1-2-2-1 is also my favourite tactic, and I have similar setting like yours! Only that I occasionally use a False 9 up front, as (not verified yet) sometimes he drags the central defender(s) away from position when they are marking him. I once had Spurs' Lamela making 3 assists in a match vs Arsenal, but against weaker opponents he can get ratings as low as 5.7...

one question, when you push so high up the pitch wouldn't you make it easier for opposition to counter? Just wonder if offside trap helps.

Do you use any player instructions?

Player instructions are linked in the first post, simply click on the position/role

@a.panda - Offside Trap is an option but I'm wary of using it with already slow players, a failed offside trap is impossible to recover from with players of my speed. Plus the teamwork values of my back four isn't that great either so there's a chance that a lot of my traps would fail.

Player instructions are linked in the first post, simply click on the position/role

Nice one. I saw the hyperlinks but didn't even think to click them...

EDIT: I'll be trying this but I want the goals to come from the AMR instead of the AML, so I've switched the LB and RB roles, AML and AMR roles, and the two MC roles.

Jdownie what changes would u make if you would use this with arsenal? For example maybe offside trap or making both fullbacks WBs? Or perhaps taking off shorter passing on people like AP and IFs

I probably wouldn't use this shape with Arsenal tbph, but I guess if I was going to then I would contemplate changing the IF/S to an AP/S (for Ozil) (although I hate using APs out wide so I would consider keeping him as an IF/S), the B2B to a DLP/S (Wilshere), the AP/A to a CM/A (Ramsey). I think Short Passing suits Arsenal perfectly so I definitely wouldn't take that off.

You could change the fullbacks if you like but personally I like the set-up I have. Both are very offensive and do their duties defensively brilliantly too. It's a good pairing to have.

Nice one. I saw the hyperlinks but didn't even think to click them...

EDIT: I'll be trying this but I want the goals to come from the AMR instead of the AML, so I've switched the LB and RB roles, AML and AMR roles, and the two MC roles.

Basically what I used with Aston Villa. If you've checked the OTF FM thread you'll probably have seen me talking about my Villa save at some point. Hugely brilliant career with them. That save is still alive, I'm just taking a break from it for now.

I probably wouldn't use this shape with Arsenal tbph, but I guess if I was going to then I would contemplate changing the IF/S to an AP/S (for Ozil) (although I hate using APs out wide so I would consider keeping him as an IF/S), the B2B to a DLP/S (Wilshere), the AP/A to a CM/A (Ramsey). I think Short Passing suits Arsenal perfectly so I definitely wouldn't take that off.

You could change the fullbacks if you like but personally I like the set-up I have. Both are very offensive and do their duties defensively brilliantly too. It's a good pairing to have.

What about philosophies/mentality?

Like I say in the OP, I'm not really a fan of changing them. However I have in the past favoured Control/Fluid and Attacking/Fluid. I suppose with Arsenal I would use Control/Fluid, Control/Balanced or Standard/Balanced. Whichever. Try one out, see how it goes, if it's good it's good, if it's bad it's bad and you try something else.

Hit the halfway point of my season (steaming through it atm).

Horrible injuries (lost Bellamy, Gunnarsson, Whittingham), a horrible congested fixture list and a tough schedule has left me with a terrible ending to my first 19 games, but overall I can't complain.

Regardless of what happens from now til the end of the season, I think it's fair to say that I've done a good job with Cardiff and I've got a strong basis for a good 433 here. The defence is leaking too many goals, especially late in games (we were leading Chelsea and managed to throw it away, feel robbed, especially since we missed 5 CCCs), but I feel like that can be attributed to the quality of my players as opposed to the tactics themselves. I'm making small tweaks per game to try and fix things out a little but it's not really working for us to be honest. I'm sure we'll get there eventually...somehow.

Arsenal storming away with the league (it's usually United in my saves who do that, so this is an interesting twist).

A couple of things I'm noticing with the tactic - the AMR is getting a lot more shots than I anticipated, I'm not sure why that is to be honest, Rhodes and Noone just seem to link up really well. Whether that's my setting or if it's just something that works for them, I am not sure. But Noone is not good enough and it is costing us so many chances (would've beaten Spurs and Villa with ease if Noone could finish). I also need better fullbacks - Brayford is alright, I don't even have a set leftback. I'll invest in those in January if I get money (probs won't).

Like I say in the OP, I'm not really a fan of changing them. However I have in the past favoured Control/Fluid and Attacking/Fluid. I suppose with Arsenal I would use Control/Fluid, Control/Balanced or Standard/Balanced. Whichever. Try one out, see how it goes, if it's good it's good, if it's bad it's bad and you try something else.

Hit the halfway point of my season (steaming through it atm).

Horrible injuries (lost Bellamy, Gunnarsson, Whittingham), a horrible congested fixture list and a tough schedule has left me with a terrible ending to my first 19 games, but overall I can't complain.

Regardless of what happens from now til the end of the season, I think it's fair to say that I've done a good job with Cardiff and I've got a strong basis for a good 433 here. The defence is leaking too many goals, especially late in games (we were leading Chelsea and managed to throw it away, feel robbed, especially since we missed 5 CCCs), but I feel like that can be attributed to the quality of my players as opposed to the tactics themselves. I'm making small tweaks per game to try and fix things out a little but it's not really working for us to be honest. I'm sure we'll get there eventually...somehow.

Arsenal storming away with the league (it's usually United in my saves who do that, so this is an interesting twist).

A couple of things I'm noticing with the tactic - the AMR is getting a lot more shots than I anticipated, I'm not sure why that is to be honest, Rhodes and Noone just seem to link up really well. Whether that's my setting or if it's just something that works for them, I am not sure. But Noone is not good enough and it is costing us so many chances (would've beaten Spurs and Villa with ease if Noone could finish). I also need better fullbacks - Brayford is alright, I don't even have a set leftback. I'll invest in those in January if I get money (probs won't).

Im not sure how would the defence hold up with much higher defensive line, especially having Per

Interesting thread as i play a 4-3-3 but more of a counter attacking style. I've tried often to go back to the high line on FM but the through ball goals are a killer for me, are you able to share the analysis of where you are conceding your goals from? Would you say the through ball over the top in between the two CD remains a problem or is other areas causing you defensive problems?

Excellent start though and look forward to hearing more on this tactic.

Good thread mate, I play a similar system and its interesting to see different versions of 433/451 or 4141 which are basically the same system, I play a F9 up front as I find he opens up more space for my IF's, I agree with the above post as regards to a high line, too risky unless you have really top class centre backs with pace, positioning and decisions, I find a BWM(s) performs well if not better than the B2B in the MCR position, maybe its because the IF blocks the B2B runs, good luck with it though and look forward to seeing how you get on.

Interesting thread as i play a 4-3-3 but more of a counter attacking style. I've tried often to go back to the high line on FM but the through ball goals are a killer for me, are you able to share the analysis of where you are conceding your goals from? Would you say the through ball over the top in between the two CD remains a problem or is other areas causing you defensive problems?

Excellent start though and look forward to hearing more on this tactic.

I use a high defensive line a lot, especially when I am expected to win a game with ease. However, I always use a Sweeper Keeper on either a support or attacking duty when I use the higher defensive line. I have found it negates a lot of the through ball issues.

I use a high defensive line a lot, especially when I am expected to win a game with ease. However, I always use a Sweeper Keeper on either a support or attacking duty when I use the higher defensive line. I have found it negates a lot of the through ball issues.

Yeah i used a sweeper keeper - support when playing around with high pressing but unless they've got incredible pace i found the opposition striker 9 times out of 10 puts it away. Then again that was using a 3-4-3 where the Central defenders leave too much space between each other regardless of how narrow you ask them to play.

Might have to go back and revisit the high press again as it would nice to finally crack it and i think the secret will lie in stopping the player that plays the through ball.

Yeah i used a sweeper keeper - support when playing around with high pressing but unless they've got incredible pace i found the opposition striker 9 times out of 10 puts it away. Then again that was using a 3-4-3 where the Central defenders leave too much space between each other regardless of how narrow you ask them to play.

Might have to go back and revisit the high press again as it would nice to finally crack it and i think the secret will lie in stopping the player that plays the through ball.

That's the key point - if you play a high line and don't press, you're just asking for trouble... ask Arsene Wenger

I play a high line with my Counter set up, but in addition I play at a very high tempo with lots of pressing, but in a disciplined "hold your shape" type of way... or at least that's the plan (which seems to work most of the time ). In defensive situations, it makes the formation look more like a 4-1-4-1.

That's the key point - if you play a high line and don't press, you're just asking for trouble... ask Arsene Wenger

I play a high line with my Counter set up, but in addition I play at a very high tempo with lots of pressing, but in a disciplined "hold your shape" type of way... or at least that's the plan (which seems to work most of the time ). In defensive situations, it makes the formation look more like a 4-1-4-1.

You actually play control because essentially that's what you've created by using the shouts to play higher tempo, higher line and press.

I've given this tactic a try with my Cardiff team, here are the results so far:

It's a very good tactic and has got me some great results, but I might have to stop using it because I get far too many red cards, 3 in 11 games (Liverpool, Southampton and Palace). As you can see, twice it cost me a result, especially in the Southampton game where I was 3-0 up until my player got sent off.

Also, another slight problem is the closing down, when the opposition has the ball in my final third normally two players go to him, this often works and they manage to get the ball back, but if the player manages to find a team-mate with a pass it leaves me wide open and they almost always end up getting a shot at goal, which has resulted in them scoring on a number of different occasions.

You actually play control because essentially that's what you've created by using the shouts to play higher tempo, higher line and press.

I beg to differ - it really doesn't look like a "Control" tactic. When they attack, they attack fast (as intended) and score many a goal from a ball played into the space behind the oppo's d-line with one of S&S (or sometimes Hendo) running on to it. Rarely have over 50% possession (see above screenshot of Arsenal result).

I beg to differ - it really doesn't look like a "Control" tactic. When they attack, they attack fast (as intended) and score many a goal from a ball played into the space behind the oppo's d-line with one of S&S (or sometimes Hendo) running on to it. Rarely have over 50% possession (see above screenshot of Arsenal result).

I think you will still have a Counter mentality structure, although those other instructions make some of it seem like a Control tactic. Of course, it's all about how it plays in certain scenarios against different opposition.

That's the key point - if you play a high line and don't press, you're just asking for trouble... ask Arsene Wenger

I play a high line with my Counter set up, but in addition I play at a very high tempo with lots of pressing, but in a disciplined "hold your shape" type of way... or at least that's the plan (which seems to work most of the time ). In defensive situations, it makes the formation look more like a 4-1-4-1.

Well hassle opponents, press much higher up and tight marking were in my TI so it wasn't that i didn't want to press. It was more that my two CMs roles/base position weren't quite right so were too slow at closing down the opposition which meant they had the time to ping the ball over the top for their striker to ghost through my 3 centre backs and score. Hence why i maybe need to go back and revisit it on an FMC test save.

I currently player Counter and a low press in my career save at teh moment that is very effective, keeps lots of possession and creates space for my quick attacking players to exploit.

This is what winds me up about FM! From the pictures you show it looks like the Inside Forwards, Advanced Playmaker and Trequarista should all be crowding and running into the same space...yet it seems to be working so well for you! grrr!

This is what winds me up about FM! From the pictures you show it looks like the Inside Forwards, Advanced Playmaker and Trequarista should all be crowding and running into the same space...yet it seems to be working so well for you! grrr!

But it's all about where they start from, and when they make the run.

They may be heading in the same general direction, but they will arrive at different times, and that is how a nicely layered attack should be.

The Treq is Roaming and intelligent, he won't be obstructing anyone.

The IF (A) cuts in from the left and will join the Treq in a sort of front two.

The AP (A) runs from Deep and will be more of an "outside the box" threat than the Treq and the IF (A), and similar can be said for the IF (S).

I think your AP (A) may be better with close down less thinking you want him in space as he is your main creative player, seems that your asking him to close down opposition players and roam from position to find space, I always thought these conflicted.

Perhaps he should be on more direct passing too ?, as asking him to pass short is restricting his passing options when he has high passing and creativity stats.

My view on Playmakers is that they should have their passing left on default.

By definition, they should be extremely capable passers of the ball, so it seems restrictive to steer them towards either end of the specturm.

If you leave them on default, they can more often exhibit their full range of passing.

Good point RT, I always thought "more direct passing" as a PI involved taking more risks with the ball and if you have a player with high passing, creativity and decisions this makes more sense than restricting him to playing short when there may be a killer ball on.

What you say does make sense though and leaving them on default may give them both options.

Quite a few posts since I last looked, instead of quoting them all I'll just answer them here (if I miss out a question you wanted answering, ask again).

Sweeper Keeper? I have used a SK in a similar system plenty before. My problem was twofold. The first was that I have David Marshall in goals. He has a poor touch, he's very slow, he's the prime example of a 'not' SK. The second problem was that a very high line with a sweeper keeper means that his passing options are limited. This means he tries to 'force' passes to where they really cannot go. It leads to a lot of stupid little mistakes that I can do without in life

Crowded space? No. Even looking at my tactic you wouldn't think that there is a problem with crowded space. The IF/A is like a secondary striker coming in from the wing (which is what I want). The AP/A is a support player, even though he has an Attack duty. He does not run into the box and look to score goals. He is there to create chances and recycle possession (this answer another question that I'll get to in a sec). I can understand people thinking the IF/S and B2B get in each other's way but as I've already explained, they don't. The IF/S gets into the edge of the box and around the byline, the B2B sits deeper and only 'gets in the way' of the IF/S when he makes late bursting runs (not all that often).

Short Passing/Advanced Playmaker? I am limiting my Playmaker but that's because I don't want him to lose the ball too easily. Keeping him with Short Passing allows creativity but not overly so, he keeps his passing short and it stops us from losing possession. This is not a possession based tactic (I don't want it to be either) but at the same time I do not want the opposition having the ball too much, hence my aggressive off the ball nature. I'll consider exploring it without restrictions but we'll see...

Goals being conceded... I haven't actually focussed too much on this (which is lazy of me, I know). So here's a quick rundown of goals being conceded. My last 10 games.

Southampton (2-2) - both goals from corners.

Spurs (2-0) - clean sheet.

Sunderland (1-1) - direct free kick.

Liverpool (2-1) - goal from corner.

Norwich (1-0) - clean sheet.

Man Utd (2-2) - pinball corner, open play (at last!), slick passing cuts the defence open.

Aston Villa (1-1) - cross from the wing tapped in at the back post.

Spurs (1-2) - Spurs work it through my midfield and defence, score rebound; Penalty

Chelsea (2-3) - pinball corner, corner, slick goal coming from a cross headed down for their striker.

West Ham (2-0) - clean sheet.

As you can see, I am not actually conceding many goals from open play (4 goal of 12 from open play). I'm being torn apart and dropping so many points because of the bloody corner glitch. I wouldn't mind if I was scoring goals from corners myself, but we have 1 goal from a corner all season and 1 from an indirect freekick

And I suppose what that quick look suggests is that I have no problem with central defenders in open play, three of the four goals conceded from open play were the fault of the fullbacks not closing down their man quick enough and stopping the cross. Only one was the fault of the CB (v Spurs) where he stupidly charged out to close down, got one-two'd around and then a rebound fell nicely for them after Marshall saved.

If you have the right player for that position then I think you'll find you can trust them more. I tend to agree with RT about leaving it default, but lately I'm experimenting with more directness as a PI.

I trust the player, Peter Whittingham fits what I need perfectly and he's also doing great ratings wise, but it's still a matter of not wanting to lose possession. He may play that killer pass more regularly and we may benefit but we may also lose the ball more. Perhaps it's a risk assessment of allowing more freedom against sides with slower players less likely to cut out his passes and counter and being more strict when there's more chance of freedom backfiring and costing us (which is obviously my fear). We're susceptible to the counter enough as it is without having to give the ball away more and give more countering opportunities.

How is your B2B getting on ?, did you tweak him ?, maybe try getting rid of "shoot less often" and giving him "get further forward".

It's my problem position. I'm cycling through a number of roles which isn't helping I guess, but it's really tough to get this right.

I'll try getting rid of Shoots Less Often to see if it helps, he already has GFF which isn't helping him too much tbh.

Is there anyway to reduce the number of cards and still keep the relative success? With so many bookings/sending offs it's almost unplayable as a tactic for me.

You could set specific players to Close Down More, thus preventing your from "Hassling Opponents" which I feel suggests/implies that they will commit fouls. Personally I don't have a problem with yellows. We pick up a fair amount (10th in the league) but nothing that I worry about. Only really Medel and Hudson, who I expect to get booked anyway, are getting regular bookings (he's got 6 in 24, Hudson has 6 in 20).

Who would you have closing down more? The RB, LB, DM and the BBM?

If you have the right player for that position then I think you'll find you can trust them more. I tend to agree with RT about leaving it default, but lately I'm experimenting with more directness as a PI.

Yes, good decisions is quite important for players on mixed passing, guess that's pretty obvious, but thought I'd just say :-)

Who would you have closing down more? The RB, LB, DM and the BBM?

Not so sure about the DM because I like my Anchor to be an Anchor, the minute he starts to close down he's out of position. I would set everyone to close down except for the two CBs and DM tbh.

You could also try Mark Tighter but Man Marking is one of those systems I despise and will never use myself.

How is your B2B getting on ?, did you tweak him ?, maybe try getting rid of "shoot less often" and giving him "get further forward".

Just want to say thanks for this suggestion, it has produced two goals in two games for Jordon Mutch (both off the bench), one being the winner in a 3-2 victory v Hull, the other being the second in an away victory against Fulham, winning 2-0.

Still early days but it's the first time my B2B has looked dangerous so it's very pleasing in that sense.

e: Jordan Rhodes continues to be impressive. His stats:

18(3) appearances, 18 goals, 3(3) penalties, 6 assists, 6 PoMs, 7.41 Avg. Rating

So after reading this and my own thread where I got a lot of advice I created this tactic. I have already tried a lot of 4-3-3 and they all failed(sacked a lot with Newcastle) but I had hope that this one would work.

SK(S)

WB(S) - CD(D) - CD(D) - WB(S)

HB(D)

DLP(S) - AP(A)

IF(A) IF(A)

CF(S)

TI's: Short passing, pass into space, work ball into box, play out on defence, lower tempo, hassle opponents.

Balanced and counter. PI's: Both IF sit narrower and both WB stay wider. SK distribute and pass shorter. Which he never does btw. Weird...

So far(6 games) I'm 19th and got 1 point. Can't seem to score or create good chances. Defensively also very bad. Pre season went great. I won 8-0 against panthiakos and 7-0 to atlethic. Playing exactly as I wanted: Good possession, lots of through balls and the front 3 scoring a lot.

The league is just a different story.

I play with Newcastle and tactic is almost full fluid.

Could you give me some insight on why my 4-3-3 isn't working? As you can see I'm a bit desperate and dont want to get sacked again. Since that is my only success in FM so far.

Some other excellent threads about 4-3-3 I red before creating my tactic:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/385030-How-to-create-a-solid-attacking-and-defensive-4-1-2-2-1-with-the-Magpies.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/275877-The-Barcelona-Style-My-Interpretation?p=9419771#post9419771

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/384872-4-1-2-2-1-Attacking-trio-not-dangerous-enough

So after reading this and my own thread where I got a lot of advice I created this tactic. I have already tried a lot of 4-3-3 and they all failed(sacked a lot with Newcastle) but I had hope that this one would work.

SK(S)

WB(S) - CD(D) - CD(D) - WB(S)

HB(D)

DLP(S) - AP(A)

IF(A) IF(A)

CF(S)

TI's: Short passing, pass into space, work ball into box, play out on defence, lower tempo, hassle opponents.

Balanced and counter. PI's: Both IF sit narrower and both WB stay wider. SK distribute and pass shorter. Which he never does btw. Weird...

So far(6 games) I'm 19th and got 1 point. Can't seem to score or create good chances. Defensively also very bad. Pre season went great. I won 8-0 against panthiakos and 7-0 to atlethic. Playing exactly as I wanted: Good possession, lots of through balls and the front 3 scoring a lot.

The league is just a different story.

I play with Newcastle and tactic is almost full fluid.

Could you give me some insight on why my 4-3-3 isn't working? As you can see I'm a bit desperate and dont want to get sacked again. Since that is my only success in FM so far.

Some other excellent threads about 4-3-3 I red before creating my tactic:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/385030-How-to-create-a-solid-attacking-and-defensive-4-1-2-2-1-with-the-Magpies.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/275877-The-Barcelona-Style-My-Interpretation?p=9419771#post9419771

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/384872-4-1-2-2-1-Attacking-trio-not-dangerous-enough

Quick question - why Lower Tempo? - Surely with a Sweeper Keeper, wingbacks (albeit in the fullback position) and players breaking from deep (AP, IFs), you want to move the ball quicker, rather than slower, to take advantage of defences who are slow to react on the transition?

Well the hints and tips told me it was good to combine with short passing and honestly it sounded logic to me. Those threads I linked also said the same. So you think higher tempo would surprise the enemy defences more and create more chances?

Well the hints and tips told me it was good to combine with short passing and honestly it sounded logic to me. Those threads I linked also said the same. So you think higher tempo would surprise the enemy defences more and create more chances?

IRL, how many counter attacking teams can you think of that play "short passing"?