Recreating the Martinez Everton style

hi, I'm trying without much success to recreate the Everton style in FM.

Here's how I've set up so far (ignore the injuries, I'm just showing my first choice team):

So first of all I want the defensive unit of the two centre backs (I've set up both as ball playing defenders, one cover, one defend), Distin & Jagielka, with the two defensive mids protecting them, Barry & McCarthy, Barry set out as an anchor man and McCarthy as a DLP/S. The full backs in true Everton style are more like wingers, Baines & Coleman. so both Complete Wing Backs. The centre mid, Barkley, more attacking than defensive, can't decide whther CM/A or AP/A would be best. I want Mirrallas (or Pienaar) on the left as an Inside Forward cutting infield to shoot or lay a through ball on, and on the other flank ideally an out and out winger of either Dealefeu or McGeady. Then Lukaku or Traore up top but I have no idea on the best role for this lone striker and can't find anything that seems to work.

Now about how I'm setting up the team. I obviously want high possession, short passing, and high pressing without the ball. I've so far kept the mentality on standard and fluidity balance, not sure about these though. At first I think I over complicated the player shouts, but I've stripped them all back now and let the team shouts take over, so they're quite minimal except for the wide men.

I've played the first half of season 1 and I've had very mixed results to be honest, I'm sitting 9th in the table with a +2 goal difference, scored just 28 (2nd worst in the top 10), and conceded 26 (worst in top 14), so I need to change some stuff. I isually get only about 55% possession.

Any advice or pointers? I really like the idea of the shape of the team, I want the two centre backs to simply defend, the two defensive mids to protect them, win the ball and lay it off to either Barkley, or the full backs who are all about attacking and interacting with the wingers. I'm pretty stuck with the striker, trying to get the best out of Lukaku before he buggers off back to Chelsea. Need help!

Cheers

Concho

Doesn't Martinez play a 4-2-3-1 with Everton? What you've set up is a pretty accurate 4-3-3 replication. A defensive variant but a 4-3-3- nonetheless.

I'm also not sure I would go with "standard" mentality. From what I gather Roberto Martinez's sides play a possession game, attack down the flanks, try to dominate in the opponents half, non aggressive, etc

Perhaps toning down to "counter" would be better?

Everton's average possession in the EPL has been 56% this season, so ball retention is huge.

20 tackles per game + 13 interceptions per game tells me that they do not press insanely high up. They're pretty patient defending.

They play about 83% short passes, so I would definitely encourage that or perhaps mixed passing in the TC.

Everton rarely attempt through balls so pass into space would definitely NOT be included if I were trying to replicate them.

If I were setting up a 4-2-3-1 for Everton I would definitely pull back the AML/AMR to ML/MR. That's going to be vital, as the fullbacks will bomb forward. In real life teams don't usually use AML/AMR's in 4-2-3-1's. In 4-3-3's you can definitely use them but, I wouldn't in a 4-2-3-1.

So the formation might look like: 4-2-2-1-1 or you could have it: 4-2(DM)-ml/cm/mr/-1

First thing - your 2 x DC's are not really suited to being BPD's, and frankly more likely to give the ball away that way, so I would start by removing that...

Lukaku drops deep and holds the ball up, Deulofeu does not stay wide, he comes inside, and you have too many attack duties in your team. Maybe get Lukaku dropping deep (support duty), and switch Deulofeu to an IF(A). Martinez certainly does not exploit the flanks, and the overlaps will already appear naturally through the system, so remove the instruction, it will just reduce the effectiveness and runs of your wide forwards. Retain Possession on top of shorter passing is not really a great idea if you want to create stuff too! It will cause more sterile possession, to borrow Wenger's phrase.

Martinez's Everton is a difficult one. I have always had a soft spot for Everton and I like Martinez a lot - so this is interesting for me!

Babebooey's reply with the statistics quoted is a fantastic representation of Everton and a thorough, helpful contribution to the discussion. The point re pulling the AML/AMR back is also a valid one - some of the time. Llama's point about Lukaku is a valid one too but again, not all the time.

Something I would point out though is that the key to Everton's attack this season has been the relationship between Barkley and Lukaku (read: AMC and CF). The fact is, Lukaku (when fit) performs a variety of roles for Everton and, in my opinion, this is the reason why he has had a successful season. He does drop deep, yes, but he also leads the line, steps out wide and is the pivot for the AMC. The point is: defences can't settle on one way to deal with him. There are many ways Everton attack and key to that is the forward's behaviour.

I will, however, start at the back. Llama is right: remove the role of BPD. Although I rate Everton's CBs I also know that they can not perform at any sort of creative level. The back two sit a touch deep - Distin is quick (over short distances) but not enough to warrant a high line (let alone a 'much higher defensive line'). Baines and Coleman are in my opinion the best full backs in the league. I'm not sure exactly how complete wing backs differ from wing backs (if anyone could shed light here I would be most grateful) so ask yourself: "Why have I set them to complete wing backs?" If you can't justify it and can't point to aspects of play the CWB offer that the WB don't then change it. I have rarely, if ever, found myself wanting more (defensively and offensively) from a wing back (this may be because I don't understand the CWB role though). I'm not sure as to what instruction to give the defensive line - I would make the point that your defensive players are all intelligent enough to judge for themselves so would err toward the side of caution and not give any specific D-Line instructions.

Midfield: Barry and McCarthy do as you say and are a barrier. Their work rate is exemplary and this gives Baines/Coleman the freedom to do as they please offensively. Whether they play in the DM or CM strata I am not sure - I don't know them as players on FM well enough - but both McCarthy and Barry do contribute to the odd attack. Definitely worth bearing in mind. I am confident though that there are no extremes in the way these two operate. Take Alonso/Mascherano at Liverpool: one destroyer, one creator. Barry and McCarthy operate as a unit and work together in very similar roles with a plethora of attacking talent in front of them. They always have a short option (Baines, Coleman, Distin, Jagielka) if nothing is on up front but, due to the changing roles of the attacking players, they can play that direct ball too. What are their PPMs? Would them both having the same role do any harm? Would it ensure there is a cohesive approach or will they get in each others way? Would their individual playing styles ensure they operated differently enough to be effective? I don't know but I am leaning toward DLP(s/d).

Llama's advice on the TIs is solid. I would go further and remove: Retain possession, shorter passing, pass into space, work ball into box, exploit the flanks and look for overlap. Everton enjoy the threat of Lukaku up front and the 'route one' option but don't utilise it regularly therefore to enjoy the threat and keep the opposition honest the team needs to set up like it could be used - does that make sense? Basically have the option of using it if needs be. Unless I am missing something, I don't see Everton passing into space all that often either. Definitely not enough to warrant a specific instruction for it. As mentioned, Lukaku often leads the line and Everton do enjoy runners from deep (Mirallas, for example). As Llama mentioned, an accurate representation of Martinez's system will generate overlaps and movement between the lines inherently so why ask for it again? I feel people often try and add unnecessary variables because they feel they should when leaving it is enough. I get panicky if I have too many TIs.

Everton's attack I really admire. I am wondering why you see Barkley as a CM not an AMC? He may be dropped deeper and used as a CM in a two-man partnership in the middle but that is a far more extreme partnership (runner/destroyer) which would command a very disciplined CM to go alongside. He has very much been Everton's first choice No.10 this season with only a couple of games springing to mind where he has dropped deep. His role choice is an difficult one. He has the potential to be fairly complete as a player and with 4 goals this season in 25 appearances so far I am inclined to think his contribution is far more support based - I would recommend a Treq role, in the AMC position. Let him use his judgement and relationship with Lukaku to make the right move at the right time. You can't replicate the free-flowing movement the two enjoy when playing at their best in FM without trusting the player to make their own decisions.

Moving on to Lukaku, he drops deep, acts as a wide target man, leads the line etc etc. His behaviour changes that of those around him. When he drops deep, Barkley pushes forward and the wingers follow suit (to over simplify things). When he leads the line he creates space, Mirallas and Deulofeu drop deeper and run at the defence looking to cross or charge forward - basically exploiting the space Lukaku creates (I rate Mirallas very highly and can't see why he doesn't attract more interest. He had a game recently (I think it was the derby where Everton were completely out played) and he ran the show despite Everton being comprehensively beaten - Liverpool couldn't handle him, just a shame they could handle everyone else). When he steps wide and acts as a target man, he naturally stretches the defence and the opposite winger then drives forward. With all this in mind I don't feel the role of a deep lying forward fully satisfies his remit under Martinez. I would argue for complete forward on a support duty with anything that would encourage movement between the lines, toward the flanks and in the channels.

Dropping the wingers (Mirallas and Deulofeu) deep is an interesting suggestion. You could argue the case for both positions but, with the possibility of PIs to amend the role slightly, I would suggest keeping them in the attacking midfield strata. Dropping them deep you risk them becoming ineffective in attack. Their speed and direct running causes problems and to truly take advantage of space created with clever movement from Lukaku and Barkley you need them on their toes, high up the pitch. Dropping them deep is definitely worth considering in certain situations though, especially if the opposition are chasing the game. Using the pass into space option and their natural tendency to attack to take advantage of space in behind would be very effective.

Dropping them deep you risk them becoming ineffective in attack.

The difference in overall attacking output between ML/R and AML/R is minimal. Sometimes AML/R provide the better option, but they can just as easily get isolated or allow the team to get pushed back too easily in defence. It's more a question of how often you want the attacking players dropping back and potentially expending a lot of energy in defence. ML/R are also generally the better option if you want them to be available for a quick/safe ball out of defence whereas the more advanced defensive positioning of AML/R make them more of a counterattacking outlet that will need to either hold up the ball or make an early run at the defence.

To manage the condition of his attacking players, Martinez usually alternates between a 4411 and a lopsided 442. Typically, you'll see either Barkley/Osman staying forward as an AMC or Mirallas staying up as an AMR with three MCs crowding the middle next to Pienaar, and this will change in regular intervals throughout the match.

The difference in overall attacking output between ML/R and AML/R is minimal. Sometimes AML/R provide the better option, but they can just as easily get isolated or allow the team to get pushed back too easily in defence. It's more a question of how often you want the attacking players dropping back and potentially expending a lot of energy in defence. ML/R are also generally the better option if you want them to be available for a quick/safe ball out of defence whereas the more advanced defensive positioning of AML/R make them more of a counterattacking outlet that will need to either hold up the ball or make an early run at the defence.

To manage the condition of his attacking players, Martinez usually alternates between a 4411 and a lopsided 442. Typically, you'll see either Barkley/Osman staying forward as an AMC or Mirallas staying up as an AMR with three MCs crowding the middle next to Pienaar, and this will change in regular intervals throughout the match.

I see your point and understand that, technically speaking, the output difference between the two is minimal but to play how Everton do I personally see the AML/R positions more appropriate. When attacking, Lukaku quite often drifts wide to win a ball in the air. The winger on that side, say AML, will use him as the pivot and drop deeper to receive the knock down from Lukaku. Baines will often push forward on the left to keep the width, and the AML with the ball will come inside. Technically I agree that you can be as attacking in a ML/R position but if we're translating Martinez's Everton to FM, I'd struggle to make use of the example given (which was a regular occurrence when Lukaku was fit) if my wide players were in the ML/R in the way Everton do (long, cross field passes).

Mirallas does drop deep at times suggesting an interchangeable 4411 but I must admit I don't often see more than Barry and McCarthy holding for sustained periods.

The AML/R vs. ML/R debate is an interesting one.

I tend to agree with The Hand of God here, and I know that Cleon is also an advocate of ML/R positions.

It's important to stress that there really is no tangible, detrimental effect to the attacking impetus of a player at ML/R relative to one at AML/R.

Above all, they actively track back to the ML/R area, which certainly cannot often be said of those operating at AML/R.

Thanks for all the replies so far, as you could see from my first post my full backs & Barkley were injured. I did move my CM to an AMC playing him as an AP/A and went on a run into the top 5. I've kinda gone backwards though back down to 8th with a poor run.

I put play into space as I was trying to get that the real EFC players often play a ball into the corners just knowing a full back will go bombing onto it, was trying to get that in there, which is also why I selected exploit the flanks. I'm a season ticket holder at Everton and watch this every week. Plus as the season goes on I see they are probably becoming more defensive, the Barry & McCarthy partnership is definately in the DM position, not CM in my opinion, but I do see McCarthy pushing forward a bit more than Barry when attacking, hence the DLP/S choice.

I've taken a lot of PI's out and have basically just got the full backs and wingers with Get Further Forward selected. I see Deulefeu or McGeady when they play on the right they tend to stay out wide a lot more than Mirrallas does when he's on the right. I know Pienaar usually plays on the left and that is the biggest change I made putting Mirrallas there as an IF, but I read an interview with Mirrallas who said that is his favoured position and I would rather him there and Pienaar drop to the bench.

As far as dropping the wingers back, I did think of that, but prefer them higher up. They would need to have the role of Wide Midfielder if I wanted to add the instruction Cut inside, and I'd prefer it as I've set up. Mirrallas or Pienaar cut inside, and McGeady or Deulefeu stay as a winger. Also I feel Coleman cuts inside more than Baines does, which is highlighted to how many goals he has scored this season from inside the box, or the edge of the box.

So I've taken on all the advice above, and I will try my AMC as a Treq for a few games, put the centre backs as regular CD's and will try full backs as WB/A (I just wanted them as attacking as possible, hence CWB), I want to keep the wide men as IF/A and W/A and I'll put my striker (Traore as Lukaku is also injured) as a CF/S. Have also taken off much higher defensive line, wasn't sure about that but read on another thread if you use hassle opponents you should use that, and that defensive block plus the full backs and wide men I feel do hassle the opponents when they lose the ball. Thought that would make them track back, as said too?

Will give that a few games and see how I go.

I think that we are at risk of debating cross purposes if we don't define what we mean by attacking impetus or output. Generally speaking, the ML/R can move into an attacking position, attack directly, cross the ball (deep/by the touchline), dribble etc just as well as a AML/R can (as it may be the same player). However as we know a player's effectiveness is dependent on the tactics. A ML/R has different attacking advantages to a AML/R and vice versa which means that one will suit a certain tactic more than the other. In the Martinez style, my observations of Everton's football leads me to believe that to truly replicate the way his side attack then the AML/R positions are more suited.

If we're examining it in a uniform way the more complete player is undoubtedly the ML/R however it can't be as simple as 'the players attack just as well' because that is working on the assumption that, well there is a huge assumption.

Just played my first game with settings like I said above at home to Norwich, had 67% possession, 12 shots to their 2 and I lost 1-0, typical Everton, lol I'm happy now!

I think if you were trying to accurately replicate the team positions, your left hand side would actually be a LM rather than the AM/L perhaps with the 'Get Further Forward' instruction, but the right hand side would still be an AM/R.

The tricky thing is always going to be replicating the team movement. Everton are really good at moving together as a team, such that there is usually very little space variation between their back line and their front line (and also why they get caught out so easily with through balls) and I think that is why most people usually play the wingers in the AM L/R positions rather than the more reserved positions. If that is the starting positions for the midfielders, the D L/R should really be sitting in the Wing Back positions in line with Barray and McCarthy, because when the wingers are in advanced positions, typically the fullbacks are also already over the half way lines and in close proximity.

I think if you were trying to accurately replicate the team positions, your left hand side would actually be a LM rather than the AM/L perhaps with the 'Get Further Forward' instruction, but the right hand side would still be an AM/R.

The tricky thing is always going to be replicating the team movement. Everton are really good at moving together as a team, such that there is usually very little space variation between their back line and their front line (and also why they get caught out so easily with through balls) and I think that is why most people usually play the wingers in the AM L/R positions rather than the more reserved positions. If that is the starting positions for the midfielders, the D L/R should really be sitting in the Wing Back positions in line with Barray and McCarthy, because when the wingers are in advanced positions, typically the fullbacks are also already over the half way lines and in close proximity.

You don't have to compromise your defensive organization to get this kind of movement though. Balanced will give you that aggressive attacking movement from Mirallas and the fullbacks while encouraging Lukaku to drop very deep on any support duty role.

The issue with Concho's tactic is that the duty assignment combined with Balanced just makes the system extremely rigid with the defence/holding-mids and attack working towards completely different ends (which you can do with Balanced but probably shouldn't and definitely shouldn't if you're trying to play like Everton).

You don't have to compromise your defensive organization to get this kind of movement though. Balanced will give you that aggressive attacking movement from Mirallas and the fullbacks while encouraging Lukaku to drop very deep on any support duty role.

The issue with Concho's tactic is that the duty assignment combined with Balanced just makes the system extremely rigid with the defence/holding-mids and attack working towards completely different ends (which you can do with Balanced but probably shouldn't and definitely shouldn't if you're trying to play like Everton).

I see that the the wide players do track back at times for Everton however, taking the 4 - 0 derby as an example, Liverpool prospered down the flanks (admittedly due to an overly attacking Stones) but because there was no cover and they were able to create 1 vs 1 situations (Sturridge vs Stones, Sterling vs Baines) from very direct, long passing where pace is important. My point is that Everton's defensive solidity stems from their holding players (Barry and McCarthy) and very familiar centre back partnership (when fully fit) of Distin and Jagielka (Alcaraz being particularly error prone in the derby if memory serves). In the main I don't think they rely on their wide players to track back - especially when dictating play as they please.

I think under Moyes the wide players were slightly deeper as the overlaps Baines enjoyed were incredibly prominent (and typical of Moyes's tenure at Everton, and United it seems) however the majority of the time I see the wide players being far more attack minded than defensively so.

The argument of which is a more complete player is different; the ML/R positions clearly offer more defensively and can offer the same in attack. I do see the benefits of ML/R positions however I must admit I am yet to really get the best out of them. A discussion for another day/thread I suppose!

I see that the the wide players do track back at times for Everton however, taking the 4 - 0 derby as an example, Liverpool prospered down the flanks (admittedly due to an overly attacking Stones) but because there was no cover and they were able to create 1 vs 1 situations (Sturridge vs Stones, Sterling vs Baines) from very direct, long passing where pace is important. My point is that Everton's defensive solidity stems from their holding players (Barry and McCarthy) and very familiar centre back partnership (when fully fit) of Distin and Jagielka (Alcaraz being particularly error prone in the derby if memory serves). In the main I don't think they rely on their wide players to track back - especially when dictating play as they please.

My sense is that you're maybe conflating role/duty with position as well as defensive behaviour in the transition phase with defensive behaviour in the defensive phase. This is obviously fairly trivial in terms of discussing actual football, but as mechanisms in a computer game, we have more pressing and important reasons to dissect this stuff.

Playing someone at ML/R doesn't mean they'll sit back more and act as a holding player in attack. In fact, it can actually set off their attacking runs earlier. If you play an attack duty DL and an attack duty wide attacker, especially on an aggressive mentality, your flank is going to be exposed in the defensive transition whether you're playing ML or AML, and if you have an opponent playing long balls to pacy wingers and strikers on the counter, your holding midfielders are typically going to be the ones dealing with it. That's the whole point of the double pivot, after all. They help provide wide cover in the defensive transition to allow the wide players to overload the flanks in attack, but when Everton are sitting back or they're playing an opponent who has successfully pushed them back into their own half, their wide attackers most certainly do drop back into a midfield position and cover space with the occasional exception of Mirallas who, again, often alternates between wide midfield and wide forward throughout the match.

If you want to see the distinction between wide midfield and wide forward IRL, watch the first few minutes of the Zenit/Dortmund match. Zenit start with two wide forwards who did not track back into their own half even when Dortmund were pushing them back from the outset. This resulted in two quick goals, so quickly, Zenit subbed Arshavin and switched to more of an asymmetric 4-4-2 shape with Hulk remaining as the second forward (but still positioned out wide in defence). Now, if you watch any Everton match, you will not see more than two players sitting forward like this at any one time when the team is defending in their own half. When out of possession in the opposition half, the four most attacking players (and sometimes, even the fullbacks) will initially counterpress the opposition in the early transition, but if the opposition attack moves forward, Pienaar and either the central or wide midfielder will drop back into shape.

One thing I will agree on is that there is a lack of role options at ML/R, and I would even go as far as to suggest that there might not be enough of a distinction between the attacking behaviour of the wide midfield and wide forward positions to justify the defensive compromise.

My sense is that you're maybe conflating role/duty with position as well as defensive behaviour in the transition phase with defensive behaviour in the defensive phase. This is obviously fairly trivial in terms of discussing actual football, but as mechanisms in a computer game, we have more pressing and important reasons to dissect this stuff.

Playing someone at ML/R doesn't mean they'll sit back more and act as a holding player in attack. In fact, it can actually set off their attacking runs earlier. If you play an attack duty DL and an attack duty wide attacker, especially on an aggressive mentality, your flank is going to be exposed in the defensive transition whether you're playing ML or AML, and if you have an opponent playing long balls to pacy wingers and strikers on the counter, your holding midfielders are typically going to be the ones dealing with it. That's the whole point of the double pivot, after all. They help provide wide cover in the defensive transition to allow the wide players to overload the flanks in attack, but when Everton are sitting back or they're playing an opponent who has successfully pushed them back into their own half, their wide attackers most certainly do drop back into a midfield position and cover space with the occasional exception of Mirallas who, again, often alternates between wide midfield and wide forward throughout the match.

If you want to see the distinction between wide midfield and wide forward IRL, watch the first few minutes of the Zenit/Dortmund match. Zenit start with two wide forwards who did not track back into their own half even when Dortmund were pushing them back from the outset. This resulted in two quick goals, so quickly, Zenit subbed Arshavin and switched to more of an asymmetric 4-4-2 shape with Hulk remaining as the second forward (but still positioned out wide in defence). Now, if you watch any Everton match, you will not see more than two players sitting forward like this at any one time when the team is defending in their own half. When out of possession in the opposition half, the four most attacking players (and sometimes, even the fullbacks) will initially counterpress the opposition in the early transition, but if the opposition attack moves forward, Pienaar and either the central or wide midfielder will drop back into shape.

One thing I will agree on is that there is a lack of role options at ML/R, and I would even go as far as to suggest that there might not be enough of a distinction between the attacking behaviour of the wide midfield and wide forward positions to justify the defensive compromise.

I understand the differences and duties between a wide midfielder and wide forward in real life and FM - my point isn't based on that - rather that to accurately reflect the behaviour of Everton's wide players, in my opinion, they need to be in AML/R positions as I feel (as you rightly pointed out) the roles available to wide midfielders are limited therefore can not truly reflect the movement, relationships and overall behaviour of the roles an AML/R can offer.

In my experience getting a ML/R player to perform similar to and have the same relationship with other attacking players as an AML/R player has proved difficult. I have a few games to play with having won the league with some to spare so will try and experiment.

I understand the differences and duties between a wide midfielder and wide forward in real life and FM - my point isn't based on that - rather that to accurately reflect the behaviour of Everton's wide players, in my opinion, they need to be in AML/R positions as I feel (as you rightly pointed out) the roles available to wide midfielders are limited therefore can not truly reflect the movement, relationships and overall behaviour of the roles an AML/R can offer.

In my experience getting a ML/R player to perform similar to and have the same relationship with other attacking players as an AML/R player has proved difficult. I have a few games to play with having won the league with some to spare so will try and experiment.

Interesting.

I actually believe the opposite to be true and its much easier to replicate the movement of wide players in real life by having them deeper at ML/MR. It's much easier to have them attack and track back when needed. Having the player in the AML/AMR slots doesn't really replicate this well enough. This goes for most teams IRL too. You can have them link up play, support attacking players and defend a lot better positioned in the ML/MR spots imo. The tactic posted in the OP is actually a better reflection of a real life 4-2-3-1 than the name sake one in the game.

I understand the differences and duties between a wide midfielder and wide forward in real life and FM - my point isn't based on that - rather that to accurately reflect the behaviour of Everton's wide players, in my opinion, they need to be in AML/R positions as I feel (as you rightly pointed out) the roles available to wide midfielders are limited therefore can not truly reflect the movement, relationships and overall behaviour of the roles an AML/R can offer.

In my experience getting a ML/R player to perform similar to and have the same relationship with other attacking players as an AML/R player has proved difficult. I have a few games to play with having won the league with some to spare so will try and experiment.

Fair enough and apologies if I misunderstood your point. As you can probably guess, I'm just a bit defensive of the effectiveness of ML/R since I think overuse of the AM positions is a major source of headaches for many players, especially those who don't play top teams.

Fair enough and apologies if I misunderstood your point. As you can probably guess, I'm just a bit defensive of the effectiveness of ML/R since I think overuse of the AM positions is a major source of headaches for many players, especially those who don't play top teams.

Oh not at all - no need to apologise! I'm fairly sure I'm not articulating myself very well anyway :o

I definitely agree that the AML/R positions are overused. Before I started fully embracing FM and its various nuances it was almost a given that I would have those positions filled. I am currently enjoying success with wing backs and exploring their effectiveness and what they offer (interestingly, they are performing more effectively than any other wide player I have used on FM14 both in scoring and creating).

Thanks for all the input. I finished 11th in my first season, disappointing but I think I was making far too many changes too often. After the patch on steam I thought I'd start again and add a few ideas from this thread and see how I get on.

Here's what I've got so far:

5 games in and it's going well!! I sold Gibson and replaced him with two other DM's, Polanski and Simao. I have changed my DM which is usually McCarthy to a BWM/S and simplified the shouts a bit. Decided to keep both wingers pushed up for now, Lukaku is now a CF/S and Barkley a Treq.

I'm not saying it's complete yet but a very nice start to the season, very happy so far. Possession is usually in the high 50's, against Spurs it was 67%!! Plus, the only goals conceded in the league were in the 3-2 win over Fulham, the other 4 clean sheets. I let my assistant do pre-season, and the cup match was a blip, with a much changed starting 11.

Three AM's all on attack duty is asking for trouble, especially when you have the fullbacks on attack duty too. You're going to get caught out an awful lot with that set up, for sure.

I would drop the AML/R back to ML/R, and put one of them (Pienaar) on support duty as well. They'll still offer just as much in attack, but you won't be nearly as susceptible to the counter attack.

Just my two cents.

Interesting.

I actually believe the opposite to be true and its much easier to replicate the movement of wide players in real life by having them deeper at ML/MR. It's much easier to have them attack and track back when needed. Having the player in the AML/AMR slots doesn't really replicate this well enough. This goes for most teams IRL too. You can have them link up play, support attacking players and defend a lot better positioned in the ML/MR spots imo. The tactic posted in the OP is actually a better reflection of a real life 4-2-3-1 than the name sake one in the game.

I am coming round to much preferring ML/R as oppose to AML/R from THOG and Cleon's points (and my own experiments). There is obviously no doubt that the ML/R is the more complete position.

Although it is a fact that Everton wide players do contribute defensively in the majority of instances I do believe that the relationship between, say, Mirallas or Deulofeu and Lukaku is akin to that of a strike partnership. At times the way Lukaku has brought them into play with his movement has been amazing (I am glad he is back and scoring for Everton!). Perhaps I am naive in saying that and it is down to my lack of real experience with the ML/R roles that I can't replicate 'strike partnership behaviour' - I'd imagine it is definitely possible.

As I said, there is no doubt the ML/R offers a lot more across the board. I currently have Renato Augusto back from injury and really enjoying the MR position

I am coming round to much preferring ML/R as oppose to AML/R from THOG and Cleon's points (and my own experiments). There is obviously no doubt that the ML/R is the more complete position.

Although it is a fact that Everton wide players do contribute defensively in the majority of instances I do believe that the relationship between, say, Mirallas or Deulofeu and Lukaku is akin to that of a strike partnership. At times the way Lukaku has brought them into play with his movement has been amazing (I am glad he is back and scoring for Everton!). Perhaps I am naive in saying that and it is down to my lack of real experience with the ML/R roles that I can't replicate 'strike partnership behaviour' - I'd imagine it is definitely possible.

As I said, there is no doubt the ML/R offers a lot more across the board. I currently have Renato Augusto back from injury and really enjoying the MR position

Yeah, I play Hazard/Willian/Schurrle/Salah/etc in the wide midfield slots at Chelsea, and Hazard is actually my leading goal scorer. They link up with the Striker incredibly well, with one-twos and all that good stuff. The wide mids find themselves ahead of the Striker quite often, which I assume is the kind of movement you're aiming for.

Yeah, I play Hazard/Willian/Schurrle/Salah/etc in the wide midfield slots at Chelsea, and Hazard is actually my leading goal scorer. They link up with the Striker incredibly well, with one-twos and all that good stuff. The wide mids find themselves ahead of the Striker quite often, which I assume is the kind of movement you're aiming for.

I'm currently enjoying some fantastic football in my save and I am utilising the wide men to great effect in the ML/R positions. With a fairly staggered attack and a really dangerous centre forward I am enjoying some fantastic football - as you are too by the sounds of it.

I will try and post some screen shots of their movement and what they offer later this evening.

I am coming round to much preferring ML/R as oppose to AML/R from THOG and Cleon's points (and my own experiments). There is obviously no doubt that the ML/R is the more complete position.

Although it is a fact that Everton wide players do contribute defensively in the majority of instances I do believe that the relationship between, say, Mirallas or Deulofeu and Lukaku is akin to that of a strike partnership. At times the way Lukaku has brought them into play with his movement has been amazing (I am glad he is back and scoring for Everton!). Perhaps I am naive in saying that and it is down to my lack of real experience with the ML/R roles that I can't replicate 'strike partnership behaviour' - I'd imagine it is definitely possible.

As I said, there is no doubt the ML/R offers a lot more across the board. I currently have Renato Augusto back from injury and really enjoying the MR position

How are you actually lined up now then?

How are you actually lined up now then?

It is working very well so far. I definitely have some tweaks to make as it is still early stages but it is looking promising. Canteros has proved an inspired buy even at this early stage and Wellington Nem has been on form too. This isn't an attempt to replicate Martinez's Everton by the way.

Yeah, I play Hazard/Willian/Schurrle/Salah/etc in the wide midfield slots at Chelsea, and Hazard is actually my leading goal scorer. They link up with the Striker incredibly well, with one-twos and all that good stuff. The wide mids find themselves ahead of the Striker quite often, which I assume is the kind of movement you're aiming for.

How do you line up with chelsea in terms of the central midfielders roles and duty. Could you also let me know what role and duty you assign to the strikers

I have been playing recently with my AMR pulled back to the MR position as suggested. He's still a winger on attack duty, with get further forward selected. The AML is still there as an IF but now on support mode, still with cut inside. I must say I really like the triangles created between the DR, MR and BWM and Barkley is all over the place causing a lot of trouble. Still top of the league 12 games in, 5 points clear, only losing 2 away to Man Utd and away to Palace in a match I dominated. The possession stats I'm achieving are nice, usually around 60%.

Interesting. Any chance of some screen shots mid-game to highlight particular strengths or weaknesses? Jagielka and Distin look good at CB - I am surprised they have the ability to play BPD. What is the cover like on the left flank when Baines and Miralles are attacking - I presume Barry will hold position and step across if needs be and you have two intelligent CBs to help too?

Interesting. Any chance of some screen shots mid-game to highlight particular strengths or weaknesses? Jagielka and Distin look good at CB - I am surprised they have the ability to play BPD. What is the cover like on the left flank when Baines and Miralles are attacking - I presume Barry will hold position and step across if needs be and you have two intelligent CBs to help too?

Here's a shot of my latest match showing the left side as we're in possession. Oviedo is on the wing furthest forward (Baines had gone off injured), Pienaar (IF) inside him (Mirrallas dropped), Barry covering and McCarthy spraying a pass out to the right. We ended up winning 1-0. Traore scored the winner as Lukaku was ineligable vs Chelsea.

That looks good. By my count there is one Chelsea outfield player out of shot and two Everton players so I feel safe to make the assumption you have a two on one on the right flank? Are you finding this to happen regularly? Certainly against a 442 I can see that being the case more often than not especially with a BWM(s) in your DM partnership (due to the fact they close down more aggressively and often positioned higher up the pitch).

How do you line up with chelsea in terms of the central midfielders roles and duty. Could you also let me know what role and duty you assign to the strikers

The central midfield is CM-D (Matic/Mikel/Luiz) and B2B (Ramires/Lampard).

The striker is a CF-S, sometimes I change it to DF-S for big away games or to close out a match.

Well, I just thought I'd update this thread at the end of the first season in game, here's how I fared:

Stunning season, I even got offered a new contract on 2nd December!!

Can't quite believe how well it worked to be honest. I did change the two centre backs to CD's instead of BPD's, as although it seemed to be working, there were a few too many mistakes (prob a bit true to life to be honest lol).

I even tried to throw it away at the end, losing 2 and drawing 1 of the last 5 against relegation threatened opposition!

Here's the final table:

And the finalised team & tactic:

I just want to thank everybody who helped me to fine tune it, it's a great tactic that gives 60+% regularly for possession and is a joy to watch.

That system goes against all my conventional logic - so hats off to you for getting such a system to work so well. Congratulations.

Yeah, second Llama's comment. Congratulations.

Cheers guys, it's really enjoyable, I obvously lost the loanees at the end of the season (except I got Barry on a free but £80k a week!), so I'm rebuilding. Chelsea paid a whopping £42m for Mirrallas and I got Nasri on loan to replace him. Lost the charity shield 2-1 to Arsenal, and the season opener at Swansea, but then won 2 drew 2 and I lie in 8th.

I thought I'd like to try the tactic elsewhere though and didn't want to stop this game so I took over England at the World Cup. I came third, losing to Bosnia on pens after dominating but ending 0-0, then beating Brazil in the third placed playoff with an average team, as most of the squad by that time were tired or suspended (Rooney!):

So getting into this now, gonna carry on at England and bring youth in and try for the Euros!

Without meaning to **** on your parade to much, but it looks like you only won the league due to everyone else playing very poorly.

Your top scorer scored only 10 goals. You won the league with 78 points and 8 losses. Your goal difference is only 33!

In another season you would of realistically finished 4/5th.

Enjoyed the discussion on the tactics though!

Chelsea are currently on 78 points with 2 games to go IRL. Not sure why you think the points total represents a poor season for all the other teams :S

The AML/R vs. ML/R debate is an interesting one.

I tend to agree with The Hand of God here, and I know that Cleon is also an advocate of ML/R positions.

It's important to stress that there really is no tangible, detrimental effect to the attacking impetus of a player at ML/R relative to one at AML/R.

Above all, they actively track back to the ML/R area, which certainly cannot often be said of those operating at AML/R.

Interesting.

I actually believe the opposite to be true and its much easier to replicate the movement of wide players in real life by having them deeper at ML/MR. It's much easier to have them attack and track back when needed. Having the player in the AML/AMR slots doesn't really replicate this well enough. This goes for most teams IRL too. You can have them link up play, support attacking players and defend a lot better positioned in the ML/MR spots imo. The tactic posted in the OP is actually a better reflection of a real life 4-2-3-1 than the name sake one in the game.

I used to use wide AMs and wide STs frequently because I wanted for my wide attackers to get goals. In the last few months I've moved them back to the ML and MR spots in an effort to get them to work harder defensively. Since making that switch, I've not lost anything offensively; they get forward and they get goals just like if they were AMs or STs. I've lost nothing going forward but have gained defensively.

Fair enough and apologies if I misunderstood your point. As you can probably guess, I'm just a bit defensive of the effectiveness of ML/R since I think overuse of the AM positions is a major source of headaches for many players, especially those who don't play top teams.

Me included. I often found my wide players getting too foward too quickly. That would limit passing options and would render me ineffective against teams that sat extremely deep.

What instructions would you give the WM a to operate like an IF A?

Cut Inside With Ball, Dribble More, Get Further Forward and maybe even Sit Narrower also

Cut Inside With Ball, Dribble More, Get Further Forward and maybe even Sit Narrower also

All that + attack duty = a WM who plays like an IF A

Cut Inside With Ball, Dribble More, Get Further Forward and maybe even Sit Narrower also

Cheers.

You should be allowed to pick an IF at ml and mr.

Quite a lot of teams that play what is considered a 4-2-3-1 drop into two backs of four out of possession. Dortmund for example take up a 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 type shape.

If you were able to pick an IF at ML/R then everybody would do so and it would defeat the point of: 1) the name being 'inside forward' (an ML/R is not a forward but a midfielder); 2) having specific roles tailored to certain areas of the game (that is to say, the game would be too easy if everybody just parked everyone deep in defence and threw everything forward in attack).

You have to weigh the positives with the negatives. For example:

Positives:

Player contributes to defending at ML/R, offers more in terms of passing options and building attacks

Negatives:

Player isn't as effective at attacking because he is much deeper naturally and also a true wide midfielder, isn't a true Inside Forward

If you have an IF at ML/R, you're basically taking the negatives and scrubbing them out, making the game easier (and not in a good way).

If you were able to pick an IF at ML/R then everybody would do so and it would defeat the point of: 1) the name being 'inside forward' (an ML/R is not a forward but a midfielder); 2) having specific roles tailored to certain areas of the game (that is to say, the game would be too easy if everybody just parked everyone deep in defence and threw everything forward in attack).

You have to weigh the positives with the negatives. For example:

Positives:

Player contributes to defending at ML/R, offers more in terms of passing options and building attacks

Negatives:

Player isn't as effective at attacking because he is much deeper naturally and also a true wide midfielder, isn't a true Inside Forward

If you have an IF at ML/R, you're basically taking the negatives and scrubbing them out, making the game easier (and not in a good way).

Perhaps then making it 'forward getting inside cutting wide midfileder' role, that would be same as wide midfielder with the above mentioned instructions already active.

As some prominent members of the forum have stated that they get the same attacking threat from wide midfielder with certain set of PI's as IFs in the AM strata with them also helping out in defense (as opposed to true IFs). So in a sense you already end up with IF at ML/R. Now the question rises, should the difficulty be defined by the amount of mouse clicks you have to take before getting the end result you want (and eventually get) or by something else (perhaps when to use the 'forward getting inside cutting wide midfileder').

-SnUrF

I see from this report Everton are playing a 3-4-2-1 which interested me. I don't have access to the game so cannot watch it. What I gather from the players on the ground is the lineup would look something like the following:

       
               Howard
    Jaigleka Stones Anton
Coleman                    Baines
        McCarthy  Barry
        Naismith   Barkley
             Lukarku

Which in FM terms to me becomes:

       
                GKd
         CDd BPD? DC/LDd
WB/CWBa                    WB/CWBd
            DLP?     CMd
          ???(SS?) ???(AP?)
                 TMa

This is a complete guess and I wouldn't know what TI ad PI to couple with this. As you can see a few roles I'm not sure about (DLP, both AMC's etc.) but I am keen to recreate this tactic. Have I deciphered formation correctly?

Going to work now. Will think about this and post a bit more tonight.

I see from this report Everton are playing a 3-4-2-1 which interested me. I don't have access to the game so cannot watch it. What I gather from the players on the ground is the lineup would look something like the following:

       
               Howard
    Jaigleka Stones Anton
Coleman                    Baines
        McCarthy  Barry
        Naismith   Barkley
             Lukarku

Which in FM terms to me becomes:

       
                GKd
         CDd BPD? DC/LDd
WB/CWBa                    WB/CWBd
            DLP?     CMd
          ???(SS?) ???(AP?)
                 TMa

This is a complete guess and I wouldn't know what TI ad PI to couple with this. As you can see a few roles I'm not sure about (DLP, both AMC's etc.) but I am keen to recreate this tactic. Have I deciphered formation correctly?

Going to work now. Will think about this and post a bit more tonight.

I think it was more of a 3-4-3/5-2-3 with Lukaku and Naismith at AML/R and Barkley as a false nine or trequartista. Jagielka was in the middle of the defensive trio but Stones made some libero-ish moves at times which you can't quite emulate with DC roles, especially on lower mentalities.

Well that makes things a bit more interesting.

I'll start with Stones. Looking into the above am I to guess he was on the right. If he is making libero moves but not playing central or as a sweeper could he be a BPDx or even wider as a FBs that cuts inside and/or sits narrower? In either case this would change the left WB I would think to give more defensive cover while the right sits much higher with Stones in behind him.

The WB's due to my previous statement would also change. I'm going to guess that Coleman is a CWB and Baines is a WBa or a WBs. I would lean to WBs to start with.

Central wouldn't change.

Having Lukaku out wide would mean he has one of my favourite new roles - WTM. I think he would need to be on attack otherwise he would be wasted. Naismith would be a IF possibly on support. I think you need the linkage of play here.

I didn't realise Barkley got so high up the pitch. I haven't been able to see much of Everton this year unfortunately. I would have thought he would be in the AMC strata which he can be as a trequartista but I think would leave a gap up forward. I would have him as a trequartista in the striker position.

This has lead me to create the following (discounting players as I'm in 2021):

The wingback roles have been swapped. Also, the tactic is a mirror of how I would imagine Everton would play due to my players.

I have no player instructions yet but am thinking of telling the WTM to shoot less and roam from position, IF to sit narrower and CMd to take riskier passes (mine is pretty skilled).

I'll give this a run and see how it plays out.

I think Barkley has fitness issues at the moment, so he's been excused from having much of a defensive workload for the past few games. The thing I would note about this system is that it was very much a product of circumstance (namely, injuries and the ineligibility of Barry) and probably not something Martinez has in mind for long-term use. It also leaked 3 goals at home.

Yeah, leaking the goals was a concern but I'm sure the formation can work - it's just a matter of how

Here is my interpretation. I'm an Everton supporter and I'm watching every single game of our beloved The Toffees so I have an idea how it should look like. The only problem is to replicate it properly in a game

Team instructions are: shorter passing, play out of defence and be more expressive.

Although we are playing decent, my defenders are completely lost at times and we conceding too much goals. Last game against Cardiff we let our opponents create 5 half chances and 2 CCC's, so we are definitely not solid enough.

I'm happy with roles of my midfield players because their shape is good and they do exactly what I want from them - Barry is my playmaker, McCarthy is chasing everything and Barkley is attacking from deep (perhaps I should find him a different role because he's not playing good ). Although I noticed that in average positions McCarthy is slightly deeper than Barry - that is weird, because he has a support duty and he hasn't any PPM's that could convince him to drop deeper. I don't know why is this happening.

I'm not sure about Lukaku's role and I want to use him better. I think CF on support duty replicate his role at Everton best but I want him to be more of a finisher than creator. Will try something different because I'm not quite happy with the way he's playing.

Mirallas is also one of my concerns. He has PI's get further forward and cuts inside as I want him to be my second striker although he's playing too wide and cross the ball to much. My opposite winger (Knockaert) is acting like Pienaar IRL - he is staying narrower and cutting inside allowing Coleman to overlap. That's working fine but perhaps he should cooperate more with my CM and play some through balls which didn't happened yet.