Being Boca: Diamonds are Romans best friend.

Background

Over the course of my FM career spanning some 15+ years I like to set myself a little challenge, in my earlier younger days it would be to assemble a squad with the best players and use the buying power of big clubs to out muscle my rivals financially, building comprehensive teams in the Galactico image never really paying attention to how I set them up. As I got older and my knowledge of real world football began to expand, the tactical side of football began intriguing me more and more. I read up extensively on forums and any articles or books I could find, to try and understand the intricacies of how different types of football can be implemented. I imagined myself as a manager and how I would implement the styles I could concoct into my side, Football Manager became my vehicle to realise these ideas (or at least to realise I had gotten things wrong). Over the various iterations I have played about with many different formation frameworks, the 4-3-1-2, the narrow 4-3-3, the 4-1-2-2-1, the 4-2-2-2 box, the 4-6-0 and most recently over the last 2 or 3 FM's the ever popular 4-2-3-1.The only one I have ever really struggled to make work, is the 4-4-2 diamond. Now there are 2 different types of diamond you can utilise in FM the wide diamond with 2 WM's, or the narrow with 2 CM's. With FM14, and most importantly 2 roles added to it, I feel I have finally been able to create something worthwhile with that said let me introduce you the narrow 4-4-2 diamond.

The Aim

With my instructions being how they are what I want is a faster short passing game. I prefer shorter passing as I want to keep the ball but also I want to be able to change directions of attack quickly offer a shorter space enabling runners to break onto the ball and for precise one touch moves to occur. Passing into space helps find runners and get in behind the opponents. Hassling them is important as I want to restrict space and win the ball back quickly it's the same reason I push up the pitch and play at a higher tempo. Focusing through the middle is sensible as it is where my most potent threats are, and with a high level of technique I can keep the ball with some comfort and utilise the short passing game to keep it moving in tight triangles pulling opponents all over the place.

Counter as a mentality is my favourite, it offers a solid base and a great platform to launch attacks at pace. When mixed with a high tempo pressing game it yeilds wonderful football, for me at least.

Ilike to have my teams be fluid as I vere toward the idea of a solid team unit who move about as one and contribute to attacking and defensive phases together, I don't use very fluid as I have a couple of specialists in my side.

The Idea

(in all the screen grabs I will show I have highlighted the shape of the diamond and how in both attacking and defensive stages it offers protection/ opportunity.)

Narrow diamond formations have for me always been super difficult to make effective it used to be susceptible to overloading attacks down the flanks which is the main concern, the other concern is that sometimes what should be the formations strength of a dominating and packed midfield can either get pulled apart in width terms leading to midfield runners backing up a striker, or it can move to far up the pitch and leave a massive gap between the defence and midfield, Thankfully one role implemented this year goes a long way to helping, the Half Back. The way I see it is that the HB is perfect for a diamond midfield, he slots into the defence seamlessly so when your WB push up the pitch a CB can move out to protect the wing without leaving a gaping hole. He also is able to start off attacks as a kind of metronome just ticking play over and over, keeping the ball moving playing triangles between the WB's, CB's, or CM's. The Half Back in my opinion is essential to a good narrow diamond formation as the type of protection he offers is one that naturally widens the defence protecting against the lack of player on the wings.

The other role which is key, and a new addition, is the Enganche. It's such an Argentine thing that it felt a must for Boca, the Enganche (in my case the last, and one of the best ever, Riquelme) plays the role of attacking conductor. The EN is when played correctly is able to retain possession, thread through balls, switch the play, hit a piledriver, or drift in unawares behind the opposing defence. In a creative term the ideal place to get your EN is here,

Circled in red is my AF who has drifted wide (more on this later) dragging a CB with him, offering a simple pass to the EN who sees the huge gap and pops the ball through for my DLFs who has started a deeper diagonal run to get the run on the opposition, helping is the fact that no less than three players are converging on the EN and although under pressure he has enough technique and guile to create a chance, unfortunately my DLFs spurned his chance but the execution of play to get him in is textbook for a diamond headed by the EN. If the closing down players had cut off the attacking pass the diamond offers other options, the EN can either go back to the CMr who could pick up the WBr for an attack down the flank, or he could go to the CMl who can pick out the WBl (another thing to notice is my WB circled in yellow, who has pushed up the pitch bringing out a FB to meet him making the gap even bigger and the chance greater) either way it's either a chance or you keep the ball.

Width

Width is important in any formation/ tactic, either in an attacking sense or a defensive one. Ideally you would want enough space between your players in order to retain possession or create pass and move type situations which can set up chances. From first glance the width is only provided from the WB's, in this tactic one attacking the other support, their primary duty in a defensive capacity is to protect the wings and push up the pitch to pin back opposing wide players. In an attacking sense the can offer crosses/ assists but most importantly they offer an 'out' ball. With most of the play coming through the creative players in the middle it is important that the WB's are in a position to offer an escape ball for players in possession and either work the ball backwards across the defence/ midfield or drive forward into space gaining ground. This is not the only source of width however, there are in fact two areas of width in this tactic, and the second one isn't the midfield it's the Strikers.

As you can see here, my CF has moved into the gap between the FB and CB the most dangerous position your forward can exploit in my eyes, what he is doing is giving the defence a problem, does the FB tuck in and hope my WB doesn't win the ball and have acres of space to dash into, or does the CB come over creating a hole in the middle? What does happen is that my WB wins the ball high up the pitch and offload it to my CF (Gigliotti) who turns around in space with enough time to play the ball inside for a shot. In my team Gigliotti is the main goal scoring threat, he is an all rounder and scored from inside, outside, head, tap in, and long range. Instructing him to move in to the channels however has the effect that it pulls the defence out of its solid shape creating holes for runners. As an AF his duty is to score, his partner however the more nimble DLFs is, without scoring loads, the much more dangerous of the two.

Mobility and understanding is key to a DLFs here mine (Acosta) has taken the place of the EN (who has broke ahead of play) to become the tip of the diamond. In coming deeper he has done two things, gained space to orchestrate and attacking move, and more importantly, forced a CB to come and meet him. Again my AF is where you want him to be on the shoulder of the CB between CB and FB (who can do nothing due to his attention being on the EN). Gigliotti has his body facing goal whilst his marker is on the half turn meaning a simple ball into space by the DLFs equals a CCC, one which Gigliotti dispatches with aplomb.

Here however he has moved into the channel, being supported by his FB, and again dragged a CB out of position, the EN has the know how to make a late run into the gap, the result is a cross and goal. My DLFs finished with 4 assists in this match.

Interchange and Movement

In this shot, we see how the interchangeable nature of the diamond is fantastic going forward. Like the DLFs in a previous chance, the AF has slipped into the diamond, again notice the most important thing in this shot. Gigliotti has yet again pulled a CB toward him. As the diamond is a 4 man operation, Gigliotti has caused damage in a twofold manner, yes he has pulled in a CB, but also he has freed up a player. The CMa now sees an opportunity, what is important here is the change of direction in the play, the CMa is running into a blind area for defenders they are all focused on he ball which is moving toward the right and as Gigliotti moves it to Acosta, the CMa dashes into the gap and the ball is quickly moved back to the left into his path for a one on one chance which Sanchez Mino takes easily. The running prowess of the CMa in particular is important, the CMs is more of a creative type, he is meant to sit a little deeper being the assist to the assist. The CMa however is a goal scorer, he will break into forward runs, arrive late and move out wide to offer crossing or 'out' ball options.

On the Defensive side of things here is what the basic pros of the diamond are,

We can see here that the diamond is set up perfectly, the shape is correct and it is moved slightly over toward the ball shutting down options. If the ball is switched in on pass it doesn't matter, all the players can see who they are picking up and have enough time to get to them, if it comes across in short passes again it doesn't matter, it will take good football to move the ball through a stacked midfield. Notice the AF also, if my WB or CM can win the ball the AF has the run on his CB and a load of space in which to curve a run into. As explained earlier if the opposition break quickly down the flanks behind the WB's the HB is there to offer cover and allow a CB to move out and meet the threat.

All in all what a narrow diamond can offer when set up right, is an attacking force to be reckoned with. It offers great passing moves, can be direct at times, and if paired with the right roles can be defensively sound. On the down side if your CB's aren't accomplished in the air you can succumb to cross goals, and like all FM tactics mistakes can cost goals.

Hopefully this has explained why and in what ways a narrow Diamond can work. Sorry for the long read but if you stuck with it well done and thanks.

Going to use this same idea for my River save. I feel our squads look to have a lot of similarities.

I used a HB for all of my recent 4-1-2-1-2 formations and find that it does really help. I changed it in favour of a more high pressing 4-3-1-2 formation and seen my Opening league fall apapart, conceding an absolute boatload of goals. Returning to HB, now, I think. Cheers for the ride, enjoyed that.

Excellent post there. A good narrow system can benefit from that quick interchanging. Good work!

MSFS,

I like the thread. This is a formation that I am playing but more defensively as per Cleons thread. I'd be interested in your view and thoughts around defending.

There is no doubt at all that hte 442 diamond is strong attacking but it's defensively where I beleive it struggles.

If the opposition are not really using attacking W/FB's then it's okay, but when you face a 4231 (AMLR) and the FB's are acting as CWB's, it becomes hard to manage that flank attacks. Sure, a strong counter is the order of the day at that point, but I think this thread would tripple in appeal if you add some defensive comments to it.

I'm also interested in your choice of Engache over TQ. I'm assuming with one/both(?) wide players moving into channels you need a central focus and he may actually get in the way of them if he was TQ, but given that the TQ seeks more space than a Engache does, why did you choose it?

Regards

LAM

Going to use this same idea for my River save. I feel our squads look to have a lot of similarities.

I used a HB for all of my recent 4-1-2-1-2 formations and find that it does really help. I changed it in favour of a more high pressing 4-3-1-2 formation and seen my Opening league fall apapart, conceding an absolute boatload of goals. Returning to HB, now, I think. Cheers for the ride, enjoyed that.

I'm a big fan of the HB in this formation too. I like that the role provides flexibility without you having to micro-manage too much.

MSFS,

I like the thread. This is a formation that I am playing but more defensively as per Cleons thread. I'd be interested in your view and thoughts around defending.

There is no doubt at all that hte 442 diamond is strong attacking but it's defensively where I beleive it struggles.

If the opposition are not really using attacking W/FB's then it's okay, but when you face a 4231 (AMLR) and the FB's are acting as CWB's, it becomes hard to manage that flank attacks. Sure, a strong counter is the order of the day at that point, but I think this thread would tripple in appeal if you add some defensive comments to it.

I'm also interested in your choice of Engache over TQ. I'm assuming with one/both(?) wide players moving into channels you need a central focus and he may actually get in the way of them if he was TQ, but given that the TQ seeks more space than a Engache does, why did you choose it?

Regards

LAM

I shall do a detailed analysis on the defensive pros in the next day or so when I have a bit of time to get in depth with it.

The reason I went for the Enganche over say a SS or a TQ is two fold. Firstly it suited the attributes of my primary playmaker, Riquelme, more than any other role, as he isn't particularly mobile. His technical and mental strengths however are perfect, he is creative, makes good decisions, good finisher and is able to use his on the ball skill to escape a challenge or traverse his way round one or two markers.

From a tactical point of view however what the EN gives you is some what limited movement in the attacking strata, which to some may seem a negative, but it can be the key to fluid attacking play. Enaganche translates to 'the hook', here is the games description.

The Enganche is the side's prime creator, a hook that joins midfield and attack and operates behind the strikers and a playmaker who sticks to his position and becomes a pivot to his team as they move around him. Unlike the Trequartista, it is a more stationary role as the Enganche acts as the focal point instead of moving around into larger areas of space.

This description however is slightly misleading from how the EN actually translates in game. From reading he role description one may be forgiven to think that the EN is a stagnant presence that stands in the AM space and offers very little in the way of movement, here is a heat map of the movement of my EN in my last match against River,

So although he stays central his range of lateral movement is good. Staying in a strictly central position is of paramount importance to the way the EN plays, it is imperitive that he is able to receive the ball in an area of the pitch which he has the most options available. If we think about it logically the further wide you send a player the more you limit their passing options as eventually you cut off one direction of pass, the TQ will tend to drift around to find holes to fill and be able to run at players or find different angles for passing/ shooting, in my opinion this doesnt work in this particular set up, I want as wide a range of passing option as possible hopefully a 360 degree range, the further wide the less options is my basic rule of thumb for a playmaker.

Now if you have a pair/ singular striker in your set up who is encouraged to stick to his position you can create a problem, sooner or later moves will break down as two players occupy the same space, in formations with a central (and by that I mean forward who only moves laterally) striker a TQ is probably a better option, for this one however it isn't. I mentioned in the OP how the strikers played a key role by moving out wide this greatly helps any formation with a EN imo, take a look at the heat maps form my two forwards in the same match,

First my AF,

And now the DLFs,

So we see how much wider they are encouraged to get indeed the vast ammount of passes from these two in this match came from a wider position back inside. Movement is a key component to any attacking plan and with the forwards moving out wide getting in between the FB and CB (the golden spot) it enables a high degree of pass and move options, or curved runs in behind. The EN is crucial to make this work because he acts as a central pivot he is able to see these options as the unfurl before him. Now the EN role is perfect in these scenarios,

As you see here the EN is automatically designed to take a more risky approach to his passing game, in game this basically means he is more intent on making the final pass in behind, which when you have two mobile runners up front is ideal, as time and time again he will look to pick people out.

The TQ has its pros for sure namely as a floating playmaker, and arguably a more direct goalscoring threat, the downside is when that they can be too mobile, and not in the position to hurt the opponents when you need them to be, the EN is always in that position it's your job creat the gaps for him to express himself. Wide forwards help, if you use wingers then ones who cut inside or drop between the lines, as well as a forward looking to run in off the shoulder would help. In a narrow diamond like mine, the EN has attacking options due to the mobile forward lines, and out balls with the WB's and CM's.

As the game description states the EN is a pivot or 'hook' which (most importantly) allows the team to move around him, this mix of fluid movement in offensive roles and the EN's central positioning marry into a very effective passing system.

Addendum,

WorkTheSpace has a great set of youtube vids on the new roles here is a link for the Enganche one which helps explain what he does

If I remember correctly the early days of Román Riquelme in Boca, and then his great spell in Villarreal, he drifted around a lot. He did not stay central. He was static in the sense that he was a classic, slow motion playmaker. But he was not static in the terms of movement.

If I remember correctly the early days of Román Riquelme in Boca, and then his great spell in Villarreal, he drifted around a lot. He did not stay central. He was static in the sense that he was a classic, slow motion playmaker. But he was not static in the terms of movement.

In his younger days he was more mobile not so much now however. The Enganche as a role however is a primarily a central one.

This thread is really really good mate. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

I must ask further about the EN; When the other team is player 1 or 2 DMs how do you go about ensuring he doesnt get marked out of the game. Do you add the roam from position instruction? Or do you alter the surrounding players?

The offensive defence.

Most people on here will be aware of the 'it' philosophy of the moment the high pressing game. It is something which was instrumental in the rise and dominance of Barcelona over the last decade and has, through architects such as Bielsa and his many disciples (Pochettino springs to mind), become a growing weapon in the defensive game we see evolving in football. On a personal level it is something I very much admire and advocate, park the bus style defending ala some of Mourinho's Chelsea performances have their place and indeed merits but a pro-active defensive game can be the key to an entire system, not to mention pleasing to the eye.

As old clichés in football go, defending from the front is a pretty old one, it does however work. The narrow diamond formation I utilise depends heavily on a aggressive pressing system, not as extreme as say a Dortmund or Atletico, but one that hustles and harries the opposition, closing down space and putting pressure on as quickly as possible. The forward line is allowed to spread like a net, the forwards move wider the EN stays central essentially forming a 3 man barrier across the attacking strata. What this does is to begin close down the FB and CB to cut off possible routes of passing, if they want to play across the back line the forwards tuck in a little forcing the pass back wide, if they do manage to get the ball into a DM or a CM I have to players in that area who can immediately close down with confidence as our friend the HB is always there to protect the back line. To highlight my aggressive pressing style here is a shot of my successful tackles and those of my opponents, these are very typical of all the games I play,

So you can see that I make a lot of sucesful tackles in their half and because I push up and hassle them they only really get the opportunity to win the ball in their half as well protecting my defence by giving me time to set when I loose possession, in their defensive strata the man in possession either loses the ball or is forced to go backwards/ sideways. If the forwards close the space in-between the FB and CB then the FB has no option to come down the line, which is exactly where I want to push them. In the last post I said that I felt the further wide you send a player the less playmaking options you give them. To show you an example of this here is a shot of a typical section of successful runs against me,

Also here is a nice example of shutting the space down and making the team act as unit to Sheppard the ball, you can clearly see how the aggressive nature of the pressing has restricted the player to nearly no out ball option. Incidentally in this game against River they managed no shots at all.

In The Middle

The Central midfield is my next line of defence, here I have my two CM on /a/ the other /s/. The attack minded CM will operate over the most ground in the middle he moves out wide when he can to close down FB's or WM's and moves a bit more centrally in possession allowing space for the WB to progress up the pitch, again he has the security of a WB to his left if he can't stop a wide attack and a HB behind should he be skinned. The CMs offers a less wide area of movement in terms of ground coverage he drops slightly deeper offering support to the HB in the defensive phase and shuts of the inside pass from a FB/ WM/ W, having an attacking WB in this sides means he more aggressively pushes up the pitch pinning back wingers if he is caught out, which on occasion he has been, then the CMs simply slots in. The midfield strata yields another gem for me, as I play a short passing, movement based game I get tackled a lot, as I get tackle I draw in fouls, here is an example,

So as I am fouled in their half I am able to sustain pressure and build attacks from my exceptional set piece takers. The converse is true however.

The Dark Arts

The high press also yields another defensive option, it is one perhaps not for the purists but it means I make a lot of fouls in the opposing half, so good thing or bad? Good for me, I tend to keep above 50% possession of the ball anyway going as high as 69% in some games, so I have more of the ball negating the opposing threat, but when I don't have the ball I break play up a fair amount and crucially more often than not in their half meaning I can get my side into position making us difficult to break down,

The HB CB combo, a perfect marriage

The HB is my most crucial weapon defensively, he can push up to meet a threat, steal the ball in the pocket, and become a third CB all in the assignment of one role. As I want my opponents to be pushed out wide as often as possible then having the HB drop in between the CB's is a great boon, he essentially becomes another head to clear if a cross comes in he also, most crucially, splits the defensive line mirroring the top line by making it wider. If your midfield have done their jobs and forced play out wide then the CB's who have widened slightly are able to offer quicker cover for their FB, pick up a midfield runner if they feel the HB can deal with the forward and (for me the most important thing) get on the front foot safe in the knowledge they can take a chance as they have cover.

Now all this may sound good in theory but how does it work in practice? well in my last season over a 38 game period a conceded 21 goals the best in the league, in 15 games so far this season I have conceded 10, but I have had to deal with both my CB's having multiple week injuries and two 18/ 19 year olds coming in, it is still the best record in the league.

Firstly, really enjoying this thread. Surprised it hasn't generated more of a response but it really is quality stuff. Logical, well thought out decisions and a good read.

You talk about your HB often and clearly it is working well for you. I do like the premise of the HB and think it is a welcome addition to the FM role choice. No role is perfect however and will offer something in one area while perhaps lacking in another.

With that in mind, how have you found the HB coping against a system whereby the AML/AMR cut inside heavily, a centre forward aggressively works to push your defensive line deep and an AMC with freedom to move laterally? I had a Corinthians save and what I found was that managing in South America gives you the opportunity to face a huge variety of formations so I'm sure you have faced - and probably successfully countered - an approach similar to what I described.

The reason I ask is because a DM dropping deep in line with the CBs is a good way of countering the en vogue inside forwards who cut inside and pack the box however the HB would perhaps be then caught in two minds: Drop deep and help neutralise the inside forward threat and risk giving the Treq in the AMC slot space and time or stay tight to the Treq and risk the CBs being overloaded by the inside forwards. I suppose there is always a risk-reward balance to be struck and the answer may simply be that he does one or the other depending on the magnitude of each threat however it is an interesting way to counter this system and certainly one I would look to employ against a similar set up - perhaps further my attacking threat and ask a CM to attack from deep to overload the centre even more and ensure I have a very attacking full back on one/both sides.

Really enjoying the thread, excellent analysis so far

Firstly, really enjoying this thread. Surprised it hasn't generated more of a response but it really is quality stuff. Logical, well thought out decisions and a good read.

You talk about your HB often and clearly it is working well for you. I do like the premise of the HB and think it is a welcome addition to the FM role choice. No role is perfect however and will offer something in one area while perhaps lacking in another.

With that in mind, how have you found the HB coping against a system whereby the AML/AMR cut inside heavily, a centre forward aggressively works to push your defensive line deep and an AMC with freedom to move laterally? I had a Corinthians save and what I found was that managing in South America gives you the opportunity to face a huge variety of formations so I'm sure you have faced - and probably successfully countered - an approach similar to what I described.

The reason I ask is because a DM dropping deep in line with the CBs is a good way of countering the en vogue inside forwards who cut inside and pack the box however the HB would perhaps be then caught in two minds: Drop deep and help neutralise the inside forward threat and risk giving the Treq in the AMC slot space and time or stay tight to the Treq and risk the CBs being overloaded by the inside forwards. I suppose there is always a risk-reward balance to be struck and the answer may simply be that he does one or the other depending on the magnitude of each threat however it is an interesting way to counter this system and certainly one I would look to employ against a similar set up - perhaps further my attacking threat and ask a CM to attack from deep to overload the centre even more and ensure I have a very attacking full back on one/both sides.

It can be a tricky one to deal with, thankfully my team instructions come into play slightly in situations like this. As I look to play narrow/ exploit the middle it means the center of the pitch can be congested so even if the movement of IF's can cause some problems it is usually crowded enough in the middle to nulify it. Like you say no role, or set up for that matter, is perfect and it is about weighing up pros and cons, this is something I strongly believe many people don't take into account. My style and system will on occassion lead to me concedeing goals, usually from very direct sides who overwhelm the attacking strata with bodies. For example I played a game last night in which my opponents formation was 4-4-2 with 2 CM's, 2 AMR/L and 2 Forwards, it's the first time I have come up against a formation like that and we struggled for a while against it as the lumped the ball forward, by-passing the midfield strata I dominate and getting it into an area where I had to deal with a lot of players high up the pitch quickly. We won the game because my players were simply better, more clinical and for the early stretches of difficulty their understanding and familiarity with my system paid off. Sometimes you loose a match because the set up is is a good match at taking yours on, these things happen. I am at a stage where I prefer to use the morale side of the game to overcome difficult tactics.

If their CF drops deeper laterally I free up a CB who is able to watch for midfield runners, as I have a CMs he can on occasion just tuck in to tighten the gaps up if my HB gets dragged to far wide or forward. I find that playing narrow and exploiting the middle help congest the pitch enough that opponents simply can't play the ball around with any comfort and are forced wider, if a TQ moves out horizontally across the pitch I am happy, it means he has a more difficult angle to score from and fewer passing options. My CB's are more than capable of dealing with crosses and the HB is great at picking up second balls in and around the box.

I think if a team went very gung-ho and committed lots of runners forward and overwhelmed the attacking strata I would find it very difficult, but at the same time eventually I will win the ball back, and gaps will be left and my short quick passing game will open them up and punish them.

EDIT; Also you are correct in the ammount of formations you come across in South America it's crazy.

This thread is really really good mate. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

I must ask further about the EN; When the other team is player 1 or 2 DMs how do you go about ensuring he doesnt get marked out of the game. Do you add the roam from position instruction? Or do you alter the surrounding players?

Very simply if I come across one DM my EN is usually able to use his nouse and skill to outwit him, sometimes the DM wins, but mostly the EN. I have rarely come up against two, usually however as my DLF is on a support duty he comes in and around one of them to distract them, I never alter the EN instructions I want him to stay where he is.

It's the surrounding players who help. The CM's will have a lot of time and space if I am against 2 DM's, usually the CMs (Gago) uses his passing ability to become the playmaker, or the ball will go out wide more and I'll get in a few more crosses for my AF to attack. With playing a game based on high levels of interchange/ movement around the EN any one in the DM position defending against me will struggle as players will float in and around him asking questions or drawing him out. Failing that sooner or later teh EN will get free on the ball and you have to have confidence that you put out the right palyer in the right way to make the right decision.

It can be a tricky one to deal with, thankfully my team instructions come into play slightly in situations like this. As I look to play narrow/ exploit the middle it means the center of the pitch can be congested so even if the movement of IF's can cause some problems it is usually crowded enough in the middle to nulify it. Like you say no role, or set up for that matter, is perfect and it is about weighing up pros and cons, this is something I strongly believe many people don't take into account. My style and system will on occassion lead to me concedeing goals, usually from very direct sides who overwhelm the attacking strata with bodies. For example I played a game last night in which my opponents formation was 4-4-2 with 2 CM's, 2 AMR/L and 2 Forwards, it's the first time I have come up against a formation like that and we struggled for a while against it as the lumped the ball forward, by-passing the midfield strata I dominate and getting it into an area where I had to deal with a lot of players high up the pitch quickly. We won the game because my players were simply better, more clinical and for the early stretches of difficulty their understanding and familiarity with my system paid off. Sometimes you loose a match because the set up is is a good match at taking yours on, these things happen. I am at a stage where I prefer to use the morale side of the game to overcome difficult tactics.

If their CF drops deeper laterally I free up a CB who is able to watch for midfield runners, as I have a CMs he can on occasion just tuck in to tighten the gaps up if my HB gets dragged to far wide or forward. I find that playing narrow and exploiting the middle help congest the pitch enough that opponents simply can't play the ball around with any comfort and are forced wider, if a TQ moves out horizontally across the pitch I am happy, it means he has a more difficult angle to score from and fewer passing options. My CB's are more than capable of dealing with crosses and the HB is great at picking up second balls in and around the box.

I think if a team went very gung-ho and committed lots of runners forward and overwhelmed the attacking strata I would find it very difficult, but at the same time eventually I will win the ball back, and gaps will be left and my short quick passing game will open them up and punish them.

EDIT; Also you are correct in the ammount of formations you come across in South America it's crazy.

Couldn't agree more! It is clear you've looked at the risk/reward of the formation and style of play and decided you're happy with it as it is (which I would be too - I think you're spot on with your last comment before the edit) - good effort!

As I and others have said great read - keep it up. I'll definitely be following with interest and will add to discussion where welcome!

Hi MSFM,

Very good read and very nice analysis!

The only issue I have found is that my WBs are too slow to move out to IFs when they recieve the ball on the corner of the box. They almost get a free run in. Tighter Marking maybe the answer?

Any chance you can go through how you chosen PI?

You mentioned above that your AF moves out wide, is he set to move into channels?

I assume GK distribution is to the defence?

Very much appreciated.

Luke

Hi MSFM,

Very good read and very nice analysis!

The only issue I have found is that my WBs are too slow to move out to IFs when they recieve the ball on the corner of the box. They almost get a free run in. Tighter Marking maybe the answer?

Any chance you can go through how you chosen PI?

You mentioned above that your AF moves out wide, is he set to move into channels?

I assume GK distribution is to the defence?

Very much appreciated.

Luke

I would be happy to go over what PI I use and why I have chosen them.

Defenders CBd/LD/WBa/WBs

Firstly you correctly surmise that the GK is set to distribute to defenders, this just ties in with the notion of playing out from the back and building attacks with quick, short passing moves. The only instructions I use for the back line are for the WB's,

So both are set to stay wider and shoot less often. I want them to stay wider so they don't get sucked inward leaving my flank unprotected as they are my only natural source of width the others are manufactured with PI I will get to later. Keeping them wider also increases the likely hood that they provide the option for an out ball, it also means that they are pushing up onto the players I want them too, within reason I would never want them to close down a central player leaving a huge gaping hole in behind them and thusly forcing my CB to cover too wide. Having them shoot less often is an attempt to get them to keep recycling possession either by moving the ball back across the pitch or picking out the killer final pass. My biggest gripe with FM is the ridiculous amount of shots taken from daft angles when a simple square ball would yield much, much better results and this is a way to try and combat it, it doesn't always work. The CB's are left alone as they do a very good job for me as is, if it aint broke and all that.

Midfield HB/ CMa/CMs/EN

Here is how I have these roles set up,

So the HB is only asked to play shorter passes, this is because I don't want him trying the extravagant Hollywood pass. Basically I want the HB to keep it simple and quickly set moves off in the midfield strata, the speed here is the key as he is playing shorter passes he is able to give it to the CM's quickly who in turn can begin the intricate passing moves with a little more space around them, it also helps to retain possession and keep moves flowing. I subscribe to the more Brazilian style of passing by which I like the ball to be played across the pitch in short bursts, this has two benefits firstly it helps me keep the ball moving making it harder to close down, secondly (and most importantly) it means that I can change direction quickly. A sweeping pass to switch play ala a European side like England or Italy has its pros but it also means that the opponents know which way the ball is going and to whom, with shorter passing across it means they can never set up 100% effectively as at any time I can switch the direction either going back cross or suddenly become incisive and cut through the middle, the unpredictable nature appeals to me.

The CM's are only asked to move out wider when they have the ball, only when they HAVE the ball and this is crucial. If I wanted to make the diamond wider at all times I would tell them to say wider, however I only want the diamond to become wider in possession so by telling them to run wide with the ball it opens up the middle slightly offering a better range of options and bringing a marker out wide with the CM creating a hole in midfield for the HB or other CM to fill or for the EN to drop into getting on the ball deeper and hitting one in behind. When I don't have the ball the CM's are narrower making it difficult for opposing sides to build attacks down the centre of the pitch, forcing them wide to cross or go backwards. It's a nice little trick that works well for this formation, as it offers offensive options but also defensive solidity. Enganche like the CB's is left alone, he works fine as he is and I don't want to mess with his instructions.

Forward line AFa/ DLFs

Here is their set up,

AF is set to move into the channels which as I have previously explained opens the attacking third up and creates difficulties for the defending unit. Holding the ball up means he doesn't surge forward an allows for attacks to be built up with more precision and intelligence. The DLFs is the most vastly altered of my players. Again like his partner he is asked to move into the channels, but also to run wide with the ball to draw defenders out and get in a position to leave a gap for the CM or EN to make a late run into the area to score. I also allow him to roam as I want him to find gaps where he can and find pockets to play through balls in, I get a lot of assists from the DLFs. The type of player I prefer in this position is a tricky winger type, with decent crossing but excellent dribbling and pace, I just got Ocampos on loan for Monaco who I have high hopes for performing here. He might not get 15 goals a season but it's his overall contribution which mattes more for the side as the AF will get 20 ish the EN not far off, and I usually muster 15+ from the CM's, CB's and subs. Movement is paramount to the success of a narrow formation and having a very mobile forward acting around a static EN means I get the best of both worlds a solid point of attack and a nimble runner, moving between lines and offer options.

I have been using almost the identical tactic for a mediocre team in my current save. The passing is beautiful, and scoring chances do come with some regularity. The main issue I have is with my fullbacks/wingbacks lacking the defensive quality to mark the wings. Almost every goal I concede is a cross from the wings, which is probably how it should be with this shape.

I have been using almost the identical tactic for a mediocre team in my current save. The passing is beautiful, and scoring chances do come with some regularity. The main issue I have is with my fullbacks/wingbacks lacking the defensive quality to mark the wings. Almost every goal I concede is a cross from the wings, which is probably how it should be with this shape.

Most threats do come down the flanks, my level of WB relative to the league is high though so it isn't so bad.

My tactics and thought processes are very, very similar to this. I first set up my narrow diamond based on the way Liverpool played a number of times towards the end of the season; Gerrard in the halfback role is probably the key to the tactic, dropping between the DCs with them moving wider and the full-backs bombing forward as wingbacks. I also have my GK distributing to defenders and I am playing a possession based, quick tempo, high pressing game whilst maintaining a solid defensive foundation.

My back 6 is basically the same, but the fromt 5 are slightly different. My MCr is a box-to-box midfielder while I play a CM (d) next to him, though I haven't really finalised this role as I'm not fully happy so often change it. The tip of my diamond is a shadow striker, with Raheem Sterling in mind. Rather than a playmaker like you have, I wanted to go for a player with great pace who will look to make runs from deep and get into goalscoring positions and it seems to work really well.

Obviously to allow my SS to work, I need my strikers to work with him as an attacking trio whilst also being based on Suarez and Sturridge. I opted for a false 9 in the left slot, someone who can drop deep and be creative, so he would hopefully drag a DC with him and allow Sterling to burst into the void. For Sturridge in my SCr slot, I felt an advanced forward would work. Someone who would be pushing the defence back and I also gave him the instruction to move out wide, to create even more space for Suarez and Sterling to operate.

I have to say my attacking trio works better than I expected. Suarez will drop deeper and act as the creator, Sterling overlaps into a forward position (as does my left wing-back, offering an extra outlet) offering a goal threat and Sturridge acts more of a decoy, taking defenders out of the game and creating space for my box-to-box midfielder (Hendo) to make runs into good positions.

The build-up play to some of my goals is beautiful to watch when my forward 3 all link up.

how have you found the HB coping against a system whereby the AML/AMR cut inside heavily, a centre forward aggressively works to push your defensive line deep and an AMC with freedom to move laterally? I had a Corinthians save and what I found was that managing in South America gives you the opportunity to face a huge variety of formations so I'm sure you have faced - and probably successfully countered - an approach similar to what I described.

The reason I ask is because a DM dropping deep in line with the CBs is a good way of countering the en vogue inside forwards who cut inside and pack the box however the HB would perhaps be then caught in two minds: Drop deep and help neutralise the inside forward threat and risk giving the Treq in the AMC slot space and time or stay tight to the Treq and risk the CBs being overloaded by the inside forwards. I suppose there is always a risk-reward balance to be struck and the answer may simply be that he does one or the other depending on the magnitude of each threat however it is an interesting way to counter this system and certainly one I would look to employ against a similar set up - perhaps further my attacking threat and ask a CM to attack from deep to overload the centre even more and ensure I have a very attacking full back on one/both sides.

I have to admit that this is the formation I struggle with the most when using my narrow diamond, so I usually switch to a formation I have created specifically for dealing with the wide 4-2-3-1. I take out one of my strikers to play an extra centre back, whilst moving my full-backs forward into the wing-back position. My DM is then changed to an anchorman rather than halfback, so he still performs a defensive duty but doesn't sit so deep.

This system means my wide centre backs and wingbacks can often double up on the opposition's wide attackers. I can't say it always works as I tend to only use it when up against a very good side like Man City or Chelsea and they still beat me sometimes, but I have significantly reduced the batterings my 4-1-2-1-2 used to get and can steal a few points off them.

My tactics and thought processes are very, very similar to this. I first set up my narrow diamond based on the way Liverpool played a number of times towards the end of the season; Gerrard in the halfback role is probably the key to the tactic, dropping between the DCs with them moving wider and the full-backs bombing forward as wingbacks. I also have my GK distributing to defenders and I am playing a possession based, quick tempo, high pressing game whilst maintaining a solid defensive foundation.

My back 6 is basically the same, but the fromt 5 are slightly different. My MCr is a box-to-box midfielder while I play a CM (d) next to him, though I haven't really finalised this role as I'm not fully happy so often change it. The tip of my diamond is a shadow striker, with Raheem Sterling in mind. Rather than a playmaker like you have, I wanted to go for a player with great pace who will look to make runs from deep and get into goalscoring positions and it seems to work really well.

Obviously to allow my SS to work, I need my strikers to work with him as an attacking trio whilst also being based on Suarez and Sturridge. I opted for a false 9 in the left slot, someone who can drop deep and be creative, so he would hopefully drag a DC with him and allow Sterling to burst into the void. For Sturridge in my SCr slot, I felt an advanced forward would work. Someone who would be pushing the defence back and I also gave him the instruction to move out wide, to create even more space for Suarez and Sterling to operate.

I have to say my attacking trio works better than I expected. Suarez will drop deeper and act as the creator, Sterling overlaps into a forward position (as does my left wing-back, offering an extra outlet) offering a goal threat and Sturridge acts more of a decoy, taking defenders out of the game and creating space for my box-to-box midfielder (Hendo) to make runs into good positions.

The build-up play to some of my goals is beautiful to watch when my forward 3 all link up.

I like the take you have on the narrow diamond, explained really well and makes perfect sense. I use the EN because Roman is my best player and I have built the side around him. I am also stacked for youth prospects to come in and replace him, seriously if you have the Argentine League loaded the amount of AMC's in the U20 sides is mental. I used a SS in a 4-2-3-1 formation I developed for another save with the right type of player it can be a great weapon. I think a SS with a F9 would work well as a duo especially with a more direct third attacker pulling defenders apart. I too was influenced slightly by how Brendan Rodgers set his Liverpool side up I used it as a sort of starting point to work my own version out.

The type of football you can get out of your team is the best I have ever had in any FM game really pleaseing on the eye.

With you having a MC set as a B2B and the other CM set to defend do you ever get overrun in the middle if your B2B is caught out to high up, or does the narrowness sort of neutralise any threats?

I agree that this version allows for some very easy to watch football, if you get it right.

My MC positions are the ones I am least sure about. I tend to keep the left one on a defend duty because my DL is set up as a WB (a), but I'm not sure CM (d) is right and sometimes I play him as a DLP (d). My B2B actually gets back quickly but even if he is caught further up, my HB is always there to cover.

Sometimes my assistant says my midfield is being seriously overrun but the stats say differently as I am usually dominating possession, so I assume he is saying that because the oppo are playing 5 in midfield.

On the rare occasions when the oppo also play a narrow formation, I sometimes switch my front three to AML - IF (s), AMR - IF (a) and ST - Treq. This is my own interpretation of Liverpool's other system of playing 3 up top with Suarez left, Sterling right and Sturridge through the middle.

In his younger days he was more mobile not so much now however. The Enganche as a role however is a primarily a central one.

I have always dreamt about playing somebody like Riquelme and Aimar together as you get the best of both worlds. I am currently more inclined to 4-4-2 kind of formations with two "interiores/playmakers". 4-1-2-1-2 is however my second favourite formation so I might give it a go soon (started a new game in Colombia and looking for a new Valderrama ).

Anyway, a great thread.

Cracking thread, picked up some good tips for my 4-3-1-2.

I am currently experimenting with the type of player I use in the AF role. Usually I go with a gut called Emmanuel Gigliotti, he is a more robust type of #9 well rounded stats, physical good presence in the air. Sadly after his stellar first season in whihc he was the leagues top scorer his goals dried up, the only real ready made made replacement was Lucas Viatri who is similar but I had deemed surplus to requirments at the beginning of the season so sold him off. I went with a different type of player in the end, Luciano Acosta (touted as the next Diego Maradona) he was more suited to being the DLFs as he was more a tricky, technical playmaker type with poorer finishing stats. Since his switch however he can't stop banging them in, and it has made me rethink what type of players are needed in the forward roles.

Next couple of days I'll post a detailed analysis of the types of playes I use and what I believe makes them suited to the roles I have given them.