The Art of Counter Attacking

Well, define 4-2-3-1?

This is my "4-2-3-1" I'm currently using with Espanyol to great effect with a Counter mentality, no TIs and a few PIs (such as telling one of my WMs to cut inside for variety):

Amazing point of view ! It seems pretty 4231 to me. Actually deep 4231. But quick question here; What is your team shape ? If you use structured or very structured it seems a little more balanced. other way, there is intelligent questions read here before where is goalscorer and such that. You may ensured that with the PI. You may have roam from position with DLF ? How is your results ? Is tactic seems ok in the pitch ? I am very interested your 4231

Another fantastic thread, Cleon! Not bad for someone who says that it doesn't have enough time and is always busy. I can't imagine how many of your threads we would enjoy and learn from if you had more time.

Personally, I can't wait for your thread on possession, because that is my preferred style of play and I'm sure I can always learn something new about it from others. I hope you would speak about different kinds of possession - with a top team, underdog, controlling the game, keeping the score, dominating opponents, etc.

Amazing point of view ! It seems pretty 4231 to me. Actually deep 4231. But quick question here; What is your team shape ? If you use structured or very structured it seems a little more balanced. other way, there is intelligent questions read here before where is goalscorer and such that. You may ensured that with the PI. You may have roam from position with DLF ? How is your results ? Is tactic seems ok in the pitch ? I am very interested your 4231

These are my results so far.

Sitting 4th in BBVA after 15 matches. Not setting the world alight, but certainly overachieving for Espanyol so far.

I usually use a Fluid team shape, but only because that is what I found works best (generally) for my particular team - it adds a little more individual creativity and helps create a more compact shape which seems to favour us. Espanyol are far from the best team in the division, but this additional creativity and slight variety in wide play (one cuts inside) is helping. Teams have already started to tighten up against us, so the creativity helps.

My goalscorers are from all over. Strikers have scored the most, but Diop especially is also grabbing a few - both DMs have the PI to Get Further Forward. DLF has no PIs. Remember - this only really affects their play when we are not counter attacking.

The tactic seems just fine on the pitch. Defensively sound, players are quick to get back into shape after losing the ball. In possession it is slow and patient - unless we are counter attacking of course.

There are a few other bits and pieces specific to my team and how I generally play the game, but that covers a lot without hijacking too much of Cleon's excellent thread .

Oddly enough, here's my current system with Sporting Lisbon. Same Mentality, same Team Shape, same lack of TIs. Top of the league after 19 games; we have conceded two goals. Two

Great thread - thanks for kicking it off Cleon! Quick question - would you change anything if you were playing as a top side? I'm trying to make a counter tactic work as Red Star (planning on getting them to win the CL for a second time!), my logic being that a) I never have truly brilliant players that will consistently unlock teams that like to sit deep so I need to try and draw the opposition out and b) I'm going to be outclassed in the CL so counter makes sense there ( plus by using the same system domestically and in CL I'm not asking the team to learn multiple tactics.

Any thoughts most welcome!

I've applied the principles of this thread to a Leicester save I was playing around with, it was mid October and I was 19th in the league, it's now April and I'm 5th. I'm mostly pleased with how things have been going, my only gripe is that I don't think I've scored a single goal on the counter. They're all set-pieces, Vardy individual efforts, or goals from normal play.

However, it could just be because my players aren't very good footballers. I've gone for hardworking cloggers in a rigid and defensive 4141 with centrebacks playing as full backs, and fullbacks as wingers. Mahrez is probably the only one who can pass a ball. Lots of 1-0 wins and overall it's been successful, I just wish I could see the improved counter attacking that everyone's banging on about.

Great as allways, Cleon

How does it work against weaker teams who are drop deeper?

Great thread mate, I was working on a counter system for a while and this guide looks like what I was looking for... Especially DF role work wonders for me, now looking for 'Tireless' striker to disrupt opposition build-up!

So, the more defensive the mentality the less aggressive the duties need to be? Would that apply even in a system that doesn't use counters? (Does that even make sense...?!)

What of formations that don't pack the defence? Like the a-typical 4-2-3-1 (or something similar to that for brevity's sake)? Is that just generally asking for trouble?

And finally, what about systems that are trying to balance, say possession alongside a counter attacking threat, but one that doesn't necessarily want to rely for the majority of time on counter-attacking? In those circumstances am I right in saying there would be absolutely no difference, since the lower mentalities encourage that possession in the first place?

What I always love to have when counterattacking is is a deep creator. A deep playmaker will always get those won balls and help unlock defenses on the counter via a killer pass.

For my own counterattack tactic, I use 4-2-3-1 with Attacking + Slightly Deeper, but you can use any other mentalities if you get the roles right

I am curious on thing. The important attributes you listed for players. As I mentioned, I've been looking to use a 4-1-4-1 counter tactic in a game and while I haven't really got the save rolling, I've been looking for players who will fit that kind of approach. I was actually targeting most of the ones listed, but I have also been looking for good Positioning. If the core of the approach is to defend effectively, I figured that Positioning would have to be important to ensure the players are where they are supposed to be. Am I overvaluing it?

Another cracking thread, I usually only play with narrow formations on FM, can a 4-1-3-2 be effective at counter attacking or would that struggle since there is no wingers?

Great thread - thanks for kicking it off Cleon! Quick question - would you change anything if you were playing as a top side? I'm trying to make a counter tactic work as Red Star (planning on getting them to win the CL for a second time!), my logic being that a) I never have truly brilliant players that will consistently unlock teams that like to sit deep so I need to try and draw the opposition out and b) I'm going to be outclassed in the CL so counter makes sense there ( plus by using the same system domestically and in CL I'm not asking the team to learn multiple tactics.

Any thoughts most welcome!

The principals are the same whether you are a top side, midtable side or a struggling side. The ideas and principles are not team focused instead it's the basics of counter attacking football I talk about. So those are applicable to all because they are footballing basics.

I've applied the principles of this thread to a Leicester save I was playing around with, it was mid October and I was 19th in the league, it's now April and I'm 5th. I'm mostly pleased with how things have been going, my only gripe is that I don't think I've scored a single goal on the counter. They're all set-pieces, Vardy individual efforts, or goals from normal play.

However, it could just be because my players aren't very good footballers. I've gone for hardworking cloggers in a rigid and defensive 4141 with centrebacks playing as full backs, and fullbacks as wingers. Mahrez is probably the only one who can pass a ball. Lots of 1-0 wins and overall it's been successful, I just wish I could see the improved counter attacking that everyone's banging on about.

You don't watch full games though do you only key highlights? If you don't watch full games then how do you know you've not counter attacked? On key highlights they can cut out the counter attacking part of the move like they did on my videos.

Great as allways, Cleon

How does it work against weaker teams who are drop deeper?

It does enough to draw them out. Plus you have to remember I still bring the ball forward and play a normal game when a counter attack isn't on.

So, the more defensive the mentality the less aggressive the duties need to be? Would that apply even in a system that doesn't use counters? (Does that even make sense...?!)

What of formations that don't pack the defence? Like the a-typical 4-2-3-1 (or something similar to that for brevity's sake)? Is that just generally asking for trouble?

And finally, what about systems that are trying to balance, say possession alongside a counter attacking threat, but one that doesn't necessarily want to rely for the majority of time on counter-attacking? In those circumstances am I right in saying there would be absolutely no difference, since the lower mentalities encourage that possession in the first place?

Well any system that has more/same amount of players in the oppositions half on the overview screen as the defence is going to struggle with packing the defence and being inside their own half as those players won't come deep enough.

It's not that less aggressive mentalities require lower duties at such, it's more about what you're trying to create. As I showed last year in the defensive arts thread you can use low mentality with aggressive roles. All comes down to the style you want. But for a counter attacking system then those mentioned throughout this thread are the fundamental basics.

I am curious on thing. The important attributes you listed for players. As I mentioned, I've been looking to use a 4-1-4-1 counter tactic in a game and while I haven't really got the save rolling, I've been looking for players who will fit that kind of approach. I was actually targeting most of the ones listed, but I have also been looking for good Positioning. If the core of the approach is to defend effectively, I figured that Positioning would have to be important to ensure the players are where they are supposed to be. Am I overvaluing it?

For defensive players it is. Like I said in the posts though, everyone has their own idea about what they think is important. At the end of the day all attributes are important but realistically unless you are a good side, you're not going to find someone with every desired attribute. So you then have to prioritise.

Well any system that has more/same amount of players in the oppositions half on the overview screen as the defence is going to struggle with packing the defence and being inside their own half as those players won't come deep enough.

It's not that less aggressive mentalities require lower duties at such, it's more about what you're trying to create. As I showed last year in the defensive arts thread you can use low mentality with aggressive roles. All comes down to the style you want. But for a counter attacking system then those mentioned throughout this thread are the fundamental basics.

Hmm... I understand, I think.

What I'm trying to create is something that defends mid-low block, containment, that will counter-attack where possible but mostly be based around a balanced attack. I guess, I'm trying to have the cake on top of eating it - I don't want to be too much one style over another if that make sense? So I don't want to be super possession oriented and vice versa. I guess, my "vision" would be open to criticism as being far too broad?

Perhaps I should start a new thread as I don't want to de-rail this one.

For my own counterattack tactic, I use 4-2-3-1 with Attacking + Slightly Deeper, but you can use any other mentalities if you get the roles right

How do you define counter attack? This system will still have the high line of control, and if it's a standard 4231 then it won't trigger counters as effectively as a lower mentality system because your will tend to have too many players up field. It will also employ more risk taking and so lacks the guile and patience to enact a conventional counter.

How do you define counter attack? This system will still have the high line of control, and if it's a standard 4231 then it won't trigger counters as effectively as a lower mentality system because your will tend to have too many players up field. It will also employ more risk taking and so lacks the guile and patience to enact a conventional counter.

If it's set out like you mention then he has to be confusing a counter attacking style with a direct style. Got to be.

Can counter work with a 4-1-2-2-1 with 2x IF on support? or to be effective will they need to be pulled back, my problem is without spending time retraining players I do have any players who are competent in the MR/ML position.

Excellent thread. Great read.

I've been tinkering with this stuff and noticed a huge amount of long shots taken almost exclusively by wide midfielders (with no PPMs). Anyone else had the same experience?

excellent thread and very helpfull i hope you'll do the same for attackig and control.

just one ide, i assume from this thread that the most transforming and flexibile tactical setup for creating an attack/control/counter version is the flat 442

One question. At what point do you think that actually you are conceding too much space and possession, where you are literally being battered.

If this is happening, whats the best thing to do in that situation. Is it to close the opposition down more or just be even more defensive?

3 Questions

-you didn't choose a playmaker role , is it because maybe the players are trying to find him and this slow down the counter attack?

-whats your opinion about the BPD role in DC position?

-about the 2nd role on attack duty ,you would choose the MC(A) or it depends during the game ?

I appreciate your work Cleon! Great article!

Are there any specific 'opposition instructions' that you'd recommend with a counter-attacking system? I have tended to avoid marking wingers tightly, to try and keep the teams shape, but usually try to 'close down more' to prevent easy crosses. Is this sensible?

I've been tinkering with this stuff and noticed a huge amount of long shots taken almost exclusively by wide midfielders (with no PPMs). Anyone else had the same experience?

Have a look at the shots and see why the players are shooting and not passing to better placed options instead?

One question. At what point do you think that actually you are conceding too much space and possession, where you are literally being battered.

If this is happening, whats the best thing to do in that situation. Is it to close the opposition down more or just be even more defensive?

If you're getting battered then I think you'd know you was conceding too much space no? Many ways to fix it though, push d-line slightly higher, change mentality if its a must, can change the roles, can try and close down more etc. All of those have implications obviously but are all focused on reducing space. So always start with the simple options first.

I don't see why if you was conceding space and possession and getting battered, that you'd change to more defensive though? That seems illogical to me as it just makes you play even deeper so space will be greater.

3 Questions

-you didn't choose a playmaker role , is it because maybe the players are trying to find him and this slow down the counter attack?

-whats your opinion about the BPD role in DC position?

-about the 2nd role on attack duty ,you would choose the MC(A) or it depends during the game ?

Playmakers can slow the counters down or stop them from happening yes. You need to have confidence your playmaker can deal with this and wont mess things up. I didn't have this luxury with my players but RTH did with his setup he posted.

I don't see the point of a BPD in a counter set up like this, it's a bit I don't know....just doesn't make much sense.

The 2nd attack duty role would depend on the shape you use and what happens during a game. In my set up it might be any of these three players, CM, WM or fullbacks.

I appreciate your work Cleon! Great article!

Are there any specific 'opposition instructions' that you'd recommend with a counter-attacking system? I have tended to avoid marking wingers tightly, to try and keep the teams shape, but usually try to 'close down more' to prevent easy crosses. Is this sensible?

I actually don't use OI's ever. I like the team to retain their shape and play the way I've instructed them too. OI's can cause complications, so I always avoid them. I'm not saying you should if you feel you can make them work for you. But for me I can achieve what I want without using them in other, more better ways like PI's or TI's.

If it's set out like you mention then he has to be confusing a counter attacking style with a direct style. Got to be.

Nope. You can make make a counterattack tactic with any mentality and I've done so plenty of times this year and lasts...and I used attacking mentality and then drop the dline deeper and get my defenders and center mids to close down less

It's amazing what someone explaining how things fit together can do.

I've been lucky with a few of these, but I didn't think this was actually possible. My run is obviously going to come to an end imminently, so I thought I'd post it while I can.

Cleon, how do you approach being slightly more aggressive if you feel a team is there for the taking?

Nope. You can make make a counterattack tactic with any mentality and I've done so plenty of times this year and lasts...and I used attacking mentality and then drop the dline deeper and get my defenders and center mids to close down less

Not with the shape you use you can't, not really. Mentality isn't an issue as a stand alone but add the shape you use to that and then you won't really have a counter attacking tactic. Anyting that uses a 4231 and a high mentality isn't a counter attacking system and calling it one is a bit stretch of the imagination and only misleads people. You might see the odd one but not regular and I still think you are confusing direct attacks with counter. Upload your save game and I'll go through the games and see how many counters you've actually had over the season. Upload it to Google Docs and post in the link in here please.

It's amazing what someone explaining how things fit together can do.

I've been lucky with a few of these, but I didn't think this was actually possible. My run is obviously going to come to an end imminently, so I thought I'd post it while I can.

Cleon, how do you approach being slightly more aggressive if you feel a team is there for the taking?

I don't tend to go chasing games or trying to score more. I tend to 995 of the time stick to what's been working throughout the game.

I am having so much fun after reading this thread and watching how better the match engine is in all areas but especially in "deep defending - shoaking pressure".

I have a hybrid of Cleon's and RTH's tactics as a base and having this base gives me confidence to tweak a little time by time to make the team play how exactly i want or to change a match.

I am having so much fun after reading this thread and watching how better the match engine is in all areas but especially in "deep defending - shoaking pressure".

I have a hybrid of Cleon's and RTH's tactics as a base and having this base gives me confidence to tweak a little time by time to make the team play how exactly i want or to change a match.

Good to hear, especially after seeing you post last week I think it was, saying how you was struggling this version and not really getting into it

Supposing that you move one of your MCs to the AMC(R or L) position ,so to play an assymetric 41311 ,which role do you suggest for counter ? AM(S) ?

An SS could work?

Not with the shape you use you can't, not really. Mentality isn't an issue as a stand alone but add the shape you use to that and then you won't really have a counter attacking tactic. Anyting that uses a 4231 and a high mentality isn't a counter attacking system and calling it one is a bit stretch of the imagination and only misleads people. You might see the odd one but not regular and I still think you are confusing direct attacks with counter. Upload your save game and I'll go through the games and see how many counters you've actually had over the season. Upload it to Google Docs and post in the link in here please.

Uhh..it's a bit complicated to do that. I changed my tactic as soon as the players were fully fit and failed to save it . I'm playing Dafuge. Initially I relied on a Counter attacking tactic.

I could tho post my setup and the pkms if you want to take a peek at that

I could tho post my setup and the pkms if you want to take a peek at that

I think it's a worthwhile exercise, as the system you describe doesn't appear to fit in with the way in which FM triggers counters. Perhaps if we see the system it might make us realise that we're missing something.

As a general aside - what you can also take from this thread is the realisation that using a mix of Duties that perhaps seems cautious or even negative is OK. If you use fewer Attack Duties, you get a far more considered and probing style of play. Historically people have often stuck to the idea of having an Attack Duty full back behind a Support winger, and a Support Full Back behind an Attack Winger, one attack Duty in midfield etc. We see many systems which methodically stick to the mantra of playing in this way. There's nothing wrong with that, but when you play with less aggressive Duties, you potentially have a lot more control of the match. I suspect if/when Cleon writes his possession article, we'll see a pretty cautious looking mix of Duties.

Personally, I really like having a more subdued range of Duties. You end up with less ridiculous numbers in the box; there's just no point having 3 or 4 players up there as having a few deeper players can easily pull a defence apart more effectively than having a bunch of players right up against the defensive line.

As a general aside - what you can also take from this thread is the realisation that using a mix of Duties that perhaps seems cautious or even negative is OK. If you use fewer Attack Duties, you get a far more considered and probing style of play. Historically people have often stuck to the idea of having an Attack Duty full back behind a Support winger, and a Support Full Back behind an Attack Winger, one attack Duty in midfield etc. We see many systems which methodically stick to the mantra of playing in this way. There's nothing wrong with that, but when you play with less aggressive Duties, you potentially have a lot more control of the match. I suspect if/when Cleon writes his possession article, we'll see a pretty cautious looking mix of Duties.

Personally, I really like having a more subdued range of Duties. You end up with less ridiculous numbers in the box; there's just no point having 3 or 4 players up there as having a few deeper players can easily pull a defence apart more effectively than having a bunch of players right up against the defensive line.

One thing I'm finding is a habit of long searching balls over the top when I've tried that, which can be frustrating. The other is the difficulty in ensuring there is support in all directions in order to ensure that the ball is supported.

Another issue I've found - or maybe this was always the case and I only just noticed it - is that the duties can really shift the dynamics of the side. I really dislike the FB/A and W/S combination for example as they seem to bunch together and sit particularly deep. -Actually, having watched a full 90 minutes last night I was pretty surprised at how extreme the difference between a W/A and a W/S was. I found the winger/S was about on the halfway line and creeping forwards at times. He certainly exploited space intelligently though, often waiting the opposition full back to tuck in before moving forward. W/A on the other hand was almost consistently in line with the strikers - something I liked and wanted (as you point out) because the way the opposition had set up was particularly deep and narrow that by "unleashing" him, so to speak, he caused havoc in that general area and really stretched the defensive line.

Okay, here we go...

Well, I wanted to use a 4-2-3-1 deep initially but I didn't have a lot of DMs on the team and the only DM that was healthy at the time was Horsfield. Its Dafuge and I'm playing as Salford

Attacking

I wanted the team to always counter attack even when there isn't the "conditions" to do so. Most defenses were playing with a deeper line and I thought this mentality was the best

Flexible

I couldn't decide between this and Ridgid, so I tried this shape the first time and stuck with it

SK (d)

WB(s)-CD(d)-CD©-CWB(a)

CM(d)-DLP(d)

W(a)-AM(a)-IF(s)

P(a)

SK (d) - Throw It Long, Distribute Quickly

A sweeper keeper that was expected to act as a third defender and then begin counters

WB (s) - Stay Wider

I used a WB to aid the attack but not too much in a way to not hinder our out and out winger.

CD (d), CD©, CM(d), DLP(d) - Close Down Much Less, Ease Off Tackles, Pass It Shorter

I lowered the closing down of the middlemen because its the lower leagues and I cant afford to give away silly penalties.

CWB (a)

To pair up with my IF (s) and help overlap each other

W(a) - Roam From Position

My out and out winger. I have two on the side and I would be crazy not to use them

IF (s)

My more defensive of the front four. He is usually right footed so I let him cut inside on the right.

AM (a) - Roam From Position, Move Into Channels

Usually the guy I have here is set up to be a "Withdrawn TM", he has the height and the ariel ability, I even gave him a PPM "Plays With Back To Goal".

P (a) - Move Into Channels

I have an awesome set of strikers in my squad starring Ashley Fletcher and he looves to play this role and it showed.

TIs

More Direct

Pass Into Space

Slighly Deeper

Get Stuck In

Higher Tempo

Play Out of Defense/Run At Defense

Exploit the Flanks

Be More Disiplined - Lower Leagues, once again.

Whipped Crosses - For my AM and P to get

And here are the pkms

http://speedy.sh/tpfT3/Salford-v-North-Ferriby.pkm

http://speedy.sh/PZ7sD/Salford-v-Tamworth.pkm

http://speedy.sh/65hJv/Salford-v-FC-United.pkm

The fault with that is by going more fluid everyone thinks they can be more creative. It's only a small increase but none the less. Having someone decide to do a hollywood pass or dwell on the ball at the wrong time and the whole counter function falls apart. So you need to consider if your players are really intelligent enough to play in a more fluid system and be trusted to use their own judgement. For me that's always a risk regardless, so I prefer the rigid to flexible route instead. Keep things simple and it means you are still in control of what you instructed the player to do. For me a bit more space between players is fine aslong as they do what I've instructed. Also remember I'm on a lower end mentality structure so players are closer together with the roles they have anyway. I still want them to have space to work in and more importantly I still need the opponents to use this space against me because my whole approach relies on it. If I close that out, then how can I effectively counter?

What if you play (very) fluid and throw 'be more disciplined' in the mix? Would you consider that too adventurous?

@Jean0987654321, I guess what I struggle with is the idea that your system is counter attacking? It simply isn't in the FM sense as a system with 3 guys in and beyond the AMC line with Attack Duties will not trigger a counter - especially in a division where you have noticed defences playing with a deep defensive line? I have to agree with Cleon - this just looks like a very direct system with a lot of high pressure on the ball? That in itself just is not counter attacking play.

I'd be interested in seeing what Cleons reaction to this is, I remember having this discussion with Jean in the counter thread ages ago. I still can't see how this isn't anything other than a high pressing attacking tactic. Maybe in the same way that Klopp is a counter attacking coach with his gegenpressing, you could say its counter attacking, by way of fast transitions. But in every other definition of the term, and how the game supposedly recognises counter opportunities, I'm still not seeing it.

@Jean0987654321, I guess what I struggle with is the idea that your system is counter attacking? It simply isn't in the FM sense as a system with 3 guys in and beyond the AMC line with Attack Duties will not trigger a counter - especially in a division where you have noticed defences playing with a deep defensive line? I have to agree with Cleon - this just looks like a very direct system with a lot of high pressure on the ball? That in itself just is not counter attacking play.

Not really on paper. That is why it is always important to watch the game on Comprehensive and get a sense of the system. It isn't really high pressure tactic if you took a look at the pkms. Much of the counters started in my own half. And not all teams were playing a deep line against me. This system may not make sense on paper but...just like using a TM in a possession tactic, some systems just work in this game.(eg. tactics over on FMBase or FMScout )

Jean i watched your first game (vs North Ferriby) on comprehensive. None of your goals came from counter attacks, well the first one maybe, but even that was just a long punt after the opposition fluffed a set piece. The other two goals came from you putting lots of high pressure on them high up the pitch. You also managed to achieve 68% possession in that match. Not really counter attacking in my book.

Jean i watched your first game (vs North Ferriby) on comprehensive. None of your goals came from counter attacks, well the first one maybe, but even that was just a long punt after the opposition fluffed a set piece. The other two goals came from you putting lots of high pressure on them high up the pitch. You also managed to achieve 68% possession in that match. Not really counter attacking in my book.

Counterattacking isn't about not having possession. The quote from the FP of this thread has a quote from Rinus Michels:A Total Football extrodinare

I have no intentioms to keep possession but I have possession, then it's a bonus, yes??

Just watched the Tamworth match. It's just not counter attacking: there are 3 or 4 men ahead of the ball at all times and it's just direct football to release a runner.

Against FC United it's the same. I see goals from set pieces and a decent counter at 25:01 (but that's from a defensive set piece where a counter almost can't fail to be triggered). 50th minute goal has you with 4 against 5 when the ball is played out of the back. Ironically, the best goal is FC United's at 54:16 from your throw, or 58:32 again from a throw.

Well just from the first post on this thread:

The accent in the counter attack style of play lays on the defensive team function, with the emphasis being on the defender’s own half of the field and letting the opponents keep the initiative of the game. This is to take advantage of the space behind their defense for the buildup and the attack. – Rinus Michels

I don't think thats what your team is doing. Its basically a direct attacking side. I didn't see many real counters in the games you uploaded.

The Michels quote talks about "letting the opponents keep the initiative of the game." If you have 68% of the ball (46% in the opposition's final third if you look at the action zones) you're not letting the opponents keep the initiative at all.

If you attack directly from everywhere on the pitch at all times, some of your goals will come on direct attacks after winning the ball in your own half, but that hardly makes a counter-attacking tactic.

Just watched the Tamworth match. It's just not counter attacking: there are 3 or 4 men ahead of the ball at all times and it's just direct football to release a runner.

Against FC United it's the same. I see goals from set pieces and a decent counter at 25:01 (but that's from a defensive set piece where a counter almost can't fail to be triggered). 50th minute goal has you with 4 against 5 when the ball is played out of the back. Ironically, the best goal is FC United's at 54:16 from your throw, or 58:32 again from a throw.

Well, time to agree to disagree

There's really nothing else to argue about otherwise we'll go in circles. All we can agree upon is that I can score goals from this tactic

The Michels quote talks about "letting the opponents keep the initiative of the game." If you have 68% of the ball (46% in the opposition's final third if you look at the action zones) you're not letting the opponents keep the initiative at all.

If you attack directly from everywhere on the pitch at all times, some of your goals will come on direct attacks after winning the ball in your own half, but that hardly makes a counter-attacking tactic.

What I'm saying is that he can make a quote like that but his teams always played with the most possession

Well, time to agree to disagree

There's really nothing else to argue about otherwise we'll go in circles. All we can agree upon is that I can score goals from this tactic

It is a thread about counter attacking, and you claimed yours is a counter attacking tactic when it clearly is not. Anybody will be able to download those .pkms and see it immediately. So far three people have done so and suggested it is not a counter attacking system, so either we're all wrong or.......