Anyone else enjoying a strikerless formation?

[furiousuk]

I'm normally a 442 fan or 4411 with an advanced AMC who plays similar to a striker but have recently attempted to change to a lone striker formation, tinkering with 4-1-4-1, 4-1-2-2-1 (wingers) and a 4-2-3-1. I couldn't get a 4-2-3-1 working right (mainly because I didn't have the players) so I plowed on with a 4-1-4-1 and a 4-1-2-2-1 which are basically the same but one has ML/MR and the other AML/AMR. I was determined to keep a playmaker in the striker slot and have quicker, striker-types in the winger positions.

Due to horrendous injuries (4 first team strikers and both decent back-ups!) I've moved the striker back to AMC generally used them as either an attacking midfielder (support or attack) or trequartista and have really quite enjoyed how it's worked for the team. It's undoubtedly defensive (even with a standard or control mentality) but has been surprisingly effective.

I use a balanced philosophy with short passing and lots of creativity. The wingers are always set to attack whether in the wide midfield slots of the AML/R slots. The lone striker/AMC is usually on support and one of the midfielders is support whilst the other is either support or attack. The DM is defensive as either an anchor man or a standard DM. My FB's are wing-backs on auto.

So, anyone else had any success with a striker-less formation?

Any ideas how to make it more offensive or whether it could effective on the counter?

[mojojojo101]

I dont play it regularly but sometimes like to finish games off with it if I feel like it. I generally play a 4-5-1 with the 2 wide players set as Inside Forwards. I'd generally pull the striker into the AMC position and set him as an Inside Forward Attack. As I play with an attacking mentality the band of 3 Inside Forwards like to make lots of runs from deep and I tend to find it gives them lots of space to turn and start running towards opposition centre backs which even at the top level they don't seem to be too comfortable with.

[furiousuk]

I do seem to use it most to finish off games too (when I have fit strikers!).

I've been tinkering with it and Barcelona seemed to employ it against Real in the Champions League Semi-Final with Messi dropping deeper so that he looked like an AM (or even MCa) for large swathes of the game. It seems like it should be able to produce a tight controlling shape that retains possession while gently 'probing' the opposition whilst it may be a little light on fully penetrating the box of an opponent. I've not had much success at really controlling the game with it early on though but I wonder if anyone has tried it with players capable of controlling the ball - my midfielders would much rather kick you in the face than pass the ball past you.

[franklin]

I made a 4-6-0 formation on patch 11.2 that worked wonders. Tested it for one season with Real Madrid and half a season with Everton.

Didn´t lose a single match in the season with Real and won Every trophy possible.

With Everton I was in 2nd place behind Man Utd halfway through the season.

I posted it on this forum if it´s of any interrest.

[jorge_jesus_de_massama]

i usualy employ a 4-4-1 when im playing a bigger club than mine! im playing withSLBenfica, and on the Champions league groupe stage i used it the second time i played Arsenal (the first time i think i playd with a 4-3-3 ang got slaughterd like 5-0 or 5-1), ang managed a win in the Emirates Stadium! my proud one nil win over Arsenal on their pitch! lool

[jorge_jesus_de_massama]

oh and just to clear this up a bit, when i say i played with a 4-4-1, i was wrong sorry! lool i meant a 4-6-0 with a AMC (that was capabble of playing the ST position curiously) playing has inside forward in attack mode!with the M/L/R supporting the front and two extremely defensive DM! worked like a charm!

[furiousuk]

I'm glad its not just me finding that it works, think I'm going to have more of a play with it and see why it works so well. I think the defense struggle with players running from deeper which is fairly realistic even with a control strategy, so long as you have fast players in the wide positions and probably a fast attacking AM - although my slow playmaker has been doing ok there. I'm a big fan of the way different player roles can pull a basic formation into wildly different shapes depending on the state of the game so it's interesting to see how exactly the AMC approaches the game when he has no-one advanced of him.

[Kawee]

If you have attacking midfielders instead of strikers, I find that the formation still operate very similarly. So in a 4-5-1, if you just pull back the striker into the attacking midfielder position, the formation still operates very similarly.

I find that it's a bit trickier if you try to create a formation with no strikers and no attacking midfielders. This means, the highest men up the pitch are your midfielders. This means, there is no focal attacking points, and you literally have to move up as a line. It's interesting to watch, but can be ineffective simply because there is usually not enough people running in behind the defense.

[furiousuk]

Kawee: I've seen that when I'm playing a flat 4-1-4-1 and I get a player sent off, if I'm holding on to a lead then I'll drop the STR so I end up with 4 defs, 1 DM and 4 mids. It's a curious little thing to watch I'll agree, and agree that its not a good formation.

I've been having even more success with an AMC, AML and AMR as an attacking triplet, sometimes assisted by an attacking MC or 2. A treq role or an attacking inside forward o AM role all seem to work well for the AMC and he does tend to drift forward into the lone STR position, particularly when given time to do so. But then again, I normally find that ML/Rs tend to operate like wide forwards if given time to move forward, they don't stop moving forward until they hit the opponents D-Line so if you play a patient build-up or from a free-kick they'll be pushing the opponents FB's right back. It's only during the transition phase between defence and attack or when counter-attacking that they get caught out for being too deep. I'm a big fan of formation-morphing (I should get round to writing a proper post on that subject).

[Kawee]

The AMC, AML, and AMR trinity works very similarly to ST, AML, and AMR trinity so that's why it works well.

The most success I've had with no strikers and attacking midfielders is by playing 4-1-5. Won the league, but it took a lot of effort indeed.

[furiousuk]

Having had the luxury of 2 fit strikers for a few games I've just seen them both injured for a while again so think I'll have to soldier on with the strikerless fun.

You're right, if you play a creative ST then dropping him to AMC doesn't make much difference so I don't think I'm going to be able to develop this into any form of tactical revolution. Gonna have to find some way of making it more attacking though as I have a couple of games against weaker opposition coming up.

Think I'm going to use a flat 4, DM, 2 MC playmakers, AML, AMC, AMR with the wingers as the most advanced players. I generally play 3 rugby players in midfield so I need a little flair from elsewhere and need to get the FB's forward. AMC will play as a treq I think, this will suit the player but I'm not sure whether the wingers will get forward enough. This is basically the same formation I use with a ST (who is usually a complete forward - support) which, even with a balanced mentality, generally creates a nice W-W shape. This shape should be more pronounced with a deeper, more creative focal point.