Has anyone managed to make 4-3-3 work?

[VibeTribe]

I just can't make it stick...A classic 4-3-3,as in :

GK

DR RCB LCB DL

RCM CM LCM

STR ST STL

Any advice?

[felley]

Never used a flat 4-3-3 myself, but I am a big fan of the 4-3-1-2/4-1-2-1-2 which are essentially staggered versions of a 4-3-3.

The key things to think about are encouraging movement between the 3 lines - as it is a flat formation - as well as support for the flanks as you only have the one player there.

This all depends on what you are trying to achieve of course. Could you provide us with any more information? A style you wish to play, perhaps? How do you imagine your team to create chances?

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Och, that would be an interesting one to make... um...

GK/D

WB/A CD/D CD/D WB/A

CM/S DLP/D B2B/S

IF/A F9/S IF/A

Reasoning?

Wingback attack because you'll need them to get up and offer wide support. The Central CM should possibly be the more defensive one, to drop back and shield the defence. The other two would be supporting roles, one to support but generally hold position, the other with more license to get forward a bit more (could easily be an attack duty I guess), with strikers in the advance positions being inside forwards, but I would personally have them in the AM slots.

I'm not too confident on the centre midfield trio though, and the central striker might need to be a role that drops quite deep to link up a bit more, maybe DLF or Treq. But that's how I would probably create a base for initially.

[herne79]

Short answer - yes .

Longer answer, in one of my saves I initially set up as a 41212 narrow midfield diamond. That quickly developed into a 4312 with a DLP def in the centre of midfield, so still giving me a midfield diamond, but I felt pushed the other 2 CMs a little wider. Results were excellent.

Eventually, that morphed into a "flat" 433 (on paper) by simply pushing the AMC up to the ST line - the trick was to find which of the striker roles/duties sat deepest (for the STC) so that midfield was still nicely linked to attack.

I also found that attacking fullbacks rather than wingbacks/CWBs were much better (for me) for providing the mix of attacking play and defensive cover I was after.

However, as felley said above, it all depends on what you are trying to achieve, your style of play etc. My setup was specifically designed for the team I was playing, players at my disposal and how I wanted them to play which may or may not be what you want, or even be suitable for your team.

[deserter]

I'd give marking duties to 1 or 2 of the strikers. They'd mark a full back or a defensive midfielder making the job of the more defensive players easier. Still, you're left with 1-2 guys high up so you can play the ball up quickly and the marking duty striker(s) will sprint up to their position too.

[felley]

Longer answer, in one of my saves I initially set up as a 41212 narrow midfield diamond. That quickly developed into a 4312 with a DLP def in the centre of midfield, so still giving me a midfield diamond, but I felt pushed the other 2 CMs a little wider. Results were excellent.

Eventually, that morphed into a "flat" 433 (on paper) by simply pushing the AMC up to the ST line - the trick was to find which of the striker roles/duties sat deepest (for the STC) so that midfield was still nicely linked to attack.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts. The left and right centre mids are key as they have a lot of work to do in supporting both attack and defence. It may be my personal taste, but a fluid style with the more moddable Central Midfielder on Support duty would be my choice for the pair of them.

Getting the striker roles and duties right will largely depend on those you have available though I imagine you would want the central striker as a False 9. In one of my tactics, I used a combination of Poacher/False 9/Advanced Forward which I felt worked very well. Having two players persistently testing the opposition with runs as well as a forward dropping off gave the defence a lot to think about.

[herne79]

Pretty much sums up my thoughts. The left and right centre mids are key as they have a lot of work to do in supporting both attack and defence. It may be my personal taste, but a fluid style with the more moddable Central Midfielder on Support duty would be my choice for the pair of them.

Getting the striker roles and duties right will largely depend on those you have available though I imagine you would want the central striker as a False 9. In one of my tactics, I used a combination of Poacher/False 9/Advanced Forward which I felt worked very well. Having two players persistently testing the opposition with runs as well as a forward dropping off gave the defence a lot to think about.

Yup totally.

I used a CMs on one side, BBM on the other however there was no real discernable difference between them. MCL or MCR played as a BWMs might also prove useful if you wanted to add in a midfield aggressor, and is something I want to try out (not until FM15 hits though).

And again yes, striker roles will be down to available personnel (3 striker + rotation options can get expensive!). Personally I played AF/F9/CF as I had the players, or switched out the F9 for a DLFs or TQ.

However, I have to say that as pleased as I was with the "flat" 433, I still favour the 4312 - it just seemed to gel better and will be my first port of call in FM15.

[Dr. Hook]

Short answer - yes .

Longer answer, in one of my saves I initially set up as a 41212 narrow midfield diamond. That quickly developed into a 4312 with a DLP def in the centre of midfield, so still giving me a midfield diamond, but I felt pushed the other 2 CMs a little wider. Results were excellent.

Eventually, that morphed into a "flat" 433 (on paper) by simply pushing the AMC up to the ST line - the trick was to find which of the striker roles/duties sat deepest (for the STC) so that midfield was still nicely linked to attack.

I also found that attacking fullbacks rather than wingbacks/CWBs were much better (for me) for providing the mix of attacking play and defensive cover I was after.

However, as felley said above, it all depends on what you are trying to achieve, your style of play etc. My setup was specifically designed for the team I was playing, players at my disposal and how I wanted them to play which may or may not be what you want, or even be suitable for your team.

I like how you described your evolution with the narrow diamond. Mine will often take different shapes like this also depending on how I try to deal with different opponents. While you'll likely never get good wing play out of it, it is an incredibly versatile formation.

[luka_zg]

does the central midfielder on defensive duty give enough cover for defence if you make your fullbacks play as complete wingbacks? and which role would be the best? CM/D? I was thinking about deploying this formation with ManUtd in FM15. Blind as CM/D and Carrick DLP/s..I don't know what role to give to Di Maria though..AP/A(run with the ball wide)? Any suggestions?

[macca72]

With your CM sitting DLP(D) or CM(D) and your central ST playing more of a supporting role (F9) you would end up with a shape like a 4-1-2-1-2. The key to making this formation work (in my opinion) is...

1. Getting the 2 outer strikers working the channels and creating space, as well as being a goal threat.

2. Balancing the 2 outer CM's so they can cover for your WB's and still provide passing outlets and attacking opportunities.

Start with CM(S) as one of your outer mids, and maybe a DLP as the other. For the outer Strikers, try a CF and something like a Poacher / AF.

Think about your player instructions, so if you want your CM to stick where he is, make sure he's not roaming. Similarly, you want at least one of your 3 strikers being encouraged to roam around and pull people out of position.

[luka_zg]

But If I put Di Maria in CM strata..I can't make him CM/S..I want him to the guy who the epicentre of everything we do attacking wise..what role would you say he plays for Van Gaal's team?

Plus I wouldn't play three ST..I'd play AMC and two ST's

[Fosse]

For Di Maria you almost need a central playmaker role, not deep but not advanced

[EnigMattic1]

I am not sure if this would be relevant but, if I use inside forwards, I find my team plays better if the inside forwards are set to 'support' and the full/wing backs are set to 'attack' as the inside forwards cut inside leaving the full/wing backs to overlap.

[bababooey]

In my opinion the "classic" 4-3-3 is better represented with the AML/AMR + central striker. Those wide men will act as wide forwards anyway, no need to put them in the STCLR slots.