OrientTillIDie Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Just looking for some opinions on an idea I've had. I would like to start a save with a League 2 team who have a big physical striker (not Akinfenwa, but someone much taller). I plan on playing 4-4-2 like Stoke under Pulis with proper wingers and physical central midfielders. Big man little man up front. Direct up to the target man or getting the wingers to run at the defence and cross it to the big man. I'm thinking something like this (formation goes right to left): GKd FBs/d (leaning towards support) CDd CDd FBs/d (leaning towards support) Wa CMd BWMs Wa Strikers I can never decide on. Either Target Man with Support Duty coupled with an Advanced Forward or a Target Man on Attack duty with a Defensive Forward. Opinions on that would be gratefully received! I can't figure out though what mentality and fluidity to use. Do I go rigid to keep the banks of four or fluid to make sure my midfield and defence defend in tandem and then my midfield help the attack? Also, would I go defensive or counter mentality? Or even Standard? The fact I struggle to work out a direct system means I end up going with a shorter passing system but I want to challenge myself and see if I can get it to work. Thanks in advance!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyyakuza78 Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Take a look at my thread here. I've converted it more into a 451 really which works better, but might be worth a read. http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/441916-A-Pulis-for-2016-Leeds-Longball Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrientTillIDie Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 Thanks for this. I'll give it a go and report back Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmason122 Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Just looking for some opinions on an idea I've had. I would like to start a save with a League 2 team who have a big physical striker (not Akinfenwa, but someone much taller).I plan on playing 4-4-2 like Stoke under Pulis with proper wingers and physical central midfielders. Big man little man up front. Direct up to the target man or getting the wingers to run at the defence and cross it to the big man. I'm thinking something like this (formation goes right to left): GKd FBs/d (leaning towards support) CDd CDd FBs/d (leaning towards support) Wa CMd BWMs Wa Strikers I can never decide on. Either Target Man with Support Duty coupled with an Advanced Forward or a Target Man on Attack duty with a Defensive Forward. Opinions on that would be gratefully received! I can't figure out though what mentality and fluidity to use. Do I go rigid to keep the banks of four or fluid to make sure my midfield and defence defend in tandem and then my midfield help the attack? Also, would I go defensive or counter mentality? Or even Standard? The fact I struggle to work out a direct system means I end up going with a shorter passing system but I want to challenge myself and see if I can get it to work. Thanks in advance!! Personally I was always a fan of the targetman poacher combination. Also worth checking out Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrientTillIDie Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 One more thing... I assume having a Head of Youth who prefers a direct style of play is more likely to bring in big physical youth players? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrientTillIDie Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 Personally I was always a fan of the targetman poacher combination. Also worth checking out Thanks! I'll have a play around and see what happens Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrientTillIDie Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 So I started with York City. They have Vadaine Oliver who is an absolute unit so they seemed like a good choice. I've played two friendlies so far and conceded 2 against Salford and 2 against Matlock which I obviously wasn't happy with. However, I fear this may be due to the low(ish) abilities of my defenders. My first friendly was Salford and I lost 2-1 but made some changes for the Matlock game and despite going 2-1 down just before half-time, I turned it around and won 4-2. I tried TM(s) with a Poacher but that didn't work at all so changed the Poacher to an Advanced Forward which seemed to have more success because he ran the channels and was able to get onto long balls over the top. I started off with a CM(d) and BWM(d) in the middle of the park but that left no-one linking the midfield to the attack so I've changed to a CM(s) and CM(d). I know that's really basic but I don't want them on the ball much because they're not very good! Also I was using two W(s) on the sides but decided to change the left winger to Attack duty after the first game, again because of the lack of support. He went on to score my first goal of the game. I'm pleased that my alterations had an affect so quickly but I still need to sort out the defence. As I said, I'm worried that it's because of their lack of ability which would be a problem because I don't really have the money or capacity to bring in replacements. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyyakuza78 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Post up your tactic, then maybe we can give you advice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrientTillIDie Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 No worries now, I think I've cracked it. 3 games into the season and looking much more solid. Still not perfect but I'm going to need time to bring the right players in. However teams are struggling to break me down and are only really scoring from the odd lapse in concentration on my defence's part. I also look quite dangerous going forward which is nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.