Feel free to say this is stupid, but I am attempting a 0-5-0-5-0 formation. Pointers welcome (both tips to help, and pointing and laughing)

[scousevasey]

Having had some success with strikerless formations on previous versions, I wanted to experiment with something different

Nobody in the defensive, midfield or striker stratas, with everyone in the DM and AM positions

I have started this with Newington Youth who are the bottom of the Northern Irish pyramid (the benefit is we can't sink any lower), and set up the roles with the follwing rationale to begin with

GK - GK(D) - this is the default.  I am tempted to move to SK but want to see how the rest of the formation works to begin with

WBR/WBL - WB(D) - the most defensive option available as I am trying to provide some defensive cover

DMCR/DMCL - HB(D) and A(D) - these started as two Half Backs with the aim of providing some cover, but I have switched one to Anchorman to see if the different roles can provide some cover for each other

DMC - RGA(S) - A defensively minded playmaker to help move the ball up to the front line

AMR/AML - IF(A) - The aim is to get the two wider players to cut into the box, and provide some of the main threat with the internal three players filling different spaces

AMCR - AM(S) - having someone to join up with the Regista and then play balls on to the three more attacking players

AMCL - AP(S) - a second ball player who will look to create once the ball is with the forward five

AMC - SS(A) - someone to burst into the box along with the wider players to put pressure on defenders and create chances

Having typed the roles, I may need to remove the Attacking Width instruction as it takes away from the Inside Forward roles, but I have left things fairly simple

I want the team to be dropping back and pushing up together, but the WBs and DMs seem split, which leads to odd opportunities for the opposition on the counter as the two WBs drop out wide, and then play a central striker onside leaving the DMs to chase back

Having had lots of long balls catch us out in the first few matches I have dropped the defensive line and line of engagement, but this might be counter intuitive

[scousevasey]

The caveat with this is I am trying to create something with poor players, many of whom are old (I have a 41 year old) who are struggling to adapt to playing slightly out of their comfort zone.  Until I get a youth intake there won't be any incoming players, and it will take time for the team to adjust

 

But really I am looking to ensure my roles and instructions are not contradictory and allow the team to defend and attack

[sporadicsmiles]

Perhaps a SK(A) to sweep up the huge void that will exist when you get counter attacked? I mean if we are going full on crazy, may as well add an extra level of craziness. Besides if your 'keeper is super bad this could give some hilarious mistakes.

[scousevasey]

These are the results so far

So adding in a SK who just disappears won't make it much worse

 

Having watched games on Extended Highlights, once we get the ball there are good passages, but as soon as it is lost the opposition get free.

I have seen players get a 10yd headstart on my DMs solely because the striker started on the halfway line and my deepest defender was pushing up.

 

Part of me is thinking that if I dropped two of the DMCs back to be DCs as Libero's it would work (avoiding the issue of quality), but I want to find a way to make the stupidity work in some way

[sporadicsmiles]

I'm not overly surprised about this to be honest. I was going to point out that any striker with even a little bit of pace would feast on you. That 5-5 game must have been damned entertaining though.

 

[crusadertsar]

Are you trying to recreate the Chapman's WM formation or something? Hate to break it to you but it hasn't worked in over 50 years because of some major changes in football rules, the offside rule being the least of them. It was glorious for a while there in 1930s and 1940s until England got destroyed by those crazy Hungarians.

[Fosse]

Why not try 50500 or 50050, it's still delusional but might actually give you a chance?

[jc577]

I don’t really get why you’re using a much lower d-line and low line of engagement when you don’t have any defenders? That’s the main issue for me. You’ve essentially got 5 forwards, two of which won’t really track back all that much. You’re much better off defending higher up the pitch with that many forward players, so that the play spends as much time in the opposition’s half as possible.

[llama3]

My 2 cents here:

• Surely the great advantage of playing like this is to be extremely compact - either pressing or counter-attacking. Given that this is with no defensive line it would lead you more to being a pressing side
• Thinking about roles and duties, I'd probably setup with something like this:

W(A) - AM(S) - SS(A) - AP(S) - W(S)

IWB(S) - A(D) - SV(S) - A(D) - IWB(A)

• Basically my thinking is - as you play wide wide players anyway, your wing backs might help you out centrally playing as Inverted Wing Backs. I'd set a pair of very disciplined central, defensively minded players (like Defensive Midfielder or Anchorman). I'd make sure that you have someone pushing out centrally with some forward movement (so either a DM(S) or SV(S)) - this gives you up to 5 players who can link up centrally and play passes into each other (AM, AP, IWB, IWB & SV).
• I'd focus on having a possession and pressing focused system of play. I'd look at experimenting with your defensive line and mentality to make sure you set up a defensive line high up in your own half.

[Jean0987654321]

What...the... 🧐

[scousevasey]

On 17/02/2020 at 15:20, sporadicsmiles said:

I'm not overly surprised about this to be honest. I was going to point out that any striker with even a little bit of pace would feast on you. That 5-5 game must have been damned entertaining though.

 

The 5-5 was good for the neutral.  I think the lack of quality, with players playing in positions/roles that are unfamiliar provides some of the troubles

 

all part of the fun though

On 17/02/2020 at 15:32, crusadertsar said:

Are you trying to recreate the Chapman's WM formation or something? Hate to break it to you but it hasn't worked in over 50 years because of some major changes in football rules, the offside rule being the least of them. It was glorious for a while there in 1930s and 1940s until England got destroyed by those crazy Hungarians.

The WM wasn’t in my thoughts, it was more thinking what would the most extreme version of a strikerless formation be, as well as a touch of the Pep obsession with midfielders

From the few games I have played, one tempting option is to drop two of the DMs back to be DC-Libero, with the remaining DM as Half Back to provide cover, which starts to look more WM in style, and if I was just experimenting with odd attacking formations I would do (a later trial may attempt this as a form of inverted foosball formation)

On 17/02/2020 at 16:31, Fosse said:

Why not try 50500 or 50050, it's still delusional but might actually give you a chance?

I know the whole thing is delusional, but I want to see what is available as a possibility.  It is tempting to take over a national team with a second manager and to trial it with an age group team, so that I can put players who are better suited to the positions/roles in the formation to see what happens

23 hours ago, jc577 said:

I don’t really get why you’re using a much lower d-line and low line of engagement when you don’t have any defenders? That’s the main issue for me. You’ve essentially got 5 forwards, two of which won’t really track back all that much. You’re much better off defending higher up the pitch with that many forward players, so that the play spends as much time in the opposition’s half as possible.

To be honest, I have no idea, I am just looking to have some fun while experimenting with formations (I have lost impetus with my long term save).

I will take on the higher line and see what happens, although from watching the games, if we lose the ball from having possession everyone is in the opposition half anyway, so the defensive line isn’t a huge issue.  It does mean I should probably press the opposition instead of dropping off, and keep a higher line to force the play

20 hours ago, llama3 said:

My 2 cents here:

• Surely the great advantage of playing like this is to be extremely compact - either pressing or counter-attacking. Given that this is with no defensive line it would lead you more to being a pressing side
• Thinking about roles and duties, I'd probably setup with something like this:

W(A) - AM(S) - SS(A) - AP(S) - W(S)

IWB(S) - A(D) - SV(S) - A(D) - IWB(A)

• Basically my thinking is - as you play wide wide players anyway, your wing backs might help you out centrally playing as Inverted Wing Backs. I'd set a pair of very disciplined central, defensively minded players (like Defensive Midfielder or Anchorman). I'd make sure that you have someone pushing out centrally with some forward movement (so either a DM(S) or SV(S)) - this gives you up to 5 players who can link up centrally and play passes into each other (AM, AP, IWB, IWB & SV).
• I'd focus on having a possession and pressing focused system of play. I'd look at experimenting with your defensive line and mentality to make sure you set up a defensive line high up in your own half.

I get the idea with the Winger and Wing Back combinations, but the original aim with Inside Forwards was to get players in the box to join the AMC-SS. Maybe one pairing on each side would work to improve at both ends

I have no experience with the SV but the role description didn’t seem to match my first aims (obviously the combinations of roles takes on more importance in a formation like this as there is very little room for error). I may make a v2 that includes this role to see what developments take place

15 hours ago, Jean0987654321 said:

What...the... 🧐

Imagine rocking up to the ground and seeing this sort of formation from the team sheet (or on Match of the Day). Definitely one of the neutrals

The aim is not to be sensible, but to test the possibilities of the tactical screen

[llama3]

2 hours ago, scousevasey said:

I get the idea with the Winger and Wing Back combinations, but the original aim with Inside Forwards was to get players in the box to join the AMC-SS. Maybe one pairing on each side would work to improve at both ends

I have no experience with the SV but the role description didn’t seem to match my first aims (obviously the combinations of roles takes on more importance in a formation like this as there is very little room for error). I may make a v2 that includes this role to see what developments take place

Basically the thing with width is that someone needs to offer you width from somewhere - if you have the wide attackers going centrally and the wing backs going centrally or staying back you're going to lack that. This formation has the default strength of natural width and a solid centre - so there are things about this that can/should make this work. Basically if it is a Wing Back or wide attacker, make sure someone offers width in the final third.

As for the Segundo Volante, my thought is to make sure someone gets forward out of the deepest line to support transition and the attacking phase. I wondered if a Regista would lack people doing enough running around him and expose him too much. Perhaps a DM(s) would get forward but show enough positioning discipline.

I like what you're doing, thinking outside of the box somewhat!

[scousevasey]

11 hours ago, llama3 said:

Basically the thing with width is that someone needs to offer you width from somewhere - if you have the wide attackers going centrally and the wing backs going centrally or staying back you're going to lack that. This formation has the default strength of natural width and a solid centre - so there are things about this that can/should make this work. Basically if it is a Wing Back or wide attacker, make sure someone offers width in the final third.

As for the Segundo Volante, my thought is to make sure someone gets forward out of the deepest line to support transition and the attacking phase. I wondered if a Regista would lack people doing enough running around him and expose him too much. Perhaps a DM(s) would get forward but show enough positioning discipline.

I like what you're doing, thinking outside of the box somewhat!

Having had a play around with the formation to make v2, and taking over Germany U21s to give the formation a chance as it adds in players who are comfortable in roles, I have split the wide role pairings, and added a SV (although the middle DM cannot be one, so I may be slightly wonky now

Left hand side is WB and IF pairing, with the right going IWB and W

The SV is on the opposite side to the SV to try and balance the space a little more

 

And for both v1 and v2 I have moved the instructions to be more positive

 

 

Currently in December in game so the German U21s will be sat around until March to get a game which will be the first real test of the formation

[BrickCommo23]

Man, I really hope this works.

[Hazpro]

Almost can't stop myself wanting to give it a go just for a giggle.

[scousevasey]

2 hours ago, Hazpro said:

Almost can't stop myself wanting to give it a go just for a giggle.

If you have a go, and have any success do let me know.

 

v2 is having more of a positive effect in terms of attacking, but we are still leaking goals. I am looking forward to seeing how a team of players who fit the positions work out

[scousevasey]

Finally made it round to the international break, to get a run out with the U21s and some players who are suited to the roles given

Much better in the attacking roles, but still some issues in the back line

Two fixtures to be played - France, who are a decent team, and Liechtenstein, who are of a lower quality.

 

Two goals conceded on the counter attack, with the penalty being from one of numerous chances created as our AMR went past the DL in the box.

Controlled the game in terms of possession, and shots, with the CCCs for France coming on the counter attack.  Surprised that we drew more fouls than we committed, but in some highlights we had 7-8 players either in the box, or just outside it as the front 5 were joined by the DMs to push up.  Lots for France to deal with

The heat map shows how France's 4-4-2 was pushed back, and we were able to funnel most of their possession to the wide areas.  Our GK was very busy moving up to play the ball as it was looked to be retained.

 

Liechtenstein were outclassed with the 17 fouls coming regularly through the game leading to their DL being sent off.  Interesting to note that the AMR vs DL was a strong point against France too, so is clearly part of the formation that is working well

A shame to concede a goal, but again it was a counter attack with everyone pushed up, which is something the formation has to live with really

At times the possession was up at 80+%, and the heat map represents that with the domination evident.

With the control of possession, both lines push up to the attacking half, giving a very dominant look to the average positions.

 

I know that if I wanted a functional formation, I could drop two of the DMs back to DCs, which would cover the counter attacks that are the downfall so far.  The next stage of the development is to see how this goes against better teams

Switzerland and Bulgaria will be tough games after their equal performance in the qualifying group so far.  This would provide a good testing ground in terms of playing a coherent side, and hopefully the Malta and Kazakhstan games are more like the Liechtenstein game.

 

Not sure when I will get time to play through to October (currently in March), although if I get fired from Newington time will progress much more quickly

[Robson 07]

On 19/02/2020 at 07:37, scousevasey said:

If you want to defend that high consider using the offside trap.  (it is all a bit bonkers obviously )

[scousevasey]

5 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

If you want to defend that high consider using the offside trap.  (it is all a bit bonkers obviously )

The problem is that when we have controlled possession, my deepest players are in line with the graphic, so a striker can be 10 yards clear and still onside

 

 

[Robson 07]

2 hours ago, scousevasey said:

The problem is that when we have controlled possession, my deepest players are in line with the graphic, so a striker can be 10 yards clear and still onside

So how do you intend to get around that problem noting all the CCCs you gave up in those last two U21 games?

[scousevasey]

9 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

So how do you intend to get around that problem noting all the CCCs you gave up in those last two U21 games?

That is part of the fun/experiment

 

With the club side in the save I have relented, due to the players being so poor, and dropped two of the DMs back to DC, which produced a 3-3 and a 3-2 in the first two games of trial

But the U21s have the benefit of better quality players, and players who are comfortable at WB/DM which means there is more scope for playing around. France are currently ranked #1 in the world with Germany #7,and while the U21s are not a perfect parallel the fact the French only got a 2-1 win is a bonus. I have lined up a range of games for the next batch of international breaks with the aim of tweaking and experimenting further.

The aim is not to have a perfect formation to control games and produce an easy win. Instead it is to see if a crazy idea can be made somewhat functional.  The CCCs against will always happen as the high line sees players racing through, and going 1v1 with the GK. But in some of them a player was getting back and starting to put pressure on the attacker, or the shot was taken from the edge of the box to avoid pressure which limits their effectiveness.

[Robson 07]

On 24/02/2020 at 06:39, scousevasey said:

The problem is that when we have controlled possession, my deepest players are in line with the graphic, so a striker can be 10 yards clear and still onside

 

14 hours ago, scousevasey said:

The aim is not to have a perfect formation to control games and produce an easy win. Instead it is to see if a crazy idea can be made somewhat functional.

I think the fact that the opposition can have players goalside of your deepest defenders and yet onside cause they are still in their own half tells you it is dysfunctional.

I'll leave you to it but wish you well in your endeavours.

[scousevasey]

7 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

 

I think the fact that the opposition can have players goalside of your deepest defenders and yet onside cause they are still in their own half tells you it is dysfunctional.

I don't doubt this, but with a deeper defensive line, when we had controlled possession our players still pushed past the halfway line (as they are DMs who would naturally do this, and WBs).

The idea is to see what is possible, and a usable formation is probably not high on the list of possibilities, but for a dominant team the question is more about what benefits can be found.

[scousevasey]

The next U21 game (albeit against lowly Andorra) saw the following

 

More shots on target than % possession for Andorra, with a ridiculous 20 corners.  The final score was 10-0, 6-0 at half time and with the red card coming at the same score

 

Total shots, and Key passes show how dominant the 05050 can be

As we scored the 8th goal , all of our outfielders are in the image, and within the attacking third, with the remaining Andorran striker looking isolated up front

Our 7th goal about to be scored with ball being played into the box, and the closest player to the Andorran striker is probably our GK

I don't think there is going to be a way to make it suitable to use in every game, but as an overwhelming favourite, with a decent GK, and pace at DM there is something to build from

[ManUtd1]

This is delightfully bonkers!

[ScoreMore (Mico)]

First off, let me say that I like how you are trying something like this.  Would asking some of your DMs to mark opposing strikers tightly help to avoid having their players onside despite being behind all your outfield players? I had tried something similar in FM16 I think (for a couple of games) and it sort of worked.

[scousevasey]

On 27/02/2020 at 19:15, ScoreMore (Mico) said:

First off, let me say that I like how you are trying something like this.  Would asking some of your DMs to mark opposing strikers tightly help to avoid having their players onside despite being behind all your outfield players? I had tried something similar in FM16 I think (for a couple of games) and it sort of worked.

I have set in the individual instructions for the DM(C) to mark a STC, the DMRC to mark a STCL and the DMLC to mark a STCR, but the issue that comes is that when we have the ball, they are not overly worried about marking the striker as they want to be open for a pass. 

[ScoreMore (Mico)]

that´s tough! shooting in the dark here then, but perhaps "hold position" or learning a stay back at all times trait?

[scousevasey]

The tweaked version of this (with actual defenders), that I have named Vindaloo after the Fat Les song (We're going to score one more than you), has had a few games at the end of the first season as a test with a demoralised squad, then after a busy preseason and an overhaul of players it faced a first league run out

  

Facing off against a team predicted higher in the league, it was a fairly even game which is a novelty for this tactical journey

The heat map shows a slightly different picture with the concentration of possession in the AMC hole of the pitch

And it resulted in a win.  From the friendly games that mixed in some of the better teams we could encourage, as well as teams who are worse than Newington Youth to try and provide a test and a boost to confidence, it seems that the tactic will be boom or bust

 

 

The German U21s will still play with the 0-5-0-5-0 formation with further updates for those interested

Edited March 7, 2020 by scousevasey
wrong link

[tiago_wakabayashi]

Em 25/02/2020 em 17:24, scousevasey disse:

 

 

The problem to make DMs like "defenders is that

I tried recently to do that. It worked well because the team is good, and was looking for a defenders with more attacking participation, then I became the DM line into CB line. But what used to disturb me is what is on the image. The DMs didn't understand that would have to balance between go further into area and stay behind when there is some rival with space. 

 

[Rashidi]

This reminds me of a recent experiment I ran on twitch in my tactics making series. I created a defender less tactic to show what could happen in transitions. Needless to say it was a lot of fun to watch. You can never use the offside trap though.

[Jean0987654321]

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

This reminds me of a recent experiment I ran on twitch in my tactics making series. I created a defender less tactic to show what could happen in transitions. Needless to say it was a lot of fun to watch. You can never use the offside trap though.

You got a lot of tactics up your sleeve

 

I tried playing with one CB + 2 FBs and I got crushed defensively as expected.

 

[scousevasey]

On 09/03/2020 at 05:50, Rashidi said:

This reminds me of a recent experiment I ran on twitch in my tactics making series. I created a defender less tactic to show what could happen in transitions. Needless to say it was a lot of fun to watch. You can never use the offside trap though.

Never managed to work out Twitch, or find the time for it.  What was the base formation, and how did it work out?