4123 with RMD and creativity

[mikcheck]

Hi there.

I want to explore the RMD and the creativity of my best front players. I would like yo know your opinion on this two variations I have created.

 

  

 

@Rashidi when you talked about the LOE, do you think it's fine like this? Standard LOE coupled with high defensive line

 

Thanks

 

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by mikcheck

[XuluBak]

From what I've seen using the RMD role in FM20, I think you're missing out on a lot of the role's potential by not having them as more of a target for back post crosses from your AMR/RB. Granted, that's based on my experience, with an RMD that was a monster in the air, but I question whether the role would be justifiably without all those goals. 

I'm curious how the role would work with a CF. I paired my RMD with a F9 a majority of the time and DLF(s) the rest. 

 

[summatsupeer]

Really you need to try it/them and see what happens with the players your use in it.  Its important that you have the right kind of players who want to create for RMD, they need to be able to see his movement and actually give him the ball.  If they're more individualistic they might not make use of him, for example if the IW beats opponents with his running, is he just going to keep going and have a shot or does he have the vision+passing/crossing (plus other mental's ofc) to then feed the RMD.

Theoretically either of your tactics could work but I prefer the MCR as a support duty and the DR as attack duty with back post crosses.  This is assuming the DR has good supply and the RMD can beat the opponents DL/DCL to convert those chances.  I'd go with generic CM-Su + FB-At initially then go more specialized if needed.  If the DR isn't good at crossing then i'd probably go WB-Su so he still gives width but more likely to recycle possession inside and let them create or switch play.

Do you need to give them more freedom? RMD, CF and BBM already have more roaming.

[mikcheck]

6 horas atrás, XuluBak disse:

From what I've seen using the RMD role in FM20, I think you're missing out on a lot of the role's potential by not having them as more of a target for back post crosses from your AMR/RB. Granted, that's based on my experience, with an RMD that was a monster in the air, but I question whether the role would be justifiably without all those goals. 

I'm curious how the role would work with a CF. I paired my RMD with a F9 a majority of the time and DLF(s) the rest. 

 

Thanks.  I think that the 2nd version of this tactic explores that by having an attacking RB.

1 hora atrás, summatsupeer disse:

Really you need to try it/them and see what happens with the players your use in it.  Its important that you have the right kind of players who want to create for RMD, they need to be able to see his movement and actually give him the ball.  If they're more individualistic they might not make use of him, for example if the IW beats opponents with his running, is he just going to keep going and have a shot or does he have the vision+passing/crossing (plus other mental's ofc) to then feed the RMD.

Theoretically either of your tactics could work but I prefer the MCR as a support duty and the DR as attack duty with back post crosses.  This is assuming the DR has good supply and the RMD can beat the opponents DL/DCL to convert those chances.  I'd go with generic CM-Su + FB-At initially then go more specialized if needed.  If the DR isn't good at crossing then i'd probably go WB-Su so he still gives width but more likely to recycle possession inside and let them create or switch play.

Do you need to give them more freedom? RMD, CF and BBM already have more roaming.

Thanks.

Between those two formations, the players I have are better suited for the first one.  Yes, both my IW and CF are very capable players in that matter, they're very creative, as well as my RB, as you can see below.

                                                                 IW                                                                                                                                   CF                                                                                                                                     CWB/WB

       

And I'm trying to explore this guy, mainly for his physical attributes :

                                                           RMD

But that trait though, I'm trying to make  him unlearn that Likes Ball Played Into Feet thing. I think it's bad for the role and I may have to sell it if he doesn't unlearn it.

The reason I decided for the CAR role is because, in that version of the tactic, I want my IW to sit narrower (as well as take more risks and roam), so the CAR would move wide. I think it makes sense.

Maybe I don't need to be more expressive, I guess it's just me trying to get the best out of my team, but that may not be totally necessary.

 

Edited June 28, 2020 by mikcheck

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, mikcheck said:

But that trait though, I'm trying to make  him unlearn that Likes Ball Played Into Feet thing. I think it's bad for the role and I may have to sell it if he doesn't unlearn it.

Yeah I think that effectively makes the player have Hold Position?  Does the tactic have a warning triangle next to the Get Forward instruction?  Either way its probably not what you want from a RMD.

1 hour ago, mikcheck said:

The reason I decided for the CAR role is because, in that version of the tactic, I want my IW to sit narrower (as well as take more risks and roam), so the CAR would move wide. I think it makes sense.

Not sure why the MCR has to move wider when you have an Attack duty DR?

1 hour ago, mikcheck said:

Maybe I don't need to be more expressive, I guess it's just me trying to get the best out of my team, but that may not be totally necessary.

Well "get the best" isn't really a reason so can't say if it will do what you expect.  Considering you've also added roaming to your AMR really your only giving them more creative freedom to them. It can be good to add variety by giving the players more freedom rather than following the instructions you've set so often, but this also means your less likely to see the patterns you've created.  I like smart team players for this whom you can trust to make good choices and cover each other, plus since they have the freedom to do more things I prefer them to be more all round players than specialists.  Your CF and IW certainly tick the boxes (a bit more teamwork would of been nice) though the RMD is more a specialist.  Will the CM pair also use the freedom well?  Or will they end up in situations / trying things they aren't good at rather than sticking to your plan a bit more often?

[Experienced Defender]

Insufficient attacking penetration seems to be the biggest issue in both your tactics IMHO. 

[mikcheck]

19 horas atrás, Experienced Defender disse:

Insufficient attacking penetration seems to be the biggest issue in both your tactics IMHO. 

I don't want my striker to be on attack duty, not only because he is creative, but also because I don't want him to be in the RMD's way. I want my striker to be more of a creator. And I also want to keep my IW.

So I guess the only option would be someone from the midfield? Being one of the best teams, perhaps I should be more attacking minded.

PI's :

RIght WB - Stay wide

IW - Take more risks, close down more

RMD - Close down more

CF - Close down more

 

 

Edited June 29, 2020 by mikcheck

[Experienced Defender]

1 minute ago, mikcheck said:

don't want my striker to be on attack duty, not only because he is creative, but also because I don't want him to be in the RMD's way

I was not referring to your striker's duty when I mentioned the lack of penetration. My comment was more about deep attacking runners who should make opposition defenses more occupied and thus (indirectly) help the RMD be more effective in what he is supposed to do (instead of being left on his own too much). 

 

7 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

This setup definitely looks better than the previous one(s), at least in terms of roles and duties 

[mikcheck]

2 horas atrás, Experienced Defender disse:

This setup definitely looks better than the previous one(s), at least in terms of roles and duties 

Can a IWB(s) also work with the Mez? Even with a IW ahead? Maybe with a IWB, a winger may be a better option.

Edited June 29, 2020 by mikcheck

[Experienced Defender]

45 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

Can a IWB(s) also work with the Mez? Even with a IW ahead? Maybe with a IWB, a winger may be a better option

Both combos with the IWB can work, depending on what you want and what type of players you have. But keep in mind that IWB is more demanding as a role than WB.

[wixxi]

3 hours ago, mikcheck said:

Can a IWB(s) also work with the Mez? Even with a IW ahead? Maybe with a IWB, a winger may be a better option.

IWB with a Mezzala and Winger should work just fine as a trio in my opinion. If you think about the spaces being occupied, it is similar to having a more conservative/holding midfielder with an overlapping fullback and inverted winger/inside forward tucking inside. It's just the personnel occupying these spaces that is different, which of course is dependent on your team.

Having a look at your players on the right though I would be more inclined to playing a 'traditional' (in the modern sense of course ) inverted winger + wingback. This is due to your right winger's low crossing + left footedness + incredible ability to drive at defences and pick a pass (20 vision!), combined with your right back's blistering pace + work rate = he'll have no issues getting up and down the flank all game.

Honestly pairing this with a forward that drops deeper i.e. F9/DLF and the raumdeuter on the left I could imagine quite a few goals being supplied to the left side of the pitch. Bonus points if you can play a playmaker in that RCM position with 'Switches ball to other flank'.

Also as a side note I would highly recommend having the LCM as someone that runs from deep or atleast sits high up e.g. a Mezzala-A or CM-A since he can create a numerical advantage on the weak side once you've overloaded the right. If you've watched City play frequently you'll notice that they have always have their 'free 8' pin the 2 weak side defenders by sitting in the channel allowing the winger to exploit the space behind as well as providing a passing option to him.

5 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

I was not referring to your striker's duty when I mentioned the lack of penetration. My comment was more about deep attacking runners who should make opposition defenses more occupied and thus (indirectly) help the RMD be more effective in what he is supposed to do (instead of being left on his own too much).

Just seen this post, this is exactly what I meant about the LCM pinning the weak side defenders by pushing up

Edited June 29, 2020 by wixxi

[mikcheck]

I wonder if it isn't too risky having a player with Gets Forward Whenever Possible trait as a WB(s) on the same side as the Mezzala (A)? Wouldn't be better a FB(S) instead?

[mikcheck]

@Experienced Defender regarding the question I've posted about the prevent short gk distribution:

 My idea  have some space behind the opposition backline to explore my RMD, but at the same time I dont want the opposition defence to have too much time on the ball.

Is prevent short gk the same as having the split block in the front 3? Maybe if I remove that and use the split block, the effect would is similar?

Edited July 18, 2020 by mikcheck

[Experienced Defender]

48 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

My idea  have some space behind the opposition backline to explore my RMD, but at the same time I dont want the opposition defence to have too much time on the ball.

Is prevent short gk the same as having the split block in the front 3?

It's not the same, because of 2 basic reasons:

1. In a split block, you decide how many players and which particular ones will be involved in it and from where they will start pressing

2. Prevent short GKD only asks your more advanced players to try to prevent the keeper from building from the back, but if they fail to prevent that, then the regular defensive instructions apply afterwards (i.e. those you already selected)

[mikcheck]

33 minutos atrás, Experienced Defender disse:

It's not the same, because of 2 basic reasons:

1. In a split block, you decide how many players and which particular ones will be involved in it and from where they will start pressing

2. Prevent short GKD only asks your more advanced players to try to prevent the keeper from building from the back, but if they fail to prevent that, then the regular defensive instructions apply afterwards (i.e. those you already selected)

Thanks. In your opinion, based in what I desire, what would you use? Keep the standard LOE with split block on the front 3 and perhaps on the Mez too and remove the prevent short gk distribution? Or remove the split block and use the prevent short distribution?

Edited July 18, 2020 by mikcheck

[Experienced Defender]

I personally prefer a split block over preventing short GKD, but that does not mean that you have to do the same. Your style of play and tactical approach can be different from mine, so you should choose what you feel the most comfortable with