Can you provide your thoughts into this tactic?

[raktim0699]

One of the most fun things about this game for me, even as a newcomer, is creating tactics and understanding their movement. The thrill of creating different types of patterns using various combinations of roles and duties is so satisfying. It does not matter whether the idea is solely your own, or it is a particular manager's philosophy that you are combining along with your own. Overall, the intent remains the same: to score goals and see your team succeed on the pitch. I always wanted to combine roles and duties in a 4-4-2 narrow formation and developed the following system. I understand football is about movement, time, and space, and before creating any tactics, I always keep that in mind. Even though it is tough to be very precise, I want to gather information from experienced people about my system. Are the players moving well in these systems with designated roles and duties selected for them? Is there anything that can be changed? The reason why I choose specific roles mentioned below

First of all, choosing IWB in a narrow system is very strange, given it is such a unique role. My idea was creating different and unpredictable movements, so to support the run of IWB, I chose a half back to drop between the two center backs and chose a DLP on the same side as IWB. As most likely that IWB will come narrow, so I wanted relatively ample space left on that side, so used HB to act as a third center back and DLP also to drop and remain deep to create space for the IWB to move without they getting each other way all the time. CF on attack duty has to stay wide to accommodate the movement of IWB as well. If, by remaining wide, he creates a gap between the FB and CB, IWB can utilize it. As you can see, the IWB movement becomes very crucial. On the other side, I am using mezzala for creating an aggressive run diagonally to make a hole on the side for our TM and AM to find space. I mean, you can not produce good movement in center midfield without using mezzala. As you can see, it creates various layers of attacks and movement and creates gaps and holes for our players to exploit. But what I am most concerned about is did I managed to allocate appropriate support and attack duties in the right places. Since it is a narrow formation, there will be a vulnerability, but I am not concerned about using it as my primary formation but want to see how it works.

 

[RTHerringbone]

I worry about the team shape when your attacks break down in the final third. How are the players positioned when that happens? It looks like you could be countered down the flanks fairly easily.

The IWB theory is interesting but I'm not sure its relationship with the CF(A) will really be as relevant as its relationship with the DLP. That's the one thing I'd focus on when your attacks develop as it risks being pretty congested in attacking transitions.

[raktim0699]

21 minutes ago, RTHerringbone said:

I worry about the team shape when your attacks break down in the final third. How are the players positioned when that happens? It looks like you could be countered down the flanks fairly easily.

The IWB theory is interesting but I'm not sure its relationship with the CF(A) will really be as relevant as its relationship with the DLP. That's the one thing I'd focus on when your attacks develop as it risks being pretty congested in attacking transitions.

Narrow shape always will have some vulnerability down the flanks because of the lack of a winger. Suppose we can keep the ball well because of our player's technical ability and score goals from creating good movement through areas where the opposition is less expecting and letting opponents play the game how we want. In that case, it is not so much of a problem. Since this is a narrow formation, then the middle will be crowded by our players, so there will be an overload, making it easier to keep possession. If we have the ball, then opponents can not take advantage of our weakness, and also, if we use it well enough, it becomes an advantage.

[raktim0699]

I am thinking of using CF on support duty while changing the role of AM to SS (A). Other combinations and ideas that I have on my mind are using an AF since he is aggressive and always runs wide; especially in this formation, there will be less crowd in the center. The plan is to use the run of IWB correctly as not to invade other people's spaces.

[RTHerringbone]

I know that narrow formations are weak down the flanks, I'm just concerned that you're exacerbating that with your wide setup AND I think you're leaving gaps centrally behind midfield when your attacks advance. A lot depends on how the HB positions himself and how far upfield Marin goes (which may not be too far on a Balanced Mentality). You just need to be cautious of the balance and space. It's all well and good looking for possession but it needs to be the right possession and it needs to be effective, rather than just congestion and anaemic passing.

[raktim0699]

3 minutes ago, RTHerringbone said:

I know that narrow formations are weak down the flanks, I'm just concerned that you're exacerbating that with your wide setup AND I think you're leaving gaps centrally behind midfield when your attacks advance. A lot depends on how the HB positions himself and how far upfield Marin goes (which may not be too far on a Balanced Mentality). You just need to be cautious of the balance and space. It's all well and good looking for possession but it needs to be the right possession and it needs to be effective, rather than just congestion and anaemic passing.

I am thinking of using CF on support duty while changing the role of AM to SS (A). Other combinations and ideas that I have on my mind are using an AF since he is aggressive and always runs wide; especially in this formation, there will be less crowd in the center. The plan is to use the run of IWB correctly as not to invade other people's spaces. You could say during the attacking transition, AF will run wide down the flanks as I have seen many times while the IWB comes narrow with DLP spraying passes from deep. I am concerned about the team instructions and how I can manipulate it to suit the selected roles and duties. Since it is a narrow formation going wide for attacking width will help IWB to come to the middle with ample space in front of him and complement the AF role. Our AM will also have areas to roam and could use our passing range of DLP.

[raktim0699]

How does TM play out in all of this, and what he accomplishes? When choosing this role, I had in mind that since it is a two forward formation with an AM behind them, TM can hold on to the ball or flick it to surrounding players around him. I can ask For AM to roam from opposition to act as an auxiliary player.

[Fox-7-]

If you want to overload the middle areas to keep possession it's supposed that your opponent will sit narrow too to protect the goal,so your threat has to come from wide areas,where must to be a lot of space to exploit,but this means that you have to have players that goes in these spaces.

If you want to create space for your IWB and his deep runs in the opponent's half I'd put on his CM side a player who runs away wide,so I'd go for a very hardworking Carrillero (that could also do the defensive job when ball is eventually lost and your IWB is too far to come back in time on the flank).And to cover IWB's adventures and your middle half that goes empty with CAR plus MEZ in the DM slot I'd choose for a simple DM(d) (or a DLP(d) to have an alternative for possession at the BPDs) and for the left CB a stopper duty to be a little more aggressive on that side that has the most defensive inbalance.I'd also change the right WB into a FB(s) 

in the front I'd try a F9/SS pair with TM for the other striker,so your IWB has all the central area for himself with a late help of the dropping F9.

 

Edited November 14, 2020 by Fox-7-