Jump to content

Dealing with 3-5-2/3-6-1s with my own


Recommended Posts

Hey all.

I am currently in a decent position with tactics that deal with most of what my opponents throw at me but the best sides in my division tend to play 3-6-1s that just dominate both my more aggressive and more passive tactics. I seem to lose match-ups so want to develop my own utilising my good players. 

I have two questions.

1. Are the roles selected here gonna work?

2. What style of football should I look to play? Long ball and winning headers won't serve me well as we have crap heading.

The roles.

 

                      CB, CB, CB

CW (A)       REG (S)         SV (A)     CW (S)

                  

                      SS (A)       AM (S)

 

                             PF (A)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Wavelberry said:

Are the roles selected here gonna work?

My main concern would be the lack of defensive solidity, simply because you use both attack-minded and roaming roles on both flanks without any holding role in the midfield. This risk might be somewhat offset by the bottom-heavy nature of the system, but the question remains if that's going to suffice. 

Up front, I would only reconsider the lone striker's role (not duty), primarily in terms of the partnership with the SS. In that respect, I would prefer a more creative and generally mobile role, e.g. CF, TQ or DLF (if the first 2 are too demanding for your striker). 

1 hour ago, Wavelberry said:

What style of football should I look to play? Long ball and winning headers won't serve me well as we have crap heading

Definitely more direct and oriented toward faster transitions, but not necessarily a pure long-ball (hoofball) style. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

My main concern would be the lack of defensive solidity, simply because you use both attack-minded and roaming roles on both flanks without any holding role in the midfield. This risk might be somewhat offset by the bottom-heavy nature of the system, but the question remains if that's going to suffice. 

Up front, I would only reconsider the lone striker's role (not duty), primarily in terms of the partnership with the SS. In that respect, I would prefer a more creative and generally mobile role, e.g. CF, TQ or DLF (if the first 2 are too demanding for your striker). 

Definitely more direct and oriented toward faster transitions, but not necessarily a pure long-ball (hoofball) style. 

Yeah this chimes with my thinking and I hadn't thought about getting someone more roamy up front so that's an interesting idea. The flanks will be key so will experiment with just wingbacks maybe. It's pre-season so have time to mint this before the new one starts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...