Roles for a 433 narrow

[B3nnet7]

Would anyone be able to give me their opinions and ideas on the best roles to use with a 4-3-3 narrow formation with 3 forwards and no wingers. 

This is what I feel would work best -

     AFa DLFs AFa

  MEZs CMd MEZa

WBs CDd BPDd WBs

              SKd

The only issue I have with this one is that the right side can be a bit exposed. But I like it other than that and feel like it covered pretty much all areas of the pitch. 

I'm pretty set with PI and TI's so it's just getting some advice on roles really and opinions on it. 

Thanks 

 

[Experienced Defender]

51 minutes ago, B3nnet7 said:

Would anyone be able to give me their opinions and ideas on the best roles to use with a 4-3-3 narrow formation with 3 forwards and no wingers

It always depends on what you want to achieve with the tactic, including the choice of a particular formation. Anyway, here is an example of how it can be set up:

CFat   DLFsu   AF

BWMsu  CMde CAR

WBsu  CDde  BPDde  WBsu

Another possible setup:

DLFsu   PO   CFat

DLPsu   CMde  CAR

WBat   CDde  BPDde  WBsu

51 minutes ago, B3nnet7 said:

The only issue I have with this one is that the right side can be a bit exposed

It's not "a bit exposed". It's completely exposed. 

 

51 minutes ago, B3nnet7 said:

I'm pretty set with PI and TI's so it's just getting some advice on roles really and opinions on it

You need to keep in mind that instructions need to be in harmony with roles and duties. Neither works in isolation.

[B3nnet7]

7 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

It always depends on what you want to achieve with the tactic, including the choice of a particular formation. Anyway, here is an example of how it can be set up:

CFat   DLFsu   AF

BWMsu  CMde CAR

WBsu  CDde  BPDde  WBsu

Another possible setup:

DLFsu   PO   CFat

DLPsu   CMde  CAR

WBat   CDde  BPDde  WBsu

It's not "a bit exposed". It's completely exposed. 

 

You need to keep in mind that instructions need to be in harmony with roles and duties. Neither works in isolation.

Thank you for your advice, is there any way of working the tactic with a MEZ in there at all? 

The issue I have is that I have 3 players in midfield who can play multiple roles but their preferred and best role is MEZ plus I really like it as a role so I was hoping to implement that somehow. Thanks 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, B3nnet7 said:

is there any way of working the tactic with a MEZ in there at all?

Yes, but I would not play a mezzala on attack duty in that kind of system. And would not use more than one mezzala. 

In my first example, a mezzala on support may replace the carrilero in MCR position, but that would certainly be a riskier setup. So it ultimately depends on how much risk you are willing to take and how good your players are to absorb that risk.

And if you want to go with mezzala (support) in MCR, you may also consider switching the right back into WB on defend as an option. 

1 hour ago, B3nnet7 said:

The issue I have is that I have 3 players in midfield who can play multiple roles but their preferred and best role is MEZ

Any player can successfully play more than one role, and some can play even 3 or more. A player who has good attributes for a mezzala in most cases can comfortably play as an AP as well. 

But if your midfielders have poor (or insufficiently good) defense-related attributes, than you should better avoid a system such as narrow flat 433. 

[B3nnet7]

59 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Yes, but I would not play a mezzala on attack duty in that kind of system. And would not use more than one mezzala. 

In my first example, a mezzala on support may replace the carrilero in MCR position, but that would certainly be a riskier setup. So it ultimately depends on how much risk you are willing to take and how good your players are to absorb that risk.

And if you want to go with mezzala (support) in MCR, you may also consider switching the right back into WB on defend as an option. 

Any player can successfully play more than one role, and some can play even 3 or more. A player who has good attributes for a mezzala in most cases can comfortably play as an AP as well. 

But if your midfielders have poor (or insufficiently good) defense-related attributes, than you should better avoid a system such as narrow flat 433. 

Excellent that makes sense thank you, tbh it did cross my mind to switch him to a support mezzala instead and would also make sense with a DLP on the other side and a WBa. 

The main reason I am so keen on a mezzala is because I have been playing my MCR as an AP most of the season in a wide 4231 and he has done well, then I played a narrow 433 with him as a mezzala(his best suited pos) and he got 100% pass accuracy and 2 assists and of course MOTM so naturally I am trying to fit that in to my style of play now. Plus I like the thought of 3 strikers. The issue I had was the exposure of my wing backs hence why I asked for advice. But you have gave me some really good ideas so thank you