Jump to content

My 4231 is working fantastic ... but


Recommended Posts

My Dortmund tactic is working very well. It is inspired by @RashidiHansi Flick tactic.
In the Bundesliga I started amazing but in CL I got completely destroyed. So maybe some small changes would help?

1) Would it make sense to change my CMr to a box-to-box instead?
2) Set my WBr to support instead of Att ?
3) I always struggle to create anything against teams who play a 3 backline. Any advise on that besides playing wider of course?

Borussia Dortmund_ Overview.png

Bundesliga_ Stages.png

European Champions Cup_ Stages.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

1) Would it make sense to change my CMr to a box-to-box instead?

No, this would make you even less defensively solid. 

Quote

2) Set my WBr to support instead of Att ?

Ideally your WB-Atk should be on the same side as the CM-De so you have some cover for him bombing forward.

Further, I don't know the stats of your players but it doesn't strike me as a good idea to operate with a much higher line of defense + offside trap in Europe unless they have world class mentals and speed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

CM support on the left and CM defend on the right would be a lot more sensible than your current combination. So you basically just need to swap their sides.

Further, I don't see any reason for the use of tight marking in a tactic like yours. Neither your style of play nor the 4231 as a formation suit tight marking.  

Dropping the LOE just a notch would both improve your defensive compactness and create more space for your forwards to potentially take advantage of. 

Instructions such as focus play and attacking width should be used on a situational basis, because different types of opposition will require different approaches to your attacking play. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

CM support on the left and CM defend on the right would be a lot more sensible than your current combination. So you basically just need to swap their sides.

Further, I don't see any reason for the use of tight marking in a tactic like yours. Neither your style of play nor the 4231 as a formation suit tight marking.  

Dropping the LOE just a notch would both improve your defensive compactness and create more space for your forwards to potentially take advantage of. 

Instructions such as focus play and attacking width should be used on a situational basis, because different types of opposition will require different approaches to your attacking play. 

Yeah he basically copied @RashidiBayern tactic from this thread.

Except some of the roles are not the same. And the defensive line has been pushed way too high. Don't know why exactly. The original tactic was created for a specific team to replicate a specific type of play. Overloading both flanks to create more space for the Trequartista in the middle, hence the focus to wings instructions. But Rashidi never meant that to be plug-and-play tactic. Or at least I don't think so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

Yeah he basically copied @RashidiBayern tactic from this thread.

Except some of the roles are not the same. And the defensive line has been pushed way too high. Don't know why exactly. The original tactic was created for a specific team to replicate a specific type of play. Overloading both flanks to create more space for the Trequartista in the middle, hence the focus to wings instructions. But Rashidi never meant that to be plug-and-play tactic. Or at least I don't think so. 

I actually won Serie A and CL with Milan, with this tactic. But there’s definitely some things that can be adjusted. 

10 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

CM support on the left and CM defend on the right would be a lot more sensible than your current combination. So you basically just need to swap their sides.

Further, I don't see any reason for the use of tight marking in a tactic like yours. Neither your style of play nor the 4231 as a formation suit tight marking.  

Dropping the LOE just a notch would both improve your defensive compactness and create more space for your forwards to potentially take advantage of. 

Instructions such as focus play and attacking width should be used on a situational basis, because different types of opposition will require different approaches to your attacking play. 

So you would set LOE to high, but keep defensive line much higher? 
The focus play and narrow width is to create overloads and a lot of movement. 
 

But can you explain why you would not use tighter marking? What about pressing intensity, offside trap and prevent goalkeeper distribution.?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

So you would set LOE to high, but keep defensive line much higher? 

I would definitely have the D-line one notch higher than LOE in a system like 4231 - so either much higher DL/higher LOE or higher DL/standard LOE. I personally prefer the latter, but an "ideal" combination ultimately depends on your players and their capabilities as well as the type of opposition and their style of play. It's not a plug'n'play, so you need to watch what happens and adjust/tweak accordingly. 

 

2 hours ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

But can you explain why you would not use tighter marking?

Because tight marking makes sense in compact low-block systems, especially when played within a bottom-heavy formation, because such systems rely on drawing the opposition into your compact defensive shell and then defending aggressively (the same applies to get stuck in). Your tactic is obviously completely different. 

 

2 hours ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

What about pressing intensity, offside trap and prevent goalkeeper distribution.?

All these instructions can vary from tactic to tactic and from team to team. Prevent GKD could make sense in your tactic because you use a top-heavy formation (4231). But if you opt to use prevent GKD, then probably there is no need for more aggressive pressing or other aggressive defensive instructions. Because if you apply them all at once, you'll basically create a defensive overkill that can easily backfire (just like any kind of overkill). 

My favorite combination when managing strong teams is a compact mid block (higher DL / standard LOE) coupled with a split block, because it has generally worked best for me. But it does not mean that different combinations are bad or cannot work. Find the one that optimally suits your players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I would definitely have the D-line one notch higher than LOE in a system like 4231 - so either much higher DL/higher LOE or higher DL/standard LOE. I personally prefer the latter, but an "ideal" combination ultimately depends on your players and their capabilities as well as the type of opposition and their style of play. It's not a plug'n'play, so you need to watch what happens and adjust/tweak accordingly. 

 

Because tight marking makes sense in compact low-block systems, especially when played within a bottom-heavy formation, because such systems rely on drawing the opposition into your compact defensive shell and then defending aggressively (the same applies to get stuck in). Your tactic is obviously completely different. 

 

All these instructions can vary from tactic to tactic and from team to team. Prevent GKD could make sense in your tactic because you use a top-heavy formation (4231). But if you opt to use prevent GKD, then probably there is no need for more aggressive pressing or other aggressive defensive instructions. Because if you apply them all at once, you'll basically create a defensive overkill that can easily backfire (just like any kind of overkill). 

My favorite combination when managing strong teams is a compact mid block (higher DL / standard LOE) coupled with a split block, because it has generally worked best for me. But it does not mean that different combinations are bad or cannot work. Find the one that optimally suits your players.

Thanks. So in my case more pressure PI on my AML,AMR and CF position. And no offside trap ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

So in my case more pressure PI on my AML,AMR and CF position. And no offside trap ?

I did not say that, nor did I mention offside trap at all. I just told you what my preferred settings are, but each team is different, so I cannot know in advance what would be optimal for your team. That's something each of us must find out on their own.

I can only tell if your (or anyone's) tactic is balanced or not and if there are any obvious flaws, contradictions or overkill. But all other things can vary from case to case.

If you want a tactic that will work like plug'n'play, then better download one from someone who is specialized in making such tactics :thup:

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...