Jump to content

Replicating Rashidis Flick tactic to a 433


Recommended Posts

I have been using a slightly adjusted version of Rashidis 4231. An with great succes. I have won everything with both Dortmund and Milan.
So I have been trying to use the same principles in a 433DM. But I really struggle to find the best roles for my three midfielder positions.
Do you have any suggestions for the 3 CM/DM roles ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

I have been using a slightly adjusted version of Rashidis 4231. An with great succes. I have won everything with both Dortmund and Milan.
So I have been trying to use the same principles in a 433DM. But I really struggle to find the best roles for my three midfielder positions.
Do you have any suggestions for the 3 CM/DM roles ?

 

So are you looking to create overloads on the wings like in Rashidi's 4-2-3-1? Except with 4-3-3

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

So are you looking to create overloads on the wings like in Rashidi's 4-2-3-1? Except with 4-3-3

Yes exactly. It worked fantastic in his 4231. But my thought was that maybe by not having a AMC player, this would create more space for the IW/IF positions to shine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

Yes exactly. It worked fantastic in his 4231. But my thought was that maybe by not having a AMC player, this would create more space for the IW/IF positions to shine. 

While this is not meant to be a replica of Rashidi's 4-2-3-1, I'm trying to acht similar outcomes with my "Swiss Knife" system. It's not built around a specific formation but rather switches depending on opposition. So anything from 4-5-1 to 4-3-3. Actually in my latest update (part 5) I show how I create right flank overload with 4-3-3. It's still a work in progress but might give you some ideas for your own tactic.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

While this is not meant to be a replica of Rashidi's 4-2-3-1, I'm trying to acht similar outcomes with my "Swiss Knife" system. It's not built around a specific formation but rather switches depending on opposition. So anything from 4-5-1 to 4-3-3. Actually in my latest update (part 5) I show how I create right flank overload with 4-3-3. It's still a work in progress but might give you some ideas for your own tactic.

 

Thanks. Great reading👍. But I’m really in doubt with my midfield. Can’t figure out if it could work with CM-DMd-MezAtt or maybe RPM-DMd-CM, CM-DLPd-MezAtt 😬

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

Thanks. Great reading👍. But I’m really in doubt with my midfield. Can’t figure out if it could work with CM-DMd-MezAtt or maybe RPM-DMd-CM, CM-DLPd-MezAtt 😬

Well it depends on the other players around your midfielders.  But as you see I show the effectiveness of Cm(s)/cm(d)/cm(a) in my tactic. Lately I have even replaced cm(a) with Mezzala and it works just as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

Well it depends on the other players around your midfielders.  But as you see I show the effectiveness of Cm(s)/cm(d)/cm(a) in my tactic. Lately I have even replaced cm(a) with Mezzala and it works just as well.

So I really don’t need to replace the playmaker (Trequartista) from the 4231 tactic with another playmaker type. ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

So I really don’t need to replace the playmaker (Trequartista) from the 4231 tactic with another playmaker type. ?

No it's not really necessary. What I do is to sometimes play a wide advanced playmaker on the side of my cm(a) (or Mezzala). In the AMR position. Combined with an IWb on that same side, it leads to an overload nicely. And frees up space for my Raumdeuter (or sometime IW(a)) on the opposite flank. But I find that most of the time playmaker is not even necessary as the overload is still created due to the number of support duties on the right flank moving into the same Half-Space and forcing the AI ti shift over to deal with it.

It's really rather simple to create the overloads. What is more tricky is actually having the right players to take advantage of the freed up space.

Edited by crusadertsar
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

No it's not really necessary. What I do is to sometimes play a wide advanced playmaker on the side of my cm(a) (or Mezzala). In the AMR position. Combined with an IWb on that same side, it leads to an overload nicely. And frees up space for my Raumdeuter (or sometime IW(a)) on the opposite flank. But I find that most of the time playmaker is not even necessary as the overload is still created due to the number of support duties on the right flank moving into the same Half-Space and forcing the AI ti shift over to deal with it.

It's really rather simple to create the overloads. What is more tricky is actually having the right players to take advantage of the freed up space.

Thanks 🙏 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@crusadertsar

With the combination of roles/duties on the right side: IW(s)+CM(a)+IWB(s) don't you suffer, in some games, with a lack of width on that side?

Because, when the IW(s) cuts inside you don't have anyone exploring the space he leaves. Even if you change the CM(a) for a MEZ(a).

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

@crusadertsar

With the combination of roles/duties on the right side: IW(s)+CM(a)+IWB(s) don't you suffer, in some games, with a lack of width on that side?

Because, when the IW(s) cuts inside you don't have anyone exploring the space he leaves. Even if you change the CM(a) for a MEZ(a).

Not at all. But here is why. I always instruct my IW(s) to stay wider. And this is by far the most important reason: I play my hardest working player on that side. Sort of my very own Park Ji-sung reborn. 

Ludovic Petit. My favourite newgen in FM21. Also Roam from position gives him more liberty to cover the whole flank and not just drift inside. Look at his stats:

 

 

 

petit.png.296271f8650eb364c4ad3f7c69386d94.png

Edited by crusadertsar
Link to post
Share on other sites

@crusadertsar

I never use the PI to stay wider combine with the roam from position. Because i thought the stay wider instruction could mitigate the effect of the roam from position instruction. Gonna try in my tactic.

I use a very similar tactic, and set of instructions by the way. Except i don't use the higher tempo and the counter instruction.

I also, instead of the CM(d) use a DM(s) on the defensive midfield line. And a WB(s) instead of the IWB(s).

But gonna try the IWB(s) and giving the IW(s) the stay wider instruction. Because in my current tactic sometimes the MEZ(a) with a WB(s) behind him leaves big spaces. Perhaps with the IWB(s) could work better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

@crusadertsar

I never use the PI to stay wider combine with the roam from position. Because i thought the stay wider instruction could mitigate the effect of the roam from position instruction. Gonna try in my tactic.

I use a very similar tactic, and set of instructions by the way. Except i don't use the higher tempo and the counter instruction.

I also, instead of the CM(d) use a DM(s) on the defensive midfield line. And a WB(s) instead of the IWB(s).

But gonna try the IWB(s) and giving the IW(s) the stay wider instruction. Because in my current tactic sometimes the MEZ(a) with a WB(s) behind him leaves big spaces. Perhaps with the IWB(s) could work better.

Since FM20 i always prefer using IWs (with stay wider) instead of traditional wingers when I want both more wide support and to stretch the field. I find that IW has less hardcoded instructions, especially the annoying ones like more crossing, ect. I got tired of seeing my wingers crosses always get blocked. They would cross even when I didn't want them to.

I find for me at least those two added instructions work very well. But again you need the right kind of player. It might not work as well with a less hardworking selfish player. Right now Petit is my all-utility winger/custom role. Covering the whole wing and contributing with both goals and assists. When he is not playing and I am forced to use another player, I can really feel the difference in our performance.

Also forgot to mention, my right IW(s) is right footed.

Edited by crusadertsar
Link to post
Share on other sites

In many ways my approach is similar to @crusadertsar's but just to give a fuller flavor of getting overloads, etc. with a 4-3-3, in my most recent season with Arsenal we setup like this:
----------DLF(s)----------
IF(a)-----------------W(s)
-----DLP(s)-Mez(A)----
----------HB(d)----------
WB(s)-CD(d)-BPD(d)-IWB(s)

Got a lot of overloads on both sides... the DLF(s) would sometimes float to either side, while the Winger, Mez, HB and IWB would all combine on the right and the HB, DLP, and WB would combine on the left (leaving the IF to make runs for the pass, although he'd sometimes also join in the overloading)

Potentially relevant is that I always use 'be more expressive' on so I think that gives me more of the roaming, etc. And my players have a lot of good on-field relationships and high levels of teamwork.

As a more general suggestion - you shouldn't think merely about "how to get the midfield right" since the midfield needs to interact with the wide players to create overloads. So, 'getting the midfield right' is also about getting the flanks right

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

Not at all. But here is why. I always instruct my IW(s) to stay wider. And this is by far the most important reason: I play my hardest working player on that side. Sort of my very own Park Ji-sung reborn. 

Ludovic Petit. My favourite newgen in FM21. Also Roam from position gives him more liberty to cover the whole flank and not just drift inside. Look at his stats:

 

 

 

petit.png.296271f8650eb364c4ad3f7c69386d94.png

Doesn't Roam from position do the opposite?

When I add Roam From Position to my Winger (attack) I find he's much more likely to drift infield without the ball, or make diagonal runs from our to in while expecting a pass.

When I don't use roam from position he just motors up and down the flank in linear fashion... Which actually suits my tactic better as he's the only one who maintains width there 

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ripamon said:

Doesn't Roam from position do the opposite?

When I add Roam From Position to my Winger (attack) I find he's much more likely to drift infield without the ball, or make diagonal runs from our to in while expecting a pass.

When I don't use roam from position he just motors up and down the flank in linear fashion... Which actually suits my tactic better as he's the only one who maintains width there 

It really depends on the roles around the player. Having an aggressive midfielder that pushes forward like a mezzala keeps my winger's roaming confined mostly to the flank. He does cut it late in build up though which is exactly what I want from him. 

Also you have to keep in mind that I am not using a traditional winger role. If I did then I would not use roaming instruction. Roaming is usually used to encourage a player to go into areas where it naturally would not. So for a role that is programmed to cut inside like IW adding roaming makes them run along the flanks more. Especially if they have the same dominant foot as the side they are on (as is the case with my player). 

Edited by crusadertsar
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

It really depends on the roles around the player. Having an aggressive midfielder that pushes forward like a mezzala keeps my winger's roaming confined mostly to the flank. He does cut it late in build up though which is exactly what I want from him. 

Also you have to keep in mind that I am not using a traditional winger role. If I did then I would not use roaming instruction. Roaming is usually used to encourage a player to go into areas where it naturally would not. So for a role that is programmed to cut inside like IW adding roaming makes them run along the flanks more. Especially if they have the same dominant foot as the side they are on (as is the case with my player). 

After this excellent comment I loaded up FM and watched 8 full matches against the same team as an experiment. I used a winger (attack) in the MR position. No TIs or PIS, everything standard. The formation was a standard 4-1-4-1,with bog standard roles everywhere. CM(s), DLF(a) FB(s), etc, against Waalwijks 4-3-3. 

The first 4 matches, the winger did not have the roaming instruction. 

I wrote down my observations as followed.

Without roaming 

1) Less likely to make diagonal infield runs off the ball. Prioritizes vertical movement. 

2) Can get marked out of the game, especially in the second half of games. Usually what would happen in the second half is the opposing LW would drop back to man mark him. He makes little effort to show himself for the ball when this happens. This coerces the ball carrier to make a poor decision instead, like a long range shot (since he's not available for a pass)

3) When he is being marked and receives the ball, is unable to turn and dribble effectively because of proximity to the defender. Much more likely to just pass it off.

Then I watched 4 matches with the Roam from position PI selected.

1) Higher likelihood of diagonal infield runs, which may increase the difficulty of finding him with a switch of play. However, also more likely to receive a through ball behind the defender, as opposed to in front of him.

2) more likely to position himself away from his marker, thus may ironically  maintain more width on occasion. When the opposing LM tries to mark him in the second half, he may go as wide as the touch line to evade him 

3) Will check back often off the ball when being marked, in order to receive a short pass to feet. Throws off the marker who was tracking his run. 

I was very impressed with these findings. And a bit surprised. Roaming seems to be a fantastic instruction when facing deep defenses, which most of us undoubtedly spend most of our time up against. 

I didn't expect it to be so effective in the Winger role, and am henceforth a massive fan.

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ripamon said:

After this excellent comment I loaded up FM and watched 8 full matches against the same team as an experiment. I used a winger (attack) in the MR position. No TIs or PIS, everything standard. The formation was a standard 4-1-4-1,with bog standard roles everywhere. CM(s), DLF(a) FB(s), etc, against Waalwijks 4-3-3. 

The first 4 matches, the winger did not have the roaming instruction. 

I wrote down my observations as followed.

Without roaming 

1) Less likely to make diagonal infield runs off the ball. Prioritizes vertical movement. 

2) Can get marked out of the game, especially in the second half of games. Usually what would happen in the second half is the opposing LW would drop back to man mark him. He makes little effort to show himself for the ball when this happens. This coerces the ball carrier to make a poor decision instead, like a long range shot (since he's not available for a pass)

3) When he is being marked and receives the ball, is unable to turn and dribble effectively because of proximity to the defender. Much more likely to just pass it off.

Then I watched 4 matches with the Roam from position PI selected.

1) Higher likelihood of diagonal infield runs, which may increase the difficulty of finding him with a switch of play. However, also more likely to receive a through ball behind the defender, as opposed to in front of him.

2) more likely to position himself away from his marker, thus may ironically  maintain more width on occasion. When the opposing LM tries to mark him in the second half, he may go as wide as the touch line to evade him 

3) Will check back often off the ball when being marked, in order to receive a short pass to feet. Throws off the marker who was tracking his run. 

I was very impressed with these findings. And a bit surprised. Roaming seems to be a fantastic instruction when facing deep defenses, which most of us undoubtedly spend most of our time up against. 

I didn't expect it to be so effective in the Winger role, and am henceforth a massive fan.

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

Great post. So the question is if Its enough to set TI to  ‘be more exoressive’ or you also need to set PI to ‘roam from position’. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ThomasHK1979 said:

Great post. So the question is if Its enough to set TI to  ‘be more exoressive’ or you also need to set PI to ‘roam from position’. 

Indeed, and it's tough to say. Not only that, it even seems situational in the first place.

For example, in the first four matches without the roaming instruction, the only reason the opposing LW was assigned to mark my RM in the second half in the first place was because of the absolute havoc he had caused with his static but constant width. He'd pick it up wide and drive in for a 1v1 and usually win, and then be able to shoot or cross. Then yes he was promptly marked out of the game after the chaos haha.

In the matches where roaming was selected, he did observe width of course. But he was a bit more likely to either check back or come short, or make a curved run for the ball in behind. Varied and unpredictable movement, but a bit less deadly in the absence of a dedicated marker. Of course, it was after he'd created or scored a few goals and their attention intensified that he really came into his own. 

It's a tough game, there's really so much to think about, but that's why we love it. 

For what it's worth, I usually don't use the be more expressive TI. I like my formations to have a few relatively static players, mixed with some dynamic movements. Kinda like how Mahrez and Rodri maintain their static positions for City, while the rest of the players are a blur of movement. 

Besides that, excessive creative freedom is usually a crutch from my observations. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use a FB(D) with stays narrow and a IW(s) with stay wide. I'm still thinking about using the roam PI, because do I want the guy to be very positional and open the half space at all times or not? Does the roam impact that? Things I'm analyzing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Razor940 said:

I use a FB(D) with stays narrow and a IW(s) with stay wide. I'm still thinking about using the roam PI, because do I want the guy to be very positional and open the half space at all times or not? Does the roam impact that? Things I'm analyzing.

The IW will already threaten the half space off the ball occasionally, unless you give him stay wide. And even then he won't be as wide as a winger role.

And yes, roam from position will impact it, making him a bit more loose in his positioning, if that's what you want 

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...