4-3-3MD False9

[patrick.jane]

Hello i appreciate ur help on giving ur opinion about this Tactic.

I want to exploit the space of the F9, but i feel i concede a lot of goals, do you guys think the defensive settings are too high?

I use the FB(S) to sit narrow

 

Thanks in advance

[Overmars]

This formation has been extremely defensively solid in FM22 for me -- and I even use more aggressive fullbacks than you have here. I suspect you might be falling victim to balls over the top or through balls. If that is the case, you might want to try cover duties for your central defenders (kind of a game gimmick, but seems to work) or just make sure your defenders have excellent anticipation, acceleration, and agility.

As for your offense -- I'm not a big fan of using a winger with a F9. I feel like F9 just cries out for two inside forwards. Maybe a DLF(a) would mix better with your other roles, providing a little more of a target for the winger.

[Johnny Ace]

That looks sound to me and I wouldn't change too much, I'd maybe just pull the lines back one or maybe, because both CMs get forward, just have one of them getting forward 

How's the XG against looking? Might just be a case of upgrading a player at the back or in goal

[patrick.jane]

1 hora atrás, Overmars disse:

This formation has been extremely defensively solid in FM22 for me -- and I even use more aggressive fullbacks than you have here. I suspect you might be falling victim to balls over the top or through balls. If that is the case, you might want to try cover duties for your central defenders (kind of a game gimmick, but seems to work) or just make sure your defenders have excellent anticipation, acceleration, and agility.

As for your offense -- I'm not a big fan of using a winger with a F9. I feel like F9 just cries out for two inside forwards. Maybe a DLF(a) would mix better with your other roles, providing a little more of a target for the winger.

Thanks for ur time, yea, many times through balls through the middle or a wing, my defenders have high anticipation, positioning, acceleration.. might give a try of putting as cover one of them.

 

As for the FWD the idea here is making it work with a F9

1 hora atrás, Johnny Ace disse:

That looks sound to me and I wouldn't change too much, I'd maybe just pull the lines back one or maybe, because both CMs get forward, just have one of them getting forward 

How's the XG against looking? Might just be a case of upgrading a player at the back or in goal

Thanks for your time.

I thought of it but i want to try making it work with these CM functions, u say put a notch down in LoE? What u think about the offside trap and defensive width? is a good option to force outside?

 

I think the players are good, many of key atributes above 16

Against Xg isnt that high, its just they have clear cut chances and its enough sometimes to get a draw or lose if i have a bad day at attack.

[Johnny Ace]

8 hours ago, patrick.jane said:

Thanks for your time.

I thought of it but i want to try making it work with these CM functions, u say put a notch down in LoE? What u think about the offside trap and defensive width? is a good option to force outside?

I was thinking more about the DL but if you're pulling that back it would make sense for the LOE to move back to, that would help restrict the space in behind your team. Just try a couple of smalls changes at a time. Too many at once could cause more problems  

[patrick.jane]

Thanks for ur answers, i tried couple things, changed MC a to MC s with further forward to try to give consistency, but lacked bit more penetration, tried the left cb to cover with the MC a but didn't change much, but what worked best was put one notch down in LoE and add counter press, maybe cause of many bodies in attack makes it easier to fight for the ball higher and avoid those long balls, also removed the Offside trap cause overall the defensive line doesnt have the high attributes for that.

 

What is your opinion on the change of adding counter press? was just luck or makes sense to you? Thanks in advance.

Edited June 8, 2022 by patrick.jane
make the text better

[Johnny Ace]

15 minutes ago, patrick.jane said:

Thanks for ur answers, i tried couple things, changed MC a to MC s with further forward to try to give consistency, but lacked bit more penetration, tried the left cb to cover with the MC a but didn't change much, but what worked best was put one notch down in LoE and add counter press, maybe cause of many bodies in attack makes it easier to fight for the ball higher and avoid those long balls, also removed the Offside trap cause overall the defensive line doesnt have the high attributes for that.

 

What is your opinion on the change of adding counter press? was just luck or makes sense to you? Thanks in advance.

Out of your two centre midfielders, just try the midfielder on the left with a role that has Get Further Forward instructed, a CM(A), MEZ(S/A) etc The left Winger should stay wide to allow this role to get forward and cause problems. Then try the right CM just as a CM(S) or something similar as you don't really need to send this position forward 

If you look at the rest of your roles, you'll have the IF making penetrative runs from the right wing, the WB on the right getting high up the pitch and the deep run from midfield on the left hand side with your Winger and Wingback proving options on the flanks 

That should give you nice balance when attacking but won't send too many players forward that when on the transition, you're caught short at the back and struggling to defend  

If overall attacking penetration is a problem, have a look at your in possession TI's. 

-Shorter passing (could stunt your teams passing options)

- Work ball into box (cuts down crosses and long shots)

- Narrow (takes out some of your team's width)

I deem these as "safe" TI's as in, they take out some of your attacking threat 

I can see you're 2nd in the league so if you're struggling to get chances, I might consider them for removal 

Adding Counter Press is an option but could create more problems, like you say so experiment with it a bit, see if you like how it plays out