Playing with three at the back...

[flumen]

I guess like many people I find it much more fun to develop my own set of tactics rather than use those developed by others. This has led to some frustration as I have moved through a whole range of formations, from sweeper based to odd asymmetric systems.

Anyway, I finally decided to try 3 at the back, but without the wbs ahead. I used a flat four across midfield, with one of the CMs given defensive duties and one allowed more freedom. I then had an advanced midfielder (playmaker) behind two mobile forwards. While i would want to claim that this tactic is extraordinarily successful I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised when I took Spurs to fifth in the first season (with no real buys beyond Demidov) and reached the UEFA Cup final.

My concern is that I think I could be developing more the back three to be a tighter unit. At present I have all three players on the same settings but I was wondering whether I should make the middle defender behave a little more like a sweeper by getting them to drop of a bit more. Has anybody else found ways to get the most out of their back three?

[phnompenhandy]

I do very well with a back 3 (although I also have wingbacks and an MCd). All my DCs need to be quick, and I play a high D-line and off-side trap. I do utilize the central one with a mentality 1 lower than the others - just in case. For sweeping however, that's where my keeper comes in. He also has to be quick and have a good 'rushing out' attribute to get those long balls that drop behind my back 3. The DCs do play tight; they hold their line on the half-way line and drop back as a unit pretty effectively.

I do think, however, that like any system it works providing your players have the right attributes.

[Tubey84]

The problem I've seen with a flat 3-5-2 - even with farrows and barrows - is that you are exceptionally exposed to wingers. Whenever I see an opposition side employing 3-5-2, I know an emphatic win will usually follow.

I've yet to see a decent and consistent 3-5-2 tactic that doesn't use at least non-advancing wing-backs. Given that Diablo was 3-5-2, I guess this isn't a surprise, as SI have simply plugged the hole in the match engine.

[flumen]

The problem I've seen with a flat 3-5-2 - even with farrows and barrows - is that you are exceptionally exposed to wingers. Whenever I see an opposition side employing 3-5-2, I know an emphatic win will usually follow.

I've yet to see a decent and consistent 3-5-2 tactic that doesn't use at least non-advancing wing-backs. Given that Diablo was 3-5-2, I guess this isn't a surprise, as SI have simply plugged the hole in the match engine.

I have found the most effective way to deal with wingers is to put my MR/L on man to man marking and then ask them to drive the wingers as far to the byline as possible (by pushing them to their ;stronger; foot e.g. right winger is pushed onto the the right foot). I also always ensure that full backs are pushed onto their weaker foot (which normally means pushed inside). Both of these are effective in reducing wing play. That said, I still concede goals from these areas on occasion! The frustrations of management...

One thing I have noticed is that experience counts very much - while I have a good (potentially outstanding) defense I sold my most experienced defenders in the July window and started to concede more - I ssuspect that was also partially because he (Woodgate) was the only true sweeper amongst them. So now I am on the search for a new SW/DC!