Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

FMWolf

Members
  • Content Count

    156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About FMWolf

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That really looks like a reinterpretation of Simeone's Atletico. And now, with the new tactical settings, it may be finally possible to do so
  2. Looks like Sampaoli has been lurking around here
  3. And honestly, when playing against one of the tallest attacking trio's in the World Cup (Perisic, Mandzukic and Rebic must average at +1.85cm) you still choose to play a back three who must average not more than 1.75cm, knowing that Croatia are problably going quite direct, looking for those guys, it's just shows that you are either a very stubborn manager or you can't read and plan the game ahead. And that doesn't really tells "now that's a good manager". I still think he'll change players to their last game, maybe even changing formation a bit, giving them a must need win. And from there, maybe they can pick some momentum and enlightening and go far in the competition again.
  4. I can't really understand Sampaoli's Argentina side. Like, for one side, you go all crazy with two very attacking minded "wingbacks" that never do that role for their clubs, leaving huge gaps on the defensive flanks. And then you go all conservative in the middle, with two defensive/working central midfielders. Is Messi supposed to do it all for the side? Or, and I confess my lack of knowledge of some of the Argentianian players, is it just that some players aren't playing to their true potential? (like Meza p.e) It just seems like a weird set-up where you're relying on Messi to be the key, but at the same time, you don't really build the team/plan to really get the max of him
  5. Oh definitely! I was not saying you're wrong or anything, just trying to give some insight on some of the things you pointed out, since I'm pretty used to see this team playing And yeah, with Guedes and Ronaldo, there really isn't a "pure" striker. It's just off the ball we try to go for that 4-4-2 shape to defend, but when on the ball the two "forwards" had a lot of movement freedom. Yeah, he does have some good moments. But I think that Andre Silva and Ronaldo work so good together and the team is so used to those two that there isn't really a need to wait for Guedes to get used to it, since that wait could've costed some points already (unless there's some unreported physical condition with Andre). Guedes would problably shine more coming in later, to really try and exploit his speed. I prefer him to Joao Mario in that position since he's more aggressive and has a bit more work rate in him, but to be honest, IMO, none of them as really put the performance needed to fill that role. Which is normal, since none of them normally does that at their clubs. If it wasn't Ronaldo's "dependency" on a partner upfront, Fernando Santos would've problably ditch the 4-4-2 by now since it's giving him way to many headaches
  6. As a Portugal fan, I've to disagree a bit with @Rashidi We started the game with our typical strategy: defend in a 4-4-2 and attack in some sort of a 4-3-3. The idea is to compensate the fact that Ronaldo doens't track back and it usually works quite well when Ronaldo is paired with André Silva, but, as it seems, not so much with Guedes. Joao Mario was the one picked today (Bruno Fernandes played against Spain) to play in the left flank and come inside to help retain possession. The plan failed, yet again, as we can't seem to find the right player to fill that role (in the Euro'16 it was Andre Gomes!). With this, our manager switched Joao Mario with Guedes (around 30min in I think), recreating a more typical 4-2-3-1, which let Ronaldo alone in the front and we all know how that ends! This also left our midfield way too exposed with our fullbacks unfortunately very tame when going forward, making our game just nonexistent. It's a rough start for us, luckily results are coming our way.
  7. @yonko Just found this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLYD_TUz-sk It helps explain his role in Sporting's system. After watching it, I'm even more inclined to use a poacher role in order to replicate it, maybe even with the "Stays In The Box" PPM
  8. Thanks for the advice! Yeah, I've also been caught with a few balls over the top when he is the last man to beat. That's exactly what I was asking: If I should change him to a cover duty or not. But, I can see that from your experience, I'm just better off getting a new, faster center back xD
  9. Using a back three, can it make sence to use your slowest center back in the middle as a DC-C? Or is it really a role for faster center backs? The reason I'm asking is because I'm using my faster center backs as DCL and DCR since they have to cover for the wingbacks but that leaves with a really slow defender to play in the middle. Since he's slow, I'm thinking that leaving him a bit behind our defensive line could help him be in a better position to chase opposition players ?
  10. @Cleon Did you ever wrote a a part 5? I was reading the articles again and it seems you were thinking of making some changes to your system. Just curious
  11. If this really your main goal, there's a couple of things I think you should change: 1) Remove "Work The Ball Into The Box" as, I believe, it's a TI that reduces the number of crosses your team makes; 2) Trade one of your wide players for a Winger. I mean, there's no better role to achieve what you want and you don't have none; Just my two cents
  12. @yonko Yeah, I have to try it! Maybe an AMC behind, one W-A on one side and one WB-A on the other to provide for him. And yes, Bas Dost is very effective. Since joining Sporting, he has 58 goals in 56 appearances!
  13. One thing I'm curious about: could the Poacher role be used on a more static player? I'm talking about those Target Man sort of players: excellent finishers, strong in the air but not fast nor that technical. Look for Bas Dost from SCP as an example. Since the Target Man role has some big cons attached to it, could a Poacher be used? (given that he has the right support)
  14. I understand! Thanks! Oh, and that was another great piece of article!
  15. Hum, okey. So what would have been the difference if he had a Resolute/Professional personality?
×