Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

rvd313

Members
  • Content Count

    1,434
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About rvd313

  • Rank
    Part-Timer

About Me

  • About Me
    I've got the battle fever on...

Interests

  • Interests
    Football, politics, economics.

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Rangers F.C.

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Quick update while I have the chance: Halfway through pre-season I made a few changes, which resulted in the following configuration: 1. We went from a Fluid shape to a Structured one. I felt attacks tended to break down too easily with a Fluid shape as the players tended to bunch together during attacks. 2. The two WB's became FB's. I felt we were too exposed down the flanks with two WB's. 3. The DLF became a F9. I mainly did this because it suited the players at my disposal. A F9 also has the 'move into channels' instruction, which means both my strikers pull wide at times, providing much needed width. 4. The BPD's are gone. There were only really a couple of players capable of performing this role to any competent degree. 5. The AP became an AM. The AP was drifting too deep and leaving the front two isolated. 6. One of the CM's became a BBM. With two CM's on support, the midfield was very static. With a BBM we have better movement in midfield and better support for the forward players. Results so far: As you can see results picked up in pre-season after I made the changes. Only played two league matches so far, but things look promising.
  2. Ok, so I've been handed the 4-4-2 Narrow Diamond. A formation I detest with every fiber of my being. Going with this set-up to begin with: Simple configuration up top with a creator/scorer partnership and a playmaker just behind. In midfield my two CM's will hopefully provide balance by not being too aggressive or too defensive. My DLP(d) will (hopefully) dictate play from deep and help us to play the ball out of defence. My two WB's will provide the width; I've given them support duties because they're the only players I have on the flanks and I need them to exercise some defensive responsibility. Finally, I've went with two BPD's for no reason other than I have something of a fetish for them at the moment. If only I was given a formation with wingers, I could deploy my other current obsession: Raumdeuters. I chose a Fluid team shape because I want my attacking players to offer some help in defence, and I also want the team to be relatively compact. Not entirely sure if this is the right choice. Time will tell. Team instructions are relatively straightforward. I like patient, possession football. I may need to increase the closing down and defensive line at some stage. Oh and St. Etienne are pish. The central defensive and midfield options are rather depressing.
  3. I won't be posting my tactic for download. Nor will I respond to PM's about it. Also, please don't just mindlessly copy what I or anyone else does. Think about what you're doing and why. The reason I post in this thread is to share ideas and experiences with regards to my attempts to play possession football. My experience is likely to be different from yours. My tactic is built specifically for my team and the specific context we find ourselves in. If you need help then provide some details and people will be willing to lend a hand.
  4. Into my third season with Rangers and I've yet again tinkered with my tactics. After winning the Premiership at the first time of asking I promptly sold my two best players for a combined £30m and then purchased this chap for £8m. Intending to play him as a false nine I then had him learn the 'comes deep to get ball' ppm. He has been nothing short of a revelation. His PPM combination means that he picks the ball up in midfield, or in the space between the opposition midfield and defence, and goes on a mazy run before playing a killer pass or scoring himself. Essentially, he's a poor man's Messi. Here's my tactic as it stands: At the start of the season I had a DLP(s) and CM(a) in midfield, along with a HB(d). I also had a WB(a) and WB(s) rather than the two fullbacks I have now. The reason I changed it is quite simple. While we were dominating possession, we lacked a cutting edge, not to mentioned being quite vulnerable on the counter, especially against teams playing two upfront. Furthermore, the halfback wasn't really working anymore - he was just getting in the way and dragging our midfielders too deep during buildup. It had also become readily apparent that we were pushing too many players forward too quickly. The attacking fullbacks were making our buildup play too direct, and the result was that too often the midfield and the F9 were bypassed in favour of wing play. Switching to fullbacks instead of wingbacks has rectified this problem. We look much more balanced and patient going forward. Finally, the reason I switched my DLP(s) to a AP(s) is that I wanted my midfield closer to my front three. Possession numbers are still good, averaging around 65% in the league. In the Champions League we did ok - between 55 to 60% depending on the quality of the opposition. In the groups stages I was drawn against Real Madrid, Man City and Lyon. Against Real and City we could only marginally dominate possession as the gulf in quality was a bit silly. Against Lyon we did much better, we managed 61% possession away from home. Results wise we also did reasonably well, attaining home wins against Real and Lyon and a home draw against City. Two defeats away to Real and City however saw us dumped into the Europa League. If I want to progress I'm going to need to increase the quality of players at my disposal. Overall though, I really enjoy the style of football my team plays at the moment.
  5. A few games into my second season and I altered things slightly, ending up with this: Basically my old formation, but with the CM(a) and DLP positions on different sides. The reason I changed it was that, while still dominating possession, our attacking moves tended to break down very easily in the final third. Practically everyone except the HB and two CD's ended up in the opposition penalty box, meaning there were no passing options and we were very vulnerable to counter attacks. I probably could have mitigated things slightly by moving to a Standard or Counter mentality, but it was pretty clear that our midfield was far too open and needed some stability. The DLP was the perfect solution. Not only has our build up play become more subtle and patient, but his more withdrawn position has created loads of space for my forward players to utilise, particularly the CF. I've also experimented a bit with changing my RB to a support duty, reason being that in one game he somehow ended up playing in a centre-forward position almost straight from a kick-off. I like attacking full backs and everything, but that was a bit too much, even for me. That being said, sometimes with a support duty the RB doesn't get beyond the AMR often enough, so I'll probably leave it as it is for now. These are my current possession stats since promotion to the Scottish Premiership: Also currently on a 22 match unbeaten run. Just awaiting the inevitable home defeat to some relegation battler... I think the HB role has been very useful in maintaining good possession numbers. With the CB's pulling wide we create better passing angles and invite the opposition midfielders to press the backline, leaving gaps for my two CM's to exploit. Also, we look extremely comfortable with the ball at the back, even under intense pressure. My HB is a really decent passer of the ball, but even my CB's are capable of dinking little diagonal balls out to my wingers under pressure.
  6. Moving into my second season with Rangers and this is the system I have arrived at: In the previous season we were absolutely dominant in possession, even against Premiership sides in the cups. However, we struggled to score more than 1 or 2 goals a game and generally looked a bit tame going forward. So I swapped my F9 for a Complete Forward and my DLP for a Roaming Playmaker and shifted my CM(a) to the right side. So far in pre-season we look a lot more dangerous going forward while still keeping the ball really well. Just played a friendly against a much superior Crystal Palace team, which we won 2-1. We had absolutely no right to boss possession like we did, never mind win the game, even if it was just a friendly. It may just be me, but I actually think its much easier to achieve possession football in FM16.
  7. So, I ditched the strikerless system due to a lack of pressing from goal kicks. I've now ended up with the following: The MCL role has been a bit of a puzzle so far. Started out with a B2B, but he ended up playing too close to my DLP, and on the rare occasion he did venture forward he pushed right up next to my striker, leaving a huge gap in midfield. Tried a CM(s) after that, but he ended up playing even deeper than the B2B, with no hint of ever getting forward. So I've arrived at the CM(a) and early signs are pretty good. He doesn't bomb forward aimlessly like I feared and actually tends to time his runs pretty well, pushing forward in line with either my F9 or IF(s) when they come deep. With better runs from midfield, my F9 is starting to pull the strings up front, whereas before he was a little bit isolated at times from the midfield. Right now my average possession rate is around 64%. At home I usually end with somewhere between 65-71%. The next step is to increase my goals scored. Right now I'm winning most games 2-0 and 1-0, but I'd rather not just pass teams to death.
  8. Anyone else gone strikerless? Having a lot of fun with this setup. Although the shape is flexible it's actually very fluid up front, with constant movement and positional interchanges. Been dominant possession wise in all my games so far, but I am playing against mostly inferior opposition. The TQ works really well - due to his lack of closing down and attack mentality, he stays relatively high up the pitch when defending and offers a consistent out-ball. We're pretty much deadly on the counter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mulRaLdLS8
  9. Agreed. I also agree on this. I never noticed he was using hassle opponents. My bad. Agreed, once more. I've said on more than one occasion that the two CM 4-2-3-1 is vulnerable through the middle. I disagree up to a point. He has three support players in midfield, who will remain in relatively close contact with the DLP. Granted though, when he loses the ball, he still has a lack of cover - how bad it is depends on the phase of play. Fair enough. I haven't looked at West Ham's squad recently. Happy to defer on this. I'm going to shut up now.
  10. Cleon, If I could be slightly devious for a moment... In the stickied thread on this forum, llama* posts the following example of a 4-2-3-1 for his Arsenal side: Is this a big tactical no no? *nothing against him
  11. Are we talking about counter-attacks or general defending? In a counter-attack situation its more likely a CB will get caught out of position, trying to fill the gap left by the BTB. In a general defensive situation, the attacking propensity of the BTB is moot. I've already said in my first post in this thread that the 4-2-3-1 with two CM's is defensively shaky. I'm just saying its not as bad as you suggest. The opposition could play a ball over the top, yes, but that could happen at any point. So what? Just stop using push higher up then. A threat from out wide when he has only one attacking fullback? Seriously? Which areas are vulnerable is dependent on the opposition. Its not that simple. You make it sound like everyone is bombing forward like nutters, leaving the DLP isolated. That's not the case. It was a sarcastic example. Which is what I said. The nuance of my point was that you don't need amazing attributes to pull it off. For what its worth, I only use the 4-2-3-1 with two holding CM's.
  12. If this were true, I wouldn't bother playing the game. It isn't. The only player in my team with PI's is the GK. That's it. I'm not quite sure what your problem is, tbh. Maybe you just need to take a break from the game? No point in being perpetually frustrated.
  13. With a full back on support, I'd say he has plenty of cover. Its vulnerable through the middle certainly, but its not THAT bad. He has a 1-3 shape to defend against counters. The second shape is much better from a defensive standpoint, obviously. You don't need sublime, Beckenbauer esque BPD's to use play out of defence. You only need composed and technically competent defenders. Not having a go btw, just giving my opinion. I respect and admire you greatly Cleon.
×
×
  • Create New...