jc577

It's just dawned on me that this is pretty close to a Man City replication

Nail on the head. An AF is great when given space to run into, both in behind the defence and into the channels, but with two strikers either side his movement will be pretty limited. As your system seems to be working I wouldn't suggest you change anything, but if you want more from your AF then i'd consider playing him as one of the outer strikers and maybe not press so aggressively.

I've found it extremely difficult to break teams down using a possession-based style... there's literally zero space/movement for quick combinations and even when there is some space, players prefer to pass wide then split the opposition with a through ball. Of course it's possible but in some ways i feel as if you have to have Rashidi level knowledge to execute a possession style effectively.

Couldn't agree more. Very good point you make here. Although Ibra has 10 for team-work and 7 for work-rate, so he won't do much pressing either way I do have him as as Treq in a 4231 though, where we might be able to get away with it due to the attacking trident behind him. The CM-A is also one of my favourites roles, both in FM and IRL... I think a lot of people just associate the role with scoring goals (which it does of course) but it can be so much more than that, player dependent of course. Paqueta will be doing his best Messi impression i'm sure, but it doesn't hurt to have another creative player if he's having an off day. Honestly i've created so many tactics I am not sure which one to use. The 4231 is by far the riskiest, but I have made some tweaks to try and dial it down a bit: Firstly, i've removed higher tempo, for two reasons. Considering its top-heavy nature, ball distribution is likely to be forward thus we may move the ball quicker as a byproduct of the formation. Also with so many players advanced, losing the ball in transition or in dangerous areas high up the pitch could be detrimental, but playing on positive the tempo is still relatively quick. Secondly, the tactic doesn't have any overlaps. Wingbacks on support should be aggressive enough for this formation, only getting into attacking positions high in the opposition's half when possession has been properly consolidated. The more I write about it, the more I want to use it we shall see!

@sporadicsmiles Great thread as always, certainly got me thinking! Recently i've found it pretty challenging to replicate possession-based football in the current ME, but this thread has inspired me to give it another try (well that, and the abundance of time everyone now has ) One thing this thread highlights for me though, is that the way mentalities work in FM really needs an overhaul. The ability of lesser teams to play on a counter mentality (which sets CBs to more direct passing by default) yet still keep the ball at the back despite an intense press is ludicrous. It's not even as if they're keeping the ball deep to invite the press and play through it (which would be kinda cool), they just never attempt to progress it. Anyway rant over! With Milan i've opted for a two minor changes so far: PF-S --> DLF-S as Ibra is far more suited to the role, especially it has age. A Treq is another interesting option, but I fear it may roam too much and not link play in central areas as i'd like. I've set the two outer CMs as a CM-D and DLP-S. Main reason for doing so was that I want the playmaker to have a higher mentality than a defend duty would provide, being more aggressive in his passing and maybe even contributing to a few assists. The rest of the team is pretty much the same. I am also considering a true 4231 variant modelled after Ajax's 2018/19 campaign, with Ibra in the Tadic role and Paqueta operating as a hybrid 10/SS a la Van de Beek.

Indeed I’ve seen this too. In fact, my Brentford team were scoring so much from set pieces (default ones, no special set-up) that the board added ‘make the most of set-pieces’ or words to that affect, as part of the philosophy Sums up FM20 tbh

Does anyone have any solid defensive set-piece routines? Because no matter how I set them up, the AI always find a way to score from them. It’s killing me to be honest, preferred conceding from long balls over the top 😂

@Experienced Defender If you were to use a MEZ in a 532, would you play him behind the support or attack duty striker, generally speaking?

If you look at the screenshot, the wide players are too narrow for my liking. In all honesty they shouldn’t be out on the flanks, but they should be maybe 5 yards wider than their current position, and definitely higher than the CM’s. If we stop focusing on the wide players for a second, what could be causing that behaviour from the CM’s? We can both agree (finally) that their positioning is definitely an issue here

No worries, all good Personally, when the tactics creator changed I believe it would have been prudent to document changes to player’s individual mentality, and the effects it has on pressing, positioning etc. The vast majority of people play on key or extended highlights, so may not be able to identify these changes in behaviour. Also, with all the additional features there is so much information to take in, people may not necessarily have the time. In regards to pressing, the example I gave earlier was actually real, from a 4231 I ran with Leverkusen at the start of FM20. The main issue I had was from opposition goal-kicks, where the Winger was positioned as if he were a strata lower. I also think attack duty CM’s should be higher during build up play, but that’s another conversation entirely

I here what you’re saying, but my wide players are nowhere near their CBs So who exactly are they marking? How does their positioning benefit us in anyway?

I have great respect for you Rashidi, and have learned so much from you over the years, but this sounds a tad patronising. In hindsight, the fact that different roles now have different mentalities does suggest that there may be differences in pressing intensity, positioning etc, however this is not public information. Secondly, I’m not sure if this is a good change. Say for example you’re using a 4231 and want to press high, and have an IF-A and W-S on the flanks, surely the winger’s deep(er) positioning will impact the ability of your team to press high?

This is a massive change, and something we should have been made aware of. But in any case, the positioning of my players is still wrong, surely? I mean I understand support duties defending slightly deeper than attack duties, which shouldn’t be the case as it indicates you need to use attack duties to press high, but for my centre-mids to be higher than the wide players? This can’t be right, even with changes to the ME.

I understand what you’re saying, but my formation is narrow in possession. In FM, the defensive shape is based on your formation, so naturally I would expect the wide players to take up wider positions. Perhaps the fact that the opposition are using a back three has meant my players attempt to press their CBs, but I don’t believe this should be the case. The positioning is clearly wrong - they’re too deep to even press their CBs. I don’t believe I should have to use man-marking instructions for my wide players to defend the flanks? That’s where they are positioned, that’s where they should be.

Extremely narrow formation? I play a 4141 DM WIDE. If I played a narrow formation such as a 4222 then this sort of positioning would be expected, but I’m not. The closing down and marking did not kick in after the goal kick was taken, as I mentioned before. Their wide players shouldn’t be unmarked as I’m playing with wide players myself, I don’t understand what’s so hard to grasp here.