Tsuru

Thank you for the inputs, really appreciated. I can try the IW-S/IW-At (or two IW-S, one with PIs) instead of the Winger. About the FB-S, do you really see them overlapping? I have the impression that on a Balanced mentality they take a lot of time to move forward, so we don´t create a true overload. But it can be an impression, of course, it is a matter of trying. The original tactic uses two Wingers with AP-At/BBM-S, as for me it makes sense to play two central midfielders with two open wingers. But using IW I would probably need to adjust the midfield, right? Maybe DLP-S/RPM-S, or Car/Mez? I can see that the playmakers would use the spaces to move around and create opportunities, while CAR would cover the fullback and MEZ would attack the empty spaces. I also considered changing the formation to a 4-2-3-1 DM, this way the fullbacks and the wingers (normal or inverted) would open space for the two DMs, the AMC and the striker to operate.

I love this thread and the idea of playing direct proactive football, as I have said here before. However... This approach has not work very well for me in FM 21. We played some great matches, however against packed defences we suffered to create good opportunities. Also we were very vulnerable to opponents´ attacks, even against weak teams that should pose us no real threat. I don´t think the approach itself is the problem, because I also tested your other ideas about direct/counter football (the ones that started with a 4-4-1-1) and it did work well, maybe my team is not simple suited for a direct, proactive style. The assistant recommends that we play more on counter approaches so yeah, maybe it is just the players that I have.

The HB is playing very nice. I also tried a FB-S but he does not move ahead quickly enough to create the overload. The problem in fact is using two wingers on a 4-1-4-1 DM, a formation that has only one striker in the centre. During some matches we went well, but the lack of opportunities against very weak teams in pre-season is very dangerous IMHO. I think that this kind of strategy may suit other formations better - like 4-4-2, 4-4-4-1 or even a 4-2-3-1, in which you can have a striker pair in order to help creating goal opportunities. But now as I hired players for a 4-1-4-1 DM I will stick with it and try another strategy.

One of my most successful tactics on Football Manager was a 4-1-4-1 DM Wide in FM 15, an approach which used two open Wingers to open space for a kind of unorthodox midfield/attacking trio: CM-Su, BBM-Su and DLF-At. Although I could never recreate this tactic completely, also because the ME changed a lot since then and because every team is different from the other, I could never forget how simple and effective it was. So I decided to use a similar idea on my FM 21 save with Tokyo Verdy in Japan, but now on a more focused and strategic way. That is, we will try to create overloads on the flanks to open space on the middle of the pitch. This idea is not new, in fact, it is one of the main principles of Juego de Posición; however my idea here is not recreate Juego de Posición or something like that, I will use just the flank overload part. I want to do flank overloads on a simple and basic tactic, defensively solid and focused on roles and duties: I don´t want lots of instructions, I don´t want a very specific pattern of play (despite the overload itself) like using shorter passing or something, or keeping possession, or direct football, whatever. Of course I can use this instructions to reinforce what I am trying to do, but they are not mandatory, I am not looking for a very specific style of football although it can happen as the tactic develops. The formation When I think about flank overloads, I think about fast Wingers with fullbacks/wingbacks helping them to keep the ball out wide, as we will need our wingbacks to move up the pitch to execute our strategy. But if we do this on a 4-2-3-1, 4-4-1-1 or a 4-4-2 we can badly expose our defensive line as we won´t have a DM, and central midfielders with defensive duties are not so reliable in FM for this kind of strategy. So we will need a DM, fullbacks/wingbacks and wingers moving up the pitch. This takes me back to the same 4-1-4-1 DM Wide I used on FM 15, and it will be our starting formation. Movement and cover If our fullbacks are moving up the pitch to help our wingers, somebody will need to cover the space they will left behind. There are many possibilities here, but one jumps at my eyes immediately: a Half Back. This DM will try to cover through balls on the flanks, will help the CBs more (as our fullbacks will be more attacking focused) and will help us recycling possession when necessary. This will create kind of a 3-4-3 when we are attacking. And I have a player that would be a very good Half Back so here we go. Using the space If we are going to overload the flanks and open space at the centre, somebody needs to explore this space, otherwise our strategy does not make sense. As we are playing a 4-1-4-1 DM Wide, a balanced approach would be a Box-to-Box midfielder on one side (someone who will help the defence but also move ahead, support the attacks and score goals when the opportunity arises) and a midfielder with an attacking duty at the other side, more focused on dribbling and moving ahead to help our striker. This gives us an AP-At or a CM-At. Fullbacks or wingbacks? When I think about flank overloads, I believe that wingbacks are better than fullbacks for this. I need them to move up early, quick and help the wingers, instead of doing this on a later attacking phase. So I decided to start with wingbacks - a traditional one on one side and, due to lack of options, an inverted on the other one. I believe that two traditional wingbacks were not working very well and the inverted gives us a mixture of a fullback and a wingback on the defending/attacking movement, although I am not completely sure about this specific choice (see below). I could also use FB-At, but he has a locked PI of crossing more which I don´t want here. So this option is not being considered right now. Mentality and instructions I did start with Positive mentality with no instructions, but my defensive line was suffering with through balls. So I decided to move back to Balanced with Higher Defensive Line and it really worked well defensively, we were much more solid. Wide and Focus Play on Left and Right (although not on the image below due to RMT´s restrictions) were natural choices, the same with Overload Left and Right (which is something we are trying to do). Later I added Play out of Defence because my team was hoofing the ball upfront (see below the improvement points/possibilities for more information on this). The first version I came up with this as the final first version: The testing process We played four official matches and won them all, scoring 10 goals and suffering two. For a starting point I believe it is doing well and we can keep working from there. What I liked? This is absurdly defensively solid, opponents had little chances to score and during matches almost kicked no balls on our goal. So far so good. The left side works wonders: WB-Su and W-Su with Overlap do excellent and nice combinations, we see the WB-Su crossing the ball almost free and he is always helping the Winger. The left Winger itself is very good too and has been decisive on some matches. The BBM and his roaming movement are perfect for this kind of strategy: he is always wandering around trying to help on possession, he looks for empty space and he helps switching the ball from one side to another, and as the left side movement is good, he finds space to operate. The right central midfielder is also working well, despite the role. Now he is an AP-At and he leads the line, moves the ball forward and look for deadly passes: on one match he did two assistances for the right winger to move behind the line and score twice. But he also does good as CM-At. I love the Half Back. He helps the defence, he recycles possession and he does deadly passes when needed. He is perfect for what we are doing. What I did not like? The right flank is...strange. The W-At became a goalscoring threat, which is interesting, but he lacks support. On some matches we see kind of an "underlap" movement, that is, the Winger moves wide and passes the ball back to the inside IWB, which crosses the ball. It is interesting but it kind of creates a conflict with the instructions I am using. The striker has been suffering a bit. If I use a CM-At/DLF-At combination, the team becomes more possession oriented but I feel that we lack some penetration against packed defences. If I use a PF-At/AP-At combination the AP-At plays very well, leading the line as I said, but the PF is kind of isolated - which makes sense as he is a true single striker on this kind of system, we don´t have a "second striker" here like a IW or IF. Improvement points/possibilities For the right side, one possibility is simply turning the IWB into a normal Wingback on Support and keep the Overload instruction. I have two concerns about this: exposing us more on the defensive line (as the WB is more aggressive than the IWB itself) and being more unidimensional (with the exact same roles doing the same thing on both sides). I did try a WB-D on the right using Overlap TI but the W-At was kind of isolated. The right side could also be an IWB-Su with W-At ahead and the Underlap Right TI instead of Overlap. This way we would reinforce what is already happening. As for the striker combination, as I said the PF is naturally more isolated (he almost never receives the ball, just on goalscoring positions) but presses the defensive line more than DLF-At, and tries to score more; the DLF-At is the opposite, helping on buildup but being less of a goalscoring threat. I believe there will be no perfect choice here, but I would like to hear your opinions about this. Remember that we are still on FM 21 so the AF still has "Get Further Forward", if we were on 22 I believe the PF or AF without GFF would be the best options here. The Play out of Defence was added because using a PF-At the team was directly hoofing the ball to him, which created good opportunities for our opponents. If I change the combination of third midfielder/striker pair this TI may not be necessary. I like the penetrating power of the CM-At and the passes and dribbling power of the AP-At, so if I opt for a DLF-At I am considering the CM-At with some of the AP´s PIs (Take More Risks, Dribble More), this way he could become a hybrid of a creator and a goalscoring threat. I considered a MEZ-At but maybe it is too offensive for the setup we are using. So far so good, as we have some improvement points I would love to hear your opinions and ideas on this. Thank you very much!

Sorry, AM-At...I thought in my mother tongue It looks like you found a solution for the CMs. For the striker pair I was thinking on something like AF/DLF-At, or maybe AF and Treq. You would keep the two playing more upfront but you would gain more variety as they would behave differently,

I think you addressed the problem very well: you need a CM which helps the defence a little bit more. I would consider some options: You can turn one of the CM-At into a DLP-Su, for example, and see what happens. If you feel you need more power upfront due to the use of the DLP (which I don´t think you will do), you can try a MO-At, or even a CWB on Attack on the same side of the DLP-Su. You can turn one the CM-At into a BWM-Su. I played like this on 5-3-2 systems before and the BWM-Su does this "dropping job" into midfield fairly well. Instead of a CM-At, you can try a simple CM-S and move the Libero into an Attacking role, for example. I think you should try to focus on the buildup from defence to the midfield and try to balance any changes with other changes on the players upfront. I would also select a different striking pair, as I think two AFs will give you less variability and also can isolate your attack from your midfield. But if it is working don´t touch it!

Very nice, thank you. Considering my main tactic it would be something like this: Just ignore the NCB, it is a standard from Rate my Tactic´s 442 and I forgot to change it I tried to downgrade the striker pair on a logical way, that is, the main tactic has an attacking and a support duty, so here I tried a support and a defend one using PFs, which are roles that fit well the two men upfront. Also the DLP-Su that normally plays on the left became a simple CM-Su as we don´t want him risking things too much. The other roles are just duty downgrades so I think it is a nice starting point.

Thank you for your feedbacks. How would you setup a 442 focused on holding a lead or playing for a draw? Just for me to have an idea. The attacking tactic is working well and the park the bus is too, but the counter/holding one is not helping us at all.

Hi Rolotor. Yes I used some PIs on the flank players to make them Play Narrower. However I am not using these tactics anymore because although they are good, they did not fit my team very well. @Jack722I have been facing some problems when changing the strategy. Normally when I am the favourite team I start with the more attacking tactic, then after a goal I change to counter attack as I think parking the bus very soon can be a lot of risk. However the team is suffering to control the match and explore the counters well - normally the other teams move up their lines and we get stuck on our field. Did you have any problems like these? This is not the first time that low block/counter tactics make my team too passive and opponents create too many chances, maybe it is something I am doing wrong, or maybe it is my tactic itself or something, so I would just like to know if you too have faced this before. It is just that this is so frustrating, sometimes we are playing very well and retreat to control the match and explore counters but we simple stop playing and it becomes more risky than if we simple kept attacking.

So let´s go to the best possible source: FM´s manual. From the 21 version (which is here more at handy): Line of Engagement The Line of Engagement is where the forwards in your team begin to press the opposition to try to win the ball back. In combination with the Defensive Line, it allows you to control the team’s vertical compactness out of possession. The distance between the Defensive Line and the Line of Engagement is the amount of space you’re willing to allow the opposition to potentially play in if they’re able to beat your press and move the ball into attack. Defensive Line This instructs the defenders as to how high they should position themselves when the opposition have the ball in their own half. You can also set whether or not to Use Offside Trap, although this should generally be used in tandem with a higher line, else opponents will be able to make their move from positions closer to the goal and with a reduced risk of being caught offside. Based on that we can try to answer some of your questions: A counter tactic can benefit from a lower LoE, yes. Why? Because according to FM´s manual your forwards will start the pressing lower on the pitch, which will help on compactness - as they will press near the midfielders. But this is not "black and white". Why? Because you can counter with a higher LoE too, it is just a little bit different strategy and need a different setup. The LoE is a piece of the jigsaw, not the puzzle itself. Team instructions, formation, roles and duties need to fit together to create the strategy and this can be done in many ways. IMHO, to play a high line you ideally need excellent defenders which are good on everything. They should be fast, intelligent, good in anticipation, pacey and nice in the air, as opponents will try through balls, crossings and inverted balls to one flank to another to surpass your high DL. And when I say defenders it is not just the CBs, but also fullbacks and DM if you use one. But again, this is not black and white. You may have poor to average defenders and still use a high line, because you want to play like that and are totally and full aware of the risk. So you don´t care if you concede because you simply want to play that way. This is a matter of risk and reward. Yes, a high DL and lower LoE can work, because as I said it depends on the rest of your setup. The risk here is that your strikers will press lower on the pitch, so opponents will have more space to operate near their own goal. Which means, a good and technical DM would have space and time to dictate the game. And at the same time your last defensive line will be higher on the pitch, so there will be also space available behind your fullbacks and CBs. That is, you would leave space ahead of your midfield and behind your DL for opponents to operate. Sometimes this can be too much space and allow them many ways of creating different goal opportunities ("routes to goal"). As I said it is a matter of risk and reward. If you need that setup for your tactic and are fully aware and confident of the risks, you should stick with it. FM tends to favour high press, full attacking tactics. But as I said, DL and LoE are jigsaw pieces, I really think we need to see things more as pieces of a complete puzzle. Everything needs to be fit and well together to work fine. You need to test and see. Have you tried to watch some games in full mode and see what happens? Select some instructions, roles, duties, Tis, change them and see what changes on the field. That is the best exercise you can do.

Oh, I am sorry...I tried to access the document from the mobile phone but it was not working, so for any reason I did not register the information. Glad to see that material about low block is kind of an evolution from another one about the School of Defensive Arts in which you also used a 4-4-2 Diamond Narrow on England Lower Leagues, changing the instructions according to the opponents, I really liked that article.

Yes, thank you. Just as a curiosity, when you used the Low Defensive Line how the LOE was set up - normal? Do you have any materials about low blocks, on a blog or something? It would be interesting to read about them too.

You presented the 4222 example with Much Higher DL/Much Higher LOE, but later you mentioned the lower DL. I think the book misses the part in which you changed the defensive line and the line of engagement, why you did and if you did any other change (like removing Counter Press, Much More Urgent or Prevent Short GK distribution).

That will be very interesting, @Cleon. All systems I used with lower DL/lower LOE or lower were absurdly passive, despite any other aggressive instructions. Looking forward to see how you adjusted your system to avoid that.

Interesting. I simply loved my 4132 with Much Higher DL and Much Higher LOE. It will probably need some adjustments for optimal compactness, but I will follow the high line path.

Sorry, just to clarify...do you use a high or a low line with the 4222? I forgot to ask about that after reading the book. For the next books it would be nice to read about your transfer market approach.

Yes I did, I am a fan of your articles! So in FM 21/22 you would still do the same, that is, select the shape/roles/duties and use Cautious mentality with no TIs?

Yesterday I applied the same principles for Cleon's 4222 Box to a 4132, which is a formation I love, and it worked wonders. So let's keep up the good work and development Cleon, I also would like to read how you would apply the principles to a counter strategy - which for me is harder to do on FM. Which instructions you would use In Possession and Out of Possession, for example? When I try to create something like that the team is always too passive or hoof the ball too much. I think it would be a nice addition to the guide. Thank you once more!

Hi Cleon. This is simply amazing and I am already reading it! I am also part of a Brazilian FM forum (https://fmanager.com.br/). Would you mind if I translate the material into Portuguese and post the material there, with all the credits to the original post and to the original download? This way I think more people could have access, read and understand your ideas. Thank you so much for this.

This is a fantastic and very nice guide. Unfortunately it didn´t work for me - on a simple test against a weaker team we were losing without a single shot on goal. Also I was completely lost with the mentality change things and adding/removing TIs. There was a point in which I simply didn´t know what to do anymore. Maybe it was my role/duty choice, maybe my attribute analysis was not good or maybe I lack patience to play this way and I need something more simple, quicker and straightforward, for example, setting up 3 different tactics (attack, counter and park the bus) and simple change among them when necessary. But thank you anyway for trying to create something different, flexible and that does not say "do this, don´t do that".

I think this is a very important and good decision. Recently I was playing with a downloaded tactic and they I started to build my own system. I will share with you the way I like to think when I am creating a tactic. Modern football is a game of denying space for your opponent to attack and creating space that your opponent is trying to deny you. So how you are going to create space and how you are going to deny space for the other team? You kind of answered that question when you said you are looking for a Guardiola style, but I would be more specific here. You want to keep the ball and play patiently on the opponent´s field, ok, but how your players are moving to create that space? How the different roles and duties will interact in order to open space, create good opportunities and close the space for your opponents to create their opportunities? I like to start simple with instructions. You mentioned the Guardiola style, so this would probably be a starting pack of something like "Play out of Defence + Narrow + Work Ball Into Box + Counter-Press + Hold Shape + High DL + High LOE + More Urgent Pressing". I am not telling you to just put these instructions, it is me trying to translate the main ideas into the team instructions. There are many different ways of recreating a patient possession style and you can use different instructions for that. I think each FM manager would translate the ideas into different TIs I like to start with the Balanced mentality. Easy, simple and you avoid overcomplicating things. It is a very good starting point so you can create anything from there. Football is highly contextual: one side of this coin is that some teams lack capacity to play on some specific ways. Sometimes the tactic is good, you set it up well, roles, duties, instructions...but your players don´t have what is necessary to play it, and you start blaming the tactic which is right and it makes sense. I really believe that the Guardiola style is very suited for a top level team, but a smaller team would probably have some difficulties - not playing it, but on keeping playing that way. How many times we have seen a good tactic that starts winning, but suddenly stops? Our opponents watch our games and try to explore our weaknesses, this is modern football. A top level team maybe could surpass this, but a less technical side would probably not. So does your team has the quality to play this way? This question is not focused on your tactic in specific, it is a question we should always ask ourselves. Football is highly contextual: the other side of that coin means that different opponents, different matches and different situations (league x cup etc.) will result in completely different matches. For this reason I like to build not just a simple tactic, but a tactical system focused on the majority of the situations I will face during a season. Normally I work with three tactics: attack, counter-attack and park the bus. I change among them depending on the opponent and depending on the game situation (if we are winning 4-0 we don´t need to be on full attack, if we score a goal we can move to counter). Of course the counter and park the bus will not be very complex tactics so I can focus on the main one (attack - in your case it would be the Guardiola one). Many people don´t like this "plan B and C" idea but as I play with smaller teams this is really necessary, I always lack the quality to force my playstyle in all matches and all opponents and expect to have success. Tactics are sons and daughters of patience. You will start with a tactic, you will test, you will win and loose and you will probably need to adjust and adapt depending on many factors. So I try to avoid changing everything after 2 matches or even after each match, unless I am really trying to figure something specific. Some ideas here for you to think when you are building and improving your system.

The Regista is basically a Number 10 on the DM spot. He can be amazing on the right system but I don´t think that is what you are looking for.

I think that you are looking for a Half Back, although maybe you haven´t noticed it yet. I am also still playing FM 21 and what I see using a Half Back is a DM that drops into defence on the early build-up, but moves around and forward to help recycle possession in the center when we are attacking (but not too much, he does not move into the area for example). I also have a friend that tried a 3 at the back system using two CBs and a HB. One of this complains was exactly that the HB used to move forward in possession, leaving the two CBs alone - something that he didn´t want as the CBs were his only true defensive line. Maybe it is easier to try and use the HB than a DM-Su, which I think may overcomplicate things here. I also think that a DLP-Su also has some "under the hood" behaviours that will make him stick more on position than a DM-Su, you can also try him.

@Robbles Quin ®™I would like to say thank you, I have been playing with your database for FM 21 and it has been a lot of fun. I would also like to ask a question, do you know if your database can be used with other updates, like the ones that activate other important leagues in Asia?

I use three tactics depending on the expectations for each match/opponents, like it is described on this topic here: