Flußkrebs

CM-A is your answer In all seriousness I've had plenty of decent if not outstanding performances with AFa-AMa when flanked by two support roles, such as IFs if using WBs or Ws or both. I tend to add SS-esque PIs to the AM-a as @dzek mentioned. Asymmetric SS is also very good if a little exploiting - runs into channels and runs wide/stay wider creates a lot of movement which the CBs usually struggle to deal with.

Similar to the question about what striker to pair with an AM(a) or SS, two main schools of thought here: -You have a linking striker who'll drop deep to create space for the CM(a) to fill, or to play the pass/drag the defenders around for the CM to run in behind. So you could use a DLF or CF or TF. In build up these two might also help play some 1-2s to get you up the pitch. -You use a an AF or PFa or Poacher to occupy the centre backs and the CMa can take up positions at the edge of the box. This will also in theory create space for the CMa to drive forward with the ball (centre backs can't step up without leaving AF 1 on 1). I think it depends on the rest of your tactic, the midfielders and also the wingers. I've been running IFs-AF-IWs CMa-B2B As my front 5 in a 433 and it works well. The AF doesn't get involved in build up at all unless it is as an out-ball. The CMa scores a fair few, averaging around 0.3-0.4 npxG/90 and the AF does pretty well too, but is mostly there to create space for the combo play from the other 4 and the full backs. If you were playing with IFa or Wa then a more supporting or hybrid striker might suit better.

I've been playing with a 424 with DMs and the FBa BPD BPD FBa back line, and whilst it wasn't intended as a De Zerbi recreation, it gets the drawing teams out part really well. I signed a CB with the trait "stops play" and another with "stay back at all times". Then due to the magic of mentoring/training, all 3 of my first choice CBs picked up both of these traits. At first I found this annoying, but then realised that combined with my 2 DMs (one with traits like moves into channels, another with comes deep to get ball) and the full backs instead of wingbacks, it made it really easy to encourage opponents to press high. Basically my CBs will just tap the ball to each other until the opponent engages, play it quickly through the lines to either a dropping IFs, DM behind the first line of pressure, or a full back breaking high, and then create the De Zerbi/Conte in possession transition. Having Pass into space, cautious or balanced mentality, and higher tempo seems to work with this. So yeah, assuming your CBs have the technical ability and composure to do so (same with GK) developing these risky traits like stops play and stays back at all time will help bait the opponent.

PART 1- BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION Football is very much a game of fashion, as is football manager and the tactics we use here. A couple of years ago it was all the rage to try and replicate teams like Atalanta, with their unique playing style, Sheffield United's overlapping centre-backs (now easily doable, and ironically something I very rarely see employed), or Bielsa's 3331. What often get mentioned when doing a run down of Bielsa (usually as a bit of fluff before going on to show the 3331 tactic itself) was the pressing principle he'd employ. The mantra was: "+1 at the back, -1 in attack". What this means in practice is that for any given formation you can create a reciprocal formation which matches all players up man for man, except 1 spare at the back and 1 spare in attack. Now usually because football formation notation isn't actually what the players look like on the pitch, it might not be immediate obvious what the reciprocal is (e.g. we switch between calling it a 352 or a 532, but never really do the same when talking about a 433 vs a 2323). So the reciprocal also depends on whether the opponents 343 is with strikers (343), AMs (3421), or wingers (3421 wide). But here is a rough list of reciprocal formations for the more commonly seen formations: OPPONENT FORMATION BIELSA RECIPROCAL 3142 3412 3412 3142 3421 4222 343 442 442 343 4231 4123 4123 4231 41212 3331 4312 3151 4141 4411 424 523 4222 3421 Obviously in FM we can differentiate further and draw the distinction between a 3142, a 3312 WB DM, a 352 with a CM-d, a 532 with a CM-d, but I've mostly just stuck to the general shape which is basically the same regardless. Some may not be super obvious how they match up. For example a 3421 is really quite tricky to match up against, as you need to provide a 4 man midfield, but with only 2 centre backs. Below, Red uses a 4222 shape to oppose Black's 3421. There are a couple of ways you could do this, but using aggressive full backs in a 4222 seems most logical. Alternatively you could use a 442 shape and invert your full backs onto their AMs, OR your wingers onto their DMs. Like I said, it is a bit tricky. The neat thing about the Bielsa principle is it means every single formation has a "natural match up" and that in theory both teams should have cover in defence, whilst otherwise matching up nearly perfectly to press the opponent. This principle is only employed because Bielsa uses strict man-to-man marking. The spare man is therefore necessary to mop up any slippages, and the striker or strikers have to press in such a way to get theh defence to clear long where any other player on the pitch is man marked. Weaknesses with this approach of course are that there is a spare man for the opponent at the back, so strong ball carrying centre-backs can march unopposed through the middle. However, there is a different trend for high-pressing teams- going man-for-man all over the pitch. By this, I don't mean strict man-marking, but rather the set up zonally of the players in such a way that a team trying to play out from the back will always face pressure, and there are no overloads or spare men naturally in the set up. For example, against a team which plays a 433, builds in a 2323 shape like Black below, you'd want to press with a front 2 against their centre-backs, and then 3 behind to press the DM and full backs. Red here are playing in a 3412 shape, ish. Obviously you might not need the wide-centre backs to stay that wide, man-marking, and instead they can shuttle across to the ball side, but the front 3 plus the wingbacks would need to press high. Alternatively, you could achieve the same by playing with a 442 diamond or 41212, dropping the DM back to cover the striker and playing with very high full-backs and wide centre-backs. Here is one more example, going back to the first. Black are playing in a 3421 shape again. Instead of the Bielsa 4222, when Red use man-for-man pressing they form a 325 shape: This could be achieved using a 343 base with strikers, or a 3421 and pushing the AMs on, or a 343 wide and inverting the wingers. Here is a list of more reciprocal formations (I've included the Bielsa one's for reference). OPPONENT FORMATION MAN FOR MAN PRESS M4M Translation BIELSA RECIPROCAL 3142 2413 4231 or 442 or 424 3412 3412 2143 4123 3142 3421 1243 343 4222 343 343 343 442 442 244 424 or 442 343 4231 1324 3142 4123 4123 3214 3412 4231 41212 21214 3412 (CB on DM) or 41212 3331 4312 2134 3412 or 4132 3151 4141 1414 3214 or 3412 4411 424 424 424 or 442 523 4222 2224 4222 or 442 3421 NB. My "translation" column is non-exhaustative- you could press in a column 2 shape by using a different set formation. My objective in FM is to build a set of formations which can be tweaked in such a way to cover ALL possibilities in that second column. To achieve this, I'll use a: - Flat 433 wide - Flat 352 - 424 In part 2, I'll show the formations and base tactics, and see how they work out. There will be some trial and error, and it might be the case that trying to create tweaks to only 3 base formations is too ambitious, and whilst the press may work, the attacking elements let it down. I'll then do some comparisons against the Bielsa reciprocal formation, playing out the same matches, and seeing if either offers a stronger defense/press/attack.

I've been using a variety of 424/4231DM type systems this year, and sometimes use a front 2 of TFs-AFa (with either wingers or inside forwards depending on tactical set up). For context this is with Nottingham Forest second season- I've signed Diego Costa to help make it stick in tricky away games, so usually Costa-Awoniyi or Costa-Johnson up top. I usually go with PFs and AFa, but in tough away games I'll go cautious, long goal kicks and then sometimes switch the PF to a TF if I really want to go direct. Another set up I've been trying is with a CF and a SS behind him, but if the player isn't suited to play as a CF I don't see why you couldn't try TF. In a 442 I prefer to use TF-a, the TF-s can drop very deep, and the classic big man in the box or near the box is a TF-a. I think with the tactic you've shared you're lacking penetration and overdoing it slightly centrally. You could try making it assymetric so the SS forms more of a 2, or better in my opinion would be making the front 2 TF-AF, and then making the central CM a more attacking role like CM-a (might need to change one of the Mez to a BWM or CAR). Reason being at the moment when you go direct, your TF-s will usually just have options behind him to knock it to, but if you play with a SS AND a AF, it should introduce more variance/movement and ability to flick on or knock down.

Just thought I'd drop this here as The Athletic have just released a bunch of historical data stuff for past world cups as prat of their coverage. Here was the pass map for the 1970 World Cup final: Backs up your formation I'd say, only thing is that they completely bypassed the centre backs and progressed the ball via the full backs. Whilst Piazza did pass it out to Everaldo, the value was very low. Anyway, just something of interest!

Just chiming in on Saka- John Muller wrote this back in August using the Athetic's new data-cluster player roles https://theathletic.com/3495225/2022/08/10/saka-arsenal-player-role/. Gives this as the evolution of Saka over the last few seasons: Wide threat: Stretches the back line and gets into the penalty area. Does some crossing but likes receiving the final ball as much as playing it. Kylian Mbappe, Vinicius Junior, Mohamed Salah Unlocker: Likes to play field marshal in the opponent’s half. Big on crosses, switches, and forward passes. More of a provider than an off-the-ball runner. Mason Mount, Neymar, Lorenzo Pellegrini Outlet: Gets on the end of dangerous passes but usually plays it safe on the ball. Takes a lot of touches in midfield or close to goal, not much in between. Draws fouls. Jadon Sancho, Jack Grealish, Joao Felix. So basically, he's split between an inside forward type (who does cross a bit) and an outlet/receiver. This to me is a Winger on attack. I completely agree with @Fantasista10- Saka is a positional play style wide-forward. You could use Winger or IW to achieve this. I've been playing a semi-Ange inspired 433 (IWBs and IW-As that stay wide then come in), which isn't far off a more aggressive/less flexible Arteta team. One of the things that has frustrated me is that the IWBs don't really form a nice 2323 shape. But what they do do is behave like Ben White- sitting a bit narrower, overlapping sometimes (especially if you use overlap TIs). I think IWBs on both sides would fit this team.

Agree with the previous replies, but some other alternatives are: 4312- setting your diamond up as a 4312 will push the LCM and RCM wider than if you set it up as a 41212 narrow. Could be a nice middle ground. Wide 4132- i.e. LM-CM-RM with a DM behind the CM (wide diamond with the 10 withdrawn to middle strata). This will give you a diamond shape if you use a role like CM-A and DM-D, but should be a little more secure than a 41212 wide. 4132 narrow- not really a diamond shape when playing, definitely a bit more of a DM holding and spraying the ball to three runners. But worth trying out.

But I love the rest of the post! V interesting.

I'm sure you know most of this already, but there are quite a few issues that trying to use this rating analysis brings up. 1) Really you ought to compare between other players at AMR, rather than comparison between positions whilst holding the player constant. Like in your example you can clearly see system effects going on- Odegaard rates as a 6.88 in your system at CM, but a 7.37 for international football. I'd hazard to guess Norway have him playing as an AP(a) or CM or Mez in a 433. But in your system I assume you have 2 more conservative roles in the pivot, and FM doesn't give out good ratings to holding midfielders unless you stomp the opposition or they complete a million passes etc etc. 2) Ratings themselves are basically meaningless precisely because it's a) opaque what they're composed of b) even if you have a vague idea through trial and error, trying to work out whether e.g 3 headers won is worth 0.2xg is a fools errand and c) they don't really translate to RESULTS, which is more important than individual performance (except for development). So what I'd suggest is instead looking at the stats/key metrics and blending it in with the ratings. 3) In this specific example, a sample of 3 games at AMR is not enough to draw conclusions. Was he on set pieces for some of these games? Did he get lucky scoring (goals vs xg) and so on. A sample of 28 games in a single position tells you that you can be confident in that 6.88 rating I'd say at CM- but how does that compare to other players who play the same role/position? Nit picky I know! But I think that the ratings system in FM is a bit broken, or wonky (and pseudoscientific concept generally, trying to score players out of 10 is a bit pointless) and, in addition to the other points, you're probably not really gaining any real new information.

A 4312, usually something like: AF-AF APs CMa-CMd-BBM FB-BPD-CD-WB The CMa has stay wider and various player traits on the two different regulars I use which mean you can get a lot of variability.

Apologies for the horrendous resolution, but here again is an example of the CM(A) pressing and finishing chances. Brilliant in a three man midfield. I think off the ball movement is the most valuable trait for these kind of players (and is undervalued in general).

A great idea- the CM(A) has been a beauty for me this year. I'm not super used to uploading gifs and vids, so bear with me. But in the video below number 10 (De Backer) threads a beautiful pass forwards for a goal GrotesqueMeanGallinule-mobile.mp4

Agree with majority of your points, but in terms of defensive leakiness for the 4312.. Now of course I'm playing here as joint favourites to win the league, but I also used this style with Fortuna Sittard, and first season implementing the 4312 we achieved this: Current version of tactic for reference:

+1 for the SS-AMa-SS combo. Had a lot of success with that in prior version of match engine (22.2 or 22.3 I think) but haven't tried recently. I was running a set up kinda like SS-AM-SS DW-CM-CM-DW WCB-CB-WCB And it resulted in lots of lovely through ball goals, often plays where the AM would pick the ball up, play it through to the SS, then make a run from deep to finish the move off in the box. Used it at lower league level as well as it's pretty straightforward and works well if you don't have a proper no 9 type, but relies on pace/stamina/off the ball from your SS (and AMa) as they'll be making a LOT of runs.