Jump to content

zabyl

Members+
  • Posts

    336
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

186 "Just keep swimming"

2 Followers

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Galatasaray

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    strip club

Recent Profile Visitors

1,090 profile views
  1. He is natural on both DM & CM. AI could have chosen DM for his best playing position. That could be because of his good defensive attributes or "defensive" training unit. Can you please change his training unit to attacking and share if it changes to CM? By the way, that is not playing position/role/duty in your tactic. It is his best natural playing position. In my opinion, SI should change or remove this option because of misunderstanding context.
  2. Yes of course. It increases the chance of making a bad choice when doing a pass, shot, cross, dribbling, pressing and marking.
  3. I don't think like that but I can accept this. From my personal ME experience; I see them come deeper more to take a pass than start a deeper position. These are two different things. Playing position affects player's starting position not roles/duties. This is what I see on ME. Your approach is fine in theory.
  4. IFs has lower mentality than IFa and that affects his risk taking. You force IFs to make more forward runs with that PI.
  5. I would use one of the two narrower attacking width options as there are no AMC and DMC on 3-4-3 WB. This can help your team's passing, decrease crossing and make more creative central attacking football. I prefer using narrow attacking width options for dual flank and no DM-no AM tactics. And this tactic has two wing backs which can provide enough width on narrow width options. Think about that. Maybe attacking width is your keystone to create something special.
  6. Bad for defensive football, good for attacking football because of more space. If you have a wide pitch, you can bully defensive opposition with wide attacking width options.
  7. Did you use LW as an attack duty role like you mentioned @dcayton9 ? If you want to reduce the risk of losing possession on the left, you can use a Treq on LW. Also a support duty sitter CM can be used on RCM with a back-3 system. You use Libero on support so this risk can be taken. If you use Libero on attack, it can increase central creativity. If you have a fine BPD, you can use him on RCB. That side lacks creativity from midfielder and winger. Lastly, what kind of football do you want to create? This is like a fast attacking approach for me.
  8. I try to use tricks like drawing attention to a different area to release CMa because of his deep starting position. CMa can be an effective goal threat if he has good speed, off the ball, composure. Passing & tempo must provide him time to get into box. He can’t reach higher areas on time with a direct style or faster passing no matter how he is fast. He is better combined with a support duty striker.
  9. These kind of tactics with only more advanced players are on attack, can’t work against every opposition. If I use this formation with your ideas, I would use both WBs on attack as CWB for overloading flanks with focus play, and change striker to a support one for creating different movements and attacking patterns. I would use a sitter (mostly DLP) and a runner (BWM) to get the balance on CM partnership. You don’t have to change the system you use. You can create pretty solid attacking football with setting roles/duties without complexity. You can try to get a balance when using roles/duties for the style you want, as a starting point. After that; you can make changes for different oppositions.
  10. What is the purpose of using wide attacking width+stay wider for double 10s on a narrow formation? If you want your double 10s to play on half spaces why don’t you use them as wide attackers? You want to force players on a narrow formation to play wide. Strange idea but probably it won’t work as you think. These images are not captured after attacking transtion. These are from build-up and transition. You must look for movements of your front three after attacking transition or in other words when most of your players are on opposition field and they have possession. AMCs start narrower and then they make movements what you want/force with role/duty/traits/PIs. If you want this shape, you should use double 10s as WF not CAM. I wouldn’t use be more disciplined if I wanted to create space efficiently. Focus play down both flanks. Fine, but who can be isolated with these? Both WBs are on support? How can you overload flanks with them? Do you want to isolate Libero or 3 central attackers? What is the plan? Double 10s and one striker try to attack space created by who? Who can create space for 3 central attackers? What is the purpose of using wide attacking width with a narrow formation? I see only one attacking pattern. Libero sends ball to flanks and WBs cross to 3 central attackers.
  11. Before Dybala’s injury; Allegri used a 4-4-2 with some interesting attacking shape. Firstly, this is my interpretation about their play. Allegri used Dybala and Chiesa as double 10s on halfspaces but Dybala roamed around more to create issues for opposition. Morata mostly ran into the channel between RB-RCB. Cuadrado pushed forward and wide to provide width. Alex Sandro too. Also I saw Alex Sandro in the box more than Cuadrado when they both played as FB. Bentancur played like a BBM or BWM. Locatelli was a deep option. I don’t know what LM/LW played like, I don’t decide. But I know that they tried to overload left to isolate Chiesa or Cuadrado on the right. Juventus shows improvements. Sorry for Dybala’s injury when he finally started to play better.
  12. Think about roles/duties teamwise not playerwise. Your plan is isolating RW to make him goalscorer. You use a narrow width to create this pattern. These are good ideas. You use an Anchor role. If you don’t want to play high pressing + possession football it is a perfect fit. Let’s say you wanted to create a mixed style of stuff and you preferred an Anchor. Your LB & LW partnership is passive because of LB’s weak attacking intent. Your LB & LCM partnership is weak because LB is passive to combine with LCM. LCM pushes higher before LB gets closer to him vertically. How can this team overload left with passive support from left flank and isolate right flank? If I want to create same attacking patterns, I would use a WBs instead of FB. I would also change DLPs to APs to make RCM more active. Plus I would change DLFa to DLFs to overload left and central areas more for isolating RW. If you use an attack duty CM, giving him more support around increases his impact to attacks.
  13. New pressing, passing, dribbling, new animation engine, personalized data graph… This is fine Just announce new set-piece creator and take my money.
  14. I respect every opinion unless it is one-sided. I can’t watch games full 90 minutes like real managers. Because I have no time for it. I have no time for extended or the other one, I forgot its name. I can only play on key highlights or just commentary. Timeline is the only option to turn back and see what is going on between a short period of time. Yes, removing it gives more realism to managerial experience. I’m agree. Even so; I have to spare less time for this game because of work & family. Changes like this disincline me from playing FM. Is someone planning to make this game for younger people who have more time? Did they forget their 30+ customers? Maybe it is time for me to stop playing FM because of having more responsibilities…
  15. If anyone is interested in replicating City; these are from yesterday’s PSG match: Build-up shape against PSG’s narrow 4-3-3. Attacking shape. FBs are like CMs in the middle, wingers are on the flanks, CMs are on halfspaces. I see 2-5 shape up front. I don’t know other player’s positions. Pressing shape against 4-3-3/4-3-2-1 narrow. It is clearly a 4-2-3-1. City’s defensive shape is narrow because Messi & Neymar played narrow. Sterling provides verticality and sits between LCB-LFB. LCB Laporte dribbles and passes to Bernardo Silva. FBs are ready to move inside. This season Pep often swaps RCM & LCM in matches to create variety on attacks. Second half. Laporte again brings ball out of defence. CMs get their respective attacking positions too early. Compact vertical shape and good horizontal spacing. Could we be all wrong about their attacking shape? This Laporte pattern changes everything. They are not playing as 2-3-5 or 3-2-5. They use a 1-4-5 shape on attack. Look at last two images. The bald tricked us…
×
×
  • Create New...