Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 "What we've got here is a failure to communicate"

About Jaye

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. This is cool. You've got players occupying space evenly across the pitch and control of the half spaces. Then you've got runners arriving late to exploit the space created by the opposition backline being moved about. A few questions: Do you find the IWs occupy the same channel as the IWBs too much? My instinct would be to use two Wingers instead. What duties are you using? The way the IWBs attack the box I'd assume they're on an Attack duty. I'm guessing DLP(D), AP(A) and IW(S)? Related to the above, what mentality are you using? A danger on this set-up is the p
  2. I said as much in my own post. Right here: "Of course, those coaches have a logic for all their tactics, but they're outside of the box and often against convention. In FM, you can do the exact same thing. You can be successful with tactics using a traditional set-up of roles/duties plus a handful of instructions AND you can be successful doing something unconventional." I said nothing about defensive solidity. You're assuming that on your own. What I'm driving at is there are multiple routes to creating a working tactic and we shouldn't be shooting down attempts to make something extreme
  3. You can check out the Vertical Tika-Taka preset in-game for ideas on how to set-up this style of play. Answering these in turn: Playmakers naturally slow play down as they look for the next pass. This is actually a good thing, especially in bottom heavy formations, as it gives other players a chance to make a run or move into position. Moreover, playmakers will, by default, seek out the more direct pass when the opportunities arises. DM(D) is a safe pick in most 4-3-3 set-ups. BWM(D) could probably work, but you have to watch his positioning. The role is more aggressive but
  4. I'm not huge on terms like "well-balanced", "logical" and "sensible" when we describe tactics. These imply there's a "correct" way to set-up tactics which simply isn't the case in a sport that has so many different set-ups and routes to success. Some real life examples of "unbalanced" tactics. Gasperini's Atalanta, using overlapping centre backs and man marking all over the pitch that leaves a lot of space, but scores a high number of goals. Bielsa's Leeds, constant movement off the ball, rotations everywhere, pressing high, etc. Both successful teams. Are they using exploits? Pep Guardi
  5. Offensively, I think your forward roles lack thrust. The DLF(S) and TM(A) will drop deep, leaving nobody to run in behind and take advantage of the longer passes from the BPB and NCB. I'd keep the Target Man and change the DLF to a Pressing Forward, Advanced Forward or Poacher, if you've got on in the squad. Defensively, the right flank is concerning because the Mezzala and the Wing Back(A) can be caught high and wide in transition, leaving your right channel exposed. Moreover, if you're Mezzala has low tackling, teamwork, work rate and bravery, he's not going to be much use when protect
  6. Since your board expects promotion, you're probably one of the stronger teams in the league. However, using Lower Line of Engagement and Lower Defensive Line means you're trying to play a counter-attacking game, as you're standing off the opposition and allowing them possession in your half. You'll be winning the ball on the edge of your penalty area, which isn't the most optimal spot to launch counters from. Since Passing, Decisions and First Touch seem to be on the weaker side, I can see why you've opted for a more direct game. Drawing the opposition out is fine, so I'd recommend bumpin
  • Create New...