Jump to content

Guv'nor

Members+
  • Content Count

    190
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 "You're a bum, Rock"

About Guv'nor

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. To get chalk on boots, attacking width needs to be maximal with focus down the flanks. Wingers need to hold position, run wise with ball, cross from byline...in effect this creates more a Fergie Kanchelskis than Pep Raheem. The latter‘s preference is for inverted runs deep in the final third with next to no crossing from the wingers/inside forwards. The inside forward is the closest one can get and falls far from the mark, the wider the attack, the more outside becomes the inside. And what’s an inside when it’s outside...
  2. Couldn't agree more with the assertion above, why the 4-4-2? Evidently, you don't have the passers in midfield, nor decent wingers on the flanks. The 2 banks of four are being broken into like it were a country western. Too late in the season to rip it all up, but once season's done, ditch the 4-4-2, pack the preseason wit friendlies and fill the training schedule, after a good dose of bootcamp, with plenty of sessions that promote tactical familiarity. Get yourself a couple of wingbacks, a decent targetman with heading, jumping reach, no pace and tendency to throw an elbow. Route 1.5.
  3. What is the team's width setting in the attacking phase? Focused passing to the flanks? What are the wingers instructions: cross more often, cross from byline, run wide with ball, stay wide? Tight M2M of the opposing fullback helps (well in the attacking third out of possession atleast) No point having 2 AMs and attacking wingers, have found this leads to more centralised play by default. Would suggest dropping one of the AMs to centre-mid, with a bit of asymmetry between the MC and AM (one left-centre, the other right-centre). Have the AM playing as a SS, this role
  4. How many algorithms are hardwired into the ME such that it cracks the whimsical codes of custom formations with bang average sides. One would imagine, many! To give yourself the best chance of success, build on the key principles of FM...no less than six players in the central third of the pitch (from a horizontal view i.e DLC/DRC, MLC/MRC...and so on), no less than 3 players making up the default defensive line (ie. player positioning on the 2D view when the opposing GK takes a goal kick, after the ball's gone out of play, width is a must, more so in this edition...direct passing if players l
  5. Gotcha. Well glad to see the adjustments worked. A little in game viewing will identify problem zones. The challenge remains to get as close to perfection as possible for a particular shape. the 3-2-4-1/3-2-5 as bold and daring as it maybe, can still evolve, in that very same shape, into a solid formation in both phases of play. Make it happen. Presently working on a multitude of motifs, the Hungarian 3-1-2-4/3-2-1-4 is proving a hard challenge but one relished nonetheless.
  6. Given that most clubs have an U23/B team and U18s, the urgency with which FM brings through new gens is a bit hasty. With each passing season, bucketloads of new editions fall off the conveyor belt, many of them with fantastic attributes at a very primordial stage in their development. It would be far better if they lessened the load, certainly in the few seasons and placed greater emphasis on developing the existing U18s. Have seen a few second/third seasons with squads full of these frankenstinian clones. A bug to be fixed perhaps? Moving on, agree with the theory of three, as far as th
  7. @Sporting, what changes were made? The 3-2 reversal at Benfica, whilst rewarding, shows they had 25 shots, it would be worth having a look at how many clear-cut chances. Given your keeper's rating, one will assume, not many. 25 chances is still a lot for the opposition, even more shots than during the 5-3 loss. Did you watch the game, where were the weaknesses?
  8. With two DMs occupying the space for inversion, the benefit of the IWB will be reduced. If not mistaken, the role description states that if 2 or more DMs, the role is almost obsolete from the inverting aspect. Plus the inversion adds to an already overpopulated central zone and further ripens the flanks for exploitation. Have used IWBs in a 2-6-2/exaggerated 4-1-3-2 with Sheff Weds (always have a few saves with the Not so Wise Owls) and Celtic. Worked well creating the 2-3 defensive shape in possession or 3-2 if DM is Half-backing. That said, think the IWB role is somewhat overrated, po
  9. Now to the point of the topic. There are a number of issues which ultimately equate to self-sabotage. 1. Firstly, whilst E = MC2, overall mentality is a product of Team Mentality and Individual mentality. Fullbacks on support in attacking team mentality, will lead to greater emphasis on the possession phase, risk and defensive disarray. Question is, what is the purpose of the fullbacks in this formation, to get forward or defend the flanks? With 5 in advanced positions, surely the fullbacks can leave their Cafu at home and go full Winterburn. Drop down the ment
  10. Finally, someone who wants to stroll through the dales to the left of the field. The gluttony of super “442s, 4132s, 4231s” is mind numbing. Once upon a time, the true Championship Manager (ode to olden times), would scratch his pencil into the back of his textbook, till there was no led left and a red ink, capitalised “see me” written by Mr Hewitt. From a real world perspective, the game is evolving far beyond the capacity of FM match engines. Play two at the back without wingbacks and 11 times out of ten, it’s a royal beating. Yet, rewind to Bayern vs Roma and Pep’s hybrid 2/3 at the ba
  11. Absolutely, No nonsense FB sitting narrow, with cuts inside in possession (granted the NNFB seldom runs with ball). Centrebacks with decent pace, anticipation and positioning can serve well as NNFB. Stays back at all times helps and ensuring the intended player stays back at set pieces too, helps in game positioning in different phases. Playing CBs with flank to foot incongruity (boom!!!), in other words, left footed CB playing as a NNRB. Its a bit lopsided, but does achieve the back three of some sort.
  12. Now to the point of the topic. There are a number of issues which ultimately equate to self-sabotage. 1. Firstly, whilst E = MC2, overall mentality is a product of Team Mentality and Individual mentality. Fullbacks on support in attacking team mentality, will lead to greater emphasis on the possession phase, risk and defensive disarray. Question is, what is the purpose of the fullbacks in this formation, to get forward or defend the flanks? With 5 in advanced positions, surely the fullbacks can leave their Cafu at home and go full Winterburn. Drop down the ment
  13. Finally, someone who wants to stroll through the dales to the left of the field. The gluttony of super “442s, 4132s, 4231s” is mind numbing. Once upon a time, the true Championship Manager (ode to olden times), would scratch his pencil into the back of his textbook, till there was no led left and a red ink, capitalised “see me” written by Mr Hewitt. From a real world perspective, the game is evolving far beyond the capacity of FM match engines. Play two at the back without wingbacks and 11 times out of ten, it’s a royal beating. Yet, rewind to Bayern vs Roma and Pep’s hybrid 2/3 at the ba
×
×
  • Create New...