Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Keyzer Soze

Members+
  • Content Count

    2,635
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Keyzer Soze

  • Rank
    Semi Pro

About Me

  • About Me
    Barreiro, Portugal

Interests

  • Interests
    FM

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Benfica

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Benfica

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the Development center! From all the new feaures anounced this is the one that would have a big impact in FMT.
  2. Hi, Your version of the 41221 is very similar to the one i'm using in my save, with the big difference being the roles of both fullbacks. Bur before talking about that, could you please explain the reason to choose the "overlap" instruction and using IWB in both flanks? What to you expect with that combination of roles and team instructions?
  3. Don't really get the underlap instruction. You have 2 IF cutting inside, plus 2 midfielders with defensive duties, why are you telling your wingback to underlap? You'll end up with a very congested center area. I also agree with @Experienced Defenderabout the LOE, and I'll add the D-line instructions. It would make more sense to drop your defensive block. Also, you don't need to use more direct passing and higher tempo to play counter attack. That instructions will automatically "turn on" when a counter occasion occurs. To finalize, I don't have much experience playing with TM, but I think your role choices are a bit one-dimensional. Your midfield pair will stay too deep and it will participate very little. You'll end up depending too much on the ability of your AP to make any kind oglf attzcking play. And also, by having 2 IF, both on attack, you will attack the same way from both wings (unless the players that are playing there have very different traits and attributes that will modify the way that they play).
  4. The behavior of the Mezzala is very different when in compare with the CM, so it's natural that his movement is different and he will appear in different areas of the pitch in particular the areas just outside the box, that perhaps, in your tactic, make him appear in a better position to shot and score.
  5. @kurupted I gotta be honest, when i look at your thread, i assumed that could be a good oportunity to discuss a tactical sistem that, at least for the people that follow the portuguese league, really interest football lovers, despite of their clubs. I had the proper respect for your opening post, saying that one of the beautys of football is that everyone see it in different ways, in terms of how the team and the players play the game. However, since then i'm getting the feeling that you don't deal very well with other users that have and share a different opinion. For me, the fun part of this thread was seeing different users posting their interpretation of Benfica tactics. We had at least 4 or 5 different versions, some more similar then others. But for you, it seems that you've made the thread with the clear idea that your interpretation is the right one, and any other version is wrong. Perhaps, next time it would be better if you simply post your tactic in the upload/download section and don't allow any comments from other users.
  6. Very nice interpretation of Benfica tactic. I only have doubts about the right midfield position, where I think Pizzi don't play as a winger but more like a third central midfielder, and the forward position, because with a CF on support I don't think you will explore the back of the opponent defense, like Severovic do irl. Edit: nevermid both comments. After reading the rest of the post, I realize that you already cover those two situations. Great job
  7. Like i said, everyone has their own interpretation. Mine is just different from yours. I just get the feeling that you got a little bit lost between trying to emulate Lage tactic and making a tactic that worked in FM.
  8. Yes, I realize that the left flank would be very exposed, but irl Benfica took lots of risks with Grimaldo and Rafa playing there. Many times we would see them going up side by side leaving big area exposed in the back. That was compensated by, Samaris that cover that side, and by the left center back that slightly drift to that side. That's why I think Samaris plays IRL as a BWM because he needs to cover a big area in that midfield. But, that risk cost Benfica, for example, the semi final in the Portuguese cup, where a bad transition in the left side, with Grimaldo trying to run with the ball, and with Rafa already up in the pitch, lost possession to Bruno Fernandes that scored a great goal. Lage tactics have some issues in transitions, in particular in defensive transitions, but in possession, it produces beautiful football. I think that this set-up that I made also suffers from the same issues.
  9. The beauty of football is that anyone see it in a different way. As a Benfica fan, I've watched, with joy, many games this season, and I must confess that my view of the tactic is very different from yours. Goalkeeper: Odisseias is not a sweeper keeper, unfortunately, because in some games we could avoid some probrl3if he plays further up the pitch. He plays always inside the box, taking very little risks. A plain and simple goalkeeper with defence duty. Right back: André Almeida is more a fullback with support duty. Yes he goes up the pitch, but always with less risk when compare with Grimaldo on the left. Whe don't see him roam from position. I some games he play more like wingback, getting more up the pitch, but most of the time he plays like a fullback. Left back: In here I agree with you, Grimaldo is a complete wingback, but for me he plays with a attack duty. Centerbacks: Ferro and Ruben Dias, make a very solid back line. Ferro, imo, his a perfect ball playing defender. He tries long passes a lot this season. Ruben Dias is central defender. However he does try to bring the ball from the defence, so that trait his a must to emulate the way he plays. Center midfield: The most common line up in the center midfield was the combo Gabriel + Samaris. For me this is DLP(s) + BWM(s) combination. Yes, both on support. Gabriel, the DLP, must have the trait to switch the ball to the other flank. Samaris, the BWM, must have the instruction to hold position and dribble less. Right Midfiled: 100% agree with you. Pizzi is a wide playmaker, but I'll give him a attack duty. Bare in mind that then WP(a) don't get further forward by default, and Pizzi have the trait to come deep to get the ball. Left Midfield: The left midfielder, usually Rafa, is not a wide playmaker. He plays very close to the box, many times acting like a second forward. I would use him as a inverted winger on attack. I would make him learn the trait to get into the opponent box. Forwards: To me this is no brainer. Felix is a trequartista playing in the attacking midfield strata and Severovic is a pressing forward with attack duty. In relation with team instructions, I agree with some that you've choose, but some I don't think make much sense in the way Benfica plays. For example, I don't see Benfica preventing the opponent goalkeeper distribution, I don't see the team, as a whole, pressing more urgently, I don't see the team focus the passing through the middle or being extremely wide. In fact I don't even think that play with a mentality so attacking because they don't rush the play that much. So, I would probably go with something like this: Mentality: positive Instructions: pass into space, work ball into the box, whipped crosses, be more expressive, distribute to center backs and full backs, counter-press, counter, higher d-line, higher LOE, use offside trap. Like I said I the beginning, everyone sees football in a different way. I don't even think if this could work in football manager, but, with the tools that FM gives us, this is the way I would try to simulate Bruno Lage tactic.
  10. The game don«t have a team instruction to tell the team to switch the ball to the other flank. If you want to make your wingers to do that, without learning the trait, you could give them the instrution to take more risky passes. Apart from that, it all comes down to the player attributes (decision, passing, vision, etc). But, why don't you make the players you want to do that learn the trait?
  11. Lowering the line of engagement, could be a good idea if you have fast players upfront. Your team will start defending deep in the field, and it will be more compact. You'll let your opponent get higher in the pitch before starting to press them. You could change your mentality with any tactic, but you ust realize the impact that that change will have in your team and player instructions. For example, you already are telling your team to pass more directly, by increasing the mentality this will be even more increased. In my current tactic (4123 wide DM), i also start the games with a balanced mentality. I set my team to play with higher tempo so everytime i change my mentality to attack i also drop the tempo to standard and add the instruction to work ball into the box. If i don't do that, and with the roles/duties i have in my tactic, i'll end up with long shots galore that will leave to nothing. I never lower my mentality below balanced. If i think i need to defend, i prefer to change the players roles or duties or other team instructions. Lower mentality change too much the pass length in particulary in the defence and i don't like the way the team just can't keep the ball. Out of curiosity... you are managing Sporting in Portugal? If that the case, you should play to win the league... not finishing mid table.
  12. When the W(a) hit the cross, you will have 2 or 3 players in the box: DLF(a) and iF(s) for sure, and depending on the player you use, the CM(a) will be your third man. It's quite good. I don't think you'll have too much problems on your right side. the CM(d) + FB(d) will give the proper cover. In fact, in some games i would change the FB(d) to a IWB(d) or even a IWB(s) to give you that extra man in the midfield. Could be handy against more defensive sides. With this last version, you cleary have a left side that will built up the play, and a right side that will score most of your goals. I wouldn't be surprise if your W(a) would be your top scorer, so choose wise the player to use there (Little tip, someone with get into opponent box trait is a must). I would drop the TI to overlap on the left side, because you already have a natural overlap with the roles and duties you have chosen: WB(s)+IF(s). Don't forget that the WB(s) have the instruction to get forward by default. With the instruction to overlap you are telling your IF to hold position more, and you need him in the box. i would also drop tight marking instruction. Unless you have a team with good players with defensive attributes, i think it's very risky telling your whole team to mark tight. You can easily be thorn apart against teams with fast and with good off the ball players... like pretty much all the top teams. Last but not least.... why did you lower the line of engagement? Because of the counter attack instruction?
  13. If you look at the CF(a) default instructions you will see why. With attack duty the CF is pretty much a one man show. He will get the ball, and will try to score. He will dribble, he will move into a channel, he will not be the team player that you need in your current tactic. You need someone that score goals, but also helps get into play your IF(a) and your MC(a). You need someone that holds the ball and waits for the support, and with a CF with attack duty it's difficult to achieve that.
  14. Hi, About your choice for player roles i kinda like it, altough i have a couple of concerns about: 1) your midfield trio, with CM(a)+BBM(s). I'm seeing two players going into the opponent box, leaving ony the BWM(d) left behind in position to give a option to recycle possession. On top of that your left side with FB(a)+BBM(s)+IF(a) can get easily exposed. I would, probably, changed the BBM(d) to a more positional player, perhaps a DLP(s) or a CM(s) with the hold position instruction ticked on. 2) I don't think your choice for the lone striker is the best one, in particulary when you have a IF(a) that needs space to cut inside. I would changed to a CF(s) or, if you want a forward with a attack duty, a DLF(a). But, apart from those tweaks, what i don't really get is your choice for some team instructions... Waste time sometimes... why? Play out of defence, with take long kicks and distribute quickly.... why? Extremely wide...why? You already have a W(s) stretching the play? Why are you making your IF(a) stay further away from the box?
  15. Well, yeah, but by a close margin. Like i said in the post, the main purpose of this tactic was making the CM(a) the focal point , so by doing this the striker don't score as much has in others setups. But, in the end, and one thing i like about this tactic is the variaty in terms of goalscoring. So, for example in this season i have, for the top 5 positions: DLF (Raul Jimenez): 20 goals, 10 assists IF (Rafa): 15 goals, 11 assists Winger (combine between Zaracho and Zivkovic): 16 goals, 18 assists CM (Gedson Fernandes): 18 goals, 5 assists AP (combine between João Felix and Pizzi): 16 goals, 11 assist I like when tactics do this.... goals and assists coming from all over the place!
×
×
  • Create New...