Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


26 "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"

About retrodude09

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Based on my own experience, an IWBd will move into the defensive midfield line, so I think it would look something like this: BPD (D) - HB (D) - CD (D) IWB (D) DLP (S) Unless this is what you're going for?
  2. Here is my attempt: The idea is for us to attack in various ways. Centrally, we have a F9 backed up by a SS so we should set lots of rotation from them with the F9 dropping deep with the SS moving higher which in theory, should make it hard to defend those two players. On the left, we have a Ws (roam from position), MEZs & FBd. The winger offers us width while the Mezzala should look to attack that left half space while the FBd looks to cover behind the two of them. On the right, again we want to take attack the same areas but we want to do it differently with a IFs, DLPd & WBs. The IFs should look to attack the half space & get beyond the striker at times with the WBs offering us width with the DLPd providing cover behind both these players. As I said, we want to attack the same areas of the field but both sides look to do it differently. The FBd, CDd, CDd & DLPd make up a sort of asymmetrical 3-1 in the build up phase which gives us a solid base to build from. I may switch either the IFs or WBs to an Attacking duty as well as making the FBd a IWBd but that would give me more of a 2-2-6
  3. I think they stay wider if you play a 4-1-4-1 / 4-4-1-1 with the wide players in the ML/MR strata rather than AML/AMR
  4. I actually disagree with this slightly. An IWBd would still move into the defensive midfield area & this probably represents Cancelo's role at the moment. Although, I would argue that he's an IWBs considering he's popping up everywhere. The opposite FB would possibly be a FBd to give you your 3 & the player in front is probably a DMd to give you the 3-1 shape. The 6 in front are probably a little harder to create & it will depend largely on the formation you use as a starting point.
  5. Everything you need to recreate this tactic is in the opening post. I'm sure in the last few pages some people have adapted it to FM21.
  6. Yeah I think Newcastle could be good. Leicester you would have Barnes, Madison & Vardy plus the likes of Tielemans & Ndidi
  7. I've been thinking of starting with either Leicester or Newcastle & I think this could be perfect for both of them. Maybe a couple of tweaks to roles to suit the players but the style itself should lend itself well to both teams. Hopefully as I get better & my reputation improves, I could tweak the style a little but even then, it should invite those teams that want to "park the bus" out a little more & create space.
  8. What about just a change in personnel? Fati at AML & move Coutinho back as one of the midfield 3 to add a goalscoring threat from there? Or even a formation change, could a 4-2-3-1 work with this squad with a front 4 of: Messi Fati - Coutinho - Griezman
  9. I went with IWB & W combination just for a little bit of variety but from what I said, the IWB didn't actually invert
  10. This is actually something I'm interested at replicating in my current save with Liverpool but I'm waiting until the end of my current season to try anything. Maybe something like: CF (A) IW (S) - AM (S) - W (A) HB (D) - RPM (S) WB (A) - CD (D) - CD (D) - IWB (S) SK (S) As I said, I haven't tried it yet but that's what I initially plan to go with.
  11. Wasn't it at Bayern where Pep really introduced Inverted Wingbacks to create his 2-3-5 shape in order to control transitions? So with that being said maybe something like: CF (S) W (A) - Mez (S) - Mez (S) - W (A) DLP (D) - IWB (D) - CD (D) - CD (D) - IWB (D) SK (S) Positive / Play Out of Defence / Counter Press / Higher Defensive Line, Higher LoE & More Urgent I went with IWB on Defend because my experience of them on Support is they still go marauding forward & you really want them to create that 2-3 basis for the formation. I would say across all three teams / styles, some Tis (if not all) would remain the same because Guardiola is very fixed in his principles & how he wants the game to be played. Your starting XI with the current Bayern team would maybe be: Lewandowski Sane - Goretzka - Muller - Gnabry Kimmich Davies - Alaba - Sule (?) - Pavard Neuer With the option to play Sane & Gnabry on the opposite sides.
  12. This is interesting because I've thought about using something similar for Liverpool when starting out with them however mine was in a 4-3-1-2 with Firmino as the 10 behind Mane & Salah. I never really tried it though & now have Haaland in my team so unlikely to.
  13. I see this a lot on the forum & I'm a little confused by it to be honest. Surely by slowing the tempo of your play down, you're giving the defensive bus more time to shift & adjust as opposed to if you move the ball quickly?
  14. @04texag- Whats the thinking behind giving the AMR the "Hold Position" PI? Won't this make him less of a goal threat?
  15. You're right, they haven't aged fantastically but they're still a good place to start in my opinion. My midfield 3 is set up similarly to yours, in terms of duties anyway = DM (D) - DLP (S) - CM (A) & I've found that my DM (D) tends to stay fairly well connected with my CBs when we're in the attacking third. He'll sometimes move to be an option to help us recycle but I think thats what Busquets did too. Could this not be achieved by teaching the CB the trait of "Brings Ball Out of Defence" & thus wouldn't affect your defensive shape?
  • Create New...