Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

alinp

Members
  • Content Count

    926
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About alinp

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. 51 in 53 appearances in the season I've recently finished
  2. Cool.... PI wise, my front 6 all have Tackle Harder, the AF Run Wide, the DLF Move into Channels and the IF Sit Narrower. I like that all the front 6 press, so there's no "less\2 closing down applied. The RPM & Mezz both have Close Down More & the Mezz also has Dribble More (kinda trying to replicate Ox). Henderson also has More Direct Passes. Finally, both WB's have Close Down More, Tackle Harder & Stay Wider. It's pretty intense and just to add I've also got OI's to Close Down and Tackle Hard on all Defenders, DM's & CM's. Currently 15 clear with 6 matches to go + UCL QF v Chelsea coming up.
  3. Or just try and use the ideas put forward and develop your own version. I have a similar set up that looks very similar, but using Very Fluid. Producing good results, winning PL in first season and currently holding a 10 point lead at Christmas in season 2.
  4. I honestly think that if you want Salah as your most advanced attacker and main striker, then go strikerless. Personally I'd have him as an IF(A), with Firmino as an AM (with some appropriate PI's) and Mane on the left as an IF(S). This should result in Mo being highest up the pitch and regularly fed by Firmino.
  5. Firmino... he's only been here 3 years!!
  6. From looking at your set up, I'm not sure what type of football you want to play as (in my opinion) you have some contradictions e.g. you're playing Control/Fluid, which in itself is reasonably attacking, and you have a TI increasing tempo, yet you then go on to instruct shorter passing, play out of defence and work ball into box. There's nothing stopping you doing this, but it doesn't seem logical to me. The formation you have is ideal for vertical football, with quick transitions and playing your nominal strikers into the space behind your oppositions defence - I'm not convinced your instructions compliment this. Initially, I'd just simplify it and see what happens with as you remove/add instructions.
  7. I wanted to ask how you're finding the flat 3 in the middle... I had a similar flat 3 in my save, although I had (LtoR) APa, DLPs, CMs. I was finding that with the DLPs in the middle, the opposition were finding too much space between them and the d-line (even tho I was playing quite a high line) as he was getting quite high when supporting attacks. I found that changing his role to DLPd helped resolve this as he wasn't caught high up the pitch so often and was more available to re-cycle possession if/when attacks broke down.
  8. I have indeed been using the DLP(D) role as the default for the DM more recently, changing it to a DM if I feel there's a need for something a little more aggressive. I'm also experimenting with an F9-CF(S) combo up front to replicate Firmino & Sturridge.
  9. @Rashidi I had a browse through your YouTube channel this morning, but couldn't see anything that was obviously what you mention earlier. If you do find a link you could share, that would be helpful. Meanwhile, I've tried a couple of matches using a 4312 set up (as suggested by @retrodude09 earlier - my roles though), but not convinced. I'm of the opinion that it works better with the DM in the DM strata (whether that's as a DM/DLP or whatever )
  10. See post above yours... I tried it from the CM position, but unsure. I still think he was more of a recycler than playmaker, giving that up to Phil, but I do need to test the options. That would be great interesting to see. I've was contemplating CWB(S) on the right with WB(S) left. I think they both get forward enough to merit the duty, but I guess if you played Att/Fluid that would still make the WB(D) fairly attacking.
  11. Ran my own test on this... only 1 game, so probably too early to say, but overall I'd say not. Occasionally dropped deep, but not deepest + IMO got drawn forward too often for my liking. I'll play a few more before deciding on the idea - although not tonight.
×
×
  • Create New...