furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 The FM 41221 (433 –451 – WoW) Introduction As with all popular and enduring formations the FM 41221 is a flexible and powerful formation from which you build your tactical framework. For the sake of this post I'm going to continue to call it the 41221 but in reality this formation will predominantly play out like a 433 or a 451 – it should really be called a 433 or a 451 depending on how you set up your tactical instructions and your personnel selection but as I'm going to start the ball rolling on the basics of the formation I'll call it after it's shape in FM – the 41221. So,I present the 41221: The Basic 41221 Shape The41221 is typified and categorised by use of a lone striker and by use of a DM. The rest of the formation can be fairly flexible in their employ but the roles of the FC and the DM set this formation apart from other popular formations such as the flat lines of the 442 or the dual holding midfield of the 4231. The roles of the wide players dictate whether this formation is considered a 433 or a 451 but the general accepted usage is that the wide players will be primarily attackers so this formation is more often comparable to a real-life 433. I'll discuss this in more depth later in the post. Part of the confusion amongst FMers is that a 433 is associated with a flat 433 with 3 CM's and 3 FC's, however, a 433 in real-life is usually more akin to the FM 41221. I'll also look to go through some basic mechanisms that make this formation tick, where they have a grounding in real-life, how they transmit to FM and finally look to go through how it plays out against a few other popular formations. At some point I'll add some typical examples of how this formation attacks and defends but this brings me to the key point of the intro: As the topic of this thread is far too large for just one guy to maintain this thread should definitely be considered COMMUNITY PROPERTY! It'll be more about the discussion than the opening post so get posting and let's start some opinions on how to use this formation and how to make it better! (There is a lot of info here so feel free to post about parts of it rather than the whole lot all in one go) The 4-3-3 Basic 433 A 433 is typified by a tight midfield triangle which can hold the middle of the pitch and by 3 attacking players. The 3 attackers can be employed fairly tightly or they can be spread and employ movement to be destructive. I'd argue that the latter is the most oft-seen. It has several tactical advantages to station your wide strikers very wide (i.e. in the AMR/AML slots). Firstly, it balances the formation and creates inherent width and with width comes gaps. Against a flat back 4 there will be 3 gaps which is perfect because you have 3 guys running at those spaces. If your midfielders push higher than the opposition then they are in a position to exploit those gaps with accurate passing and you've created a devastating dual pivot (or the Xavi-Iniesta carousel of doom) purely through tactical placement. Employ fast, hard-working attackers who are good off the ball and creative, passing players at MC and you're on to a winner. The second advantage of wide wingers is that they will naturally find themselves in more space. They can float into the gap between defence and attack and look to pick the ball up deep and either run at the defence (ala early Messi or early Man Utd Ronaldo) or look to be a provider (Iniesta at times – particularly for Spain - , possibly Nasri in this role for either Arsenal or City). Another advantage is that they will naturally be in a better position for a quick counter attack. Generally if the other team is attacking in earnest at least one full-back will move forward to join the attack – by positioning a player in this space you always have an outlet for a quick counter and this player should be supported by the FC who, given some creative license, has hopefully moved into some space as the wide player collects the counter. This last advantage is often overlooked but really typifies the difference between employing your wide players in the AMR/AML slots rather than the MR/ML slots. If you're placing them in the AM strata then you're considering them to be attackers – this means they should stay high. You'd want them to track back occasionally when you're heavily overloaded but their primary role is to provide an outlet for a quick counter. If you want them defending more comprehensively then put them in the midfield. A further advantage is that the natural placement of AMR/AML means that the attacking play of opposing full-backs is negated which has some interesting side effects. Against narrow formations with numbers in the middle the full-backs must provide a definite wide threat but in order to do so they must leave their team dangerously exposed to the quick counter via AMR/AML. The role of a full-back is often to recycle possession when options are limited in the centre but the positioning of AMR/AML naturally prevents this too which leads to riskier passes and more chance of winning the ball back –classic passive defending. The 4-5-1 The Basic 451 The basic premise of having 3 men in the middle to win the midfield battle remains but the wide players must play more as midfielders than attackers. For me this is very hard to achieve when using your wide players in the AMR/AML strata for the reasons stated above but the formation is often depicted as a 451 in real-life. The role of the wingers is this case is supporting rather than directly attacking so you'll often have to provide support to the lone striker in different ways. Arsenal with a young Fabregas probably typified this at times. With a triple pivot midfield it was often difficult to quantify whether Fabregas was a midfielder, an attacking midfielder or, at times, a support striker. With Rosicky, Nasri or Lauren wide they would usually adopt supportive roles (Arsahvin at times too but was more attacking, Walcott obviously more aggressive). This meant that they needed a further player utilising the 'negative' space behind the FC in this formation (more on that later). This system evolved very definitely into a 4231 as time went on. Bolton's classic formation under Allardyce was a more obvious example of a 451 where the wingers dropped in-line with the midfield whilst defending but it is debatable whether they should be considerd AMR/AML or MR/ML for FM purposes. Allardyce often gave license to a midfielder (e.g Okocha) to move forward to more directly support the striker to compensate for deeper wide players. The W-o-W The WoW I'll keep this section brief as it really just explains a basic premise of the natural separation in this formation. The diagram says it all really – there is a clear definition between the back 5 and the front 5. The mentality structure laid out for Fluid by FM further defines this but unless you really set about to break up this positioning then this is what you'll get with the 41221 shape - but it's pretty crucial to making it tick (I'm not saying you need Fluid for this formation at all, I prefer Balanced but whichever you choose there will often be this WW shape). For your MC's to really dictate how you attack they need to push on into the negative space between DC's and MC's so they'll have some degree of separation from the DM – obviously the game is fluid and this definition of a triangular midfield is dynamic (as shown with the Arsenal/Fabregas example above). Whereas the popular 4231 has one creative guy in this space and only 4 primary attackers the 41221 shape is more attacking and uses 5 primary attackers. Defensive stability is created through the triangle shape created by DM, DC, DC and I'll go into this in a little more detail a little further on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 Basic Mechanisms The Classic Bluff – The Negative Space The Battle for Control of the Danger-Zone The most dangerous area of the pitch is directly in-front of the GK but the DC's sit there (either 2 or 3 of them) so in practical terms it is the space in-front of this that becomes the most dangerous area. Sure, getting to the byline is dangerous but it is a secondary threat as the ball must be played into the central area to score. Not so with the area in front of the DC's because it is a direct goal threat as well as being just deep enough to be a deep threat. Many mechanisms attempt to disrupt this space – placing an AM or 2 in this space (e.g. Kaka, Riquelme, Stankovic, Fabregas), employing a split striker mentality system (e.g. Linkear/Beardsley, Bergkamp/Henry, just about Rooney/Welbeck at times), using advancing midfielders (e.g. Gerrard, Okocha), wide players cutting in (e.g.Nasri, Iniesta). But what's going on in this formation – no-one is using that space? Oh no, hang on, they all are! Yep, the beauty of this formation is that it inherently leaves space in the most dangerous area of the pitch which automatically puts doubt in the opposition – do I mark that space and leave a player unmarked or mark the player and leave the space unmarked? As that area is left clear there are numerous different ways of using the space. The Messi/Van Persie Method The FC drops deep into the Danger-zone FC – Treq or Deep-lying forward - Supp. AMR – Inside Forward - Att AML – Winger - Att MC's – Adv.PM/CM - Supp Employing a player in this role is asking a massive amount of the player but if you have someone with immense talent then it's a very attractive way to utilise the danger space. By dropping deeper the CB's have a real issue to contend with – do I follow and leave space or let an immense talent have some room to manoeuver? Creative ability is often required but having the ability to run at the opposition as Messi or Luis Suarez do is also desirable. Mental and technical ability need to be abundant. To compensate for the FC dropping deeper and the gaps that might arise from that movement it is probably best to use the wide-players in attacking roles where they will look to get beyond the FC into more direct positions to attack (e.g. Villa at Barcelona, Walcott/Chamberlain/Gervinho, and presumably Podolski if RvP stays). I've put the MC's with a support role because they probably don't need to occupy that space as it'll just cramp the FC although there are numerous ways to use them – including encouraging them to run beyond the FC into the gap his movement will hopefully create. The Drogba Method The FC stays high and enlarges the Danger-zone FC – Adv.For or Complete Forward – Att AML – Adv.PM – Supp AMR – Inside Forward – Att MCr – Numerous roles – Supp MCl – CM – Att Drogba absolutely typifies the high FC in a more direct version of this formation. His role is to be a massive handful with his ceaseless movement and physicality – defenders need to be worried about him running beyond them, around them or smashing them in the aerial challenges. This keeps them honest and keeps them pinned back which means that the dangerous area gets bigger. There are still numerous options for using this space. Typically Mourinho's Chelsea pushed their wingers forward in more direct support of Drogba which accentuated his ability to win 50/50 balls from defenders. The midfielders became more supporting in nature although Lampard often moved further forward to pick up the pieces from the destruction the front-three caused. The roles I've suggested are a slightly more complex assymetric version that attempts to attack the space with 2 players – the AML and MCl e.g. Joe Cole and Frank Lampard. The FC in this system can afford to be less creative but must have some mechanism for magnetizing defenders – in Drogba's case this was physicality and direct goal threat but Van Persie has played this type of role as well, in which case he interests defenders mainly with his positional awareness and uncanny knack of hitting a gap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 The Dual Pivot A Typical Dual Midfield Pivot With the safety of the DM behind them the 2 midfielders are free to be the creative heart-beat of your team. They need to push in-front of the opposing midfielders in order to have the best chance at finding the critical pass to the front-three. The Xavi-Iniesta combo typifies this mechanism best as Busquets rarely ventures forward but because Busquets has some creative ability as well it is a difficult decision to leave him unmarked to concentrate on Xavi and Iniesta. At times Chelsea have employed a dual pivot in this system using 2 of either Lampard, Deco or Ballack although it was nowhere near as effective as the creative and technical mastery that Barcelona possess in their midfield. Lampard and Essien could be considered a dual pivot with Makelele holding behind but Essien was primarily static and the dual pivot should really refer to fluidity of position amongst both midfielders. Some nice ideas for the midfield combo: MCl – B2B/CM/Adv.PM – Supp MCr – B2B/CM/Adv.PM – Supp DM – DM/Anchor – Def The simplest and arguably most effective way is to match the role and duty of the midfielders (I normally use Adv.PM-Supp), employ plenty of creativity and choose 'smart' midfielders. Decision-making is crucial in making this work effectively. In terms of player selection I usually like to use contrasting players with the same roles so that their natural attributes define the difference in how they play. The Triple Pivot A Midfield Triple Pivot - Featuring a 'Hinge' Player This is a slightly more complex and progressive variant of the dual pivot whereby all 3 midfield players are more fluid. When employing this system the midfield become a core (albeit a fluid core) around which the rest of the team can operate. It doesn't really matter whether this core is 2-1 in alignment or 1-2 as it's primary role of creating space for itself and occupying defenders remains the same. Arsenal's former midfield of Fabregas/Wilshere/Song was so fluid that it is hard to tell who plays where at times as Song is also game for a foray forward. It requires incredible teamwork and mental ability to cover effectively for one another in such a fluid setup. Chelsea's midfield of Lampard/Essien/Mikel could be considered a triple pivot as it is able to rotate with either Essien or Mikel at it's base or with them both forming a base and Lampard more advanced. There are numerous ways this can be achieved in FM but one such way in the 41221 shape is to assign one of the midfielders a 'hinge' role and have the other 2 rotate around him as in the diagram shows above. Some suggested roles to achieve this could be: MCl – CM/Adv.PM – Att (High mentality / RFD often) MCr – DLP/CM – Supp (Medium mentality / RFD rare) DM – Modified DM – Supp (Medium to highish mentality / RFD often or normal) The difficulty here is getting the DM to step up into the space vacated by one of the MC's. By restricting the other MC you're trying to ensure that when MCl heads forward you have created a holding midfield to cover behind and create some depth in your formation. It's definitely possible in FM and it's an attractive way to play –setting it up isn't easy but it's alarming how effective it can be in creating space. The Defensive Triangle The Defensive Triangle and The Defensive Box As this formation encourages the MC's to push on and is primarily attacking with 5 attacking players (this can be increased to 7 very easily by using aggressive, attacking FB's) you need some way of minimising the counter-attacking threat against you. This is primarily achieved through shape. The defensive triangle formed by DM, DC, DC is actually very hard to break down quickly and funnels attacks wide where it takes more time to work the ball back centrally in order to score – this time allows other players (particularly hard-working FB's) the time to recover their position and secure a solid defensive platform. Beyond counter attacking stability this formation is capable of defending the most dangerous area on the pitch with 5 central players (the blue box in the diagram). These players form a tight box (MC,MC,DC,DC) with the DM floating free inside. The position of the DM flanked by 4 players means that he is either man-marking an AM or is free to pick up threats as they enter this dangerous area. In fact, with the correct player in at DM he will be free to pick up threats moving all across your backline. Whilst a stopper/cover combo can work it isn't really necessary if you use a solid, holding player in at DM (i.e. Anchorman/DM – Def) so 2 CD roles for your DC's is a good choice and maintains a solid triangle shape. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 Real-life 41221 Shape Jose Mourinho and Chelsea's Smashmouth 433 Chelsea under Mourinho circa 04-06 I've mentioned this type of tactic several times in this discussion already. For me it's typified by the role of Drogba in keeping the defence pinned back and by the role of Makelele who has a destructive defensive role to perform and a very simple attacking role. Arsene Wenger and the Invicibles The Invicibles circa 03-05 Okay, so this is a little strange as an inclusion into a discussion about the 433 but in many ways the formation employed by The Invicibles attacked like a 433 – it certainly has many of the characteristics that define the success of a 433. Henry often stationed himself wide and ran centrally at the defence. Ljungberg was similar but stayed wide more often and arrived slightly later. Bergkamp was free to drop deep from FC. Pires often moved in from the left wing as Henry occupied that position so could actually be considered as an attacking midfielder (of sorts) who made more central runs. This left Vieira who sometimes moved forward and Gilberto who rarely ventured forward and played the holding defensive midfielder role. When Pires held wider and Cole overlapped it definitely looked to overload the left side and leave Ljungberg free on the right but with Pires moving inside (as he did more so towards the end of this period of dominance) it definitely looked like a 433. Alex Ferguson and Ronaldo/Tevez/Rooney Manchester United circa 07-08 Again, this formation was primarily a 442 with Rooney and Tevez as strikers and Ronaldo and Giggs as wide players but due to it's assymetry it often attacked like a 433/4231. Rooney and Ronaldo ended up playing wide and attacking the centre with Tevez creating space with his tireless running centrally. Due to the talent of the front-three they often changed positions to further confuse the defence. Giggs tucked in and often played very centrally with Scholes in a slightly more traditional midfield role and Fletcher/Carrick with a more holding role. Josep Guardiola and the Xavi/Iniesta Carousel of Footballing Mastery Barcelona circa 10-11 Whilst the tactical plaudits have often headed towards the use of the front-three in many ways it is the accomplishment of allowing Xavi & Iniesta space in the middle to express their technique and creativity that has led to Barcelona success and has allowed Messi to fire the bullets these 2 have been loading for him. There have been a number of different versions of the Barcelona 433 but all revolve around Xavi & Iniesta pulling the strings in midfield whilst the wide players act predominantly as direct attacking threats. At first Yaya Toure would have a bit more freedom to move forward but this soon changed as he started to perform the role we now deem synonymous with the Barcelona DM role where the DM is often subsumed into the backline to allow the FB's to move aggressively forward and provide width as the wide attackers drift more centrally into the space vacated by the deep-moving FC. The traditional variant had a triple pivot with Toure also allowed freedom of movement. It also features Messi & Henry on the wings as very aggressive attacking players and Eto'o through the centre who played a predominantly high role. These 3 all possessed incredible movement to open gaps that the incredible creativity of Xavi & Iniesta would exploit. Towards the end of the season though Toure would drop deeper which left a dual pivot – the role that Busquets or Mascherano now have firmly adopted. Having played with Ibrahimovic in a high role, Guardiola moved to swap Messi with Eto'o and grant him permission to really drop deep from FC. More recently it has been Villa & Pedro/Sanchez on the wings who often act more as wide strikers than anything else. There will probably be a shift away from this fantastic Barcelona style as players age and with the departure of Guardiola but the success of Barcelona using this system has been incredible and is a great example of what happens when tactical execution and team selection are perfectly matched. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 reserved..... For observations when facing specific formations Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 reserved for future use For '41221 in the wild' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 ...reserved.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 ....reserved.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRL88 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Well everyone elses threads look **** after this!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 Thanks SRL88, praise indeed as there have been a number of threads of VERY high quality recently! There's a little more to come but I think it's going to have to wait until tomorrow - the diagrams are taking a little long than planned and the forum keeps re-formatting my cutting & pasting which is annoying. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steakfaced Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Ooooh looks like I've got some lunch reading for later Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommonufc Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Wonderful read, great work! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karnage94 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Oooh fantastic read that was. My only problem is that I can't question any of that. Comprehensive coverage of the 4-1-2-2-1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOSEPH! Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 As always Furious great work. You wanted a discussion and a community thread. When time allows I shall contribute but once again you've outdone yourself Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwinsFan86 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Absolutely fantastic read! I would add something constructive, but you haven't left anything out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaunwwfc Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 That my friend, is a brilliant, brilliant thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleon Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Why do all the good threads always appear when I've been away for a few days, so have loads to catch upon and read a quality thread like this. Could have gave me a heads up Nice work fella, can't wait to have a proper read Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
llama3 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 very good read - i have a slightly (but not massively) different take on a few roles on the Chelsea 04-06 and Arsenal 01-04 teams being released at the weekend/monday in my team and tactics guide. Interesting ideas, high quality thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommonufc Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Reading through again, and picked up on the discussion of the 'dual pivot' of the two offensive midfielders in a midfield three, and the triple pivot of Arsenal; but perhaps I could raise the use of double pivot - being two holding players. Double Pivot Look around many of the top European club sides and International teams and you will see the use of two midfielders that will sit deep and orchestrate their teams play, circulating the ball, receiving it from their defenders and moving it onto the offensive players in the side - Alonso/Busquets, Schweinsteiger/Khedira, Scholes/Carrick, Britton/Allen . When I first came across the term 'holding-midfielder' it would have been Claude Makelele who anchor the Chelsea midfield under Mourinho and act as a defensive barrier in front of his back four - looking back now, I see Makelele has a very defensive player, maybe even primitive compared to many of the holding players you will see in the game now, and the next development of my personal understanding of the holding player would be the use of Bastian Schweinsteiger and Sami Khedira in the 2010 WC for Germany. Here I would say would give the perfect example of a double-pivot in action. Bastian Schweinsteiger goes under the nickname of 'The Brain' in Germany, this can be pretty self exploratory when you look at him being the nerve center of the German national side, as well as Bayern Munich. From deep he will be able to control the midfield through assertion on the ball, and with help of Khedira with Germany and someone like Gustavo or Tymoshchuk next to him for Bayern he will always have a close passing option horizontally. The use of the horizontal passing I believe to be the main factor that a double pivot will give to your side, and when looking to control the play I will always look to have at least two players who will offer themselves for such passing in deep areas of the field. Andre Villas-Boas sums up this point brilliantly in the following quote, explaining how coaches will look to use these defensive midfielders as bases from which offensive play can be built - albeit the point he's trying to make is why can't these defensive players become more adventurous with their passing in terms of looking forward - something that the following pair of Alonso and Busquets in my next example are perfect exponents of. "Top teams nowadays don’t look to vertical penetration from their midfielders because the coach prefers them to stand in position (horizontally) and then use the movement of the wingers as the main source to create chances. So, you, as a coach, have to know exactly what kind of players you have and analyse the squad to decide how you want to organise your team offensively. And then, there are maybe some players more important than others. For instance, many teams play with defensive pivots, small defensive midfielders. And, except Andrea Pirlo and Xabi Alonso, and maybe Esteban Cambiasso and one or two more, they are players that are limited to the horizontal part of the game: they keep passing the ball from one side to another, left or right, without any kind of vertical penetration. Can’t you use your defensive midfielder to introduce a surprise factor in the match? Let’s say, first he passes horizontally and then, suddenly, vertical penetration?" Evolution of the Spanish midfield Above you will see the two line ups that Luis Aragonés used at the 2008 European Championships. As you know, this was the first of crowns that the Spaniards have gone on to win; and the style of play, known as 'Tiki-taka' was first highlighted on the World stage. Since then the Spanish side have gone on to achieve even greater success, with Vicente Del-Bosque. Back in 2008 Aragonés played with one recognised holding midfielder - Marcos Senna. The team would invariably line up from what would be seen as a 4-4-2, albeit an extremely fluid and creative 442 - this would see Senna paired with the teams orchestrator Xavi. In the 2008 Euros the was a noticiable changing point in terms of the shaping of Spain's midfield that hasn't looked back since. Previously, as you can see, two strikers would be played in Villa and Torres; but after a lackluster Semi-Final first half against Russia in that competition David Villa was replaced by Cesc Fabregas through injury, thus changing the shape of the team to become the image you see on the right - creating a 4-5-1, or 4-1-2-2-1. Spain went on to win that game 3-0, as well as the Final against Germany. The changing of manager from Aragones to Del-Bosque has seen the continuation with the 4-1-2-2-1 brought in for the 2008 semi-final second half, but has now been almost radically transformed to be able to assert Del-Bosque's mantra of control onto the side. Below you shall see the 2012 Euro Final line up against Italy, four years on from Euro 2008 and very much different. The fluidity of the Spanish side, the willingness to interchange positions and feed of each others movement is almost recognizable on Football Manager I believe, it's not so much a formation as a system. What you are able to impleiment to great affect is the double-pivot action that Xabi Alonso and Sergio Busquets undertake. I'd consider their positions in game to be seen as DPL(s) and Anchor for Alonso and Busquets respectively. Here, under the system that is set out to maintain possession and assert control over the opposition, you will see that they do this by taking up the space highlighted in front of the defence. From here, invariably the opposition will drop-off and regroup into their positions for fear if they were to press in an uncoordinated manor they would be dissected through crisp counter-attacking movement and passing between their lines. So due to the space that is created in this highlighted zone it allows Alonso and Busquets the time on the ball to calm proceedings through their passing between each other and their defenders. From here, they will look to move the ball on either horizontally to full backs or Xavi whom drops deep, or as AVB outlines to forward to offensive players that are moving inbetween the lines of the oppostition - Silva, Iniesta, Fabregas. I've no doubt skimmed over some points that could have been made, and talked more about the replication within FM, but hopefully shall add some talking points and reference into the thread. Please excuse any spelling as it was rather rushed Hopefully you weren't planning on this talking point, and I've spoiled a surprise Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 very good read - i have a slightly (but not massively) different take on a few roles on the Chelsea 04-06 and Arsenal 01-04 teams being released at the weekend/monday in my team and tactics guide. Interesting ideas, high quality thread. I'll look forward to seeing that - I'm not a massive football historian and I was busy being a sportsman rather than reading about them back in the early 00's so it'd be good to hear some different views on it. Reading through again, and picked up on the discussion of the 'dual pivot' of the two offensive midfielders in a midfield three, and the triple pivot of Arsenal; but perhaps I could raise the use of double pivot - being two holding players. Double Pivot Look around many of the top European club sides and International teams and you will see the use of two midfielders that will sit deep and orchestrate their teams play, circulating the ball, receiving it from their defenders and moving it onto the offensive players in the side - Alonso/Busquets, Schweinsteiger/Khedira, Scholes/Carrick, Britton/Allen . Some cracking points and it's an absolute omission that I didn't at least mention that the double pivot is more suited to the 4231 these days (although with a fluid midfield trio defining the exact shape of the midfield becomes moot because it's be changing constantly based on what is happening in the game). A deep double pivot just gives a little license to either of the pair too with the reliance that the other is already in position to cover - Schweinsteiger often arrives late and Alonso scored from a header in the Euros (final/semi-final?) after showing his game-reading ability and heading forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommonufc Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 I'll look forward to seeing that - I'm not a massive football historian and I was busy being a sportsman rather than reading about them back in the early 00's so it'd be good to hear some different views on it. Some cracking points and it's an absolute omission that I didn't at least mention that the double pivot is more suited to the 4231 these days (although with a fluid midfield trio defining the exact shape of the midfield becomes moot because it's be changing constantly based on what is happening in the game). A deep double pivot just gives a little license to either of the pair too with the reliance that the other is already in position to cover - Schweinsteiger often arrives late and Alonso scored from a header in the Euros (final/semi-final?) after showing his game-reading ability and heading forward. Yes, Alonso scored his header against France, and from the spot - Khedira scored that belter against Greece after some good build up play. Here's the link to the game - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18355075 - just about 1.00min on you can see Schweinstiger holding position as Schrulle has spread wide. Schweinstiger then moves it out to Boateng, from which Khedira has ventured into the box unmarked when he scores. Personally I always seem to find fun in setting a team up to keep the ball, and have found great success in the use of double pivots. The most prominent I remember was the use of Fernando Gago paired with Yohan Cabeye or the more forceful Tiote in a Newcastle save, made a few posts about it in the Newcastle thread at the time here. Obviously those are rather extreme examples, but I've found you can have great flexibility around the rest of the team from which a base is made from - those two in midfield. You mention the safe guard of one playing when breaking forward, knowing there is another to cover - that's something I hadn't thought too much when writing the post, and in general the defensive side two players in these positions could give you. I'd more focused on the offensive side of things, and how a double-pivot can act as a springboard from which the rest of play is built from. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOSEPH! Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Obviously those are rather extreme examples, but I've found you can have great flexibility around the rest of the team from which a base is made from - those two in midfield. . Couldn't agree more. With my Madrid team a perfect example of this, perhaps to a far extreme, would be Alonso/K Asamoah. It is the combination of these two that builds, literally and metaphorically speaking, a platform on which to build attacks. Not only when defending have you pronounced the all important defensive triangle (two CB one DM) to a more secure square you also have a fantastic base on which to launch a successful counter-attack. The interaction and relationship of the two have a huge impact. Two Asamoahs wouldn't be helpful however the intelligence (in terms of passing and positioning) of Alonso makes up for the brute-like aggression Asamoah brings. If Asamoah closes down too much Alonso covers. If Alonso launches forward as he does IRL then the instinctive defending of Asamoah allows him the creative freedom to do so. It is interesting this thread has popped up and the discussion of the two DMs too as I have just had an interesting game against Barcelona (two variants of the 4-5-1 against each other) which, when I have finished looking over, will provide some interesting points. I feel it is worth mentioning my Madrid team won the game 4-1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 If you get your basics right then pretty much anything is possible - a house built on good foundations and all that. I think when you're creating a tactic people often jump in too quickly, they see all the possibilities stretching out for their team and leap ahead too far. You need to make your base and get that working right first of all and then add on bits and pieces as you go. My Brazilian thread showed a bit of my thinking on this where it started with a concept and kept adding bits on - I've just added a different variant before th World Cup begins and as I was reading through the other excellent Brazil thread just posted it reminded me. Getting your base right, whether that's a single (i.e. 1 holding mid), dual or triple pivot should be got working first. Then you can decide whether you stick your big man or your little man up front, whether you have creativity or brutality on the wings etc etc. Similarly this works if you have a fulcrum or focal-point for your team further up the pitch. Whatever you 'thing' is, get that working and then bolt the extras on to it over time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pakito Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Great read! I am personally a fan of 4-3-3 and of its High Priest here in Italy, the one and only Zdenek Zeman and managed to have a few variations working pretty well (as usual, note that I'm still on FM11). I also enjoy the countering capabilities of the 4-5-1 when I'm up against a much stronger opponent. There are a few key points I would like to talk about given my experience with this formation: 1. The playmakers My personal preference is for an inclined triangle with two playmakers operating at different height - that is to say, a deep lying playmaker (DPM from now on) and an advanced playmaker (APM), both on support, backed by an anchorman (AM). I used to go for a pair of APMs as suggested in the OP, then settled for the DPM/APM pairing after trying it out for the sake of exploiting Karagounis' defensive capabilities while managing Panathinaikos, and never looked back. While this sounds less aggressive than a double-APMs system, the presence of a DPMs allows for the occasional long balls from deep that APMs would tend not to try - and that more often than not prove absolutely devastating with coupled with speedy inside forwards. Also, having the playmakers at different heights will make them either less prone to be closed down by two opponents, or leave one unmarked (unless facing a diamond). If more steel is needed, I replace the APM with a ball winner on support (which in times of need is heavily tweaked to look like he's on defend - no forward runs, long shots... yet left with his support-level mentality and closing down) 2. The defending midfielder Here it's tricky - I used to want another playmaker here (albeit a skilled defender, think Veloso, Gago or M'Vila), but then figured out that an anchorman fits better behind the DPM/APM duo - the long balls are provided by the DPM at MC. If I was to go back to a double-APM system at MC, then I'd return to play a triple-playmaker triangle. 3. The fullbacks I mentioned Zeman. I adore attacking fullbacks I prefer to keep 'em both on the same role as I don't use wingers upfront (only inside forwards or advanced playmakers) so I need both to provide width (or both to support - I refuse to play a solid back 4 unless staring at a possible massacre - read on). Hug touchline is a must: width, width, width. 4. Possession football and counter-attacking football The best thing about this shape is that it allows perfect triangles and a truckload of offensive players for possession-based football, but can be converted into a fortress with a couple of changes - I learnt this best at Panathinaikos where I could walk the league without any problem, but had to face much stronger opponents in the CL. Change the Inside Forwards to Wingers on support (if you're *really* scared, push em back to MR/ML) and the Fullbacks to defend, use a fast poacher upfront (I had Cissé) set as target man running onto ball, sit back and enjoy - the harder they come, the harder they fall. With a designated ball winner (the DM) surrounded by 5 players (or even 6 if you go for a double-DPMs; 7 or 8 if you have the luxury of ball-playing defenders...) capable of feeding the lonely striker with balls overhead or crossed from deep, the counterattacking capability is unmatched by any formation I'm aware of. 5. The triple pivot I have a slightly different take on this setup as well - I was trying it out at Genoa with excellent results but the rest of the team was not setup the way I would set it up now. My bet is that it'd be extremely interesting to have this kind of formation: DR: FBa hugging touchline DCr: DCd DCl: DCd DL: FBd DM: DPMs MCr: BWs (modified as mentioned above) MCl: CMa AMR: IFa AML: Wa ST: whatever as long as he stays central when attacking, it should look something like: AML --- MCl --- ST --- AMR --- DR ------------ DM --- MCr ------------ DL --------- DC --- DC Now, my problem's to get the DL to act as a third central defender and for the back 3 so formed to work properly - something I can't manage properly. This is of course designed to counter a team playing two strikers - if you're up against a front 3 (or a lonely striker), then the AMR would play as a winger and the fullbacks would be on defend or support depending on the situation - a much easier setup to get to work. The shifting midfield triangle, however, does work as intended. Hope this can be food for thought for somebody =) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaniv242 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 because of these kind of threads i love this forum! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yonko Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 furiousuk, Excellent thread! It's been a while since I've posted here, but threads like that can "wake me up". I'm especially happy to see a thread on the 41221 formation, which is my choice of formation since CM became FM. Of course I've tried other formations a long the way, but I always come back to my beloved 41221. A few people here may have recognized me as a long time Barca fan (since 1990) and thus I've played only with Barca (and no other team) since FM11 and now FM12. Of course, I currently have one of my many Barca saves on FM12. I want to see your take on having Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta used as DM-s, DLP-s and AP-s respectively. I don't think this combination of roles gets the best of these players, particularly Xavi, in terms of passes made, assists and facilitating possession control in the current FM match engine. I've always found that it's better to have Iniesta as AP-a/Fabregas as CM-a and Xavi/Thiago as AP-s. Or to keep it as is, but give Xavi as the DLP-s mixed RFD by adjusting manually. In addition, the "wide play" of all 3 midfields could be set to "moves into channels". Also, in regards to Messi, definitely the most suitable role is as Treq-a, but at times I've often found that he can be equally devastating as CF-s, because that takes huge advantage of the numerous diverse PPMs he has, allowing him to equally drop deeper or run behind the DCs getting on the end of a through ball. Anyway, I like the fact that you have described different variations of the 41221 based on assigned player roles. I guess in general I'm wondering if in addition to different roles, perhaps different manually adjusted instructions can get more of a particular set of players. For example, I like to give my center midfielders "move into channels" instructions, as well as to my DCs. I know from a previous thread of yours that you also like to do this for your DCs. BTW, I do not think that Arsenal's "Invicibles" team used a variation of the 41221. I think Wenger used more of a variation of the 4-4-2. And the team with Song, Wilshire and Fabregas was more of a 4231. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yonko Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Just wanted to add a few other things...... I always play my 41221 with Balanced Philosophy and mostly Control Strategy (Counter when wanting to be more defensive). But wanted to know what benefits would Fluid bring? How would it affect passing? Another thing is about Creative Freedom. Does it affect movement off the ball - horizontal and vertical? As you guess it, I'm looking for more passes, more possession and loads of goals :-). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gee_Simpson Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 What a great thread this is and I've been looking forward to it since you mentioned you were going to create it and I haven't been disappointed! It is especially useful to me as I'm currently using a 41221 with PSG and I'm looking for more ideas as I'm not the greatest tactically, this thread has provided the information that I can use to my advantage so thanks for that. You are a credit to these forums mate, well done Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Bestie7 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 I would certainly include the attacking/defensive role of the full/wing-backs. If someone used a "Messi" style system with one or two inside forwards on the wings, the width is then created by the backs pushing forward. This is a massive part of the central attacking play because without the backs, the defending team can tighten up and restrict the space in front of their defence by almost squeezing their fullbacks into being 4-central defenders (actually seen in some games against Barcelona last season). The attacking backs are then pushed forward to stretch the defending team's back line and restrict this from happening as often as it might (again, vs Barcelona the opposition countered by using their wingers as fullbacks so it was a 7-man defence but this is a very rare tactic). Without this width attack, the team can be quickly nullified if against a solid defensive united. However on the other hand, if the opposition has fast attacks and the squad is able to switch between the Messi/Chelsea versions of the 4-3-3 then you can then have more defensive backs to increase defensive stability while having the wingers keeping the pitch wide and the CMs moving forward (as described). Essentially it must be remembered that the fullback roles are as important for the attacking phase as any of the CM-WG/IF-ST are. If someone makes the mistake of wanting Wingers and wingbacks, there is too much width and not enough penetration. Inside Forwards and defensive fullbacks means not being bale to stretch the play and the opposition's defenders can congest the centre. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaycar Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 This is an utterly outstanding thread about one of my favourite formations, just brilliant stuff fury! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iLikeTrains Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I am currently playing the same formation and its wonderful to see how you explained all this stuff so easily that anyone can understand it. Chapeau for taking time for this wonderful thread! But do you mind if I would ask if you could share the Arsenal tactic? I always wanted to play like the Invincibles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaniv242 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Question for all of you if im laying the Arsenal way With a Deep lying forward suport the messi\vanpersie way... What should me tempo and width should be?right now im playing very wide and slow thanks very much Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Bestie7 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Question for all of youif im laying the Arsenal way With a Deep lying forward suport the messi\vanpersie way... What should me tempo and width should be?right now im playing very wide and slow thanks very much The van Persie Arsenal play(ed) neither exceptionally wide nor with a slow tempo as far as I can tell. The width is provided by the choice of if Walcott players on the right or a more IF type player and Arsenal generally don't play with a slow tempo but rather a possession based style in the last 1/3rd of the pitch. Standard-Control settings with a play ball into box shout (plus perhaps others) should give a relatively close showing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
b101 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Great read this, always useful to have a fresh take on how to exploit space. Always wanted to build a formation using a great complete forward as well - might aim for that now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbobBRFC Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Excellent write up Furious top read, wish I had more time to write up articles but I barely have time to play the game let alone write about it. Always been interested in setting up a double pivot and have even attempted a triple pivot at some point. It is very hard to get right I found but when it does produces some excellent possesion football. I seem to remember it was set up something like: -------------GK----------- -FB/S--DC/D-DC/D--FB/S -----DM/D---------------- --------------MC/S------- -W/S------T/A-------IF/A -----------AF/A----------- Manually tweaked the roles of the three central players so that they sort of switched positions, regularly found the DM popping up in the box and grabbing a goal. The only problem was it was weak down the left hand side as the DM tended to sit slightly more to one side. Going forward to front three (AML/R & STR) were brilliant to watch, the Treq was everywhere linking up play. I got the idea from a thread I think Lucatonix wrote a while back on the triple pivot. As you mentioned in the OP it is very much like Arsenals Wilshere/Fabregas/Song trio with Fab being the AMC, Wilshere being the MC and Song the DM. I think I actually tried it with Arsenal but brought in an extra AMC for the creativity. Ive got a Barca save somewhere on my computer, might fire it up and try to create a pivot system, it has always interested me. Might even try my hand at creating one of these posh threads and base it on the triple pivot. If you dont mind it being pretty similar to yours Furious. EDIT: Probably wouldnt be similar actually because mine would be based more around the 4-2-3-1 rather than the 4-5-1/4-3-3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmonfu Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Mint thread Furious, well worth the wait! Threads like these make me want to visit this forum every day! Keep up the good work Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 27, 2012 Author Share Posted July 27, 2012 Thanks for all the kudos guys, much appreciated. Glad this is taking off, there have been some amazing points raised. Thought I'd written a lot but the topic is so vast there is loads still to pore over! Gonna try and get some examples done as well as theory is all well and good but we all like to see that theory take flight! if im laying the Arsenal way With a Deep lying forward suport the messi\vanpersie way... What should me tempo and width should be?right now im playing very wide and slowthanks very much Yeah I agree with Bestie, Arsenal don't play that slow or that wide (Walcott adds width but usually cuts inside, Sagna then provides width when he has time to bomb forward, which he does enthusiastically). A standard/control setup sounds good and should set tempo and width where you need them. Arsenal play with the ball far higher than many other teams which means they can't afford to play slowly, their movement is ceaseless (and sometimes fruitless!) and if their technique and teamwork were as high as the tactical system requires they would be absolutely incredible - as it is playing that high means that any mistake is more easily mopped up by the opposition but, of course, conversely, any opposition mistake is more easily capitalised upon. It's a risky way to play but can be a very exciting one. I am currently playing the same formation and its wonderful to see how you explained all this stuff so easily that anyone can understand it. Chapeau for taking time for this wonderful thread! But do you mind if I would ask if you could share the Arsenal tactic? I always wanted to play like the Invincibles. I roles I've got a only vague estimates, particularly for The Invicibles example as that formation is very hard to simulate in FM. It's a 442 but it's so mutable that if you hit pause on several of their different attacks and asked someone to name the formation I think you'd get everything from 442, 41221, 433, 244, 235 - infact, there were times when either Campbell or Toure headed forward and they were probably only left with the other CB and maybe Gilberto/Parlour for protection. It was unbelievably attacking but the players had the technique, workrate and movement to allow them confidence that they would keep the ball or lose it either scoring or firing a shot wide or over. I think there is a thread being written that will go into more depth about The Invicibles and how it might work in FM, keep an eye out for that! BTW, I do not think that Arsenal's "Invicibles" team used a variation of the 41221. I think Wenger used more of a variation of the 4-4-2. And the team with Song, Wilshire and Fabregas was more of a 4231. Yep, that's definitely fair comment. The Invicibles were a 442 but the formation moved so much when attacking that it could easily be considered a 4231 or a 41221 at times - infact, very often it pushed Henry, Pires & Cole wide left with Bergkamp & Vieira shuffling over too which left Ljungberg free on the right, I'm not sure what you'd call that attacking shape but it's not massively dissimilar to how Spain or Germany have pushed to one side and left either Villa or Podolski free on the other side. I'd say that The Invicibles formation switched to a 41221 though once Fabregas and the next breed arrived. It wasn't until later that Arsenal assumed a 4231. It switched/switches between the 2 midfield shapes though fairly regularly so it's always been difficult to say whether Wenger prefers/preferred a 1-2 or a 2-1 shape in his midfield. Probably depends as much on the players. I always play my 41221 with Balanced Philosophy and mostly Control Strategy (Counter when wanting to be more defensive). But wanted to know what benefits would Fluid bring? How would it affect passing? I've always favoured Balanced. I like a nice fluid team and have used more global mentality structures (like very fluid) from time to time but have found that it's harder to define the general directions you want players moving in which often means that your 'formation' can be quite prominent. Fluid would likely define the seperation between the front 5 and the back 5 although it would depend massively on which roles you selected for players. Logically, very fluid or fluid should suit this formation quite well as it would allow the front 5 to buzz around the danger area and be supported by the DM and FBs but I'm not sure it quite transmits to FM, depends what you want really. As I say, I've always favoured Balanced. In terms of passing fluid is supposed to make your movement more 'fluid' so, similarly, the passing amongst your players would be more fluid also. It's not hard-coded in though, choosing fluid basically just sets up your mentality structure. Another thing is about Creative Freedom. Does it affect movement off the ball - horizontal and vertical? Yeah, I've always thought that CF affects movement as well as the player decision-making process. I've written a little more here Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 27, 2012 Author Share Posted July 27, 2012 Might even try my hand at creating one of these posh threads and base it on the triple pivot. If you dont mind it being pretty similar to yours Furious. No problems my end - the more the better as far as I'm concerned! EDIT: Probably wouldnt be similar actually because mine would be based more around the 4-2-3-1 rather than the 4-5-1/4-3-3 As pointed out somewhere the 4231 naturally sets up a very effective dual pivot. Even with dual DLP/def roles, if you use lots of creative freedom, they'll have a foray forward at some point (whether you want this or not is a different matter). Whilst the 41221 and 4231 are antithetical in nature, they come from the same principles, it's just that the triangular midfield is inverted. The implications of this switch are many and varied but because the formations share a common basis you can create various systems for mutating between the 2 mid-game. This has been exploited in real-life in several ways, a little less reliable in FM as there is more emphasis on the underlying formational position. It's still exciting to try though! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbobBRFC Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 No problems my end - the more the better as far as I'm concerned!As pointed out somewhere the 4231 naturally sets up a very effective dual pivot. Even with dual DLP/def roles, if you use lots of creative freedom, they'll have a foray forward at some point (whether you want this or not is a different matter). Whilst the 41221 and 4231 are antithetical in nature, they come from the same principles, it's just that the triangular midfield is inverted. The implications of this switch are many and varied but because the formations share a common basis you can create various systems for mutating between the 2 mid-game. This has been exploited in real-life in several ways, a little less reliable in FM as there is more emphasis on the underlying formational position. It's still exciting to try though! Yeah I found the easiest way to create the pivot in FM is playing with Mentalities and Forward runs, pegging the MC back a bit and giving the DM slightly more license to roam almost brings them in line. A good amount of CF is needed to give them the opportunity to get forward if they feel they should. I can imagine with less intelligent players it would be pretty poor but with a good intelligent team (Arsenal, Barca, Spain etc) it could work wonders. I think the important part is going to trying to get the DM and MC in line with each other when attacking and defending and getting the fluidity between them, bring the Treq closer up to them as well and it should be a pretty effective triple pivot. Going to be a lot of individual editing of instructions to try and bring them together. Very exciting to try, I can never start a save and keep with it always buy players to try and mould a team into a system then I find another formation I want to try and move onto that. Oh well eh Not got access to FM at the moment so struggling to try anything, ive got a introductional piece nearly finished but not sure whether to open the thread or wait untill Ive got a proper full analysis. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Mou Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Awesome thread again, furious. As my post count indicates, I am much more of a reader than a contributer, but I've grown a real appreciation for your threads. They are always extremly informative and very well-written, great stuff Actually, this thread has given me the inspiration to go and try to create a Triple Pivot, but I'm currently doubting my approach a bit, would really appreciate some help whether my ideas are practical and where I might be going wrong. I picked a mediocre team in Germany's third division, so definitely no fancy stuff. My midfielders definitely fit the triple-pivot though - I have one natural defensive midfielder who is a really good finisher for my standards (11 for finishing) and actually scored 7 goals IRL in the season 10/11. He is decent in other 'offensive' attributes as well, first touch is 13, passing, decisions and creativity are also pretty good coupled with good stamina. In addition to that I have a really talented CM-A and a decent playmaker, who would play as the 'hinge' player as you described it. Roles are DM-S, DLP-S and CM-A. My problem is up front, to be honest it's a bit of a luxury problem. I have a Drogba-like forward who's my best player (and my only really good striker as well), 190 cm, 87 kg, pretty much a beast and perfect for the Drogba-role. So, common sense tells me I should try out your Chelsea setup for the front three, with two attacking IFs and one CF-A. The thing is, I want to play possession football and like to employ a freakishly high defensive line and I'm not sure whether this would work with the current roles. I mean, even though I think it was at Chelsea when Mou claimed he had never seen a match when his team had less possession than the opponent, you definitely wouldn't consider the 04-06 Chelsea a tiki-taka-side. I'm just unsure whether the style of a triple-pivot, short passing and a Chelsea-esque forward line could be made to work, especially as my IFs aren't world beaters. I'm still in preseason and so far it looks decent, just beat a Dutch second division team convincingly 4-2 with more than 60% possession. Still, would like you guys to give me some feedback so I can probably rethink the tactic while still in preseason. Kind of ruins a save for me when my tactics are working poorly the first few matches, would like to avoid that. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOSEPH! Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 As mentioned earlier I recently had an interesting game against Barcelona at home. It was a battle of the two most dominant teams in the league by some way, as expected, but more importantly it was a bit of a tactical battle of variants of the 4-5-1. I have managed better results than Barcelona in terms of points this season; I have a 100% record whereas Barcelona have drawn a game. Barcelona have put the more impressive performances in down to the scoreline though (6-0,7-0 etc) with Messi putting in the best first season I have seen from him ever on FM with 28 goals in 22 games including 9 assists and 10 MoM and an average rating of 8.7. This presented me with a problem as you'd expect however their attacking three wasn't my primary concern. Mascherano, Iniesta and Xavi were. I was concerned that my line up midfielders wouldn't cope with their attacking and creative prowess. The ability Iniesta and Xavi have needs no explanation really. I was confident in my defence's ability to cope with the movement of the front three and, most importantly, their fluidity. My philosophy in terms of tactical battles in FM is that I want the opponent to change to accommodate my tactics, not the other way round. I want them to blink first, so to speak. This isn't to say I don't adapt my team selection and tactics to the opposition however, for example, instead of defensively handling Dani Alves I would look to pin him back with an attacking fullback. This whole philosophy was key in my team selection. Team Selection Analysis I do recognise the kits are different to the screenshots of the game however selection was the same. Error on my part. So first off a look at my team selection in response to what I expected Barcelonas to be. It did turn out to be different; sneaky Guardiola. As game starts and previous formations would suggest Dani Alves would start at RB with a typcal Abidal, Puyol & Piqué forming the rest of the defence. This was important in my selection at LB and AML. Marcelo had a very, very attacking set up with Di Maria for the first time employing a play maker role (this turned out to be the difference in the game, more later) with the aim of exploiting any space the advancing Marcelo would create from the isolated Dani Alves or the space he would leave bombing forward. As it turned out it was a very, very defensive back four. I put this down to the attacking threat my team does carry however it does make sense as he has given his attacking players complete license to do what they do best! As we have discussed a solid platform in defence is key to building your team around. Guardiola has sent out a back four that gives Xavi, Iniesta, Messi and co. the license to roam, perhaps more so than they usually do, while at the same time dealing with my potency in attack. His midfield three is, however, exactly as Furious pointed out in his analysis. Asamoah's positioning (SRL has employed this shape to great effect in his thread) is key here. Not only have I paired him defensively with Carvalho, an incredibly intelligent defender, he is also quick, strong and well positioned enough to cover any space Marcelo leaves as he goes forward. Carvalho being intelligent enough to cover for any players out of position. Pepe set to Limited Defender suits his attributes well (strong physically however he doesn't shine through as being particularly intelligent) and paired alongside Ramos I have two very physical, dominant players to cope with Villa's movement supplied with Barcelona's passing. I don't need extra cover from Abidal as even if he does get forward he carries no threat. Down to how Barcelona have played throughout the course of the season it was fairly clear that Iniesta was the more advanced CM out of Xavi and himself. Not only has he scored a lot more he also has more assists. Xavi's passing has been a joy to watch at times but Iniesta is the more attacking. When we were up against an attack from Barcelona Marcelo did employ his defensive position well, matching Messi in pace excellently. Asamoah had Iniesta and Alonso managed to contain Xavi. I realise that my two CMs are set to different sides than the Barcelona two however their fluidity means that although they hold a basic shape there is no chains holding either down. This is an example of where I decided player selection and how each player compliments each other was more important than an exact formation match up. If Asamoah was on the right hand side of defence I wouldn't have had the faith in Carvalho to maintain an intelligent position while covering Marcelo's gaps. Pepe and Ramos needed no extra help either and I couldn't have Alonso dropping any deeper than absolutely necessary either. This is the difficulty with Barcelona's 4-5-1 variant. Their fluidity and strength across the board, wide and middle, mean that forcing play to the flanks with that all important defensive triangle (two CBs one DM) just makes things worse. These match ups were key to my whole tactical premise against Barcelona; ensuring I had my team set out to bring the best out of my players while ensuring Barcelona's were kept in check. When is that not the aim though hey?! In all honesty the realisation that the Barcelona were the technically superior team helped. My dominance in the physical department meant that matching player for player never troubled me. My attacking selection was in keeping with this. The match ups were key. Ronaldo has Abidal beat all day. Higuain has the anticipation, off the ball movement and pace to beat their centre backs despite them both being very intelligent and strong -- I trusted my creativity from Alonso, Ozil and Di Maria to be the deciding factor in the match up in my Attack vs Defence. I will illustrate this well in a bit. This set up also was in place to stop Barcelona building from the back. Typically the FBs would push up, CBs would go wide and provide a good base to start. The less than attacking full backs of Abidal and Puyol meant there wasn't this threat to deal with therefore the attacking positions of Di Maria and Ronaldo restricted building from the FBs. Higuain held the CBs with Ozil pressing Mascherano high up the pitch. Alonso holding Xavi in check and Asamoah tracking Iniesta. This is all in theory of course and I was hoping it would work out. Here is an example of Barcelona trying to build from the back: Player Selection In Practice As you can see Abidal has the ball at LB. Ronaldo's natural attacking position is pressing him. Pique isn't available as the aware and threatening Higuain is on his case. Only players I feel are a realistic passing option have been highlighted - Abidal doesn't have the ability to make that risky pass across the face of goal. The eagle eyed of you will realise that Xavi isn't in their midfield three. He was injured, thankfully, within two minutes of the game. I truly believe this had a huge impact on the final result. In all honesty he was being played at 72% condition and up against an energetic midfield pair of Alonso and Asamoah he was never going to last long. It allowed me to be a bit more creative. Busquets does need picking up but he doesn't carry that attacking threat. This whole man-for-man dominance I tried to implement actually lead to a goal in more than one situation. Here, Abidal actually goes long and diagnoal to Messi who is in no position to pick up a poor, too short pass from Abidal. Marcelo heads clear, Ozil collects, Di Maria receives and lays it to Higuain who scores. I wouldn't call this pressure in the sense that the Barcelona team were being pressed aggressively. I would call this good field placement. None of my players are out of position therefore the pitch is well covered. I'm not pressuring technically amazing players but instead holding my own positions, all designed to restrict the Barcelona way of playing. In attack I hoped these match ups would stick; here is one example: Player Selection In Attack This was actually an attack that lead to a goal. Marcelo was afforded such space on the left due to his late arrival and how narrow my normal attacking four forced the Barcelona back six to be. As you can see every player is matched up to another. This was indeed my plan from the start. From left to right: Di Maria has Bartra and Puyol occupied with fantastic moving into channels; Higuain has a huge, huge amount of space with only one player marking him. Ronaldo, as always, has Abidal beat in every way (he actually scores in this move); Alonso and Ozil are keeping Mascherano and Busquets busy. Barcelona's lack of defensive positioning from their wingers is actually their downfall here. Although they do have players in a fantastic countering position they are all more than covered. Statistical Analysis Real Madrid Heat Map / Real Madrid Passing / Di Maria Passing Barcelona Heat Map / Barcelona Passing / David Villa Passing As you can see from the heat maps Barcelona sat back a lot more. We had a lot more presence in their box and they had to defend a lot wider to compensate for my attacking prowess. If you notice that my right wing occupied a lot space nearer the byline than my left. Normally I require width from both Ronaldo and Di Maria however, for the first time, Di Maria employed an advanced playmaker role. I asked him to drop slightly deeper and utilise the channel a bit more. The placement of Alonso, my most creative midfielder, was key to utilising the attacking prowess and ability of Ronaldo and I asked Di Maria to be that more creative to compensate for the lack of creativity on the left hand side and to provide Higuain and Ozil with a bit more ammunition. You can see both of these points in the passing. Barcelona's passing was very central and not too probing (refer back to player placement) however my highest concentration of passing was in the final third. I played a lot more direct than Barcelona (partly due to weather conditions) leaving the real creativity to flow in the final third as oppose to across the board where I feel I'd get outmatched. The game though, I feel, was won in our utilising of our attacking players. Although Barcelona's movement at times was superb they never really threatened inside the box. The balance of creativity and direct attacking threat from Marcelo, Di Maria, Ozil, Higuain, Alonso and Ronaldo provided a lot of food for thought for the Barcelona back four. The passing of Di Maria and Villa, the equivalent Barcelona player, highlights this. Di Maria's passing was a lot more positive. It showed he had options and most importantly time to pick those out. Villa's passing was often negative and, in general, a lot deeper. Di Maria's passes were a lot further up the pitch. The fact that Di Maria dropped deep a lot more pulled Puyol out of position which allowed Marcelo to utilise that space. No tracking back from the Barcelona AML meant we had a lot of success down that flank. You'll notice from Villa's passing and the positioning of the Barcelona three up front compared to the original formations that they rotated positions a lot -- something I noticed for future reference! This is a meaty post I know and there is a lot to read and take in. I guess I want to point out different varieties of the 4-5-1 variant and look at how I decided to counter the Barcelona 4-5-1 and highlight how important of a factor team selection can play against a technically superior side. 4-5-1s are key to modern day football and provide a wide variety of attack and freedom however it is fair to say that they do contain the same fundamental weaknesses - that is why often 4-5-1 vs 4-5-1 can be a high scoring game. Recognising the flaws in an opponent aND deciding how to play their tactics can nullify those flaws in your own system while exaggerating your own strengths. Please comment, criticise or anything you feel you need to! Hopefully this has been a good analysis of two of the more impressive sides in European football in the modern era when it comes to FM. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2008 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This looks excellent and much appreciated Ive always wondered how I could get a 4-1-2-2-1 to work in an attacking sense and this has given me a few ideas. I look forward to reading the whole of this later and hopefully I can contribute my findings at some point Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yonko Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Nice analysis. If you had to guess, what would you say were the roles Guardiola set for his players against you, particularly in midfield? It looks like Messi and Villa switched flanks, but I'm surprised Messi played on the wings. Also, it looks like Busquets subbed in for Xavi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOSEPH! Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Nice analysis. If you had to guess, what would you say were the roles Guardiola set for his players against you, particularly in midfield? It looks like Messi and Villa switched flanks, but I'm surprised Messi played on the wings. Also, it looks like Busquets subbed in for Xavi. Well noticed. The fluidity of the front three was a problem for me and actually what led to their only goal from Iniesta. Messi, Villa and Sanchez, as you rightly pointed out, were switching positions regularly. The premise of my defence since they switched remained the same. I was confident in their abilities to cover them successfully as the Barcelona full backs provided no attacking threat whatsoever. Perhaps Messi being on the flanks was in part in the hope of limiting my full backs to defending. They are often key in opening up defences with the width they provide. In terms of analysis of their player roles here is what I reckon (I will ignore the keeper): The Barcelona back four was fairly rigid in its structure. I feel this changed as the game went on but from their starting 11 I would say: Puyol (RB) - FB defend He rarely left his half and had very aggressive man marking instructions against Di Maria. He went in hard a lot which forced my hand in a change in tactics with Di Maria. Bartra (CB) - CD/LD defend He came on 2" in. Although a very, very well rounded player he did need to be fairly tightly controled due to Piqué's role. He is also young and prone to buckling under pressure. Piqué (CB) - BPD defend As in real life. A few attempted defence splitting passes from deep and always made himself available to his team mates in defence. Fantastic player. Abidal (LB) - FB defend As with Puyol. Fairly aggressive man marking however Ronaldo managed to find the flaws in this. Abidal had a 5.0 end of game rating. --- Mascherano (DM) - A defend This is how it started. I feel that this changed into a more modified DM (as explained by Furious in this thread) as the game went on but he often dropped into the back line. Busquets (CM) - CM support This is why I feel Barcelona didn't have the attacking potency. Xavi went, so did their link up play. Busquets is a force in defence; intelligent, strong, well positioned and great anticipation but he doesn't have potency in attack. He did arrive late in the box from time to time to try and support Iniesta. This is where Alonso became key. Iniesta (CM) - AP attack Even without Xavi he was a threat. Scored Barcelona's only goal from a winding run. Barcelona's heartbeat with intelligent runs and fantastic passes. --- Messi (AMR) - IF attack He rotated a lot. Came central at times and also went to the AML position. Ridiculously threatening; his supply was bad though. His role did change to Trequartista when central. Sanchez (CF) - T attack Dropped deep, ran from deep, found space in channels and played some key passes. More of a threat when Messi was there however Sanchez had a good game. Villa (AML) - IF attack As in real life. Threat on the ball, threat off the ball. Supply was limited but also his options to pass and go weren't that good. Switched with Messi for the first time at around 24" if memory serves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furiousuk Posted July 27, 2012 Author Share Posted July 27, 2012 So, common sense tells me I should try out your Chelsea setup for the front three, with two attacking IFs and one CF-A. The thing is, I want to play possession football and like to employ a freakishly high defensive line and I'm not sure whether this would work with the current roles. I mean, even though I think it was at Chelsea when Mou claimed he had never seen a match when his team had less possession than the opponent, you definitely wouldn't consider the 04-06 Chelsea a tiki-taka-side. I'm just unsure whether the style of a triple-pivot, short passing and a Chelsea-esque forward line could be made to work, especially as my IFs aren't world beaters. I'm not massively up on football history but I suspect some success in Chelsea 04-06 getting more possession was that they were probably extremely good at getting it back. Makelele, Essien & Lampard are all very solid players capable of imposing physically as well as being mentally very strong. I'd think a triple pivot with a high attacking line could work well with the 3 fluid players in the middle all capable of playing a good pass and the front 3 solely tasked with creating gaps with loads of movement and pace. Looking over the stats for those couple of seasons for Chelsea though Joe Cole played loads of games and whilst Duff & particularly Robben (and Wright-Phillips & Kalou) could be considered IF's Joe Cole probably wouldn't be, certainly not consistently. With Cole playing as Adv.PM I suspect that he played on the opposite side of the pitch to Lampard so that the 2 of them pushed in behind the top two players (Drogba, Robben) whilst the 2 more holding midfielders held more (Essien, Makelele). Almost forms a 4222 in attack with bands of attackers. If you wanted to play more possession based with a high def. line then I'd definitely have a look at one (maybe both) wide players as Adv.PM's. I'd probably change the wide play to cuts inside to keep them in tight. I use a similar variant that also focusses the play down that side as well, works pretty well and keeps the IF on the other side in acres of space. Please comment, criticise or anything you feel you need to! Hopefully this has been a good analysis of two of the more impressive sides in European football in the modern era when it comes to FM. Loads of cracking stuff in there Joseph, great post! A fantastic example of getting your personnel selection bang on and nullifying a threat whilst highlighting your own strengths. Reactivity is great and all but, as you point out, the opposition should be adapting to try and deal with you (particularly if you are, on paper, the stronger team) - it's balancing subtle tweaks that react to your opponent but keep your own distinct 'flavor' which is key. Something you showed in your post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOSEPH! Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Loads of cracking stuff in there Joseph, great post!A fantastic example of getting your personnel selection bang on and nullifying a threat whilst highlighting your own strengths. Reactivity is great and all but, as you point out, the opposition should be adapting to try and deal with you (particularly if you are, on paper, the stronger team) - it's balancing subtle tweaks that react to your opponent but keep your own distinct 'flavor' which is key. Something you showed in your post. Thank you. It is all about combining the subtleties of team selection, reactivity and highlighting your own strengths while nullifying the opponents. It is a well thought through game and, despite Xavi's absence having a big factor, I feel the scoreline showed our tactical dominance. This is the second time this season I have beaten Barcelona by 3 goals. Something I am quite proud of. The post was really there to show how you can adapt the versatile 4-5-1 and all its variants to really emphasise its strengths while putting your opponents down. You may be inferior in some departments to any team but there is always something you will do well and the key is to try and give your team the best possible environment in which to flourish and enhance those strengths. Forcing your opponent to change shape, tactics or strategy (tactics and strategy hold key differences) will inevitably put them out of their comfort zone. If you are physically dominant to Barcelona, as I was, mark them out of the game. Make those individual battles count. Recognise those frailties in the formation, exploit them to your team's strongest ability, while nullifying the opponent's strengths. Admittedly it is a subtle tweak as you pointed out Furious but it can be done through some quite extensive scouting work (and perhaps hundreds of millions of pounds worth of talent I was generously given at Madrid :o ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yonko Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Well noticed. The fluidity of the front three was a problem for me and actually what led to their only goal from Iniesta. Messi, Villa and Sanchez, as you rightly pointed out, were switching positions regularly. The premise of my defence since they switched remained the same. I was confident in their abilities to cover them successfully as the Barcelona full backs provided no attacking threat whatsoever. Perhaps Messi being on the flanks was in part in the hope of limiting my full backs to defending. They are often key in opening up defences with the width they provide. In terms of analysis of their player roles here is what I reckon (I will ignore the keeper): The Barcelona back four was fairly rigid in its structure. I feel this changed as the game went on but from their starting 11 I would say: Puyol (RB) - FB defend He rarely left his half and had very aggressive man marking instructions against Di Maria. He went in hard a lot which forced my hand in a change in tactics with Di Maria. Bartra (CB) - CD/LD defend He came on 2" in. Although a very, very well rounded player he did need to be fairly tightly controled due to Piqué's role. He is also young and prone to buckling under pressure. Piqué (CB) - BPD defend As in real life. A few attempted defence splitting passes from deep and always made himself available to his team mates in defence. Fantastic player. Abidal (LB) - FB defend As with Puyol. Fairly aggressive man marking however Ronaldo managed to find the flaws in this. Abidal had a 5.0 end of game rating. --- Mascherano (DM) - A defend This is how it started. I feel that this changed into a more modified DM (as explained by Furious in this thread) as the game went on but he often dropped into the back line. Busquets (CM) - CM support This is why I feel Barcelona didn't have the attacking potency. Xavi went, so did their link up play. Busquets is a force in defence; intelligent, strong, well positioned and great anticipation but he doesn't have potency in attack. He did arrive late in the box from time to time to try and support Iniesta. This is where Alonso became key. Iniesta (CM) - AP attack Even without Xavi he was a threat. Scored Barcelona's only goal from a winding run. Barcelona's heartbeat with intelligent runs and fantastic passes. --- Messi (AMR) - IF attack He rotated a lot. Came central at times and also went to the AML position. Ridiculously threatening; his supply was bad though. His role did change to Trequartista when central. Sanchez (CF) - T attack Dropped deep, ran from deep, found space in channels and played some key passes. More of a threat when Messi was there however Sanchez had a good game. Villa (AML) - IF attack As in real life. Threat on the ball, threat off the ball. Supply was limited but also his options to pass and go weren't that good. Switched with Messi for the first time at around 24" if memory serves. This is more excellent stuff, thanks. Do you think Xavi was a DLP-support when he was on the field before being subbed off, or do you think he was a AP-support? I'm just wondering if AI managers such as Guardiola give their players roles based on Assistant Manager's reports? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yonko Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 furiousuk, I'm wondering what is your take on assigning a designated playmaker? From my experiences, every time I've set Xavi as my playmaker, the opposition sets very tight man-marking on him and my other CM ends up seeing a lot more of the ball, resulting in more passes. Thus, Xavi is taken out of the game and unable to fulfill the role I want him to play. I've noticed this happens even when I haven't set him as my playmaker, but just given him a DLP-support role. Would it be wise to have Xavi swap places with Iniesta and/or give him "roaming" instructions? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOSEPH! Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This is more excellent stuff, thanks. Do you think Xavi was a DLP-support when he was on the field before being subbed off, or do you think he was a AP-support?I'm just wondering if AI managers such as Guardiola give their players roles based on Assistant Manager's reports? He was literally on for 2 minutes. I barely saw him impact the game to be honest. However, due to Xavi's abilities I, personally, would have him set more attacking than a DLP - Support. He has incredible creativity, ability in picking a pass, dribbling, nimble feet. The list goes on and on. For me, however, the best (I have never managed him so may not be the best person) role for him would be Advance Playmaker Support. My reasoning Strengths and Attributes That Exemplify the Advance Playmaker The support role in an Advance Playmaker suits Xavi perfectly. Perhaps not the designated FM attributes that one should have, but for me personally. I think if we take the journey from when he receives the ball to when he releases it should provide a clear representation of how good Xavi actually is and how well his attributes contribute to one complete, perfect playmaker. Before receiving the ball his teamwork will put him in the best possible position to receive the pass paired with his anticipation to predict the pass and read it before opponents. His first touch will give him the most space from immediate opponents, his technique alongside his first touch will help him beat tight marking opponents -- his balance comes into play here aswell. Once he has found the space, which he will, his PPMs start to come into play. Dictates tempo will ensure he will remain the heartbeat of your team from a slightly deeper position than his partnering Iniesta. Tries Killer Balls, Plays Short Simple Passes & Comes Deep To Get Ball all contribute toward a wide variety of passes available to him while giving himself the most space and time possible to execute these passes. These alongside his fantastic decisions ensure he will always pick the right ball. The right ball will be available to him due to his excellent Anticipation of player's movement. Teamwork will be definite in the pass being the correct one for the team, not being selfish. Tie this with Tries Killer Balls Often alongside his Avoids Using Weaker Foot, creativity, passing, technique (his technique in executing an accurate pass with the correct weight, curl on the ball, finesse. His weaker foot is 'Reasonable'. This is poor however his high technique means that he can still open up the left hand side of the pitch with his right foot)and decisions and you have one complete playmaker. Not strong enough to ever challenge physically in the nitty gritty of the box however he doesn't need to. His general creativity will provide space and put fear in defensive opponents therefore providing space for team mates to exploit and to utilise his creative prowess. I hope this was a suitable analysis for you as to my reasoning behind his Advance Playmaker (support) role being my preferred choice! It is up to you to make sure he receives the ball in the correct positions now and his team mates make the movements to make the most of his abilities Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James9 Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Furiousuk How would you set up the midfield with the following Arsenal players Mikel Arteta, Ramsey, Song. I am thinking about buying Yan M'Villa the give me some bite in central midfield. I have read that if you put the two central midfielders on the same role and duty then they will be easily marked out the game. How would deal with the issue of ensuring that when both midfielders are given the same role and duty (advance playmaker support) they will not get marked out the game. Mikel Arteta has PPM comes deep to get the ball do you think this will allow him to drop deeper and play on a different line to Ramsey or would you suggest that I drop Arteta mentality. I also both Poldolski and Damiao to play as strikers and was considering using the Drogba Chelsea Set Up because none of these two strikers have the creative abilities of Van Persie to play the Van Persie/Messi Method. Could you give me some advice n how to set up the midfield if I was to use Poldolski or Damiao as my Advance Forward/Complete Forward Attack. My starting strategy is usually Balance with Standard/Control. Passing - Shorter Creative- More Expressive Press More Zonal Marking Drill Crosses More Roaming I have decided to use Gervinho as a inside forward attack and Walcott as winger attack. Would you make any changes to my team set up or roles and duties for my wingers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.