Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
craiigman

Cruyff's 343 Diamond - Is it possible?

Recommended Posts

As he explains here:

[video=youtube;7NZ0byEyeOA]

I don't know if I will try to actually emulate it, as he also says, teams play with 1 ST now. But it would be cool to see a variation of it. This is what I just threw together for the fun of it.

Xk4iVIl.png

My only issue is with the 3 at the back really. Inverted wingbacks role is more like what Cruyff talks about, joining in, but at the same time only leaves 1 CB. Maybe will have to play 3 CB's and change more PI's?

Anyone got some suggestions, what roles would work best? It may not work, but who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my modest opinion, the formation you've presented lacks width (especially with the ball). Remember also that the formation that you choose is your off the ball formation. As far as I've understood, Cruyff said that when defending, you should have 4 at the back, one of the fullbacks only occupies the midfield when the team has the ball; I'd go for only one IWB in that case, and probably a CD on cover near the IWB. I wouldn't have an half-back on the DM strata, probably an Anchor man or a defensive midfielder. I'd try to keep the width on the same side of the IWB, by having a Winger maybe. At the front, wouldn't the IFs occupy the same space with the ball as the CF? Maybe switching one of them to support would be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my modest opinion, the formation you've presented lacks width (especially with the ball). Remember also that the formation that you choose is your off the ball formation. As far as I've understood, Cruyff said that when defending, you should have 4 at the back, one of the fullbacks only occupies the midfield when the team has the ball; I'd go for only one IWB in that case, and probably a CD on cover near the IWB. I wouldn't have an half-back on the DM strata, probably an Anchor man or a defensive midfielder. I'd try to keep the width on the same side of the IWB, by having a Winger maybe. At the front, wouldn't the IFs occupy the same space with the ball as the CF? Maybe switching one of them to support would be better.

Can you do an example of how it looks on the pitch, not too sure I understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no tactical expert, far from it; I was thinking of something alongside this:

7ZDXK4H.png

Don't mind most of the roles, specially from midfield onwards. I guess the first step would be to try and get the defense and midfield working, so I added the PI 'get further forward' to the IWB and 'sit narrower' to the FB, in order to have the three man defense when with the ball. This might cause a narrower 4 man defense when off the ball, so it may leak goals (and it did). I tried this formation with standard mentality and fluid shape in a game of my current save with Panderborn. I expect that having a fluid shape to encourage the movement of the IWB. I don't have great players, and the tactic familiarity is not that great:

pOThf1G.png

But I think this might be enough to see if there is movement of the IWB to the midfield. I'm playing against a standard 4-4-2 and I've cleared all opposition and team instructions. I did a change on half time though, which was changing the DLP-D and AP-S to defensive midfielder (D) and attacking midfielder (S). During the game I've noticed that the IWB keeps staying on the wide side of the field instead of drifting inside in order to support the central midfielders in the same way that the IF does with the ball on the attack. I'll show the team's average positioning during the first and second half overlayed with the IWB heat map:

PwfUGif.png

(the first half)

RdK9zeY.png

(the second half)

Both central mids drifted in the second half, probably because the role change. I also did swap them at approximately the 60 minute mark. You can see the heat map for the IWB, clearly he is staying wide with the ball, instead of coming inside. I would also expect to see some horizontal change in the 4-man defense between with ball and without ball, which isn't significant. I'm not showing it in these pictures, but comparing with the FB, there are no visible differences (particularly in terms of the heat map), except for the number of passes. This might be caused by the presence of the DM at the center-left side of the field. It may be a reason for the wideness of the IWB.

My guess is that using an IWB probably isn't a good idea, as it seems to me that the role isn't quite working. On the other hand, I have some players that can be adapted to that position and have the PPM 'Cuts inside from both wings'. I'll try using one there, although this PPM seems to be applied mostly to when the player has the ball; we'll see.

Update

I played a rematch with the adapted player at IWB that has the PPM 'cuts inside from both wings'. He is a right-footer, so being in the left would allow him to cut more efficiently. I did some changes to the formation, bringing the attacking midfielder to the midfield, placing it in the center. I also changed the role for the right FB, putting him as a limited defender. I expected that this would allow the back-3 to form more easily.

qh89c3M.png

Actually the diamond appears situationally, when the IWB has the ball and drifts inside, but most of the time he is quite far from the midfielders. One can see from the heat map that he occupies the half-space for almost the full length of the field. It seems like a box-to-box that tracks a lot more back to form a 4-man defense when off the ball.

NGgzkE6.png

(The heatmap from the IWB; compare it with the previous one. The #15 is the CM-S average positioning)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You lot i believe are all wrong.What he described in all essence in the chalkboard, is the movement of the so called "left back" towards the left side of the midfield park, keeping the rest 3/4 of the defense in place.An inverted wing back in 3 words.That movement starts from the back and ends partnering up in midfield with the right midfielder in the period of the build up.Thus, creating the diamond shape in the middle and giving the "false sense" of a 3 man backline when it was actually anything else but a 3 man defense.

So the official system of the Barca tactic back then was this :

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------S-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LW---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RW

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------AM-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RMF-----------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DMF----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IWB--------------------------------------------------LB------------------------------------------------------------------------------RB--------------------------------------------------RB-

The updated tactic from @gongmin is much more close to reality than the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You lot i believe are all wrong.What he described in all essence in the chalkboard, is the movement of the so called "left back" towards the left side of the midfield park, keeping the rest 3/4 of the defense in place.An inverted wing back in 3 words.That movement starts from the back and ends partnering up in midfield with the right midfielder in the period of the build up.Thus, creating the diamond shape in the middle and giving the "false sense" of a 3 man backline when it was actually anything else but a 3 man defense.

So the official system of the Barca tactic back then was this :

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------S-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LW---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RW

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------AM-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RMF-----------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DMF----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IWB--------------------------------------------------LB------------------------------------------------------------------------------RB--------------------------------------------------RB-

The updated tactic from @gongmin is much more close to reality than the rest.

that's some poor formatting :p Yet looks fine in the quoted post lol

Like this?

GK



RB -- RB -- LB -- IWB

DM

RCM--------

RW ------ AM ------ LW

ST

Two right backs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm no tactical expert, far from it; I was thinking of something alongside this:

7ZDXK4H.png

Don't mind most of the roles, specially from midfield onwards. I guess the first step would be to try and get the defense and midfield working, so I added the PI 'get further forward' to the IWB and 'sit narrower' to the FB, in order to have the three man defense when with the ball. This might cause a narrower 4 man defense when off the ball, so it may leak goals (and it did). I tried this formation with standard mentality and fluid shape in a game of my current save with Panderborn. I expect that having a fluid shape to encourage the movement of the IWB. I don't have great players, and the tactic familiarity is not that great:

pOThf1G.png

But I think this might be enough to see if there is movement of the IWB to the midfield. I'm playing against a standard 4-4-2 and I've cleared all opposition and team instructions. I did a change on half time though, which was changing the DLP-D and AP-S to defensive midfielder (D) and attacking midfielder (S). During the game I've noticed that the IWB keeps staying on the wide side of the field instead of drifting inside in order to support the central midfielders in the same way that the IF does with the ball on the attack. I'll show the team's average positioning during the first and second half overlayed with the IWB heat map:

PwfUGif.png

(the first half)

RdK9zeY.png

(the second half)

Both central mids drifted in the second half, probably because the role change. I also did swap them at approximately the 60 minute mark. You can see the heat map for the IWB, clearly he is staying wide with the ball, instead of coming inside. I would also expect to see some horizontal change in the 4-man defense between with ball and without ball, which isn't significant. I'm not showing it in these pictures, but comparing with the FB, there are no visible differences (particularly in terms of the heat map), except for the number of passes. This might be caused by the presence of the DM at the center-left side of the field. It may be a reason for the wideness of the IWB.

My guess is that using an IWB probably isn't a good idea, as it seems to me that the role isn't quite working. On the other hand, I have some players that can be adapted to that position and have the PPM 'Cuts inside from both wings'. I'll try using one there, although this PPM seems to be applied mostly to when the player has the ball; we'll see.

Update

I played a rematch with the adapted player at IWB that has the PPM 'cuts inside from both wings'. He is a right-footer, so being in the left would allow him to cut more efficiently. I did some changes to the formation, bringing the attacking midfielder to the midfield, placing it in the center. I also changed the role for the right FB, putting him as a limited defender. I expected that this would allow the back-3 to form more easily.

qh89c3M.png

Actually the diamond appears situationally, when the IWB has the ball and drifts inside, but most of the time he is quite far from the midfielders. One can see from the heat map that he occupies the half-space for almost the full length of the field. It seems like a box-to-box that tracks a lot more back to form a 4-man defense when off the ball.

NGgzkE6.png

(The heatmap from the IWB; compare it with the previous one. The #15 is the CM-S average positioning)

Cheers for this btw, thanks for having a proper look. I'll see what I can implement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a look at the comments, came up with two:

4LTbLkS.png

Om8Bnfv.png

I've put the IWB in the LWB area, but may need to be in the LB spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I have had any success with Complete Wing Backs on FM2015 and yet to try in 2016.

Did actually play a 3-4-3 Diamond a few times. My biggest success was thumping Real Madrid in the Champions League.

Try pulling your AMC back to midfield and using instructions to make him attack. One is that it'll create space but the main reason is that it'll give you broader midfield coverage. From what I remember I played:

GK - GK(D)

DCR - DC(D)

DC - DC©

DCL - DC(D)

DM - DM(D)

MCR - CM(S)

MC - CM(A) Get Further Forward

MCL - CM(S)

AMR - IF(A) Sit Narrower

AML - IF(A) Sit Narrower

FC - CF(S) Move into channels, run wide with ball

Mentality Standard

Shape Very Fluid

TIs High defensive line, close down more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I created a Louis Van Gaal inspired diamond on FM15, much similar to the one above. But with a Sweeper and a AMC.

Helped me win 3 league titles with Ajax and a Champions League, whilst also breaking the 100 goal barrier a couple of times in the league.

18071b56-ab37-45fb-beed-5d2ad54d3748_zps0k0qwhco.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I created a Louis Van Gaal inspired diamond on FM15, much similar to the one above. But with a Sweeper and a AMC.

Helped me win 3 league titles with Ajax and a Champions League, whilst also breaking the 100 goal barrier a couple of times in the league.

18071b56-ab37-45fb-beed-5d2ad54d3748_zps0k0qwhco.png

Looking at that, I'd have thought you would be too weak defending the wings. How does it work out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see more specific info on how you got that to work, tomwood138. Been wanting to do that for ages, but couldn't in FM14 (didn't have 15)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a template for a 3-4-3 in FM2015.

AF-A____DLF-S____DLF-A

________AP-S__________

WM-S ____________WM-S

_______DM-D__________

CD-D____CD-D____CD-D

GK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that's some poor formatting :p Yet looks fine in the quoted post lol

Like this?

GK



RB -- RB -- LB -- IWB

DM

RCM--------

RW ------ AM ------ LW

ST

Two right backs?

I guess its too hard to get that i mean right centreback.Lmfao.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's possible to emulate in FM what was discussed in the video. I do hope that this type of thing will be possible in a future version. I think the way to do it is to have two formations, one with the ball and one without it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think it's possible to emulate in FM what was discussed in the video. I do hope that this type of thing will be possible in a future version. I think the way to do it is to have two formations, one with the ball and one without it.

Agreed.We can edge closer though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looking at that, I'd have thought you would be too weak defending the wings. How does it work out?

I set the CM to man mark any wide players, AM to then man mark an opposition CM so we weren't out numbered in the middle.

Here's it more in detail now I'm at my computer, but the forward is now set to Complete Forward - Support

Tactics_%20Overview%20Overview-3_zpsh953miwd.png

Screen%20Shot%202015-11-09%20at%2016.21.07_zps0rxyacjt.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

I like the design and TI from your tactic.

Don't have sure if it will work in a more difficult league (for example England). But you won the CL, so it should work...

What about conceded goals, what was the number? And what was the normal type, from the wings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello,

I like the design and TI from your tactic.

Don't have sure if it will work in a more difficult league (for example England). But you won the CL, so it should work...

What about conceded goals, what was the number? And what was the normal type, from the wings?

All depends on the players too. The CM's need to be hard working.

Defence was very tight in the league. Not so much in the CL, but I decided to just out score the opposition as we didn't struggle scoring goals. The front 4 were very deadly.

Screen%20Shot%202015-11-09%20at%2017.09.24_zpswlhmiivo.png

Screen%20Shot%202015-11-09%20at%2017.09.26_zps1tu2bk3e.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you use player instructions at all?

When you say the MC's mark the wide players, I assume that you mean players in the MRL or AMRL positions?

And the AM marks one of the oppositions MC's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Player instructions are;

Sweeper & both DCs have none.

DM - Shoot less often, Dribble Less

CM - Shoot less often, Dribble Less, Close down more, Hold position

AM - Roam from posistion, pass it shorter, move into channels, close down much more

W - shoot less often, pass it shorter, cross from byline, close down much more

FW - shoot less often, dribble less, close down much more, pass it shorter, move into channels

As I go into a game, I set both CMs to man mark the opposition wingers in the MRL or AMRL position. If they don't have any wide men then I don't set any marking instructions for the CMs.

If the opposition then has 3 in midfield I'll set the AM to man mark a CM so he drops back even more, if it's a strong team. Against a weak opponent I'll not set any marking instructions for the AM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys 3 at back means 3 CD not 2 wide backs and 1 central defender.

The thing Cruyff was explaining about the movement of a side center back is that they used to choose players that were used to playing wide positions too. In FM terms those players that have DCL or DCL/WBL kinda description. They would still play center backs but were instructed when in possession to run wide and create overload on their side of the pitch.

This would, then, Cruyff further explains, do two things to the opposition. First - Strikers would not mark the defender running wide, which would make opposition coach rage, then they would start listening to the coach, and create second - after 10 marking runs like that they would get completely exhausted and useless as spearheds of the attack.

I speak Dutch and following chalkboard and semi-accurate undertitles is quite a feat for a short clip explaining a lot.

I'm not sure these forward runs by the center backs are recreatable on the FM16 or 15 engine but I'm sure tomwood138 there with his Ajax recreated most precisely what Cruyff was explaining - a 3-4-3 diamond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys 3 at back means 3 CD not 2 wide backs and 1 central defender.

The thing Cruyff was explaining about the movement of a side center back is that they used to choose players that were used to playing wide positions too. In FM terms those players that have DCL or DCL/WBL kinda description. They would still play center backs but were instructed when in possession to run wide and create overload on their side of the pitch.

This would, then, Cruyff further explains, do two things to the opposition. First - Strikers would not mark the defender running wide, which would make opposition coach rage, then they would start listening to the coach, and create second - after 10 marking runs like that they would get completely exhausted and useless as spearheds of the attack.

I speak Dutch and following chalkboard and semi-accurate undertitles is quite a feat for a short clip explaining a lot.

I'm not sure these forward runs by the center backs are recreatable on the FM16 or 15 engine but I'm sure tomwood138 there with his Ajax recreated most precisely what Cruyff was explaining - a 3-4-3 diamond.

Mine was more aimed at recreating LGV's 3-4-3 diamond, which was bit more rigid with its positioning of players.

I did retrain any defender that had the DCL or DCL/WBL description with the correct attributes (and height) to play as a centre back. I though this would help as they would often get dragged wide or cut out attacks down the flanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys 3 at back means 3 CD not 2 wide backs and 1 central defender.

The thing Cruyff was explaining about the movement of a side center back is that they used to choose players that were used to playing wide positions too. In FM terms those players that have DCL or DCL/WBL kinda description. They would still play center backs but were instructed when in possession to run wide and create overload on their side of the pitch.

This would, then, Cruyff further explains, do two things to the opposition. First - Strikers would not mark the defender running wide, which would make opposition coach rage, then they would start listening to the coach, and create second - after 10 marking runs like that they would get completely exhausted and useless as spearheds of the attack.

I speak Dutch and following chalkboard and semi-accurate undertitles is quite a feat for a short clip explaining a lot.

I'm not sure these forward runs by the center backs are recreatable on the FM16 or 15 engine but I'm sure tomwood138 there with his Ajax recreated most precisely what Cruyff was explaining - a 3-4-3 diamond.

Really? http://www.barcelonafootballblog.com/10708/match-review-part-1-barcelona-50-villarreal-man-defense/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the IWB role work the way it should on FM16? It was completely useless on Fm 15. I want to know if its been fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does the IWB role work the way it should on FM16? It was completely useless on Fm 15. I want to know if its been fixed.

How should it work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How should it work?

they should be an extra midfielder when the team has the ball, like alaba when he's playing at LB. you can see it this season against arsenal or wolfsburg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teams don't go into the defensive phase with 20 yards between each defender, not even Barcelona. What's needed to represent that is an option that causes the DCs to split much wider in possession and shuttle the ball up the flank. This is something you see quite often with modern back three/five formations. However, attempts to model this in FM have caused issues with the DCs not getting compact quickly enough when possession is lost, so 3 DCs tend to stay too narrow in possession whereas a DC+DLR stay far too wide out of possession. You can compensate for this somewhat if you man-mark the front two/three of a narrow/diamond formation, but that's an imperfect solution.

Anyway, long story short, you can't really recreate this set-up at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mine was more aimed at recreating LGV's 3-4-3 diamond, which was bit more rigid with its positioning of players.

I did retrain any defender that had the DCL or DCL/WBL description with the correct attributes (and height) to play as a centre back. I though this would help as they would often get dragged wide or cut out attacks down the flanks.

Have you tried to recreate your Van Gaal tactic in fm 16? it looked really good on fm15.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've finally got into fm16, but I've started at Crewe. Once I've got my head round the new interface and ME I'll be looking to recreate the log diamond again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've finally got into fm16, but I've started at Crewe. Once I've got my head round the new interface and ME I'll be looking to recreate the log diamond again.

ill be looking forward to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...