Antonio Conte - Juventus, anybody cracked this?

[iamneallyons]

Has anybody managed to crack creating a working conte style tactic that he used at juventus?

3 at the back, pirlo sitting - wingbacks to create width etc.

[Lobaeux4]

I'm curious about this as well, so I think I'll do a little study of Conte today and see what I can drum up.

[MattyWillo10]

Every time I have tried a back three with wing backs ahead of the back line, I always get exposed and never look like a strong defensive unit, I would love to see other peoples thought on 3 at the back and if anyone has had any success with it

[RTHerringbone]

Every time I have tried a back three with wing backs ahead of the back line, I always get exposed and never look like a strong defensive unit, I would love to see other peoples thought on 3 at the back and if anyone has had any success with it

First place to look in that case is the impact of not using Wing Backs from WBL/R, but instead from the standard DL/R slots. It will see them drop in more quickly which will compress gaps between players in the defensive line. It will rarely have a detrimental impact on how the wing backs advance up field.

[MattyWillo10]

First place to look in that case is the impact of not using Wing Backs from WBL/R, but instead from the standard DL/R slots. It will see them drop in more quickly which will compress gaps between players in the defensive line. It will rarely have a detrimental impact on how the wing backs advance up field.

I've actually tried that it my most recent save (Leeds save, I have just created a new thread about it) and it does work a lot better defensively and as you say haven't noticed any negative effect on my attacking from the roles.

[tmason122]

First place to look in that case is the impact of not using Wing Backs from WBL/R, but instead from the standard DL/R slots. It will see them drop in more quickly which will compress gaps between players in the defensive line. It will rarely have a detrimental impact on how the wing backs advance up field.

This works great. It is far more defensively solid than having them play in the traditional WB slot.

[RTHerringbone]

This works great. It is far more defensively solid than having them play in the traditional WB slot.

It's basically the exact same logic as saying that instead of a 4-2-3-1, that you should use a 4-4-1-1, or you should use a 4-1-4-1 instead of a 4-3-3. It seems less emotive when it relates to wide defenders rather than wide midfielders, but the principle is exactly the same.

[Guest]

check these:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/443393-My-opening-gambit-3DC-or-bust

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/439348-How-to-set-up-a-5-2-1-2-3-1-4-2

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/323826-Playing-the-Juve-Way-a-Journey-into-3-5-2

[iamneallyons]

had a check through those, all decent info - however, they are from years gone by and the ME has changed a lot now.

[iamneallyons]

This works great. It is far more defensively solid than having them play in the traditional WB slot.

yeah i could see how that would work - i have always found that sometimes the initial look of a formation isnt how you want it to play/look out on the field - that requires movement in the field of play, so as you said employ them from the back to support or attack rather than in between the defence and midfield.

[Lobaeux4]

Gonna try tackling it tonight, especially as the DailyMail are reporting Conte is coming to Chelsea to replace Hiddink.

[Jean0987654321]

Gonna try tackling it tonight, especially as the DailyMail are reporting Conte is coming to Chelsea to replace Hiddink.

If you take anything the Daily Mail posts, then boy oh boy, you're gonna have a mare

[Lobaeux4]

If you take anything the Daily Mail posts, then boy oh boy, you're gonna have a mare

Ain't that the truth!

[luka_zg]

It's basically the exact same logic as saying that instead of a 4-2-3-1, that you should use a 4-4-1-1, or you should use a 4-1-4-1 instead of a 4-3-3. It seems less emotive when it relates to wide defenders rather than wide midfielders, but the principle is exactly the same.

yes, but the thing is 4-2-3-1 is not 4-4-1-1, and 4-1-4-1 is not 4-3-3, is it? And 3-5-2 is not 5-3-2.

[RTHerringbone]

yes, but the thing is 4-2-3-1 is not 4-4-1-1, and 4-1-4-1 is not 4-3-3, is it? And 3-5-2 is not 5-3-2.

Why not? It depends on the interpretation. Is "formation" offensive or defensive shape? Does it matter? It's all splitting hairs.

[herne79]

yes, but the thing is 4-2-3-1 is not 4-4-1-1, and 4-1-4-1 is not 4-3-3, is it? And 3-5-2 is not 5-3-2.

No . You are thinking in terms of where positions get placed on the tactic creator, and labelling it accordingly. What is far more important is how players actually position themselves on the pitch.

Example - in my "4-4-2", my wide midfielder on my left flank is every bit as deadly in attack as someone who had been placed in the AML position - but he also does more defensively. I get far more out of him positioned in the ML slot than I ever would if I'd placed him at AML. He won the Ballon D'Or last season, beating Messi into 2nd place.

Think about what you want players to do on the pitch, rather than thinking about chalk board formations .

[luka_zg]

No . You are thinking in terms of where positions get placed on the tactic creator, and labelling it accordingly. What is far more important is how players actually position themselves on the pitch.

Example - in my "4-4-2", my wide midfielder on my left flank is every bit as deadly in attack as someone who had been placed in the AML position - but he also does more defensively. I get far more out of him positioned in the ML slot than I ever would if I'd placed him at AML. He won the Ballon D'Or last season, beating Messi into 2nd place.

Think about what you want players to do on the pitch, rather than thinking about chalk board formations .

And yet the game will say that 4-2-3-1 formation is different than 4-4-1-1. You should be able to get defensive play from an AML/R player the same way you get offensive play from ML/R player. Unfortunately in this game it's not possible.

Barca absolutely never plays 4-1-4-1 formation in RL, yet in FM terms they do. It's just wrong.

[Cleon]

And yet the game will say that 4-2-3-1 formation is different than 4-4-1-1. You should be able to get defensive play from an AML/R player the same way you get offensive play from ML/R player. Unfortunately in this game it's not possible.

Barca absolutely never plays 4-1-4-1 formation in RL, yet in FM terms they do. It's just wrong.

You fail to understand that the shape you see on the pitch is your defensive shape. Just because something looks like a 4411 or 422 doesn't mean it is. It's quite possible the roles used morph it into a 4231 or 424 etc.

And you can get defensive play from AML/AMR especially with the changes for FM16 that made it possible.So not sure why you use words like it's not possible etc when it clearly is. The important factor is the role you use. If you use an attacking role then he can't defend as good as someone with a less attacking role and so on. Which is pretty accurate really.

[herne79]

And yet the game will say that 4-2-3-1 formation is different than 4-4-1-1. You should be able to get defensive play from an AML/R player the same way you get offensive play from ML/R player. Unfortunately in this game it's not possible.

Barca absolutely never plays 4-1-4-1 formation in RL, yet in FM terms they do. It's just wrong.

Why is it wrong? You mention that we "should be able to get defensive play from an AML/R player" and then mention Barca. Why should we be able to? How much defensive work do Messi and (to a lesser extent) Neymar do? If I was setting up a Barca-esque tactic, and wanted players who didn't offer much defensively, then yeh I'd use AMR for Messi.

But that's an exception. Off the top of my head I can think of perhaps just 4 players where I would use the AML/R slots if I was trying to replicate their roles (Messi, Robben and, perhaps, CR7 and Neymar). There could be a few others, but everyone else I would use the ML/R position if I wanted them to contribute defensively as well. How many teams really employ someone to remain high up the pitch and offer very little defensively? Not many.

The game calls it 4231 and differs it from 4411 (for example) simply to give it a label on the chalk board formation. If you adjust the wide roles in the "4411" you can make it look like the so-called 4231 on the pitch where it counts and be stronger defensively. How things look on the pitch is what matters, not on the TC.

To be honest, the 4411 and 4231 formations are little more than variants of the 442 that have been given a new label to differentiate them. It's just semantics.

[marsh82]

“Formations are neutral; it is their application that gives them positive or negative”

Jonathon Wilson

[RocheBag]

And yet the game will say that 4-2-3-1 formation is different than 4-4-1-1. You should be able to get defensive play from an AML/R player the same way you get offensive play from ML/R player. Unfortunately in this game it's not possible.

Barca absolutely never plays 4-1-4-1 formation in RL, yet in FM terms they do. It's just wrong.

If a player would defend just as much at AMR as he would at MR, then what's the point of it being two different positions?

Not sure why everyone is obsessed with making attacking midfielders act like wide midfielders.

[tmason122]

If a player would defend just as much at AMR as he would at MR, then what's the point of it being two different positions?

Not sure why everyone is obsessed with making attacking midfielders act like wide midfielders.

I agree. For me, while it is nice for an AMR or AML to defend, I actually prefer them to sit up the pitch and be ready for a clearance so we can get on the counter-attack quick. I don´t need them to defend, I already have 7 or 8 players back, so as far as I´m concerned the AML or AMR can stay a little more upfield.

[RocheBag]

I agree. For me, while it is nice for an AMR or AML to defend, I actually prefer them to sit up the pitch and be ready for a clearance so we can get on the counter-attack quick. I don´t need them to defend, I already have 7 or 8 players back, so as far as I´m concerned the AML or AMR can stay a little more upfield.

Exactly. If AMR defended just as well as MR, then what am I supposed to do if I don't want them tracking back? It's two different positions for a reason. Seems like some people are just too stubborn to move their wingers back to wide mids if they want them to defend.

[iamneallyons]

i personally found that asking an WBR/L AMR/L to "close down less" lets them get back and sit in their defensive position alot more effectively rather than bombing off up the field to close down and leave gaps.

[bennymc]

Damn, I came here hoping for some advice about setting up like Conte's Juve (especially given their great run lately).

Anyone still interested in the OP? I've found an article that might help: https://boxtoboxcentreback.wordpress.com/2016/01/31/a-closer-look-at-juves-midfield-trio/

[Paul Scholes]

Why is it wrong? You mention that we "should be able to get defensive play from an AML/R player" and then mention Barca. Why should we be able to? How much defensive work do Messi and (to a lesser extent) Neymar do? If I was setting up a Barca-esque tactic, and wanted players who didn't offer much defensively, then yeh I'd use AMR for Messi.

But that's an exception. Off the top of my head I can think of perhaps just 4 players where I would use the AML/R slots if I was trying to replicate their roles (Messi, Robben and, perhaps, CR7 and Neymar). There could be a few others, but everyone else I would use the ML/R position if I wanted them to contribute defensively as well. How many teams really employ someone to remain high up the pitch and offer very little defensively? Not many.

The game calls it 4231 and differs it from 4411 (for example) simply to give it a label on the chalk board formation. If you adjust the wide roles in the "4411" you can make it look like the so-called 4231 on the pitch where it counts and be stronger defensively. How things look on the pitch is what matters, not on the TC.

To be honest, the 4411 and 4231 formations are little more than variants of the 442 that have been given a new label to differentiate them. It's just semantics.

How much defensive work Messi do?

[video=youtube;CyX6W3hAsvA]

[video=youtube;sFpgrDD3vhA]

[herne79]

How much defensive work Messi do?

If you look hard enough you can find exceptions to anything. I was using an example to illustrate a point.

[bennymc]

So literally nobody here wants to talk about Conte's Juventus then? lol.

[RTHerringbone]

So literally nobody here wants to talk about Conte's Juventus then? lol.

Why not try to stir it conversation yourself? There are a few links in post eight, but what do you know about this side? How do you think they should be set up in FM?

[Lobaeux4]

I tried to set up Chelsea with how I believe Conte would (or will) and it earned me a poor showing, grumbling from the players about my performance and a real battle to stay out of the relegation zone. Plus, the board wanted me to play an attacking-possession based style.

Hmmmmm, sounds very familiar.

If someone can come up with a Conte tactic that would work in the EPL, I'm all ears.

[Guest]

I've posted in post 8, I'd like to start discussing again:

Regarding Premier league, I had problems using my 5-3-2 with Tottenham.

The problems using this formation were my team got pressed back into my penalty area , I couldn't dominate midfield, my attackers were cut of, wingbacks also, so this led to unsuccessful crosses, no ball possesion, no chances, etc., etc.

I went to manage Udinese and initially I had problems there too, but I've recently managed to play some quality football (good performance generally, last match was against Sampdoria, I had 60 % ball possession, my WBR had 8.2 without being assistant or goalscorer, 12 shots, 6 of which were on target , but those were really good chances).This is at the beginning of the season with tactical familiarity 'awkward'.

You can try this tactic in PL, haven't gone back myself.

Formation:

Treq(a) AF(a)

BBM-DLP(s)-CM(d)

WB(s)----------------IWB(s)

DC(d)-----DC(d)

LIB(s)

GK (s)

TI's:

Mentality control , as attacking is just too attacking (I couldn't keep the ball without lowering tempo,and I don't like that), shape fluid to make the team compact(helped solving attackers and wingbacks isolation), retain possession with passing range at maximum that retain possession allows(I allow my DLP greater passing range), defansive line very high with play offside(solves getting pressed back to my box, also makes my team more compact). I've left width balanced.

PI's:

DLP- mixed passing

BBM - go further + shoot more often+roam from position

IWB® - go further+ shoot note often

WBL-stay narrower when team has the ball

-I'm not so sure about attacking roles, I'll try moving treq to AMC position to have a better link. I'm currently instructing them to man mark opposition's creative midfielders (against Sampdoria- Roberto Soriano + Fernando ). This gets them closer to my midfield and is also very useful defansively.

-Libero bcs he pushes my DC's wider, has a lot of interceptions, and gets me another player in the midfield. The other reason is , when I press opposition into their box, my DLP is way high up, libero on the other hand, is positioned a bit lower so in these situations he becomes my playmaker and changes sides. Also, I don't like to see my DC's staying literally 1 meter away from wingbacks when GK distributes the ball after goalkick (happened always when I had flat 3 at the back. Idk ,maybe it's a bug).

-Left wingback is a little bit more defensive. He's on the same side with my BBM who goes forward to try long shots, that's why I instruct WBL to stay narrower whom my team has the ball.

The key was to move defensive line higher up, having players more compac and getting numbers in midfield (libero+WBL).

[RTHerringbone]

Damn, I came here hoping for some advice about setting up like Conte's Juve (especially given their great run lately).

Anyone still interested in the OP? I've found an article that might help: https://boxtoboxcentreback.wordpress.com/2016/01/31/a-closer-look-at-juves-midfield-trio/

I'm probably going to have a look at replicating elements of this system in the coming days. That linked article is good and touches on all aspects of the system, not just the midfield three. I've found a few other reasonably in-depth pieces of analysis which bridge the Conte and Allegri eras, so I'll see what I can rustle up - some kind of hybrid of the two perhaps:

http://www.sempreinter.com/2016/01/29/tactical-analysis-juventus-f-c-3-0-f-c-internazionale-milano/

http://spielverlagerung.com/2016/01/26/juventus-roma-10/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=2-click-twitter-button&utm_term=2ClickTweetButton&utm_campaign=Juventus+%26%238211%3B+Roma+1%3A0

http://www.italianfootballdaily.com/53676-2/

https://vimeo.com/59338216?ref=tw-share

https://grup14.com/article/tactical-analysis-juventus-playing-style-and-key-characteristics

[RTHerringbone]

OK, so here's version one:

I'm basing this just on the articles above plus some input from a user on this forum (higgins) who's a firm Juventus fan. Could also do with Federico from this foru dropping by for his view.

Roles and Duties were the easiest bit for this first draft. Stylistically it's hard to pigeon-hole Juve as Italian football remains tactically varied and Allegri is a versatile coach.

Key bits from the articles were:

Outer DCs are quite expansive ball players. The whole back three are technically skilled, but the outer guys are often seen bringing the ball out of defence. This is hard to replicate in FM, but BPDs asked to Dribble More seems a good start.

The 3-5-2 / 5-3-2 can be viewed in a number of ways, but I'm using a flat back five to try to force the three DCs to assume a more laterally compact shape when the wing backs drop back. It is also clear that Evra / Sandro and Lichtsteiner / Cuadrado do defend deep when the ball is in their half and even form a sort of pseudo back four at times. Both flanks are penetrative, but I've compromised early on to have a bit of a mix on either flank, and to partly compensate for Pogba's movement.

The central midfielder is the deeper of the trio, and he tends to stay deepish but does show some lateral movement. Hard to reflect with a DLP (D) but I want a flat three to start with to try to cover the width a little better in midfield. A Regista is a possibility if required if I need to change formation.

Pogba is regarded as a roaming guy who likes to occupy the Hipster "half space". He and Khedira are prone to drifting about and contributing to what can be regarded as direct play at times. Pogba is set to Roam From Position (inherent in the BBM Role at MCR) and the Frenchman also Moves Into Channels in an attempt to replicate the movement into the so called left half space. The BBM also Moves Into Channels, in reference to a comment in the BoxToBoxCentreBack article where "In some games, Khedira has moved from typical 8 positions to deep in the right halfspace, to support Claudio Marchisio in the build-up." He won't be deep as a BBM when attacking so I'll look at that.

Up front, I've taken an initial steer from higgins, whose view is that Dybala has been moulded into a "deep forward with playmaker Duties". We'll see how the Treq Role suits him. Mandzukic was first choice early in the season (before injury) and is described as "Mandzukic plays as a traditional number 9, often with his back to goal, holding the ball up for others to make runs into the final third, Mandzukic also makes lots of runs in behind and into the opposition box." Clearly this is a key duo and I'm not sure how this'll do, but it's a starting point at least.

Mentality is Counter as direct play was mentioned a few times in the articles. It also reflects the deep block of Juve that appears in the links, and may also help to reduce lateral spacing between the DCs when we attack (I know it probably won't!). Specifically in a match against Inter, it was noted "On defense, they were also content to sit back and wait for an Inter loss of possession to counterattack, pressing only when the ball was near the wings, but not always with a lot of intensity."

Team Shape is Very Fluid to try to force vertical compactness; again a trait which shined through the documentation. That specific setting is tempered with a TI to Be More Disciplined. This is a well drilled side and the players I want to break from that rigidity have PIs to do so. Generally we want order and discipline.

Work Ball Into Box will reduce crosses (plus the added bonus of reducing long shots), and is a direct nod to the use of wing backs, plus a few references to Juve's use of "cut backs rather than crosses". The wing backs also have PIs to Stay Wider, Fewer Risky Passes, Close Down More and (for Evra) Cross Less Often. It was suggested that the pressing tended to be done by the wing backs to retain midfield shape "despite playing a in high intensity system, the trio in the centre do not actually cover a massive amount of ground and actually don’t do too much work defensively."

Use Tighter Marking is selected based on the fact it's an Italian side. They can defend

[iamneallyons]

I'm probably going to have a look at replicating elements of this system in the coming days. That linked article is good and touches on all aspects of the system, not just the midfield three. I've found a few other reasonably in-depth pieces of analysis which bridge the Conte and Allegri eras, so I'll see what I can rustle up - some kind of hybrid of the two perhaps:

http://www.sempreinter.com/2016/01/29/tactical-analysis-juventus-f-c-3-0-f-c-internazionale-milano/

http://spielverlagerung.com/2016/01/26/juventus-roma-10/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=2-click-twitter-button&utm_term=2ClickTweetButton&utm_campaign=Juventus+%26%238211%3B+Roma+1%3A0

http://www.italianfootballdaily.com/53676-2/

https://vimeo.com/59338216?ref=tw-share

https://grup14.com/article/tactical-analysis-juventus-playing-style-and-key-characteristics

il link up a few articles videos etc iv watched myself in the past which tried to replicate it - i would say the last time i was able to get close was in FM14, again il post up shortly the formation i used etc.

[RTHerringbone]

il link up a few articles videos etc iv watched myself in the past which tried to replicate it - i would say the last time i was able to get close was in FM14, again il post up shortly the formation i used etc.

That would be handy - I think I'm more focused on their current system to be honest. Pirlo was a somewhat pivotal part of the Conte system so it's harder to replicate with the current squad.

EDIT - Minor changes see Dybala revert to False Nine to better link play. TIs added to Prevent Short GK Distribution to force the STs to stay a little further up field while the AI keeper has the ball. Also Stay On Feet as the Wing Backs were both going to ground quite early, likely due to Close Down More. 3-0 win at Cesena in first friendly and we played pretty nicely.

[iamneallyons]

http://www.passion4fm.com/football-manager-2014-attacking-tactic-cobra-3-6-1/

the above link is a tactic id used in fm14, it worked really well when you used the correct players and it was fluid.

i watched various full matches...

by watching full matches you can clearly see the shape/style/way conte had his team setup to play.

[iamneallyons]

Just to add im a MASSIVE fan of Conte - loved how he had juventus playing, you are right though pirlo was pivotal to that but im sure you can find similar players in the game.

i think the most important aspects of a conte style team is pressing/workrate/discipline.

[RTHerringbone]

That Cobra system is nothing like Conte had Juventus playing. Not even close

I haven't even read that much on it, but to imagine an Italian side playing an Attacking Mentality FM equivalent in real life, and with Attacking wingers rather than anything vaguely defensive? Well......let's have a look:

It's visible six seconds into the Roma game

At 01:09 in the Fiorentina game you can see the general depth of a back five - you can't get that with two Attacking Wingers in an Attacking Mentality. I think the Cobra system on that website has a unique interpretation of the system.

[iamneallyons]

That Cobra system is nothing like Conte had Juventus playing. Not even close

I haven't even read that much on it, but to imagine an Italian side playing an Attacking Mentality FM equivalent in real life, and with Attacking wingers rather than anything vaguely defensive? Well......let's have a look:

It's visible six seconds into the Roma game

At 01:09 in the Fiorentina game you can see the general depth of a back five - you can't get that with two Attacking Wingers in an Attacking Mentality. I think the Cobra system on that website has a unique interpretation of the system.

yeah its not absolutely literal, i dont think you should take it that it is either but i think they have tried to use elements of the conte way.

i think conte has juventus playing very controlling, very patient, hard working, industrial so to speak.

[iamneallyons]

At 01:09 in the Fiorentina game you can see the general depth of a back five - you can't get that with two Attacking Wingers in an Attacking Mentality. I think the Cobra system on that website has a unique interpretation of the system.

Say if your mentality is defensive, it would bring the team deep anyway wouldnt it? so would adding "deep" onto the team instructions be pointless in a sense?

[RTHerringbone]

It's more the alignment of the back five that matters. No mentality will get attack duty wingers back in line with DCs like that.

[iamneallyons]

It's more the alignment of the back five that matters. No mentality will get attack duty wingers back in line with DCs like that.

so how on earth would you do it?

because they drop that far back yet can be seen marauding into the opposition half to...

[Jean0987654321]

so how on earth would you do it?

because they drop that far back yet can be seen marauding into the opposition half to...

CWB (a) in the DL/DR or WBL/WBR strata will do it. I have used three in the back formations in the past and if you want a 3-5-2 shape in attack but a 5-3-2 shape in defend, I'm a big fan of that role

[RTHerringbone]

so how on earth would you do it?

because they drop that far back yet can be seen marauding into the opposition half to...

You don't even need an extreme Role. You can use a Wing Back on Support in a Control or above Mentality from the DL/R or WBL/R position and get that sort of forward thrust still. You have to remember that "formation" in FM is by and large your defensive shape. You'll never get that sort of defensive depth from the ML/R slots with an Attack Duty.

[iamneallyons]

You don't even need an extreme Role. You can use a Wing Back on Support in a Control or above Mentality from the DL/R or WBL/R position and get that sort of forward thrust still. You have to remember that "formation" in FM is by and large your defensive shape. You'll never get that sort of defensive depth from the ML/R slots with an Attack Duty.

yeah iv mis-read what you put initially about "No mentality will get attack duty wingers back in line with DCs like that." i thought you had put no role, but yeah i thought if you had a CWB on attack in line with the back 3 that would do it.

[pauso]

I'm very interested in this recreation of juve tactic as i'm a juventus fun (i'm italian) and i've watched every single match. My thoughts about the formation you posted above... the back three, i think it's only chiellini on the left who often bring the ball out of the defence, barzagli on the right is quite cautious with the ball, maybe you should remove the dribble more instruction to him. The central midfielder (usually Marchisio) is the deepest, but he's not playing like Pirlo as a Regista, i see him more as a simple CM defensive (or DM) and i also see Bonucci as the real playmaker from the deep.

[bennymc]

Why not try to stir it conversation yourself? There are a few links in post eight, but what do you know about this side? How do you think they should be set up in FM?

Honestly RT, I had intended to, but was disappointed in the response and then got completely sidetracked. Eager to catch up now!

Here's what I went for....

Only instructions are More Direct Passing, and Roam From Positions

[bennymc]

Mentality is Counter as direct play was mentioned a few times in the articles. It also reflects the deep block of Juve that appears in the links, and may also help to reduce lateral spacing between the DCs when we attack (I know it probably won't!). Specifically in a match against Inter, it was noted "On defense, they were also content to sit back and wait for an Inter loss of possession to counterattack, pressing only when the ball was near the wings, but not always with a lot of intensity."

Team Shape is Very Fluid to try to force vertical compactness; again a trait which shined through the documentation. That specific setting is tempered with a TI to Be More Disciplined. This is a well drilled side and the players I want to break from that rigidity have PIs to do so. Generally we want order and discipline.

Work Ball Into Box will reduce crosses (plus the added bonus of reducing long shots), and is a direct nod to the use of wing backs, plus a few references to Juve's use of "cut backs rather than crosses". The wing backs also have PIs to Stay Wider, Fewer Risky Passes, Close Down More and (for Evra) Cross Less Often. It was suggested that the pressing tended to be done by the wing backs to retain midfield shape "despite playing a in high intensity system, the trio in the centre do not actually cover a massive amount of ground and actually don’t do too much work defensively."

Use Tighter Marking is selected based on the fact it's an Italian side. They can defend

Mentality: I read it as the opposite, that more direct play would be achieved by being more Attacking. Also on the low block, my instinct said to take that route because of the age/pace of the defence, but the article seemed to suggest the opposite. Happy to put this down to my own misinterpretation, of course, I just think it's great that we can read the same article and reach different conclusions when interpreting it in FM.

I'm curious about your choice of instructions regarding the wing backs, that's something I couldn't think how to re-create in FM, so I think I'll try your way on for size.

[Dr. Hook]

Mentality: I read it as the opposite, that more direct play would be achieved by being more Attacking. Also on the low block, my instinct said to take that route because of the age/pace of the defence, but the article seemed to suggest the opposite. Happy to put this down to my own misinterpretation, of course, I just think it's great that we can read the same article and reach different conclusions when interpreting it in FM.

I'm curious about your choice of instructions regarding the wing backs, that's something I couldn't think how to re-create in FM, so I think I'll try your way on for size.

Nothing to see here, just the incoherent ramblings of a terrible tactics moderator

[herne79]

I went for the counter route here also, as remember that in FM terms, a counter style shortens passing at the back and makes it more direct for the attack positions and vice versa. When you get into the final third with a counter style, you should see the direct play. Attack mentality with play out of defense and the more direct TI might work well. In playing around with this, on the attack duty, I had more hoofers from the defenders where I wanted a more patient, technical buildup. How do you find the movement out of your defense?

Erm, isn't the other way around Doc? Counter mentality has long passing at the back, and shorter more patient build up in attack...?