The Art of Attacking Football

[tyro]

What helped me was really looking at the games and pausing it. Take a look again at how Cleon, RTH, and Rashidi's analyze. Use a various camera settings.

If you want to analyze your attack, then pause the game when your players are in the opponent's half. Watch your ball carrier. Check what passing options he has. Check what your other players are doing. If you have an IF is he cutting in with the ball? Where are your fullbacks? Where are your central midfielders? Are there options? Do they create movement? Where does the opponent leave space? How can you attack that space?

I started to think along the lines and really if you think of it, you have unique players with unique ppms. So even if you copy paste a tactic and think it might work, it might not. How can it, unless you use the same team with the same formation and then in similar conditions.

That's the beauty of the match engine. It takes all into account. Oh and yes, morale is also a factor. Bad morale makes good players miss easy chances. And complacency does as well. Maybe your players became complacent?

Maybe it is how certain teams line up against you. But how would anyone but you know? What's happening in game?

[Rashidi]

What helped me was really looking at the games and pausing it. Take a look again at how Cleon, RTH, and Rashidi's analyze. Use a various camera settings.

Maybe it is how certain teams line up against you. But how would anyone but you know? What's happening in game?

Exactly, we can only guide you on what you should be looking out for, the rest is up to you

[alinp]

ok so I following everyone's advice, I changed the Raumdeteurs to inside forwards (Support), the right wing back to attack to take advantage of the space being left by the inside forward ahead of him cutting inside and in the hope the roaming playmaker next to him will find him out wide, and the deep lying forward to complete forward (support) to try and encourage him to join the attack more.

Mate...you seem to have made a considerable number of changes, so I'm not surprised it's showing no consistency. Your players are probably well confused - one minute they're retaining possession, the next they're playing direct. Did you stop at Mixed at any point, just to see? Why have you gone from Fluid to Structured? Why high line to slightly deeper? Why drop to Control - the thread is about playing with an Attacking Mentality? I know ppl queried your lower tempo, but now you've gone to the other extreme - again, how about leaving it Normal for a bit and letting the Mentality do the work for you, adjusting as you see fit based on what you see happening on the pitch?

When you look at the posts by the likes of Cleon, you'll note that he makes minimal changes and sees what happens rather than abandoning his starting point and trying the something completely different.

[Orikoru]

Mate...you seem to have made a considerable number of changes, so I'm not surprised it's showing no consistency. Your players are probably well confused - one minute they're retaining possession, the next they're playing direct. Did you stop at Mixed at any point, just to see? Why have you gone from Fluid to Structured? Why high line to slightly deeper? Why drop to Control - the thread is about playing with an Attacking Mentality? I know ppl queried your lower tempo, but now you've gone to the other extreme - again, how about leaving it Normal for a bit and letting the Mentality do the work for you, adjusting as you see fit based on what you see happening on the pitch?

When you look at the posts by the likes of Cleon, you'll note that he makes minimal changes and sees what happens rather than abandoning his starting point and trying the something completely different.

I agree with this, there's plenty to be said for leaving things in the middle and making subtle changes as you go, rather than swinging from one extreme to the other.

[gunnerfan]

I agree with this, there's plenty to be said for leaving things in the middle and making subtle changes as you go, rather than swinging from one extreme to the other.

That goes for your AM making suggestions to change. When the suggestions are made during the match, it's simply based on your statistics in a given category at the moment. I've had my AM suggest retaining possession ten minutes into the match, then two minutes later urge me to go to more direct passing. The AM doesn't know what you're trying to accomplish.

[Orikoru]

That goes for your AM making suggestions to change. When the suggestions are made during the match, it's simply based on your statistics in a given category at the moment. I've had my AM suggest retaining possession ten minutes into the match, then two minutes later urge me to go to more direct passing. The AM doesn't know what you're trying to accomplish.

Yeah I pretty much ignore that guy. He basically just says the opposite of whatever you're currently trying to do.

[summatsupeer]

Just want to show my tactic following the principle Cleon demonstrated.

Formation

I keep swearing to not use 4123 DM Wide but I always end up using it.

Team Instructions

Bit higher and more pressing to try and cause mistakes or a quick turnover.

Shorter Passing, Play Out Of Defense and Work Ball Into Box are to create better chances and less back to front passing (even though the defences passing is short due to attack mentality they were still looking for my ST / AML too much).

Narrow width and Fluid because I want players to be closer and play to be more central with just my LB and RB providing width. I also want my front 3 more involved in transitions so they aren't isolated.

Player Instructions

GK: Roll It Out, Fewer Risky Passes, Distribute to Full Backs.

DL + DR: Stay Wider.

MCL: Hold Position, Riskier Passes.

Player Roles

I'm using two center backs but shielding them with a DM on Defend duty, as he role is a Defensive Midfielder he does close down but with two MC I feel using an Anchor Man would be to negative. He shuts counter attacks down and covers the back 4 when they move out of position.

I've been a little conservative with a FB Support, I feel having both the LB and RB on Attack duty is too unbalanced. I'm still watching his play to see if I can get more from him, maybe with a PI. My DR on WB Attack has been creating goals with crosses and pull backs. My starter is on 8.3 average and his backup 7.98.

The central midfield was initially a CM Support and BBM but I felt due to the forward thinking of the team and the tempo I needed more support for my forward so switched the BBM to a CM Attack. I also added Hold Position and Riskier Passes to my CM Support to keep a central deeper presence. I did consider a play maker role but I didn't want extra focus to go to him and I was happy with his general position, I didn't want him to start roaming and dribbling as a RPM, I didn't want him deeper as a DLP, the only one i'm still considering is AP Support with the Hold Position instruction.

Up front I have the same as Cleon, I would highlight the importance of having a player with Hold Up Ball instruction leading the attack. Playing with an attacking mentality the ball goes forward very quickly and the extra few moments he takes allows players to make runs and offer him support. I did have my AMR as a AP Support but he plays too deep and narrow leaving the ST and RB isolated.

Key players for me so far have been:

1. DLF Support ability to hold up play, pulling players out of position then playing a runner in.

2. CM Support linking play and creating goals

3. WB Attack providing width, pulling players out of the center creating space for a cross / pull back.

Quick Analysis

This is including friendlies so inflates my goals scored a lot (a lot were crosses), in the league i've scored 22 and conceded 4. In europe i'm 15 scored with 5 conceded and considering i'm in a group with Barcelona (lost 0-2, won 4-0) thats not bad.

Looking at the assists against me none are from long balls over the top, this backs up what i've seen in the games. My CB and DM cover well with a hard working team who get back quickly.

20% of goals I concede are from crosses which is pretty low, the high mentality and pressing doesn't give a lot of time for good crosses.

Possession isn't great (40-50% typically) but I have no instructions the encourage it, the amount of good chances we create mean I always feel we can outscore the opposition. If we're clear in a game I might switch to slower game to rest the players a bit.

Results

A few hiccups whilst things weren't fluid and a few injuries to the starter+backup but things have settled well.

[Kick Wilstra]

Just read your opening post so far, but just wanted to say I'm becoming a big fan of the 3-4-1-2 in my current save. I came to it because I was looking for an alternative with a 3 man defence to use against 2 up front formation, and I wanted to playing time to a talented prospect that can play AMC and ST position, but my AMC and ST were two best players in my squad, so I didn't want to take them of. I love the interplay of those 3 upfront. I play them as a CF(a), DF(d) and AP(a). The CF has the PPM drop deep to collect ball. This creates space for the other two, or left W(a) to drop into. I've seen a lot of fluid movement, and sometimes I have to set highlights to key only, as on extensive it basically shows the full match LOL.

[WayneRomney]

Just want to show my tactic following the principle Cleon demonstrated.

Now all that remains is to call Louis van Gaal or Ed W.

[iamneallyons]

Just want to show my tactic following the principle Cleon demonstrated.

Formation

I keep swearing to not use 4123 DM Wide but I always end up using it.

Team Instructions

Bit higher and more pressing to try and cause mistakes or a quick turnover.

Shorter Passing, Play Out Of Defense and Work Ball Into Box are to create better chances and less back to front passing (even though the defences passing is short due to attack mentality they were still looking for my ST / AML too much).

Narrow width and Fluid because I want players to be closer and play to be more central with just my LB and RB providing width. I also want my front 3 more involved in transitions so they aren't isolated.

Player Instructions

GK: Roll It Out, Fewer Risky Passes, Distribute to Full Backs.

DL + DR: Stay Wider.

MCL: Hold Position, Riskier Passes.

Player Roles

I'm using two center backs but shielding them with a DM on Defend duty, as he role is a Defensive Midfielder he does close down but with two MC I feel using an Anchor Man would be to negative. He shuts counter attacks down and covers the back 4 when they move out of position.

I've been a little conservative with a FB Support, I feel having both the LB and RB on Attack duty is too unbalanced. I'm still watching his play to see if I can get more from him, maybe with a PI. My DR on WB Attack has been creating goals with crosses and pull backs. My starter is on 8.3 average and his backup 7.98.

The central midfield was initially a CM Support and BBM but I felt due to the forward thinking of the team and the tempo I needed more support for my forward so switched the BBM to a CM Attack. I also added Hold Position and Riskier Passes to my CM Support to keep a central deeper presence. I did consider a play maker role but I didn't want extra focus to go to him and I was happy with his general position, I didn't want him to start roaming and dribbling as a RPM, I didn't want him deeper as a DLP, the only one i'm still considering is AP Support with the Hold Position instruction.

Up front I have the same as Cleon, I would highlight the importance of having a player with Hold Up Ball instruction leading the attack. Playing with an attacking mentality the ball goes forward very quickly and the extra few moments he takes allows players to make runs and offer him support. I did have my AMR as a AP Support but he plays too deep and narrow leaving the ST and RB isolated.

Key players for me so far have been:

1. DLF Support ability to hold up play, pulling players out of position then playing a runner in.

2. CM Support linking play and creating goals

3. WB Attack providing width, pulling players out of the center creating space for a cross / pull back.

Quick Analysis

This is including friendlies so inflates my goals scored a lot (a lot were crosses), in the league i've scored 22 and conceded 4. In europe i'm 15 scored with 5 conceded and considering i'm in a group with Barcelona (lost 0-2, won 4-0) thats not bad.

Looking at the assists against me none are from long balls over the top, this backs up what i've seen in the games. My CB and DM cover well with a hard working team who get back quickly.

20% of goals I concede are from crosses which is pretty low, the high mentality and pressing doesn't give a lot of time for good crosses.

Possession isn't great (40-50% typically) but I have no instructions the encourage it, the amount of good chances we create mean I always feel we can outscore the opposition. If we're clear in a game I might switch to slower game to rest the players a bit.

Results

A few hiccups whilst things weren't fluid and a few injuries to the starter+backup but things have settled well.

Surely fluid would naturally make your side narrower and closer together without the narrow instruction?

Cleon originally said about creating width, wouldn't the narrow instruction negate that slightly?

[poobington]

The narrowness in combination with the fluidity, slightly higher defensive line and closing down probably creates a more compact shape allowing for the ball to be won back quicker. With the AMR and AML slots you create width, and I suppose the full backs can also be instructed to stay wider.

[alinp]

Surely fluid would naturally make your side narrower and closer together without the narrow instruction?

Cleon originally said about creating width, wouldn't the narrow instruction negate that slightly?

Fluid will make them more compact front to back, not narrower. Width when defending is generally instructed by mentality.

[summatsupeer]

Now all that remains is to call Louis van Gaal or Ed W.

Haha, strangely my usual style is more like LvG, I hate wasted possession. This tactic doesn't have good possession time but when we lose the ball its typically something that if it had been executed better or not defended as well would of made a great chance.

Surely fluid would naturally make your side narrower and closer together without the narrow instruction?

Cleon originally said about creating width, wouldn't the narrow instruction negate that slightly?

As alinp said, the Team Shape is about the distance front to back and doesn't affect width.

I am sacrificing some width for more central support and penetration. Cleon noted the width of his team means quite a lot of crossing, I don't want that, I want more support and penetration in central areas with just enough width (from my DL+DR) to keep defenses honest.

If I had used a 442 Diamond, I would naturally be narrow, i'm just bringing my wider starting formation more central.

[Cleon]

Haha, strangely my usual style is more like LvG, I hate wasted possession. This tactic doesn't have good possession time but when we lose the ball its typically something that if it had been executed better or not defended as well would of made a great chance.

As alinp said, the Team Shape is about the distance front to back and doesn't affect width.

I am sacrificing some width for more central support and penetration. Cleon noted the width of his team means quite a lot of crossing, I don't want that, I want more support and penetration in central areas with just enough width (from my DL+DR) to keep defenses honest.

If I had used a 442 Diamond, I would naturally be narrow, i'm just bringing my wider starting formation more central.

I actually noted that width allows you to use all the pitch and not be confound to the same areas all the time. Playing narrow limits your options and space, which are both massive things based on the shape you use. But if it's working for you then that's fine. However I've no idea why someone would play as narrow as possible with the shape you use, it doesn't make much sense to me.

[summatsupeer]

Sorry I should of re-read instead of trying to remember what you said and getting it wrong.

My aim was to create better quality chances by having the players more central when penetrating so less shots are from tight angles due to being wider when penetrating. It might be limiting my options and space but I think its making better quality chances.

I need to analyse properly vs a wider version as this is mostly from memory and what I think I saw.

[Cleon]

It's interesting because looking at your results and the games you failed to win, it is against teams who i'd expect to sit deep and absorb pressure in most cases. Against these sides you'll struggle for penetration if you are narrow as you aren't stretching them. With out even looking at your games I'm pretty confident this is part of the issue in those games because of the teams you are failing to beat.

[summatsupeer]

Results have been fine since.

Norwich nearly came back cos I screwed up my team talk.

The West Ham game I had some great chances and hit the woodwork a couple of times. There goal was a 35 screamer, they only had 2 other shots that were poor chances from tight angles.

I've added a few screenshots from the West Ham game as it was one of my lowest chances created games: http://imgur.com/a/Ku8Uq

If you could have a quick look it would be appreciated, i'm a little out of my comfort zone with this attacking tactic and not seeing how more width would of provided better options. If I played wider it could make more space centrally but I can't see anyone who could really exploit it, maybe these are just bad examples though? Whilst i'm winning there could still be improvements to be made.

[Cleon]

Results have been fine since.

Norwich nearly came back cos I screwed up my team talk.

The West Ham game I had some great chances and hit the woodwork a couple of times. There goal was a 35 screamer, they only had 2 other shots that were poor chances from tight angles.

I've added a few screenshots from the West Ham game as it was one of my lowest chances created games: http://imgur.com/a/Ku8Uq

If you could have a quick look it would be appreciated, i'm a little out of my comfort zone with this attacking tactic and not seeing how more width would of provided better options. If I played wider it could make more space centrally but I can't see anyone who could really exploit it, maybe these are just bad examples though? Whilst i'm winning there could still be improvements to be made.

Look how narrow the oppositions back 4 are. If you played wider you'd have your front players in space and away from their marker. Currently they always have a player on them, the fullbacks are making them and almost stood on top of them. Because you play narrower they're only going to get narrower as the move advances on.

Your example 3 shows this best as the central defenders are spectaors and have no-one to mark so even if your front players get the ball it's going to be easy for the defence to deal with as you have no midfield able to support quickly enough. Your player will be forced wide with the ball which is a bad thing. Where as if he is slightly wider he won't be forced outwide, instead he could just simple run inside and then one of the centrebacks would have a choice to make, stay still or move across.

You have to remember that creating space isn't about what your side do, you also have to factor in what the opposition players then have to do too.

[daleuk8]

I actually noted that width allows you to use all the pitch and not be confound to the same areas all the time. Playing narrow limits your options and space, which are both massive things based on the shape you use. But if it's working for you then that's fine. However I've no idea why someone would play as narrow as possible with the shape you use, it doesn't make much sense to me.

Would you only play narrower then when using a wide formation?

[summatsupeer]

Look how narrow the oppositions back 4 are. If you played wider you'd have your front players in space and away from their marker. Currently they always have a player on them, the fullbacks are making them and almost stood on top of them. Because you play narrower they're only going to get narrower as the move advances on.

Your example 3 shows this best as the central defenders are spectaors and have no-one to mark so even if your front players get the ball it's going to be easy for the defence to deal with as you have no midfield able to support quickly enough. Your player will be forced wide with the ball which is a bad thing. Where as if he is slightly wider he won't be forced outwide, instead he could just simple run inside and then one of the centrebacks would have a choice to make, stay still or move across.

You have to remember that creating space isn't about what your side do, you also have to factor in what the opposition players then have to do too.

I see what you mean I think. By starting wider you have more space to isolate whoever closes your down, opening up space for runners or to dribble into that space if you beat them 1v1 etc. My concern was having the AML/AMR so wide that they are more like wingers / creators and them getting pinned against the touchline. Would you say that width has less effect in the final third so this concern isn't warranted?

I'll make a wider variation this weekend when I can play properly and see if I can see how it affects the play.

[Cleon]

Would you only play narrower then when using a wide formation?

Well you wouldn't play narrow when you already have a narrow formation would you? It just doesn't make any kind of logical sense to me to even attempt that.

I see what you mean I think. By starting wider you have more space to isolate whoever closes your down, opening up space for runners or to dribble into that space if you beat them 1v1 etc. My concern was having the AML/AMR so wide that they are more like wingers / creators and them getting pinned against the touchline. Would you say that width has less effect in the final third so this concern isn't warranted?

I'll make a wider variation this weekend when I can play properly and see if I can see how it affects the play.

No width is more useful in the final third imo. Plus you don't have to go really wide, you could leave it balanced and it would be enough. You also need to take into account the roles you use and IF and RMD who both will roam about and cut inside anyways regardless of width setting. The width setting will just instruct them how wide they'll be initially.

[summatsupeer]

I meant that in the final third attack duty players will look to get into scoring positions so I shouldn't worry about them playing too wide because of the width instruction? The forward players will naturally narrow the closer we are to the goal compared to the center of the pitch.

Attacking mentality gives extra roaming doesn't it? With the roles and that extra roaming might explain why they find space and I can create chances, still could be improved of course.

[Cleon]

I meant that in the final third attack duty players will look to get into scoring positions so I shouldn't worry about them playing too wide because of the width instruction? The forward players will naturally narrow the closer we are to the goal compared to the center of the pitch.

Attacking mentality gives extra roaming doesn't it? With the roles and that extra roaming might explain why they find space and I can create chances, still could be improved of course.

There's only one level of roaming, someone is either roaming or they aren't. There is no in between. Attacking mentality duties don't mean they look for scoring opportunities either it all still depends on the roles they have. A winger won't look to score as often as a inside forward and so on. All the attacking mentality does really is make tempo faster, rush decisions more, play higher up the pitch etc.

[PhroX]

(Another) Great thread Cleon, really appreciate what you and the other tactical boffins do to help the community for this game. Of course, now there's even more ideas for tactics I want to try out, but I'm one of those players that tends to stick to one long term save and play slowly on top of that, so I dunno if I'll ever get round to making something inspired by this. Hope I do, as it looks fun.

I do admit though, I'm curious what roles you'd have gone with had you chosen the 3-4-1-2 instead. Not asking for a fully developed tactic or anything, just your initial thoughts on what would fit an attacking style with that formation.

[summatsupeer]

There's only one level of roaming, someone is either roaming or they aren't. There is no in between. Attacking mentality duties don't mean they look for scoring opportunities either it all still depends on the roles they have. A winger won't look to score as often as a inside forward and so on. All the attacking mentality does really is make tempo faster, rush decisions more, play higher up the pitch etc.

I'm surprised that the role has more effect than the duty, is it the effect of the instructions (more crossing / stay wider / no cutting inside) that causes the role difference (winger vs if) rather than some hidden settings?

Cheers for the education

(Another) Great thread Cleon, really appreciate what you and the other tactical boffins do to help the community for this game. Of course, now there's even more ideas for tactics I want to try out, but I'm one of those players that tends to stick to one long term save and play slowly on top of that, so I dunno if I'll ever get round to making something inspired by this. Hope I do, as it looks fun.

I do admit though, I'm curious what roles you'd have gone with had you chosen the 3-4-1-2 instead. Not asking for a fully developed tactic or anything, just your initial thoughts on what would fit an attacking style with that formation.

Having read the thread what do you think you should do? The whole point of this is so you can make those decisions, don't worry there no end of year test. Even though I felt I was going to get an A but not as clever as I thought and was more of a B- .

[Cleon]

I'm surprised that the role has more effect than the duty, is it the effect of the instructions (more crossing / stay wider / no cutting inside) that causes the role difference (winger vs if) rather than some hidden settings?

Cheers for the education

Having read the thread what do you think you should do? The whole point of this is so you can make those decisions, don't worry there no end of year test. Even though I felt I was going to get an A but not as clever as I thought and was more of a B- .

A duty doesn't change what role someone is though, at the end of the day he is still a winger and doing what's expected he's just more aggressive i.e further up the field on attack rather than support, he might run with ball more etc. But the fundamentals are the same because it's the role that determines what he actually has to do. I'm surprised you think duty makes the difference to how roles differ from each other, because that would make roles obsolete there would be no need for them would there?

[Warrenwwr]

good thread so far. as always Cleon is doing a service.

my only wish for this thread now is for it to be 10+ pages long and maybe renamed to something like the art of tactics in fm2016

i used the ideas in this thread to reform my straight 5 man midfield with 2 DCs and 1 Libero Atk to support my 2 forwards. from what i have seen, almost all the problems i had initially with tactics this year can be solved with midfield balance. for eg simply changing 1 of my MCs from BWM to CM(Def) made all the difference

[chile_paul]

Great thread cleon.

How do you adjust your tactic when playing away from home or against better opposition.

Do you adjust mentality down to control, moderate the TI's, moderate the roles and duties or a combination of all of the above.

Thanks

[Cleon]

Great thread cleon.

How do you adjust your tactic when playing away from home or against better opposition.

Do you adjust mentality down to control, moderate the TI's, moderate the roles and duties or a combination of all of the above.

Thanks

I don't judge games as home or away or better opposition. I treat all games the same and always play my usual set up. Any changes I do come from what I see happening in a game.

[summatsupeer]

A duty doesn't change what role someone is though, at the end of the day he is still a winger and doing what's expected he's just more aggressive i.e further up the field on attack rather than support, he might run with ball more etc. But the fundamentals are the same because it's the role that determines what he actually has to do. I'm surprised you think duty makes the difference to how roles differ from each other, because that would make roles obsolete there would be no need for them would there?

Yeah of course, I started doubting what I thought I knew but had just confused myself trying to think how team width settings would affect there play.

I played half a dozen or so matches with the default width rather than narrow, didn't notice a lot of difference when watching play I think due to roaming as we said. Looking at the analytic's the positioning is a bit wider so they are generally wider but I think its a little to subtle for me to tell the pros/cons without more testing.

[gunnerfan]

I don't judge games as home or away or better opposition. I treat all games the same and always play my usual set up. Any changes I do come from what I see happening in a game.

Does this mean that you only prepare one tactic?

[Cleon]

Does this mean that you only prepare one tactic?

It does yes, I personally don't see the point of having more than one for the way I play. I'd rather not guess what is going to happen but instead, base any changes based on what I see happening in a game. It's the only way to know how a game is going.

[gunnerfan]

It does yes, I personally don't see the point of having more than one for the way I play. I'd rather not guess what is going to happen but instead, base any changes based on what I see happening in a game. It's the only way to know how a game is going.

Interesting. I've always figured that certain formations present better defending options to certain attacking formations. For example, when facing a side with an odd-man front, I find it helpful to have a good, solid DM in front of the backs, while a 4-4-2, not so much. Then again, when starting out with a new club, I base my tactics on what players I have and what they do best.

[Cleon]

Interesting. I've always figured that certain formations present better defending options to certain attacking formations. For example, when facing a side with an odd-man front, I find it helpful to have a good, solid DM in front of the backs, while a 4-4-2, not so much. Then again, when starting out with a new club, I base my tactics on what players I have and what they do best.

This approach works too, however, when do you draw the line? What I mean is, you can over analyse and over micromanage. Plus even if the opposition have an advantage, you'll also have one somewhere on the pitch too. How do you know your formation change works or more importantly, you might not have needed to change the shape. It just comes down to preference really and how picky you want to be, there will always be faults in any system and you can't create a perfect tactic that has no flaws. Myself, I just prefer to work with one tactic and do very minimal changes based on the first fifteen minutes of a game.

[gunnerfan]

This approach works too, however, when do you draw the line? What I mean is, you can over analyse and over micromanage. Plus even if the opposition have an advantage, you'll also have one somewhere on the pitch too. How do you know your formation change works or more importantly, you might not have needed to change the shape. It just comes down to preference really and how picky you want to be, there will always be faults in any system and you can't create a perfect tactic that has no flaws. Myself, I just prefer to work with one tactic and do very minimal changes based on the first fifteen minutes of a game.

Oh, definitely true. I was chatting with my son about it, and the analogy I used is of a blanket that's not large enough - either your feet are going to be cold or your upper body is going to be cold, so you have to pick which one you can live with. So, yes, you have to decide what weaknesses you can live with. OTOH, in the game on the pitch, the danger of a particular weakness being exploited (and the opportunity to exploit weaknesses in opponents) has to change with each opposing shape and the different players who make them up, because the individual match ups change. Now, that could mean that you just need to approach each match differently, maintaining the same shape but adjusting how you use it, or you may need to change that shape to bring more force to bear on a given point on the pitch. Injuries also play a part, as the player who comes in to replace an injured starter will likely not have the same skill set or be able to play the same role.

Anyway, I'm anxious to see how you do with this latest project of yours.

[Stretcheddie]

Love this. Set this up on my Basingstoke save and it started brightly enough but Registas and Raumdeuters aren't traditionally found in the Lower and Non Leagues. Pushed the Regista forward to a Deep lying playmaker role on support and went with 3 central strikers, A Defensive forward and Target Man on Support with an Advanced Forward between them. These roles were chosen to suit the squad I had and I occasionally use a DLF instead of a defensive forward depending on who is available.

Up shot of all this is that between this and Harry Hammonds 442 that I used as an away tactic I won the FA Trophy and the VNS.

Onwards and upwards.

P.S Cleon, RTHerringbone and Rashidi should all have their faces put on money.

[tmpnd]

Hey guys, is a role like Trequartista in ST position more suited to help break down stubborn, deep sides? I currently have a Raumdeuter and a IF(S) on the flanks.

[JaYmZeE]

Mate, the best way to break down deep sides is width and crosses from the by-line, which means aggressive full backs overlapping ideally - set to cross more and to do it from the by-line. Make sure you've got runners coming from deep to help get on the end of these crosses - runners they'll find hard to pick up and switching play - anything whatsoever that'll stretch them - so maybe a DLP switching play between flanks - I'd also go with wingers on support rather than an IF & Space sniffer wide - your WB's or FB's on Att will still overlap with them and wingers are great for arriving at the back stick for scoring goals.

The last thing you want to do is find yourself playing in front of them - and really thats' all IF's and Space sniffers will do - cut inside and find an army of bodies - WIDTH MY FRIEND - WIDTH - or as John Barnes put it - or something like this - "there's only one way to beat them, get round the back"

[iamneallyons]

Hey guys, is a role like Trequartista in ST position more suited to help break down stubborn, deep sides? I currently have a Raumdeuter and a IF(S) on the flanks.

you need width to break down a deep compact side, the treq will drop deeper so hopefully drawing out a defender to leave space but ultimately i would have thought you need to spread the back line of the opposition?

[iamneallyons]

Any more updates on this thread Cleon?

[Cleon]

Nope I've quit writing FM stuff, so there will be no future updates for anything

[iamneallyons]

Nope I've quit writing FM stuff, so there will be no future updates for anything

really, how come?

[RTHerringbone]

https://tifo.site/help

[iamneallyons]

https://tifo.site/help

whats the link for RTH?

[Jean0987654321]

whats the link for RTH?

Prolly a site that Cleon is helping to develop. This means that his time to write articles are very, very limited. Ah...well, they are a lot of other guys here that will pick up the pieces, at least....

[gunnerfan]

Nope I've quit writing FM stuff, so there will be no future updates for anything

I saw that elsewhere and was saddened. Your articles made my re-entry into FM-ness (after 4 years) much easier. I hope this doesn't mean you're walking away from the game altogether.

[Gee_Simpson]

I saw that elsewhere and was saddened. Your articles made my re-entry into FM-ness (after 4 years) much easier. I hope this doesn't mean you're walking away from the game altogether.

This. Cleon's articles will be a big miss!

[mikcheck]

Cleon, thank you for another great thread.

Space and movement is important, mainly in this type of football. In that tactic you've created, "only" 3 of your players have roaming instructions as default, but i guess that roaming it's not crucial, as long as the roles and duties make sense?

I have the habit of adding roaming to all the attacking players with good attributes, but i think that do more harm than good.

[Cleon]

Cleon, thank you for another great thread.

Space and movement is important, mainly in this type of football. In that tactic you've created, "only" 3 of your players have roaming instructions as default, but i guess that roaming it's not crucial, as long as the roles and duties make sense?

I have the habit of adding roaming to all the attacking players with good attributes, but i think that do more harm than good.

If everyone is roaming then no-one is sticking to their position, which means no-one is doing the things you want in the areas you need. People often confuse roaming with intelligent movement and think roaming can offer this. But it's not that simple and not always the case. Just because someone is roaming it doesn't mean it's beneficial to the team, players around him or for the tactic as a unit. The more people that roam the more people that will be out of position and when you lose the ball this can cause huge problems.

[mikcheck]

Thanks Cleon