Arrigo Sacchi's 4-4-2 (Very Fluid)

[kingjericho]

This setup is almost carbon copied by Benfica this season, under new manager Bruno Lage. The team plays a very pressing 4-4-2, using different areas of the pitch to create chances.

LB Grimaldo is more attacking than RB Almeida.

The midfield 4, IRL, are mirrored from this setup, as LW Rafa is a right-footed winger who could eventually have a Inside Winger role instead of a classic Winger.

RW Pizzi is an all-rounder, who fits well in the Wide Midfielder role. A Wide Playmaker would also be an option, but in reality it's Gabriel the true playmaker in the team.

Gabriel as a Deep-Lying Playmaker and Samaris is a Central Midfielder who is strong at tackling but also a good passer, so the generic role fits is perhaps the best choice.

I'd perhaps change the front two's roles. João Félix is the magician of the team, and I would leave him on support because it's Seferovic who attacks the back of the opposition defense line. Either a CF(a) or AF(a) would fit him perfectly.

[kurupted]

Em 17/05/2019 em 18:34, kingjericho disse:

This setup is almost carbon copied by Benfica this season, under new manager Bruno Lage. The team plays a very pressing 4-4-2, using different areas of the pitch to create chances.

LB Grimaldo is more attacking than RB Almeida.

The midfield 4, IRL, are mirrored from this setup, as LW Rafa is a right-footed winger who could eventually have a Inside Winger role instead of a classic Winger.

RW Pizzi is an all-rounder, who fits well in the Wide Midfielder role. A Wide Playmaker would also be an option, but in reality it's Gabriel the true playmaker in the team.

Gabriel as a Deep-Lying Playmaker and Samaris is a Central Midfielder who is strong at tackling but also a good passer, so the generic role fits is perhaps the best choice.

I'd perhaps change the front two's roles. João Félix is the magician of the team, and I would leave him on support because it's Seferovic who attacks the back of the opposition defense line. Either a CF(a) or AF(a) would fit him perfectly.

Ok.

Using Gabriel as a DLP-D ? Using Samaris as CM-D, i can understand, but Gabriel as a defensive Deep Lying Playmaker ???

[kingjericho]

27 minutes ago, kurupted said:

Ok.

Using Gabriel as a DLP-D ? Using Samaris as CM-D, i can understand, but Gabriel as a defensive Deep Lying Playmaker ???

I think a DLP/D + CM/S pairing creates a more attacking dynamic than the contrary. This way, the team has a creative player that receives the ball from deep, and his partner helps all the way from their own half to the opposition area.

If you watch closely the matches where Benfica played with Gabriel + Samaris, you will see that it's Gabriel who receives the ball from the defenders more often, and while he's dictating the game, Samaris either stays back or moves forward depensing on how the attack is developing.

[kurupted]

Em 24/05/2019 em 11:59, kingjericho disse:

I think a DLP/D + CM/S pairing creates a more attacking dynamic than the contrary. This way, the team has a creative player that receives the ball from deep, and his partner helps all the way from their own half to the opposition area.

If you watch closely the matches where Benfica played with Gabriel + Samaris, you will see that it's Gabriel who receives the ball from the defenders more often, and while he's dictating the game, Samaris either stays back or moves forward depensing on how the attack is developing.

Yes, Gabriel does that, but i don't think Samaris should have CM-S, using DLP-S with CM-D maybe ?

[kingjericho]

6 hours ago, kurupted said:

Yes, Gabriel does that, but i don't think Samaris should have CM-S, using DLP-S with CM-D maybe ?

I think I'd be more open to even using a DLP/S + CM/S partnership. Both players work hard and have good positioning, and aided by a high defensive line they should be able to control the midfield with both Support duties.

[kurupted]

16 horas atrás, kingjericho disse:

I think I'd be more open to even using a DLP/S + CM/S partnership. Both players work hard and have good positioning, and aided by a high defensive line they should be able to control the midfield with both Support duties.

With that tactic, how can you achieve good possession ?

Benfica in some games, home games and away too, gets 500 sometimes 600 passes completed. How can you achieve that ?

[kurupted]

17 horas atrás, kingjericho disse:

I think I'd be more open to even using a DLP/S + CM/S partnership. Both players work hard and have good positioning, and aided by a high defensive line they should be able to control the midfield with both Support duties.

Have you tried using the midfield like: Segundo Volante (s) and Defensive Midfield (d) ?

[kurupted]

I am trying right know DLP-D with BWM-S.

Both wingers with WM-A with instructions to stay inside.

[robot_skeleton]

On 13/06/2019 at 22:10, kurupted said:

I am trying right know DLP-D with BWM-S.

Both wingers with WM-A with instructions to stay inside.

Stay inside? And why change the playmaker?

Edited June 16, 2019 by robot_skeleton

[kurupted]

Em 16/06/2019 em 09:21, robot_skeleton disse:

Stay inside? And why change the playmaker?

When you say playmaker with mean the WP in the right wing ?

Yes, the real playmaker is Gabriel, not Pizzi.

 

Im not sure entirely about J. Félix role. Ive tried Trequartista, F9, DLF-S, and i don't quite seem to like them.

[Delial]

il y a 17 minutes, kurupted a dit :

When you say playmaker with mean the WP in the right wing ?

Yes, the real playmaker is Gabriel, not Pizzi.

 

Im not sure entirely about J. Félix role. Ive tried Trequartista, F9, DLF-S, and i don't quite seem to like them.

The best role, for me, for J.Felix is DLF-S with the "roam from position" PI. Lot of goals, he comes deep to collect the ball but not as an AP in the AMC strata. He stays next to Seferovic and let central middlefielders do the job.

[kurupted]

6 minutos atrás, Delial disse:

The best role, for me, for J.Felix is DLF-S with the "roam from position" PI. Lot of goals, he comes deep to collect the ball but not as an AP in the AMC strata. He stays next to Seferovic and let central middlefielders do the job.

Do you think "Pass into space" is an option in Lage's model ?

[Delial]

Il y a 2 heures, kurupted a dit :

Do you think "Pass into space" is an option in Lage's model ?

It depends on how your see its tactic. But for me, it works. 

To be honest, the biggest issue of recreating Lage’s tactic is the pressing. 

[bamb00zle]

Took this idea for my Sevilla side on FM18. Obviously Sevilla are one of the strongest sides but not the level of Real, Atletico, Barca and Valencia. We should be challenging for the top four but probably end up in the Europa League.

i saw that very fluid wouldn't work for me as I don't have CBs who are great at carrying/playing the ball well. So I changed to fluid and occasionally flexible to create more space.

We have a very hard working squad (that is my hallmark as a manager I expect nothing less) so i kept the very high press

I looked at the balance of my squad and went WM (s) on the right flank with FB (a) behind him. Left side is Winger (a) and a simple FB (s) behind him

The central midfield is comprised of a DLP (d) and CM (s). The CM (s) is a real workhorse and will do the majority of the pressing. The DLP is stationary and sprays the ball to the flanks (he has that PPM)

Up top is AM (a) with move into channels and more risky passing and in front of him is a false 9.

So what did I see? The very high press and high D line lead to me being counter attacked ruthlessly especially by 4231s. So I moved it down to 'more' instead of 'much more'. The D line is moved to slightly higher when at home and normal when away. I've removed all play out the back options and passing into space as my team aren't the level of the OPs. Instead I've gone mixed passing, distribute to FBs quickly. I also check the scout reports and man mark wingers (but not inside forwards as they'll drag you all over.) to minimise the disruption AMR and AML can have against this tactic. I also put one CB on cover to sweep up through balls and he's doing a better job.

All these changes and now we are motoring along great. Beaten Atletico, Valencia and Real at home, conceding less goals and playing lovely football. The AM (a) and False 9 are wreaking havoc and my attacking winger is a genuinely world class player (regen) who is pacey and direct. He is actually our top scorer and creator too. The WMs cuts inside and is also skillful and direct and chips in too and assists at the back. The FB (a) is getting forward well but not as relentlessly if he was WB (a). I wanted to keep some solidity (petrified of counters) and it largely works but you'll never eliminate it completely.

I'm really pleased I was able to spot these issues and adjust it to suit my players. It has saved my job as we were struggling in the bottom half when I first took over.

 

Edited July 1, 2019 by bamb00zle

[kurupted]

Em 06/06/2019 em 19:31, kingjericho disse:

I think I'd be more open to even using a DLP/S + CM/S partnership. Both players work hard and have good positioning, and aided by a high defensive line they should be able to control the midfield with both Support duties.

What about team instructions ?

[kingjericho]

1 hour ago, kurupted said:

What about team instructions ?

This is what I'm using now. Slightly different from what's in this thread, but Sacchi's philosophy remains.

[vogado86]

On 17/05/2019 at 18:34, kingjericho said:

This setup is almost carbon copied by Benfica this season, under new manager Bruno Lage. The team plays a very pressing 4-4-2, using different areas of the pitch to create chances.

LB Grimaldo is more attacking than RB Almeida.

The midfield 4, IRL, are mirrored from this setup, as LW Rafa is a right-footed winger who could eventually have a Inside Winger role instead of a classic Winger.

RW Pizzi is an all-rounder, who fits well in the Wide Midfielder role. A Wide Playmaker would also be an option, but in reality it's Gabriel the true playmaker in the team.

Gabriel as a Deep-Lying Playmaker and Samaris is a Central Midfielder who is strong at tackling but also a good passer, so the generic role fits is perhaps the best choice.

I'd perhaps change the front two's roles. João Félix is the magician of the team, and I would leave him on support because it's Seferovic who attacks the back of the opposition defense line. Either a CF(a) or AF(a) would fit him perfectly.

You play with Félix at DLF (S) and Seferovic at CF(a) or AF(a)?

[kingjericho]

10 minutes ago, vogado86 said:

You play with Félix at DLF (S) and Seferovic at CF(a) or AF(a)?

I am not using this tactic, this was just my interpretation of it to best suit Benfica's players. Tbh if I were to choose a role to fit the way Seferovic plays, maybe a PF(a) would be the best option, as his main purpose is to close down the defenders. Even Bruno Lage said the strikers must run a lot regardless of scoring more or less goals.

[vogado86]

1 hour ago, kingjericho said:

I am not using this tactic, this was just my interpretation of it to best suit Benfica's players. Tbh if I were to choose a role to fit the way Seferovic plays, maybe a PF(a) would be the best option, as his main purpose is to close down the defenders. Even Bruno Lage said the strikers must run a lot regardless of scoring more or less goals.

This is my Benfica tactic in the begining of the season. I take some ideas from this treath.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, vogado86 said:

Sorry, but I have to ask you what's the point of time wasting (instruction) in this particular tactic, given that it looks pretty much attack-minded?

Edited August 26, 2019 by Experienced Defender

[vogado86]

2 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Sorry, but I have to ask you what's the point of time wasting (instruction) in this particular tactic, given that it looks pretty much attack-minded?

I had selected that instruction because a specif game. What is your sugestions?

[Experienced Defender]

53 minutes ago, vogado86 said:

I had selected that instruction because a specif game. What is your sugestions?

I don't have a suggestion, just saying that it makes little (if any) sense when considered in the context of the whole tactic. The thing is, you want to waste time when you are an underdog playing against a (much) stronger opponent. But your tactic - apart from the time wasting TI - does not look as if you are an underdog. Therefore, the instruction is inconsistent with the rest of your tactic.

[vogado86]

3 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I don't have a suggestion, just saying that it makes little (if any) sense when considered in the context of the whole tactic. The thing is, you want to waste time when you are an underdog playing against a (much) stronger opponent. But your tactic - apart from the time wasting TI - does not look as if you are an underdog. Therefore, the instruction is inconsistent with the rest of your tactic.

Thanks for the explanation. I will try to improve my tactic.

[TacticNewb]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! I've used this tactic to great effect on previous FMs across many different clubs and leagues but due to the new tactics interface I'm not sure what instructions to use that would keep it in line with your initial principles. Could you shed some light on what instructions and possibly which roles you would use if you were to set it up on this year's game. Thanks in advance 😁

[zlatanera]

@TacticNewb If you just copied it directly on previous editions, just do that again for FM19 - don't use Line of Engagement, Counter-Press / Regroup, Counter / Hold Shape instructions until you know if you need them. FM19 tactics seem to basically play like previous FMs' Flexible shape. I did that on a save ages ago and we did decent (Dortmund 2nd season, won Europa League and Cup and came 2nd in the league, despite the fact that back then AMs were genuinely rubbish due to lack of movement). 

[FMSacchi]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

I've saw on another topic of yours that you have downloaded the demo for fm2020.

You've been quite vocal about the tactical side not being as good as previous editions so do you think this tactic could be updated to this year's edition and still be successfully implemented and be as good as this tactic was when you first created it.

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

3 hours ago, FMSacchi said:

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

I've saw on another topic of yours that you have downloaded the demo for fm2020.

You've been quite vocal about the tactical side not being as good as previous editions so do you think this tactic could be updated to this year's edition and still be successfully implemented and be as good as this tactic was when you first created it.

Yes, absolutely. 4-4-1-1 is always going to be a solid shape. If you look at some of the newer threads, you'll see that I moved on from using Standard mentality and Very Fluid all the time to using Control a lot more and using more Support mentalities to balance it out.

Obviously in FM 2019 onwards, the tactics creator has lost the functionality of Team Shape in getting compactness but lots of Support duties does that anyway.

Happy to help out if you want to have a go 

[FMSacchi]

1 hour ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Yes, absolutely. 4-4-1-1 is always going to be a solid shape. If you look at some of the newer threads, you'll see that I moved on from using Standard mentality and Very Fluid all the time to using Control a lot more and using more Support mentalities to balance it out.

Obviously in FM 2019 onwards, the tactics creator has lost the functionality of Team Shape in getting compactness but lots of Support duties does that anyway.

Happy to help out if you want to have a go 

Thanks for answering.

I would absolutely appreciate your help on this. 

The TIs that are used would/could still apply but things like line of engagement and counter-press weren't an option back then so would these be added and if so would the pressing urgency change due to counter-press?

If you change mentality to positive would passing and width be affected and therefore need to be changed accordingly.

I know I'm just firing questions out and they would need to be tried in-game before they could be answered but your knowledge or the game and ME seems to be up there with the best at the moment

Apologies for sounding like an inquisitive 10 year old but I'm not very good at making my own tactics and like using tactical replications to try and achieve more than they did at the time.

Thanks 😁

[coach vahid]

Hi people...

It's my turn to propose an adaptation in the new tactical system.
In the team instructions, the only additional instruction is the line of engagment much higher (which for me seemed logical). I kept the same roles, I just added the individual AT instructions to the supports. Will that be enough to keep the system efficient? I do not know. we have to test. ( forgot to mention. I'm on FM19)

Edited April 8, 2020 by coach vahid

[JIPI1]

2 hours ago, coach vahid said:

Hi people...

It's my turn to propose an adaptation in the new tactical system.
In the team instructions, the only additional instruction is the line of engagment much higher (which for me seemed logical). I kept the same roles, I just added the individual AT instructions to the supports. Will that be enough to keep the system efficient? I do not know. we have to test. ( forgot to mention. I'm on FM19)

Your GK could also be a Sweeper on support for added compactness, mentality increase and more risky passing

[zlatanera]

@coach vahid @JIPI1 I think you’ll find a team full of support duties on Balanced too risk-averse. I had a Roma tactic that operated off similar principles, if you’re worried about player mentalities being too far apart with ‘shape’ not being very fluid, I had both WM on At and both FB on Su with Overlap on each flank to bring them together. But just copying the roles outright will work too. 

Looking at that tactic I just referenced,  the best way to copy this would probably be to only add Counter-Press. You’ll be more compact by not messing with LOE. Also I don’t know much about your attackers but I wouldn’t necessarily use Low Crosses if you have big guys up top - in the original post however he has Domenico Berardi who whilst not short is definitely more of a ball-on-ground guy. 

Edited April 8, 2020 by zlatanera

[DimitrisLar]

3 hours ago, coach vahid said:

Hi people...

It's my turn to propose an adaptation in the new tactical system.
In the team instructions, the only additional instruction is the line of engagment much higher (which for me seemed logical). I kept the same roles, I just added the individual AT instructions to the supports. Will that be enough to keep the system efficient? I do not know. we have to test. ( forgot to mention. I'm on FM19)

do you have any pi, like move into channels, in the AM? do you have at least one player making a third-man-run? are you doing it via traits? 

btw wide players (not mentioning wide playmekers) can participate in the build up even with an attack mentality, if you choose stay narrow in the PI. It says so in the description of the PI.

[coach vahid]

Il y a 1 heure, zlatanera a dit :

@coach vahid @JIPI1 I think you’ll find a team full of support duties on Balanced too risk-averse. I had a Roma tactic that operated off similar principles, if you’re worried about player mentalities being too far apart with ‘shape’ not being very fluid, I had both WM on At and both FB on Su with Overlap on each flank to bring them together. But just copying the roles outright will work too. 

Looking at that tactic I just referenced,  the best way to copy this would probably be to only add Counter-Press. You’ll be more compact by not messing with LOE. Also I don’t know much about your attackers but I wouldn’t necessarily use Low Crosses if you have big guys up top - in the original post however he has Domenico Berardi who whilst not short is definitely more of a ball-on-ground guy. 

it was just a proposal to end up with the same instructions in a very fluid shape (as you know, we can no longer choose the fluidity of the team). and rediscover the original spirit of the original post.

il y a 59 minutes, DimitrisLar a dit :

do you have any pi, like move into channels, in the AM? do you have at least one player making a third-man-run? are you doing it via traits? 

btw wide players (not mentioning wide playmekers) can participate in the build up even with an attack mentality, if you choose stay narrow in the PI. It says so in the description of the PI.

I just use the original instructions. In the opening post AM with attack duty got  " get further forward". I just use AM on support (for keeping very fluid shape) and i added "get further forward + Hold up ball".

The CF got already in his PI "move into channels",so i added none.

[DimitrisLar]

8 hours ago, coach vahid said:

it was just a proposal to end up with the same instructions in a very fluid shape (as you know, we can no longer choose the fluidity of the team). and rediscover the original spirit of the original post.

I just use the original instructions. In the opening post AM with attack duty got  " get further forward". I just use AM on support (for keeping very fluid shape) and i added "get further forward + Hold up ball".

The CF got already in his PI "move into channels",so i added none.

how is it going? any remedy for no crossing wingbacks from dangerous positions? 

[kr10]

13 hours ago, coach vahid said:

it was just a proposal to end up with the same instructions in a very fluid shape (as you know, we can no longer choose the fluidity of the team). and rediscover the original spirit of the original post.

I just use the original instructions. In the opening post AM with attack duty got  " get further forward". I just use AM on support (for keeping very fluid shape) and i added "get further forward + Hold up ball".

The CF got already in his PI "move into channels",so i added none.

Fluidity doesn’t mean anything anymore, it is purely cosmetic. Changing roles to get “very fluid” isn’t the right way to think about it - the movement of the players and utilization of space is what you should be thinking about 

[coach vahid]

Il y a 2 heures, kr10 a dit :

Fluidity doesn’t mean anything anymore, it is purely cosmetic. Changing roles to get “very fluid” isn’t the right way to think about it - the movement of the players and utilization of space is what you should be thinking about 

Ok ... So forget everything I wrote. I still believed in more fluid = more compactness.

In his guide Pairs and Combinaisons  - The Ultimate Guide, llama3 write " the more support duties you have, the closer your team, the closer your steam will stick together-". 

Edited April 9, 2020 by coach vahid

[kr10]

59 minutes ago, coach vahid said:

Ok ... So forget everything I wrote. I still believed in more fluid = more compactness.

In his guide Pairs and Combinaisons  - The Ultimate Guide, llama3 write " the more support duties you have, the closer your team, the closer your steam will stick together-". 

Agree with this. I had made a thread earlier about a classic 442 with an support and attack striker, with a WP support and attacking winger. It was a great system, great to watch- with one issue, especially in away CL games. The support striker wasn’t getting involved much, and as a result my possession and build up play was getting stifled. 
 

as a result I am looking at a 4-4-1-1 to get the 10 more involved. I do want my main striker to be on attack duty, spearheading the line and stretching the defense - I don’t really need him dropping deep as there are already 4 or 5 creators in the side.

so, with an AF up top, I am experimenting with the 10 role. I am currently torn between an AM(A) and AM(s) - while the guides all say to spread duties, I honestly believe that a AF and AM(a) recreates the main striker second striker dynamic the best. The AM(s) is good in possession but plays a bit too deep. 
 

does anyone have any thoughts on the above? I would love to use a DLF(s), but it just doesn’t work on this FM as I’d like it to, barely any link up with the AF

[Vizzini]

57 minutes ago, kr10 said:

Agree with this. I had made a thread earlier about a classic 442 with an support and attack striker, with a WP support and attacking winger. It was a great system, great to watch- with one issue, especially in away CL games. The support striker wasn’t getting involved much, and as a result my possession and build up play was getting stifled. 
 

as a result I am looking at a 4-4-1-1 to get the 10 more involved. I do want my main striker to be on attack duty, spearheading the line and stretching the defense - I don’t really need him dropping deep as there are already 4 or 5 creators in the side.

so, with an AF up top, I am experimenting with the 10 role. I am currently torn between an AM(A) and AM(s) - while the guides all say to spread duties, I honestly believe that a AF and AM(a) recreates the main striker second striker dynamic the best. The AM(s) is good in possession but plays a bit too deep. 
 

does anyone have any thoughts on the above? I would love to use a DLF(s), but it just doesn’t work on this FM as I’d like it to, barely any link up with the AF

I play a 4-4-1-1 with Milan (Auba as 9, James Rodriguez as 10), and from mye experience the AM is much more effective as an AM-A behind an AF-A.

[kr10]

23 minutes ago, Vizzini said:

I play a 4-4-1-1 with Milan (Auba as 9, James Rodriguez as 10), and from mye experience the AM is much more effective as an AM-A behind an AF-A.

Great to hear, that’s what I think I’m going to go with as well. I absolutely need to have a pure 9 in my team, the support striker concept isn’t my favorite. It removes the threat of a direct ball over the top. 

What I am trying to recreate is the Kaka/Shevchenko partnership up top, and I think that the AM-A and AF-A works best for this. 
 

I made a detailed 442 thread about the Milan side I created, you can take a look here if you’d like: the football played is very good on the eye and could be worth a try as an alternate tactic: 

 

[Vizzini]

23 hours ago, kr10 said:

I made a detailed 442 thread about the Milan side I created, you can take a look here if you’d like: the football played is very good on the eye and could be worth a try as an alternate tactic: 

 

I never visit that section because it usually is just full of unrealistic tactics that try to exploit the match engine, but your post has made me question that assertion, thank you!

The tactic you have shared is actually really similar to the one I am playing with at the moment. I also love the interplay between the CM-D, FB-A and WP-S, and as you say everything just makes sense, both on paper and when watching matches. Have been thinking of making a 4-4-2 version, actually, as I have four forwards currently, who are all decent in the air (Auba, ageing Giroud, Rafael Leao and Andre Silva).

 

[kr10]

5 hours ago, Vizzini said:

I never visit that section because it usually is just full of unrealistic tactics that try to exploit the match engine, but your post has made me question that assertion, thank you!

The tactic you have shared is actually really similar to the one I am playing with at the moment. I also love the interplay between the CM-D, FB-A and WP-S, and as you say everything just makes sense, both on paper and when watching matches. Have been thinking of making a 4-4-2 version, actually, as I have four forwards currently, who are all decent in the air (Auba, ageing Giroud, Rafael Leao and Andre Silva).

 

Looks good to me, looks like we have similar tastes in tactics! From my experience the 442 produces much prettier passing patterns compared to a 4411. I would definitely recommend giving it a go - nothing quite like bringing back an age old tactic with a modern twist. 

Just one thing to keep in mind - with your setup above, I’ve found that having 2 left footed strikers helps. If you go with the WP on the right, you’d want 2 right footed strikers. I usually go for the latter in a career save since it’s much harder to find tall left footed strikers than it is left footed wingers/playmakers. 
 

since you have Aubameyang (love that you brought him home btw), it might be worth getting rid of Hakan/Chiesa and building a group of left footed wingers and WPs instead. I’ve found that putting a right footed player in the left striker slot (as AF) greatly reduces their effectiveness 

Edited April 10, 2020 by kr10

[Vizzini]

That is interesting, and something to consider going forward, not unreasonable to think that someone will come in with a big bid for Chiesa/Hakan soon, always smart to plan for the future.

[VirgilFanDijk12]

For anyone who is interested, I have been developing a Sacchi inspired tactic for FM20, and it has done pretty well in testing. It is Fluid, rather than Very Fluid, but changing Winger to support will change that. This is as close as I've got so far.

[Cain89]

il y a 56 minutes, VirgilFanDijk12 a dit :

For anyone who is interested, I have been developing a Sacchi inspired tactic for FM20, and it has done pretty well in testing. It is Fluid, rather than Very Fluid, but changing Winger to support will change that. This is as close as I've got so far.

Do you have any players instructions? Or can you upload it? I will be happy to test it.

[VirgilFanDijk12]

Okay @Cain89 here it is. There are quite a lot of player instructions haha. I may look to reduce those at some point, but I have found a lot of those instructions work quite well in general with a lot of tactics. Thanks for testing it 

Sacchismo.fmf

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

https://www.coachesvoice.com/arrigo-sacchi-ac-milan-italy-coach-tactics/

My posts don't seem to embed from South Sudan for some reason but this is a good read for anybody interested 

[Novem9]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

Amazing thread, thank you for this work!

Very interesting your opinion about using PF(s) instead CF(s) in modern FMs?