World Cup 2018 Tactical Interpretations

[Whelan102]

Tifos look at Uruguays tactics at the world cup.

 

Who fancies giving this a crack into the fm tactics creator.

[Ricotero_uy]

Uruguay national team and the Maestro Tabarez continue making us proud. The commitment of the players, from the stars Suarez, Cavani and Godin, to the not as known, is incredible. The workrate of the whole team is amazing and a player I have been asking to be called since 2016 (specially because Italy could have taken him), Torreira, has showed the world that, we may not be the "prettiest style playing" national team, but we will not be dying without a fight.

 

Also really important is the change of the mentality for the world that the Uruguay national team won in the 70s and 80s. Only one yellow card in 4 matches. Things have changed for a team that has the worst record of the fastest player sent off in a WC (Jose Batista in Mexico 86 against Scotland, 54 seconds).

 

Yes, we know Suarez has done things bad. We know he's always trying to take some advantage. But his hunger to win is the hunger all this small country has. I know a lot of you may not like how Uruguay plays, or how Suarez does things, but believe me, inside of you, you would love players with his commitment playing in your squad.

Great post!

[Los_Culés]

Garra charrúa!

URU 

My beloved team is Argentina but with ARG out I support URU. I admire their long term project led by the Maestro Tabarez. I can only wish that a clone of Maestro Tabarez takes over ARG.

[carloshcorbalan]

Partido a partido....

Se podría traducir el vídeo a enlace con las tácticas y sus explicaciones  para aplicarlas a football manager???

Gracias...

 

[Jean0987654321]

6 minutes ago, carloshcorbalan said:

Partido a partido....

Se podría traducir el vídeo a enlace con las tácticas y sus explicaciones  para aplicarlas a football manager???

Gracias...

 

Translation: Match by match ...

Could you translate the video to link with the tactics and their explanations to apply them to football manager ???

Thank you...

 

 

Nah, man. That's a bit tough to do. Maybe line up spielverlagerung to Bing translator instead

[carloshcorbalan]

No comprendo tu sugerencia......Como seria eso...????

 

[Jean0987654321]

3 hours ago, carloshcorbalan said:

 

I do not understand your suggestion ...... How would that be ... ????

 

If you're talking translating the tactics into FM, that'll be tough to do and it would require a lot of work. I, myself, could do a few of those at a time but thats it

[carloshcorbalan]

No pretendo complicar las cosas...

Gracias de todos modos...

[howard moon]

21 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

I think the important thing with that possession style is lots of support duties with few (if any) attacking runners, most likely a FB. High-ish mentality but retain possession, slower tempo, shorter passing to reduce risks taken and with higher line & pressing instructions. 

Cleons possession guide explains there style of play, slightly different roles+duties between Spain and Germany but the basic principles are the same:  https://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/445500-The-Art-of-Possession-Football

What (if any) effect do you think team shape has? Cleon goes with structured to spread the players out and reduce creative freedom, but unless I’m wrong in my interpretation, a more fluid shape would bring the front and back of the team closer together which might help with the high line and pressure

[summatsupeer]

17 minutes ago, howard moon said:

What (if any) effect do you think team shape has? Cleon goes with structured to spread the players out and reduce creative freedom, but unless I’m wrong in my interpretation, a more fluid shape would bring the front and back of the team closer together which might help with the high line and pressure

The main thing that creates a style are roles&duties plus team mentality.  Team shape doesn't create a style, its just one of many TI's that can be used to tweak the basis.  If your basis is a lot of support duties then your players will likely be closer anyway, do they need to be even closer?  There comes a point where you have to question if players are too close, reducing space to play around opponents and making it easy for them to play over you if you have a high d-line.  Just like its possible to isolate players too much in other styles.

[ericstpeter]

On 03/07/2018 at 07:46, Whelan102 said:

Tifos look at Uruguays tactics at the world cup.

 

Who fancies giving this a crack into the fm tactics creator.

Taking a shot! Here's my take:

As for PI's:

GK - None

CWBs - None

CDs - Tackle Harder, Mark Tighter

HB - Tackle Harder, Mark Tighter

CAR - None

AM - Mark Tighter, Fewer Risky Passes, Move Into Channels, Hold Up Ball, Mark DM

CF S - Mark Tighter, Move into Channels

CF A - Mark Tighter

 

Most of the TI's/PI's are designed to create and fast counter-attack (Pass into Space, Move into channels) and a good defensive press (Close down more, Get Stuck In, Use tighter marking). AM marking the DM should help with a high press

[Jean0987654321]

I'll give Uruguay a shot.

The Tactic

PIs

GK: DIstribute to CBs

SV (a): More Risky, Shoot Less Often

DW (s): Sit Narrower

WM (s): Sit Narrower, Get Further Forward

DF (d): Move Into Channels

AF (a): Close Down Much More, Roam From Position

 

The result

[Whelan102]

Nice to see my Uruguay post has already got two responses and two completely different takes on the tactic.brilliant to see, I'll update my original post when spielverlagerung uploads there Analysis of Uruguay vs Portugal.

[summatsupeer]

@Whelan102 I think they're so different because @Jean0987654321 has actually done Portugal and not Uruguay

[Jean0987654321]

5 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

@Whelan102 I think they're so different because @Jean0987654321 has actually done Portugal and not Uruguay

Nope, that's Uruguay.

[summatsupeer]

45 minutes ago, Jean0987654321 said:

Nope, that's Uruguay.

Ah sorry, was going off the image you posted earlier with a 442 diamond shape but looking back at the game they were defending in a 442 shape like you've made.

[Mutumba]

Well, guys. Perhaps its time to give Sweden a go, ey? All down to tactics and team spirit, much less to individual quality - isnt that what tactics are all about?

442: Two DF-forwards ? One IW on the left, perhaps even two? Two def mids in the centre Highly structured, standard mentality? Lindelöf is a ball playin cb, drops behind and chases the ball (?) while Granqvist is more of a traditional stopper? Might have the roles a bit confused.

 

[goqs06]

4 hours ago, Millsinho said:

Here’s my interpretation of England (don’t laugh - I actually like how we play!).

Going well with Bari in Serie B in 2020-21 on my journeyman save - top of the league by 11 points after 22 games, media prediction 9th.

Only player instructions are run with ball more for the outer centrebacks, to try (with limited success) to replicate how often Maguire and Walker bring the ball out of defence. Kane is the DLF who holds it up and stays central as a goal threat, and Sterling / Vardy is the AF who runs at defenders and tries to beat the offside trap. All other positions will be obvious. I know the high pressing is not always how England play, but it’s how I think they play best - e.g. start of the Tunisia game.

 

Vardy and Kane haven’t played as a tandem yet. The most used pairing so far for England is Kane-Sterling where  Kane is a CF (S) while Sterling is either a AM (A) or SS.

[warlock]

1 hour ago, goqs06 said:

The most used pairing so far for England is Kane-Sterling where  Kane is a CF (S) while Sterling is either a AM (A) or SS.

You need Kane as an AMC with 'drop deeper' PI. There was a moment the other night where he was England's deepest player. And Sterling was consistently the most advanced player (with a 'dribble more and lose the ball' PI). Other than that, I think Millsinho has got it about right.

[Cloista]

Sterling has definitely been the more advanced of the two, which I personally think has been the problem, he's almost playing like a poacher. I think we'd do better if Kane focused on what he is really good at and played more as the Poacher, with Sterling more as a Trequartista, dropping deeper and floating to the flanks. Alternatively swap Sterling and Dele Alli's positioning so Alli can play closer to Kane like he does for Spurs, with Sterling bursting through from deep the way Lingard is doing.

[golden-goose]

On 03/07/2018 at 13:46, Whelan102 said:

Tifos look at Uruguays tactics at the world cup.

 

Who fancies giving this a crack into the fm tactics creator.

As far as I know, Uruguay shift between several formations and shapes. I know they've looked like a 4-4-2, a deep 4-2-3-1, 4-1-3-2 and a 4-3-1-2, as well as some overloaded 4-4-2 against Portugal, where they basically shifted the entire midfield to their right side where they knew Portugal wanted to be creative. It was almost like 4-1-3-1-1, with an empty slot on the left side midfield (according to  the match analysis/stats).

Against Egypt, they played a pretty narrow diamond with midfielders supporting the flanks. I'd say a 4-1-3-2 or a 4-3-1-2 with carrileros or something. Maybe some PIs and OIs that set up the specific pressing patterns they use. No tight marking on the wingers, but always press them. More pressing on the front three men (Suarez, Cavani and Bentancur), DLPd in Torreira.

[Armistice]

10 hours ago, warlock said:

You need Kane as an AMC with 'drop deeper' PI. There was a moment the other night where he was England's deepest player. And Sterling was consistently the most advanced player (with a 'dribble more and lose the ball' PI). Other than that, I think Millsinho has got it about right.

There's no PI Drop Deeper, unless you were talking about the PPM or just an aspect of his game. He dropped deep because England's midfield was not able to transition the ball to attack and supply him with passes so (he does this sometimes at Spurs) he drops deep and tries to play others in. Also I believe Sterling was the most advanced player because after the goal and especially after Alli was subbed off, England switched to a more defensive, counter-attacking oriented strategy and tried to use Sterling's pace.

[crusadertsar]

After watching the Belgium Brazil game I feel like creating a tactic utilizing Wide Targetman , to recreate how Martinez played Lukaku with Inside Forward / Raumdeuter driving forward from the other side. And playing De Bruyn as a forward? Simply brilliant. I'm so inspired. Anybody tried similar tactics in past?

[denen123]

18 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

After watching the Belgium Brazil game I feel like creating a tactic utilizing Wide Targetman , to recreate how Martinez played Lukaku with Inside Forward / Raumdeuter driving forward from the other side. And playing De Bruyn as a forward? Simply brilliant. I'm so inspired. Anybody tried similar tactics in past?

De Bruyne was utilised as a false 9 in my opinion. Seeing as most of the counter attacking runs were initiated by him. Both Lukaku and Hazard, stretched the pitch whenever he had the ball, creating options for him to pass & their movements made it difficult for the fullbacks to deal with. Lukaku as Raumdeteur? Wasn't merely finding pockets of space and easy flick ons like a muller/Dele esq player. Held ball up made runs. Cut inside(saw a bit of trickery here & there). Wide target Man? Maybe? But he did more than what a Mandzukic type does for Allegri. Maybe WTM but that'll affect the F9 a bit. inside forward might do.

[denen123]

@ö-ozil did something of this nature. It can be a blue print for tonights game.

[Barbosa04]

There were some bold decisions from Roberto Martinez. Lukaku as a winger, De Bruyne as a central attacker? Experimenting against Brazil in a knockout game? That's some gamble that could go either way spectacularly. That display now should be as a reference that 3 striker systems are not unrealistic as a lot of fm players moan about. Did you see how many times Belgium's attacking trio was just walking without any pressing and letting the rest of the team do the defending? 

[denen123]

Its because they had the basic already covered. De bruyne dropping deep so they can outnumber the opponents in midfield. It also helped that they were trying so grd to get neymar on the ball(because Fella, Munier & Toby occupied that spot for easy interceptions). Wouldn't be quick to say "a Martinez Masterclass" because I think Thierry Henry  made the changes. Lmao

But the major change was Kevin playing upfront. They'll probably use the same setup against France to Neutralize Mbappe's movement.

[OlivierL]

8 hours ago, denen123 said:

Its because they had the basic already covered. De bruyne dropping deep so they can outnumber the opponents in midfield. It also helped that they were trying so grd to get neymar on the ball(because Fella, Munier & Toby occupied that spot for easy interceptions). Wouldn't be quick to say "a Martinez Masterclass" because I think Thierry Henry  made the changes. Lmao

But the major change was Kevin playing upfront. They'll probably use the same setup against France to Neutralize Mbappe's movement.

Idd major change. Also putting Lukaku on the right wing so he could confuse Marcelo and keep him back.  Fellaini dropping to the right back position when Meunier was attacking. and Chadli going to the central midfield position without ball. great tactical changes !

[denen123]

1 hour ago, Olivierlandman said:

Idd major change. Also putting Lukaku on the right wing so he could confuse Marcelo and keep him back.  Fellaini dropping to the right back position when Meunier was attacking. and Chadli going to the central midfield position without ball. great tactical changes !

Yeah. I totally agree.

[Jean0987654321]

https://spielverlagerung.com/2018/07/04/round-of-16-brazil-2-0-mexico/

https://spielverlagerung.com/2018/07/05/round-of-16-colombia-1-1-england/

Some more articles

 

[Jean0987654321]

https://spielverlagerung.com/2018/07/08/quarterfinals-uruguay-0-2-france/

 

 

France's article is up

[noikeee]

On 07/07/2018 at 04:27, Barbosa04 said:

There were some bold decisions from Roberto Martinez. Lukaku as a winger, De Bruyne as a central attacker? Experimenting against Brazil in a knockout game? That's some gamble that could go either way spectacularly. That display now should be as a reference that 3 striker systems are not unrealistic as a lot of fm players moan about. Did you see how many times Belgium's attacking trio was just walking without any pressing and letting the rest of the team do the defending? 

It could've easily backfired though, "letting the rest of the team do the defending" ended up working but you look at the amount of chances Brazil had, and wonder how many more times, if you had replayed that match, would Belgium still end up winning it? I honestly don't think they would often. Great strategy but got a bit lucky IMO and it was just another, now more counter-attacking variant, of Belgium's plan to try to win the cup by outscoring the opposition every match (leave 3 men forward and defend with just 7 + the keeper??). And I don't think that's quite sustainable even if their attack is extremely good, which it is.

[scwiffy]

Semi finals are looking very tasty tactically, mainly in terms of strengths vs weaknesses

England v Croatia is set up to be all about the central battle, Southgate has implied that he won’t change his setup but this will leave Henderson on his own to deal with the more advanced Modric and Rakitic. On the flip side, this leaves Ali and Lingard with easy hunting ground. Dalic has singled out Sterling as the main threat to his side and given his pace to run behind the slow CBS and movement in the space behind Modric and Rakatic, I think he’s spot on. Unless either manager tweaks their system (would not be suprised to see Southgate use Dier at Ali or Lingard’s expense. Also Dalic has used Modric deeper in this tournament), it could be a real ding-dong of a game.

There’s a similar vibe with France vs Belgium, Frances best player so far, Mbappe, will be up against Belgiums weakest link, Carrasco. But you’ve got other mismatches which are arguably in Belgium’s favour, Lukakus strength against Varane, Fellanis height against Kante.

Both games have potential to be very open if managers stick to their ways

[w_x]

13 hours ago, scwiffy said:

Semi finals are looking very tasty tactically, mainly in terms of strengths vs weaknesses

England v Croatia is set up to be all about the central battle, Southgate has implied that he won’t change his setup but this will leave Henderson on his own to deal with the more advanced Modric and Rakitic. On the flip side, this leaves Ali and Lingard with easy hunting ground. Dalic has singled out Sterling as the main threat to his side and given his pace to run behind the slow CBS and movement in the space behind Modric and Rakatic, I think he’s spot on. Unless either manager tweaks their system (would not be suprised to see Southgate use Dier at Ali or Lingard’s expense. Also Dalic has used Modric deeper in this tournament), it could be a real ding-dong of a game.

There’s a similar vibe with France vs Belgium, Frances best player so far, Mbappe, will be up against Belgiums weakest link, Carrasco. But you’ve got other mismatches which are arguably in Belgium’s favour, Lukakus strength against Varane, Fellanis height against Kante.

Both games have potential to be very open if managers stick to their ways

I wonder if Croatia will play a midfield 3 with Brozovic/Modric/Rakitic

[Mutumba]

How would people interpret France tactics? 

 

Giroud

Matuidi Griez Mbappé

Pogba Kanté

Theo Varane Umtiti Pavard

 

Greizmann is very mobile, and can be spotted out on the wings at times. Perhaps a Trequartista?

Kanté as DM de? Pogba as DLP? Mbappé as IF? 

[denen123]

3 hours ago, Mutumba said:

How would people interpret France tactics? 

 

Giroud

Matuidi Griez Mbappé

Pogba Kanté

Theo Varane Umtiti Pavard

 

Greizmann is very mobile, and can be spotted out on the wings at times. Perhaps a Trequartista?

Kanté as DM de? Pogba as DLP? Mbappé as IF? 

Pogba= vol

Kante= anchor/DM(d/s)

Mbape= winger

Matuidi= DW/WM

Griezeman/Giroud would be down to preference, especially given that they play a fairly structured counter attacking soccer with defenders defending(umtiti/Varane). Striker less? Maybe. 

 

[denen123]

So sad Belgium lost. Martinez has to be questioned on his choice of Dembéle & why De bruyne not play F9 again? De bruyne was terrible. Don't get me started about Lukaku choking again. Fellaini got too carried away. I like witsel. He should be playing in a tougher league. 'Complete player'. The idea behind their set up was good but their main players didn't show up bar Hazard, who I thought was immense.

Congratulations to Deschamps and his boys. Conclude by saying, Kante is a certified baller.

It's coming home.

[noikeee]

No way Kanté's an anchorman, he moved so much off the ball even for a regular DM, constantly putting himself available for passing options. He also takes the ball and dribbles forward himself if there's an opportunity to counter.

I reckon we're gonna need a whole separate thread for Belgium's tactics in this semi-final, mental.  SI gonna need to build a whole new match engine just so we can replicate that.  3 at the back with the ball, 4 at the back without? Belgium takes the ball, LB becomes a LCB, RB becomes a (very attacking) RWB? Just Fellaini alone, how could we possibly ever replicate him, he played MC without the ball but on tight marking on Pogba all pitch wide, CM sometimes even LWB with the ball (switching with Hazard?), but running into the area to become a very static ST target man whenever the ball went into the right wing and crossing became a possibility. 

Hazard tracking all the way back to near his own corner flag as left-winger without the ball, with the ball becoming sort of the nominal LWB but really more like a wide trequartista roaming all over the entire pitch and taking people on.  Total joy to watch, that first half was fascinating, too bad it didn't work out for them at the end.

[Jean0987654321]

I agree on Kante's position. He is easily a BWM (s) w/ Dribble More PI

 

If I want to emulate France as a whole, I start with this shape

Control/Fluid

SK (s)

WB (s)-CB-BPD-CWB (a)

SV (a)-BWM (s)-DW (s)

IF (a)-SS (a)

DLF (s)

TIs

Pass Into Space

Higher Tempo

Floated Crosses

[Jean0987654321]

1 hour ago, noikeee said:

No way Kanté's an anchorman, he moved so much off the ball even for a regular DM, constantly putting himself available for passing options. He also takes the ball and dribbles forward himself if there's an opportunity to counter.

I reckon we're gonna need a whole separate thread for Belgium's tactics in this semi-final, mental.  SI gonna need to build a whole new match engine just so we can replicate that.  3 at the back with the ball, 4 at the back without? Belgium takes the ball, LB becomes a LCB, RB becomes a (very attacking) RWB? Just Fellaini alone, how could we possibly ever replicate him, he played MC without the ball but on tight marking on Pogba all pitch wide, CM sometimes even LWB with the ball (switching with Hazard?), but running into the area to become a very static ST target man whenever the ball went into the right wing and crossing became a possibility. 

Hazard tracking all the way back to near his own corner flag as left-winger without the ball, with the ball becoming sort of the nominal LWB but really more like a wide trequartista roaming all over the entire pitch and taking people on.  Total joy to watch, that first half was fascinating, too bad it didn't work out for them at the end.

I think Belgium's tactic is easily to emulate when you consider the DEFENSIVE shape. The shape was a 4-in-the-back. Easy. Just give the LB a Defend role and let him sit narrower. As for the Fellani role, he was easily a SV (a) w/man marking instructions

[noikeee]

25 minutes ago, Jean0987654321 said:

I think Belgium's tactic is easily to emulate when you consider the DEFENSIVE shape. The shape was a 4-in-the-back. Easy. Just give the LB a Defend role and let him sit narrower.

I know the formation in FM is the defensive shape but that's gonna be limited. Just making Vertonghen a FB/D with sit narrower and Chadli a CWB/A from a back 4, will be a sort of decent-ish approximation, but ain't gonna cut it in some phases of the game, such as when Belgium started playing out from the back and it became a clear back 3 with Vertonghen-Kompany-Alderweireld spread evenly across the pitch. Good luck replicating that shape in FM with a back 4 formation...

[Jean0987654321]

 

31 minutes ago, noikeee said:

I know the formation in FM is the defensive shape but that's gonna be limited. Just making Vertonghen a FB/D with sit narrower and Chadli a CWB/A from a back 4, will be a sort of decent-ish approximation, but ain't gonna cut it in some phases of the game, such as when Belgium started playing out from the back and it became a clear back 3 with Vertonghen-Kompany-Alderweireld spread evenly across the pitch. Good luck replicating that shape in FM with a back 4 formation...

This is easy.

 

Attacking/Fluid

SK (s)

------------BPD-CD-FD(d)

CWB (a)--DLP (s)-SV (a)

WP (a)----RPM (s)------IW (a)

----------DLF (a)------

 

TIs

More Direct

Whipped Crosses

Close Down Much More

Work Ball Into Box

[Ultrajet]

to @Mutumba and @denen123 , I did not see France play in this formation but I am ok for things like Griezmann/Giroud, strikerless, etc.

Until 30' it was very difficult for the team. Mbappe was meant to track back defensively on right wing and attack at the same time, it was impossible because of Hazard vs Pavard. Pogba and Griezmann helped tight up midfield after 5' and 10' occasions.

I believe they went for a 433, but all around and defensively was 4132. The #1 route to goal (not counting free kicks or corners    ) was Griezmann playing to Mbappe on right wing, combining with Giroud and Pavard occasionaly. Matuidi midly played as a Mezzala when Hernandez I believe who be a good ol FB(s). They made Belgium's right wing useless for the whole match.

Kante is le facteur X of midfield, he defends like classic MD, but with the ball he sort of played segundo velante all by himself. Incredible player.

 

(oh hello hi so this is my first post)

[howard moon]

14 hours ago, Jean0987654321 said:

I agree on Kante's position. He is easily a BWM (s) w/ Dribble More PI

 

If I want to emulate France as a whole, I start with this shape

Control/Fluid

SK (s)

WB (s)-CB-BPD-CWB (a)

SV (a)-BWM (s)-DW (s)

IF (a)-SS (a)

DLF (s)

TIs

Pass Into Space

Higher Tempo

Floated Crosses

Given that mentality is linked to risk, I can’t see how you’d class France as playing ‘control’. They kept people behind the ball, we’re narrow, ceded possession etc. Surely ‘counter’ is a better starting point?

[Jean0987654321]

5 hours ago, howard moon said:

Given that mentality is linked to risk, I can’t see how you’d class France as playing ‘control’. They kept people behind the ball, we’re narrow, ceded possession etc. Surely ‘counter’ is a better starting point?

Just because you give Control as a mentality, doesn't mean you're actually "control". They ceded possession yes but they pressed at times even high up the field. Control mentality emulates their pressing as Control gives you higher tempo and high pressing. When it comes to compactness, you can use shape for that and I use Fluid

[Pompey_Dan]

2 hours ago, Jean0987654321 said:

Just because you give Control as a mentality, doesn't mean you're actually "control". They ceded possession yes but they pressed at times even high up the field. Control mentality emulates their pressing as Control gives you higher tempo and high pressing. When it comes to compactness, you can use shape for that and I use Fluid

Control as a team mentality increases the individual mentality of every player, the higher the mentality the more risk those players will take.  With "control" being the third highest mentality it stands to reason that this encourages players to take more risks and play more low percentage (high reward) passes.  Yes,  "control" naturally increases tempo and pressing but only because these instructions tend to support a philosophy of attacking high mentality football.  The two are not mutually inclusive.

Do you honestly think France played high risk football against Belgium?  If so, then sorry but I think I might have been watching a different game!

[denen123]

17 hours ago, Ultrajet said:

to @Mutumba and @denen123 , I did not see France play in this formation but I am ok for things like Griezmann/Giroud, strikerless, etc.

Until 30' it was very difficult for the team. Mbappe was meant to track back defensively on right wing and attack at the same time, it was impossible because of Hazard vs Pavard. Pogba and Griezmann helped tight up midfield after 5' and 10' occasions.

I believe they went for a 433, but all around and defensively was 4132. The #1 route to goal (not counting free kicks or corners    ) was Griezmann playing to Mbappe on right wing, combining with Giroud and Pavard occasionaly. Matuidi midly played as a Mezzala when Hernandez I believe who be a good ol FB(s). They made Belgium's right wing useless for the whole match.

Kante is le facteur X of midfield, he defends like classic MD, but with the ball he sort of played segundo velante all by himself. Incredible player.

 

(oh hello hi so this is my first post)

Welcome.

Yes, I initially said it maybe a striker less, but with the inclusion of Giroud(all physical & all) it might not be. Its down to preference.

Still believe matuidi was a cross between DW/WM. Simply because he regularly occupies the wings and marks out the opposition. He comes narrow, occasionally, I agree. But WM & DW are coded to move narrow during play, so its still ideal.

Le facteur X. I like that. Would never have known if you didn't explain. I've never really pinned him down to be BWM or ANCHOR, simply because, he has added a new dimension to his play since joining Chelsea. No longer just 'winning balls'. He stops play, makes darts with the ball out wide & through middle & switches flanks. I just used anchor in my thesis to force pogba going forward. Simply a case of balance as opposed to 'perfectly fitting all roles'.

France never played control. Quick incisive passing from front to back, with the occasional hoof to Mbappe's corner. Not even going to tart with that very deep, ugly & annoying defending. Hazard & a few Belgium players wee noted to have complained about their play. Negative. They never wanted the ball. When the had it they were in a hurry to offer mbappe to relieve them of it. 

 

[Ultrajet]

Il y a 8 heures, denen123 a dit :

France never played control. Quick incisive passing from front to back, with the occasional hoof to Mbappe's corner. Not even going to tart with that very deep, ugly & annoying defending. Hazard & a few Belgium players wee noted to have complained about their play. Negative. They never wanted the ball. When the had it they were in a hurry to offer mbappe to relieve them of it. 

France played direct but it's not like they didn't want the ball. They looked comfortable with it when they had possession. Griezmann getting exhausted during competition is weighing down the team and maybe explains lack of offensive pressure. And of course there's Giroud who looks fairly determined not to score.

[blehq12]

On 12/07/2018 at 15:33, denen123 said:

Le facteur X. I like that. Would never have known if you didn't explain. I've never really pinned him down to be BWM or ANCHOR, simply because, he has added a new dimension to his play since joining Chelsea. No longer just 'winning balls'. He stops play, makes darts with the ball out wide & through middle & switches flanks. I just used anchor in my thesis to force pogba going forward. Simply a case of balance as opposed to 'perfectly fitting all roles'.

Opted to play around with a new role, the Carrilero with the PIs mark tighter, close down more and tackle harder. Works a charm for me! 

[iloveyouknap]

5 hours ago, blehq12 said:

Opted to play around with a new role, the Carrilero with the PIs mark tighter, close down more and tackle harder. Works a charm for me! 

With a france tactic? Can you share?