Critique my tactic,help against 4141, lone striker role

[Asclepius]

Hello, I have been using this tactic with Dortmund. I have been successful against teams that attack at me, yet defensive teams I usually draw and or they get one lucky goal in. What do you guys think of my tactic?

Also do you guys have any tips on breaking down 4141 teams. Also I did notice whenever I played a high line teams using a 4141 got 5 more chances at goal than other teams. Therefore, I dropped the defensive line to standard and that helped a little. 

Furthermore, without an AMC do you guys usually have the lone striker on support rather than on attack to link play with the midfield and not get isolated. 

Thank you 

[Parri]

First of all, sorry for my bad english.

I think you need to remove some instructions against teams that play defensive against you, like Pass Into Space; in that situations, space will be a premium.

Also, I dont know why u have your left back in defend duty, maybe change him to support at least?

[Asclepius]

@Parri I thought putting a fullback on support will get in the same space as the winger?

[Ultrajet]

My suggestions :

- yes your striker will be more useful with a support duty. The way you have set up your tactic, your n°9 is your IF(a). Therefore the job of your DLF is to help with midfield to create space and launching passes for him.

- I think your left fullback is useless with a defend duty against defensive teams. Try at least a support duty, or even attack, which would create some helpful overlaps.

- on the other hand, an attack duty for your right fullback may be a bit too dangerous, especially because ahead of him you have your main striker (the IF, who won't defend much) and a BBM, who sometimes won't be able to come back in time when you get caught on counter. I'd suggest WB(s) OR Car(s) for the midfielder.

- I don't play FM19 so I can't say for your TIs, but some of them like overlap on the right, run at defence and lower LoE are bothering me.

[Asclepius]

I put run at defense because my squad is currently the best dribbling team in Bundes..and I have a LoE so I have space for my IF to move into. 

[VinceLombardi]

11 hours ago, Asclepius said:

Furthermore, without an AMC do you guys usually have the lone striker on support rather than on attack to link play with the midfield and not get isolated. 

Yep. I prefer a PF (s). I think he does really well as a link up player in transition and in the final third plays a good attacking, scorer-type role. It's not a creator in the final third like an F9, DLF (s), or TM(s). I am also a really big fan of his defensive contributions. 

However he likely isn't ideal for a longball or very quick counter game. He is noticibly slower to get into a scoring position vs attacking roles and it can hurt you if you are trying to get forward quickly from your own half.

31 minutes ago, Asclepius said:

I put run at defense because my squad is currently the best dribbling team in Bundes..and I have a LoE so I have space for my IF to move into. 

Makes sense to me.

[Ultrajet]

il y a 53 minutes, Asclepius a dit :

I put run at defense because my squad is currently the best dribbling team in Bundes..and I have a LoE so I have space for my IF to move into. 

Indeed it makes sense. But personally I would prefer "dribble more" as a PI for some players than using the general TI.

[Experienced Defender]

Your left flank is well-balanced in terms of roles and duties - you can even change the LB to FB sup (or WBdef) - but the right side is pretty much risky IMO, with both the wide defender and wide forward (IF) on attack duty (and without any real midfield cover). What I would suggest is changing the WB to support duty and giving the MCR a more conservative role (e.g. CAR or DLP).

17 hours ago, Asclepius said:

without an AMC do you guys usually have the lone striker on support rather than on attack to link play with the midfield and not get isolated.

This is a good question. I personally prefer having the lone striker on support, especially when there is no AMC behind him, but given that you have a CM on attack in the midfield, a DLFatt (or PFatt is perhaps even better option) should work. However, in that case I would rather have a winger on attack than IF (IF would be on support, or APM on support instead of IF). And that winger on attack in your system would be on the right (AMR), while the IF/APM on support would go to the left (AML).

As for team instructions (in possession), I would definitely avoid the "Run at defense" TI. Pass into space and Wide width can be used occasionally, depending on the situation at a given point during a match.

Finally, overlap right in your current setup compounds the vulnerability on the right flank, but if you changed the roles/duties according to my suggestion above, then the overlap would make more sense and the defensive risk would not be that high.

[Asclepius]

@Experienced Defender Thankyou for your input. 

 

Why is having a winger on attack better than an IF on attack? 

 

Also in General is it better to have an inside forward with a winger instead of running with two inside forwards, and why? 

[Experienced Defender]

22 hours ago, Asclepius said:

Why is having a winger on attack better than an IF on attack? 

It's neither "better" nor "worse". It all depends on the context. If you want the lone striker on attack duty, then I'd rather have a winger as the other forward on attack duty than IF, in order to avoid the striker and IF "fighting" for the same "area of influence". But if the lone striker is on support duty, then it can create space for an IF on attack duty to exploit. And of course, it's not just about duties but also roles. For example, a MEZ on support duty is inherently more attack-minded than a BBM (let alone CAR or DLPsu), even though they are on the same duty.

 

22 hours ago, Asclepius said:

Also in General is it better to have an inside forward with a winger instead of running with two inside forwards, and why?

Again depends, but is to some degree a matter of one's personal preference as well. What I always look to avoid is being one-dimensional. But I am generally finding it difficult to understand why most people talk exclusively about winger and IF roles in wide forward positions, when there you also have another roles, such as APM (on both duties), trequartista, RMD and (even) WTM 

[jc577]

On 25/01/2019 at 16:24, Experienced Defender said:

Again depends, but is to some degree a matter of one's personal preference as well. What I always look to avoid is being one-dimensional. But I am generally finding it difficult to understand why most people talk exclusively about winger and IF roles in wide forward positions, when there you also have another roles, such as APM (on both duties), trequartista, RMD and (even) WTM 

I think this is because these are the most common two roles for wide forwards IRL, plus a RMD and an IFa aren’t much different (in terms of needing to create space for them to be effective.)