Who makes space for who

[Armistice]

So what I want to talk about is how to make space for certain players in your team, to give an example of what I mean, in a 4-2-3-1 you want to have a playmaker in AMC so I heard people say that an attacking striker who will give the AI defence something to think about will make some space for the playmaker. Or in a 4-3-3 I seen some people use a winger on the side of a CM-A to make space for him. What other combinations are there? A DLF to make space for an IF/CM-A? An IF to make space for an attacking fullback? How do you guys create and exploit space in your tactic?

[Experienced Defender]

You already mentioned some good examples of how different roles and/or duties can create space for each other or for someone else. Specifically in a 4231, if you want your AMC to be a playmaker (though he does not necessarily have to be play a PM role), a good idea is to have the striker not only on attack duty but also of a non-creator type (e.g. poacher or PF on attack). You can then also use a winger on attack on one side, to create extra space for the playmaking AMC toward that flank. But given that the PM will also need someone in support to work with (besides having enough space to operate in), on the opposite flank you can use an IF on support. And now that you have the front 4 sorted out, you can think about setting up the rest of your team - i.e. those behind - in such a way as to create appropriate support for the front 4 in the attacking phase while at the same time keeping solid balance and cover in defense.

[Armistice]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

You already mentioned some good examples of how different roles and/or duties can create space for each other or for someone else. Specifically in a 4231, if you want your AMC to be a playmaker (though he does not necessarily have to be play a PM role), a good idea is to have the striker not only on attack duty but also of a non-creator type (e.g. poacher or PF on attack). You can then also use a winger on attack on one side, to create extra space for the playmaking AMC toward that flank. But given that the PM will also need someone in support to work with (besides having enough space to operate in), on the opposite flank you can use an IF on support. And now that you have the front 4 sorted out, you can think about setting up the rest of your team - i.e. those behind - in such a way as to create appropriate support for the front 4 in the attacking phase while at the same time keeping solid balance and cover in defense.

I was reading Lines & Diamonds the other day and I think in the Depth section of the Attacking principles it said "Creating depth will give a central playmaker the space he needs to orchestrate the attack". Isn't this another important aspect of a central playmaker? I mean, let's take this example of 4-2-3-1. Some people opt to use a box to box midfielder, or a mezalla or another advanced playmaker in CM. Then they use an IWB on that side. Doesn't these roles make that player run into the AP's space? Sure you create an overload centrally if anything but is that overload useful? Also it's so important to UNDERSTAND what and why to choose when designing a tactic. People (like me for example) tend to choose specific roles and duties combinations because a guide said so or because it worked for some other people in a similar system. Shouldn't be this way imo.

 

I'm still a long way from understanding what to choose in terms of roles and duties and what to expect in my football style when choosing that. But I'm slowly getting there I think.

 

Edit - let me give you another example. Let's pick the same 4-2-3-1 and put it in a match against a formation that has packed the central midfield. Like a 4-4-2 DM, 4-1-4-1 or even 4-2DMs-1CM-2-1 (or a deep 4-2-3-1). What would you do in this situation? The AP doesn't have the space naturally anymore so he's often around a lot of bodies.

Edited May 22, 2019 by Armistice

[Experienced Defender]

6 minutes ago, Armistice said:

Some people opt to use a box to box midfielder, or a mezalla or another advanced playmaker in CM. Then they use an IWB on that side. Doesn't these roles make that player run into the AP's space? Sure you create an overload centrally if anything but is that overload useful?

Can be useful if you know exactly what you want to achieve with that (kind of) overload and how you are gonna utilize it in terms of creating chances. Otherwise, overload purely for the sake of overload means nothing. Btw, I personally would never use an AP (or any other PM role except sometimes a DLP) in a CM position if I already have one in the AMC. 

 

11 minutes ago, Armistice said:

in the Depth section of the Attacking principles it said "Creating depth will give a central playmaker the space he needs to orchestrate the attack". Isn't this another important aspect of a central playmaker?

Basically, there are two things you need to make sure when using a playmaker:

- that he has enough space to operate in

- that he always has at least 2 safe passing options relatively close to him (so that he can choose when to play it short and simple, and when to try some more adventurous pass either to the other flank or a killer ball straight forward)

However, you need to bear in mind that your playmaker in the AMC spot may sometimes lack space to operate, not because you haven't set up your system in the right way, but because the opposition are defending in such a way as to neutralize him as much as possible. What I usually do in such situations is making him a quasi-PM, so that he still does what a regular PM does, but without being a ball-magnet. How? Very simply: play him as a standard AM on support and add just 2 PIs - roam from position and take more risks (and btw, I allow my AMC to roam from position when I do play him as an AP as well).

 

[Rashidi]

A better way to set up the 4231 is to use a shadow striker in the AMC role surrounded by support players and in midfield you have a DLP. 

The shadow striker is underrated he can use his passing and decisions to move the ball quickly which is what you really want. An AP in the role can sometimes be a luxury as most sides start using a DM or even 2 when you get better. So an AP there is just going to try finding a pass in the middle is a storm of players. A shadow striker with comes deep to get the ball can work very well with a DLP and he should be in a good position to keep the ball moving. 

Thats just my personal take, you can of course use a playmaker there, but then you are really depending on creating Overloads which can be challenging.

[the SLC]

this is a great question!! one i have really struggled in finding a solution. granted im not a very good fm manager but i like a good old 442 and like my strikers to be the main scorers( i dont mean 50+ etc but more than 25) its this mind set ive really struggled with. how on earth do i make this happen? i have opened a thread about it somewhere and had many useful hints and tips but always struggled to implement them into the game. so i shall be keeping and eye on this thread for more guidence

[mikcheck]

@Rashidi wonder if would you please give me your opinion about this, now that you have wrote about using a Shadow Striker. Using it with attacking mentality:

Thank you.

Edited May 23, 2019 by mikcheck

[HUNT3R]

15 hours ago, Armistice said:

I was reading Lines & Diamonds the other day and I think in the Depth section of the Attacking principles it said "Creating depth will give a central playmaker the space he needs to orchestrate the attack". Isn't this another important aspect of a central playmaker? I mean, let's take this example of 4-2-3-1. Some people opt to use a box to box midfielder, or a mezalla or another advanced playmaker in CM. Then they use an IWB on that side. Doesn't these roles make that player run into the AP's space? Sure you create an overload centrally if anything but is that overload useful? Also it's so important to UNDERSTAND what and why to choose when designing a tactic. People (like me for example) tend to choose specific roles and duties combinations because a guide said so or because it worked for some other people in a similar system. Shouldn't be this way imo.

 

I'm still a long way from understanding what to choose in terms of roles and duties and what to expect in my football style when choosing that. But I'm slowly getting there I think.

 

Edit - let me give you another example. Let's pick the same 4-2-3-1 and put it in a match against a formation that has packed the central midfield. Like a 4-4-2 DM, 4-1-4-1 or even 4-2DMs-1CM-2-1 (or a deep 4-2-3-1). What would you do in this situation? The AP doesn't have the space naturally anymore so he's often around a lot of bodies.

I always use one example to help people to start thinking about this and the layers that can be involved.

Picture your tactic as a 4-2-3-1. I'll be focusing on the 2 holding midfielders, the AMC and the ST, but of course there can be many variations. Imagine you're playing against a straightforward 4-4-2. There's fairly little space between the lines, but you have the ball in midfield.

Now, your 2 holding midfielders are sitting and holding position and possession, with the ball. That draws the 2 MCs forward toward them, which opens a bit of space between the lines for your AMC. Once the AMC receives the ball, that now leaves one of the DCs to close down the AMC, which leaves a gap in the D-Line. It also leaves your ST (who has space to charge into, behind that DC) 1 v 1 with the other DC.

---

It's a simple example and maybe even a bit outdated since that's one of the aspects of what initially made the 4231 so dangerous, particularly when it was introduced in England. That's why the 41221 (451) was introduced so that there is a DMC to specifically be there against the AMC.

As Rashidi says, you'll find a lot of teams employing a DMC or 2x DM formations these days, so variations had to be introduced. This is where strikers can start pulling wide or dropping deep for an AMC to burst forward.

Imagine you have that same 4-2-3-1 formation, but with a support striker and an attack duty AMC, for instance, against a DM and 2x DC. Immediately, the AMC is out of the question as he is marked. But, your striker starts to drop deep, leaving his marker, and receives the ball. That forces a DC forward. Now your attack duty AMC (or even an IF, but I'm trying not to involve too many positions) can burst forward in that gap the DC just left.

---

There are many, many, many more possibilities. Hopefully the simple examples can help you get you to start thinking of more combinations and variations.

 

[pheelf]

Off the top of my head,

False 9s create space for any False 10 role.

Players that sit wide create space for players in the middle and vice versa.

Wide players which sit narrower create space out wide for other wide players on the same flank.

Defend duty MC behind support duty ST create space for them to drop into.

In 2 ST partnerships, the Support duty striker pulls the defensive line forward while the Attack duty striker pushes it back which creates space as it breaks the line.

Players which run wide with the ball create space in the channels and on the opposite flank as the defenders shift over.

Players that dribble create space for those that don't around them.

Playmakers and Target Men can create space for those around them and vice versa.

There are probably more examples but those are the ones which comes to mind.

[the SLC]

this is my attempt so far.  the poacher doesnt have move in to channels PI ticked nor does he have the MIC ppm. the PF has move wide with the ball PI selected. im hoping this drags the defence wide making room for the poacher. have only tried it in one game so far and my poacher scored 2. hopefully it wasnt just luck and he continues to score

Edited May 23, 2019 by the SLC

[yolixeya]

2 hours ago, mikcheck said:

@Rashidi wonder if would you please give me your opinion about this, now that you have wrote about using a Shadow Striker. Using it with attacking mentality:

Thank you.

I'm not Rashidi, and I didn't use Shadow Striker other than in a couple of games. Only thing I noticed that he worked well with Targetman on support. But I see some other issues with your tactic, two big ones that I don't like:

1. Why do you have two playmakers next to each other? There is no need for that.

2: Your left flank is pretty sterile in attack. You dont have anyone on the wing there, and FB is on support. It makes more sense to put CWB on that side, so that someone gives you width on that side.

[Armistice]

On 23/05/2019 at 13:06, HUNT3R said:

I always use one example to help people to start thinking about this and the layers that can be involved.

Picture your tactic as a 4-2-3-1. I'll be focusing on the 2 holding midfielders, the AMC and the ST, but of course there can be many variations. Imagine you're playing against a straightforward 4-4-2. There's fairly little space between the lines, but you have the ball in midfield.

Now, your 2 holding midfielders are sitting and holding position and possession, with the ball. That draws the 2 MCs forward toward them, which opens a bit of space between the lines for your AMC. Once the AMC receives the ball, that now leaves one of the DCs to close down the AMC, which leaves a gap in the D-Line. It also leaves your ST (who has space to charge into, behind that DC) 1 v 1 with the other DC.

---

It's a simple example and maybe even a bit outdated since that's one of the aspects of what initially made the 4231 so dangerous, particularly when it was introduced in England. That's why the 41221 (451) was introduced so that there is a DMC to specifically be there against the AMC.

As Rashidi says, you'll find a lot of teams employing a DMC or 2x DM formations these days, so variations had to be introduced. This is where strikers can start pulling wide or dropping deep for an AMC to burst forward.

Imagine you have that same 4-2-3-1 formation, but with a support striker and an attack duty AMC, for instance, against a DM and 2x DC. Immediately, the AMC is out of the question as he is marked. But, your striker starts to drop deep, leaving his marker, and receives the ball. That forces a DC forward. Now your attack duty AMC (or even an IF, but I'm trying not to involve too many positions) can burst forward in that gap the DC just left.

---

There are many, many, many more possibilities. Hopefully the simple examples can help you get you to start thinking of more combinations and variations.

 

Yeah I’m thinking along these lines when trying to understand how a tactic makes and exploits space. As for that support striker + attacking AMC v 2 DMs formations, if the striker drops deep wouldn’t he get into one of the DMs marking zone though? So therefore the DCs won’t have to leave the line in order to deal with the striker.

[mikcheck]

Em 23/05/2019 em 11:43, yolixeya disse:

I'm not Rashidi, and I didn't use Shadow Striker other than in a couple of games. Only thing I noticed that he worked well with Targetman on support. But I see some other issues with your tactic, two big ones that I don't like:

1. Why do you have two playmakers next to each other? There is no need for that.

2: Your left flank is pretty sterile in attack. You dont have anyone on the wing there, and FB is on support. It makes more sense to put CWB on that side, so that someone gives you width on that side.

Thanks for your reply.

1 - Well I did it because I have 2 good players with playmaking abilities, whilse they're also solid defensively. Is there any downside using 2 playmakers side by side?

2 -  I did it because Dalot is amazing going forward and my lef back is not as good going forward and my AP is left footed so I want him to be on the right side. Also, what I'm thinking is, let's imagine that the AP is cutting inside with the ball and the DLF is ahead of him tyring to find space to run into, if I have CWB going up from the right, it can open up space for the DLF to run into space, with the opp defenders also worried about CWB runs. Does this make sense? I don't remember clearly  but I think @Cleon - Cleon if you're there, I'd also really like to know your opinion about the formation =) - used this same kind of formation few years ago, probably with different roles, but I remember well that he also used CWB behind a wide man (I think was either a IF or a AP) on the right side and on the left only a fullback with a support duty, I believe.

Edited May 25, 2019 by mikcheck

[Armistice]

Ok so I am going to post an example of how to start building the tactic to create and exploit space by using the same 4-2-3-1, where I am stuck and maybe people will help with some suggestions as always.

Let's say we face a lot of times the defensive 4-1-4-1s (which means we're usually the favorites to win. Sometimes even to batter the AI). At least we're not playing in Serie A otherwise we'd have seen 5-4-1s. I have highlighted in the pic who marks who.

Want to mention the previous talk of AP-attacking striker combination. Against a 4-4-2 the AP is going to be situated between the CBs and CMs like @HUNT3R said so when he has the ball, he would be able to attract a CB away from the d-line to close him down. That means there will be space in the middle of the defence. That's how a playmaker creates space for the striker. I don't know exactly if the mechanism of a striker creating space for the AP what I’m going to tell, but I can only guess that because the striker looks to make runs, he will push the defence which will create a bigger gap between the CBs and the midfield.

But now with this 4-1-4-1, we have a DM in the equation who will keep tight on the AP. So the AP will need to lose this marker and then pray that one of the CBs will leave the d-line to close him down so the space can be created again. But has to be down a lot to the playmaker to have a great day at the office to make things happen. Sometimes it might not happen. So we need an easier solution.

 

This is when I’m going to take one of the suggestions given on this topic. Now my striker becomes the space creator and the AMC becomes the space exploiter. So which role + duty will look to create space - DLF-S, PF-D/S, CF-S, T-A and F9. Which role do I want? This is a bit harder but let’s do like this - Do I want my striker to roam? - no. So T-A, CF-S are out. Do I want him to dribble more - no. So F9 is out aswell. That leaves me with the DLF-S and PF-S. I want the striker to try risky passes to his partner and the PF can't do that so I'm going with a DLF. The DLF also moves into channels, so maybe it will be useful. First pattern is drawn. But the more important thing is to integrate it in the tactic itself.

 

Next pattern should be on the left. I have a decent fullback who will like to go forward to do good. So because attack duty make earlier/maybe more runs forward than support duty, I'm going to give the fullback just that. I need the player ahead of him to create the space on the flank tho. That is going to be an IF. I've given him a support duty. That means the IF runs are going to be from deeper. When he runs from deeper it's likely that he will attract the AI's CM on his side (AI’s MCR to be precise) rather than the fullback and probably the DM who will shift more towards the IF. That is good because I want the DM to forget what’s his main duty and that’s my AMC. Btw one thing regarding the IF, because I don’t want him to stay too wide or too narrow, I've chosen a player with Move into Channels PPM. I think Move into Channels should make him move between the AI wide mid and the CM like in the pic.

 

1. DLF dropping deep/move into channels. That should create some space centrally.

2. SS attacking the space. His Move into channels PI might be problematic sometimes. We'll see.

3. IF cuts inside from the channels. attracts CM/DM.

4. Fullback goes forward. Should have plenty of space.

 

Sure these look good on paper but in reality it can go wrong like the fullback can be man marked by AI’s wide midfielder so that makes it difficult for the FB to pull out the AI’s fullback. That’s what I need to watch in matches.

 

Now question would be what role & duty to pick in CM? Maybe someone who will cover for the attacking fullback? Maybe a DLP who will become an option when the IF runs into trouble and needs a safe pass? Maybe the DLP can also release our fullback so then this decision would be the right one? What do we do with the other CM? What pattern should we build on the right flank and why? These are some questions I need help answering

Edited May 25, 2019 by Armistice

[Experienced Defender]

35 minutes ago, Armistice said:

1. DLF dropping deep/move into channels. That should create some space centrally.

2. SS attacking the space. His Move into channels PI might be problematic sometimes. We'll see

So your AMC is no longer in a PM role, right? Which is good IMO, especially as you intend to pair SS with DLFsu  

 

37 minutes ago, Armistice said:

3. IF cuts inside from the channels. attracts CM/DM.

4. Fullback goes forward. Should have plenty of space.

IF on support and FB on attack - a good combo as well 

 

37 minutes ago, Armistice said:

Now what do I do with the CMs and the other wide AM? I plan to give my RB a FB-S role so I guess I can afford the AMR to be more aggressive. Question is do I need that. What patterns can I create on the right?

My preference for the AMR would be a winger on attack. The left CM should be on defend duty, either a DLPdef or CM def. Perhaps DLP would be a better choice, given that you no longer have an AP in AMC (provided of course that you have the right player for the DLP role). Now remain the right CM and RB. There are 4 combinations I would consider: BBM and FBsup, BBM and IWBde, MEZsu and FBsu and MEZsu and IWBde. If you opt for the IWBde, I would suggest the Overlap right for creating more dynamic interplay on that side. Now, why would I go with either a BBM or MEZsup in the CMR? Because with a SS in AMC and a winger on attack in AMR you need a midfield role that will work the spaces in the AM strata behind and between those two attacking roles. The FBsu/IWBde is logically meant to cover for them.

[Armistice]

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

So your AMC is no longer in a PM role, right? Which is good IMO, especially as you intend to pair SS with DLFsu  

 

IF on support and FB on attack - a good combo as well 

 

My preference for the AMR would be a winger on attack. The left CM should be on defend duty, either a DLPdef or CM def. Perhaps DLP would be a better choice, given that you no longer have an AP in AMC (provided of course that you have the right player for the DLP role). Now remain the right CM and RB. There are 4 combinations I would consider: BBM and FBsup, BBM and IWBde, MEZsu and FBsu and MEZsu and IWBde. If you opt for the IWBde, I would suggest the Overlap right for creating more dynamic interplay on that side. Now, why would I go with either a BBM or MEZsup in the CMR? Because with a SS in AMC and a winger on attack in AMR you need a midfield role that will work the spaces in the AM strata behind and between those two attacking roles. The FBsu/IWBde is logically meant to cover for them.

Ok but why a winger on attack? I have an inside forward who will make runs late in the box, I have a DLF who will drop deep so there’s a good posibility that the winger has no real aim to cross the ball to. How would a winger help me create and exploit space? Let’s take it like this - how would a winger exploit the space the DLF creates?

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Armistice said:

Ok but why a winger on attack? I have an inside forward who will make runs late in the box, I have a DLF who will drop deep so there’s a good posibility that the winger has no real aim to cross the ball to. How would a winger help me create and exploit space? Let’s take it like this - how would a winger exploit the space the DLF creates?

First, the winger is not there to exploit the space created by the DLF, but primarily to provide attacking width and a wide passing option on the right. It is primarily the SS who is supposed to take advantage of the DLF dropping deeper. And precisely because you have an IF on support on the left and a DLF on support paired with a SS, an attacking winger makes even more sense. So, when the IFsup has the ball in the final third, he will have 4 basic options:

1. to exchange passes with the DLF and both CMs before a promising opportunity for a through ball (or sometimes cross) into the box occurs

2. to bring into play the attacking FB overlapping him on the left flank, who can then deliver a cross

3. to switch the ball to the other flank or the other side of the box (toward far post) for the onrushing winger

4. and to occasionally attempt a shot on goal himself

The DLF on support will have more or less these same basic options as the IF. And of course, the SS - despite being on attack duty -  will not spend the entire time in the box waiting for passes and crosses, but will also look to involve himself in the creative phase of attacking build-ups. Sometimes he can switch the ball for the winger and then quickly run into the box to try and receive the return cross (or pass).

But let's get back to the winger on attack in AMR. In addition to serving as a provider of width - which can be particularly useful when central areas get congested by the opposition defense - he is also a latent goal-threat from the right. For example, when an attack goes through the opposite side (left), the RW on attack will not remain stuck to the touchline, but will naturally move more toward the middle and wait for the opportunity to attack the space (left by opposition defense moving to the left). So when the attack reaches its final stage, he will in most cases be somewhere around the far post, from where he can either look to score himself or assist to a teammate in a potentially better goal-scoring position.

Conversely, when an attack goes through his (right) side, once he receives the ball, he will look to beat his defender, surge to the byline and either cross into the box or play a cut-back pass for a late-running teammate (in this latter case, the "cuts inside from the right wing" PPM can be of great benefit). The moment he is about to deliver the cross/cut-back pass, there will be more than enough of his teammates both in and at the edge of the box (SS, DLF, IF, BBM, FBat). 

All this is based on the assumption that the winger is right-footed. But of course, it does not necessarily have to be a winger. You can opt for an IF on attack as well, but here again I would prefer a right-footed player. In case your AMR is left-footed, my preference would be a trequartista or AP on attack (though these two roles can be right-footed as well). The only role I would look to avoid for the AMR in this system is RMD, because I fear he and SS would more often obstruct than help/support each other. Simply, RMD is too much focused on scoring, so when you use this role, all others around him need to be focused on creating space and chances for him.

However, each of these alternative roles would require some tweaking.

And of course - you'll need the right team an player instructions. Because even if you create an "ideal" setup of roles and duties, without appropriate and logical TIs, it's not likely to work.

[beverage1982]

This is a really interesting discussion and timely given something I'm working on. 

 

If we were talking a similar set up but with a 4141 would we be looking for the SS goal threat from the 4231 to come from midfield instead?

 

Right now I have WB s, if s, Mez s on the left unlocking a winger a and B2B on the right. Then a CF s up front. I'm thinking to truly capitalise the Mezz should go to A right? 

Edited May 26, 2019 by beverage1982

[yolixeya]

On 25/05/2019 at 15:02, mikcheck said:

Thanks for your reply.

1 - Well I did it because I have 2 good players with playmaking abilities, whilse they're also solid defensively. Is there any downside using 2 playmakers side by side?

2 -  I did it because Dalot is amazing going forward and my lef back is not as good going forward and my AP is left footed so I want him to be on the right side. Also, what I'm thinking is, let's imagine that the AP is cutting inside with the ball and the DLF is ahead of him tyring to find space to run into, if I have CWB going up from the right, it can open up space for the DLF to run into space, with the opp defenders also worried about CWB runs. Does this make sense? I don't remember clearly  but I think @Cleon - Cleon if you're there, I'd also really like to know your opinion about the formation =) - used this same kind of formation few years ago, probably with different roles, but I remember well that he also used CWB behind a wide man (I think was either a IF or a AP) on the right side and on the left only a fullback with a support duty, I believe.

1 - Downside is that you will have 2 players doing the same thing and you probably don't need that most of the time. You could have some other role there that is focused more on defensive tasks or some runner to help you with transitioning. The way I see it, this way they both come deep to get the ball, they compete for it and take away from each other.

2 - I see you keep mentioning AP but there is no AP in your tactic. I'm assuming you mean IF. But it doesn't matter, because I never said that your right side can not wor, thou it looks crowded there for my taste. I said that your left side is weak wich makes your overall tactic weak. I'm just making a assumption because I didn't see how it works, but I would look to put someone on the wing there or to give the LB more attacking role. Ofcourse if you did that, you would have to make other changes.

[Armistice]

I would give this a generous bump. I'm looking to put the tactic plan to work these days although I confess I must pick up on the ideas again because I kind of forgot what I was supposed to look for in game.

[mikcheck]

Em 27/05/2019 em 08:28, yolixeya disse:

1 - Downside is that you will have 2 players doing the same thing and you probably don't need that most of the time. You could have some other role there that is focused more on defensive tasks or some runner to help you with transitioning. The way I see it, this way they both come deep to get the ball, they compete for it and take away from each other.

2 - I see you keep mentioning AP but there is no AP in your tactic. I'm assuming you mean IF. But it doesn't matter, because I never said that your right side can not wor, thou it looks crowded there for my taste. I said that your left side is weak wich makes your overall tactic weak. I'm just making a assumption because I didn't see how it works, but I would look to put someone on the wing there or to give the LB more attacking role. Ofcourse if you did that, you would have to make other changes.

Thank you

[mikcheck]

I wonder if a SS can work behind another attacking role like a DLF(a) or Adv Forward?

 

[Experienced Defender]

3 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

I wonder if a SS can work behind another attacking role like a DLF(a) or Adv Forward?

 

SS can work behind another attacking role, but depends on what is your system (formation)? Do you want SS behind a lone striker or 2 strikers? And what style of play do you want to implement?

[mikcheck]

18 minutos atrás, Experienced Defender disse:

SS can work behind another attacking role, but depends on what is your system (formation)? Do you want SS behind a lone striker or 2 strikers? And what style of play do you want to implement?

Thanks for your reply.

Basically its a assymetrical formation. 

AMR - IF(s) 

AMCL - AM(s)

AMC - SS

STCR - DLF(a) or Adv. Forward

DMCL - Regista

DMCR - DM(d)

I have technically gifted players and I like fast football. Dont like possession just for the sake of it, but when I play attacking or even positive, I see a lot of rushed play and wasted shots.

Edited June 4, 2019 by mikcheck

[Experienced Defender]

26 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

Thanks for your reply.

Basically its a assymetrical formation. 

AMR - IF(s) 

AMCL - AM(s)

AMC - SS

STCR - DLF(a) or Adv. Forward

DMCL - Regista

DMCR - DM(d)

I have technically gifted players and I like fast football. Dont like possession just for the sake of it, but when I play attacking or even positive, I see a lot of rushed play and wasted shots.

I have no experience with asymmetric formations and generally don't like them, so really cannot offer some useful advice. Sorry mate.

[mikcheck]

No problem thank you.

[Armistice]

On 04/06/2019 at 20:17, mikcheck said:

Thanks for your reply.

Basically its a assymetrical formation. 

AMR - IF(s) 

AMCL - AM(s)

AMC - SS

STCR - DLF(a) or Adv. Forward

DMCL - Regista

DMCR - DM(d)

I have technically gifted players and I like fast football. Dont like possession just for the sake of it, but when I play attacking or even positive, I see a lot of rushed play and wasted shots.

Well why would you use an Advanced Forward ahead of a Shadow Striker? Did you read the Shadow Striker role description? He's a False 10 so you'd need a False 9 if you want him to work properly.

[herne79]

49 minutes ago, Armistice said:

Well why would you use an Advanced Forward ahead of a Shadow Striker? Did you read the Shadow Striker role description? He's a False 10 so you'd need a False 9 if you want him to work properly.

Yes that is the intention of the role and how it would perhaps be based on real life examples - hence the role description.  However there is no reason why we can't use roles creatively and outside of their original intent.

[mikcheck]

2 horas atrás, Armistice disse:

Well why would you use an Advanced Forward ahead of a Shadow Striker? Did you read the Shadow Striker role description? He's a False 10 so you'd need a False 9 if you want him to work properly.

I understand what you're saying but there is support around them too, either by AM(s) or IF(s). Even the Shadow Striker is a role that can iniciate attacks too.

Edited June 7, 2019 by mikcheck

[Armistice]

On 07/06/2019 at 12:19, mikcheck said:

I understand what you're saying but there is support around them too, either by AM(s) or IF(s). Even the Shadow Striker is a role that can iniciate attacks too.

How do AM-S and IF-S help create space?

[jc577]

7 hours ago, Armistice said:

How do AM-S and IF-S help create space?

IF-A creates space by running diagonally at the opposition, potentially drawing the attention of a CM/CB, or the full back follows the run & leaves your full back in acres of space. 

Edited June 9, 2019 by jc577

[summatsupeer]

You have to consider you system as a whole not just the combinations.  An SS-A can work with an attack duty forward, I think DLF-A could be a good combo when attacking quickly and opponents pushing up.  Against defensive opponents then you might lack some depth in the hole to draw opponents out.  You also need width so opposition FBs dont have a easy time and can just sit narrow and remove passing lanes etc.

AP-S could have the opposite problem, sits deep and collects and then wants to create.  In a slower possession system he will be more considered.  In a high risk, direct and fast style he might try to force things, especially if made into a AP-A.  The same way a SS-A is very urgent due to duty and instructions, if everyone around him is support he might get isolated or lack options.

To create space I think the main thing is to give different options, and the right options that fit the system

[Armistice]

9 hours ago, jc577 said:

IF-A creates space by running diagonally at the opposition, potentially drawing the attention of a CM/CB, or the full back follows the run & leaves your full back in acres of space. 

Yeah that makes space for an attacking fullback. But he said he got support duties around the SS so my question was made regarding the SS, how do they create space for the SS. The IF cutting inside and taking a CM or hopefully a DM can work but you also have to be wary of the congestion created centrally, I would say.

[mikcheck]

Thank you.

[burdinho]

This is a brilliant thread, thanks guys. 

I'm managing Lazio in 2026, and my style is to assemble talented young players with good physical skills. I took over 3 years ago with a lot of older senior players on big money, so it took a while to shift them out.

In my first full season we finished 3rd which was well above expectations. However last season I finished 9th despite a semi final CL appearance which kept me in the post. As such this season, I had to get 9 from the first 15 points to save my job, which I did. I'm currently 4th in the league and only lost my first game of the season at the halfway mark. That said, I'm miles off the top spot. Europa League is my objective for the season.

With that context in mind, my chronic issue since finishing 9th and up to the halfway mark this season, is an alarming lack of goals. After 19 games I've scored 21, joint 4th worst in the league with 12 conceded, 2nd best.

I have an impressive couple of strikers, but even more talented CMs and AMCs, and some good wide players too. So therefore I'm focusing on 2 main systems:

They are both designed to be used at home against weaker opposition, which I believe is the majority of the league. I have a 4141 for away games when I consider myself outsider.

4321

 

This is a new-ish system for me to use, and whilst it has worked in some games, it has more often failed. Again I will take some lessons from this thread about potentially using one SS, but what I'm really unsure about is the central three.

One should protect, the other support the front three, but I'm not sure about the third role. I have players capable of fulfilling all three duties and most roles I believe, it's more a question of how to fit them together.

I try to keep TIs to a minimum, and use a higher LOE and a standard DL. I prefer high pressing if possible and try to win the ball back at the earliest opportunity.

I want the system to create plenty of chances, from drawing the opposition out, with plenty of assists from a variety of sources. However this is not happening at all.

4231

Nothing new here, but from reading this thread I am going to use SS more; I was using AP (A) primarily along with a AF(A).

However I'm not too sure about the middle 2 CMs; I don't want the AM and striker to be too stifled, and the CMs will naturally have more defensive roles. So I'm currently using DLP (s) and CM(d).

I expect the front four to weigh in with goals, and this hasn't really happened at all.

Any advice would be very welcome!

Thanks to everyone that has contributed so far.

 

Edited June 10, 2019 by burdinho

[burdinho]

I should add as well, I'd also like to get the 4312 working, as I have an excellent couple of young strikers breaking through - but the question would be the same about the central three.

[burdinho]

I'm also using this system and not really creating much with it either! I tend to use this in away games against stronger teams, but I still want to carry some attacking threat because of the creative players that I have available. Is there anything wrong with this at first glance?

 

[summatsupeer]

@burdinho Well can't see instructions, only thing I'd tweak is putting mez and wb on opposite sides.

Pure personal pref would be to have the DM as DLP with a quick/mobile CM who can counter attack more.

[NabsKebabs]

4 hours ago, burdinho said:

I'm also using this system and not really creating much with it either! I tend to use this in away games against stronger teams, but I still want to carry some attacking threat because of the creative players that I have available. Is there anything wrong with this at first glance?

 

Everyone is on defend or support except your striker on attack. He's likely getting too isolated. 

Edited June 11, 2019 by NabsKebabs

[summatsupeer]

14 hours ago, burdinho said:

I try to keep TIs to a minimum, and use a higher LOE and a standard DL. I prefer high pressing if possible and try to win the ball back at the earliest opportunity.

I want the system to create plenty of chances, from drawing the opposition out, with plenty of assists from a variety of sources. However this is not happening at all

So you prefer pressing but then expect to draw opponents out? Pick one.

Where the 4321 gives space (flanks) can be good to draw opponents out, then press against touch lines.  You need the outside CMs to be hard working to help with this.  With two narrow AMs and wingbacks, where will they have space to join in attacks with roaming? I think AP-S + MEZ-A but with a holding LB could work so the MCR I'd prefer more of a CAR type.

I'd drop pass into space, hit early crosses and play for set pieces. If this is what you want to use against teams you expect to beat, they're likely to keep players back, so hitting early balls is likely a low chance of success, especially with a lone forward even with two AM.

I'd also drop the wider instructions, you have WBs to give width.  Telling narrow player to play wider won't change much, biggest effect will be on your back 4, likely giving bigger channels that can be exploited.

[summatsupeer]

15 hours ago, burdinho said:

4231

Nothing new here, but from reading this thread I am going to use SS more; I was using AP (A) primarily along with a AF(A).

However I'm not too sure about the middle 2 CMs; I don't want the AM and striker to be too stifled, and the CMs will naturally have more defensive roles. So I'm currently using DLP (s) and CM(d).

I expect the front four to weigh in with goals, and this hasn't really happened at all.

I think this is another issue of not using the formation to it's strengths. With two holders (double pivot) your FBs can be quite aggressive but with two wingers it doesnt quite fit.  I'd like at least one of them to cut inside and let a FB provide width.  If not then maybe a IWB-S/A to come inside or IWB-D to cover a CM-S who can use space inside of W-S.

I'd lose most of those in possession instructions, its adding too much focus and risk on specific actions.  You have a DLP and SS plus hopefully a bit more variety on flanks to take the risks.  Do you want the gk+back 4 launching passes? Do they all have the attributes to do so, maybe a single BPD could give that option with a decent success rate.

Id never consider using Regroup with a 4231 wide. Regroup is more to get players back behind the ball to shut down passing options, but you have a top heavy formation that more suited to counter pressing.

[burdinho]

great, thanks @summatsupeer appreciate your comments.

[burdinho]

some really positive early results from switching to IWB, an IF and overlapping WBs....really unlocking the potential of the side, scoring 13 in 3 games. Thanks again

[Armistice]

On 11/06/2019 at 18:46, burdinho said:

some really positive early results from switching to IWB, an IF and overlapping WBs....really unlocking the potential of the side, scoring 13 in 3 games. Thanks again

Good to hear 

[Armistice]

Hey guys, I thought this would be nice to be given a bump. You know, when people set up a system, they do it because they have some textbook roles combinations that were learned from other, more experienced FM players. But when things don't work out as they should, they don't know what to look for to change.

Take a DLF-SS combination. If the DLF is surrounded by lots of opposition players, he's unable to hold the ball up and create space for SS to attack. So in this situation the combo fails to work despite being a good option on paper. So what do you do then? Do you switch the roles around? Make the striker a classic number 9 and the AMC a classic number 10? Do you add another striker and change the formation? You know, stuff like this.

Btw didn't ask these questions to get an answer, just to give you an example of what I mean. We need to be able to read the game to understand what there needs to be done.

[Svenc]

Whilst thats true I'm questioning the "needed" part. That "needed" part would be "needed" if the AI Managers themselves were able to "read" a thing. Your Competition aren't other, more experienced FM Players. Your Competition are AI. Except for in an online experience. However, those Competition are still given Broad Tools to react to Things when Things aren't working. They are, a lot of the time, suprisingly simple typically.

The scorelines doesn't suit at HT? Switch to another Formation (plan B), do a couple Subs, go generally more aggressive and see if something sticks. Ten minutes from time and there's a Goal desperately missing? Push men Forward and pump balls into the box etc. etc. Whilst this sounds off-topicy and I don't want to derail a good thread -- just saying. But I am saying that as someone who holds finite interest into having significant edges over Competition, as that's not a Thing in Football Management. (Which is why I've stopped following These Forums for the most part -- still a good thread so thumps up!) 

Edited September 27, 2019 by Svenc

[Zemahh]

What I find immensely helpful when thinking about space, is drawing. Open up Paint, draw your formation against the formation you're going to face and then draw some arrows showing your players' basic movement during your attacking transitions. Now do the same for the opposition's players and see how their players are going to track yours. For example, opposition's left WB will most likely be forced to track your right IF inside, which is going to create space for you to exploit out wide (usually with your right WB). Or another example, if you were to instead use a Winger on that side, opposition's WB would have to stay wide, which could then create space in central areas. Now think about which one of your players is taking advantage of that space and again, which one of the opposition's defenders is going to be forced to deal with him (because at some point someone is going to have to step out and close him down, which is going to create a new pocket of space somewhere on the pitch).

There's usually less need for all that when you're an underdog and the AI is leaving tons of space for you to exploit naturally, while it's attacking you like a wild dog, but once your media prediction and form improve, you need to start being a little bit more methodical.