DM role for a deep pivot that stays close to the DC strata

[XaW]

I'm having quite a lot of success with my tactic, but I find that my DM is advancing up too far no matter what role I want to give him. Here is my current setup and it's working fine:

So, what I want is the AP on the left to tuck in and the LB provide with when the AP pulls the defender in and it's working quite well. My only issue is getting the DM to say back enough to help the DC's and to function as a pivot to recycle possession. I had him as a Halfback, but found him wandering too much so at the moment I'm using him as an Anchor Man since it's the most defensive I can get. What I ideally want is to get him to pull back between the DC's, almost like an advanced stopper that can also pass, when we are in possession, but HB did not work like I had hoped. I've also tried a DPL on defend, but he also wanders a lot and he got the ball too often for my likening. I've already asked him to press less, but that didn't seem to do much difference.

I'm not looking for hints to make the tactic work better, only to get the DM to stay back more than he currently is. I'm doing very well with a smaller side, outplaying a lot of the better teams, but we do sometimes get caught out with the DM too high up the pitch seemingly without reason. Any ideas are more than welcome.

[XaW]

A bit more information. This is how I would like him to be positioned and he is when the goalkeeper distributes the ball (the DM is nr 6 - Herskedal):

'

But shortly after the DC have to hoof the ball up due to a lack of options (fair enough, that happens), but the DM then gets too far up the pitch and leaves the opponent striker with a vast distance to any other player:

Now, nothing happens at this point, but if my striker fails to challenge properly for the ball I would be in trouble if they had lumped it down the centre. And I see these kinds of situations a bit too often for my taste. So I would like the DM to stay 10-15 meters behind that position closer to the attacked, between the DC's.

[herne79]

Assuming there are no player Traits encouraging the player forward, how about the Trait to "stay back at all times" along with the PI to "hold position"?

Bear in mind that you are using a very high def line, so when in possession your players are going to be pretty high up the pitch anyway and combined with a fairly aggressive Mentality which will also encourage forward thinking.

[XaW]

7 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Assuming there are no player Traits encouraging the player forward, how about the Trait to "stay back at all times" along with the PI to "hold position"?

Bear in mind that you are using a very high def line, so when in possession your players are going to be pretty high up the pitch anyway and combined with a fairly aggressive Mentality which will also encourage forward thinking.

Yeah, I've asked him to "Hold position" already, but I don't really feel he listens to my instructions.

Here is another example, we have just lost the ball:

Here I would like him to keep his position and head back into the defensive line, instead he presses without any seemingly reason:

He ends up fouling him and I'm actually fine with it, it's simply just not him doing what I want him to.

I know I'm having an aggressive line (not very high, only one tick over normal) and one tick of pressure (plus counterpressing), but I would still like him to be the controlling aspect of the team. Holding his position and recycling the possession, being the "quarterback" if you like. I'll try to teach him the "stay back at all times" PPM, that might help. I can add that I've tried other players in the same roles, but without any big differences.

This is the individual instructions:

Edited December 12, 2019 by XaW

[Experienced Defender]

58 minutes ago, XaW said:

 

58 minutes ago, XaW said:

I find that my DM is advancing up too far no matter what role I want to give him

The role you are already using in the DM spot - anchorman - is the most defensive-minded DM role and thus least inclined to get too far forward (unless the player has such a trait). But you have to bear in mind that the DM as such is not a defender, but midfielder. Therefore, no matter how defensive his role is, you cannot expect his positioning to be same as that of CBs. And this was in relation to the possession phase (when you have the ball).

If you don't like how he behaves when your team is defending, then remove the counter-press and more urgent pressing.

[XaW]

4 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

The role you are already using in the DM spot - anchorman - is the most defensive-minded DM role and thus least inclined to get too far forward (unless the player has such a trait). But you have to bear in mind that the DM as such is not a defender, but midfielder. Therefore, no matter how defensive his role is, you cannot expect his positioning to be same as that of CBs. And this was in relation to the possession phase (when you have the ball).

If you don't like how he behaves when your team is defending, then remove the counter-press and more urgent pressing.

Yes, I know he is a DM and not a DC, but I would like to have him deeper when in possession. Imagine how Fernandinho played for Man City last season, or how Henderson at Liverpool before the bought Fabinho. A player that, when in possession, steps down into the DC strata, but also can act as an outlet to recycle possession.

I might be asking for too much of the game, but it's something I'm striving towards.

I do like how the team as a whole defends, the balance is great, I'd just like the DM to stay around 10 meters deeper when we have possession to give us an even better balance. I'm doing very well and the tactic really works, with a very few instances. I'm currently 2nd in the league when my odds to win were 1,001 before the season. So even as a lower rater team the tactic works. So I don't have any big issues with it, but this is one thing I can't really find a solution for, that's why I'm asking if anyone in here have any suggestions for how this one player can slightly change his position.

[themadsheep2001]

Just spitballing, but would the role you want not be a HB?

[XaW]

1 minute ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Just spitballing, but would the role you want not be a HB?

Yes, and that is what I started with, but apparently that role is more of a playmaker and he very often stepped into the MC strata leaving the DC's quite unprotected. I would also assume that a HB would fill the role, but it doesn't seem to work like that in the game.

[themadsheep2001]

5 minutes ago, XaW said:

Yes, and that is what I started with, but apparently that role is more of a playmaker and he very often stepped into the MC strata leaving the DC's quite unprotected. I would also assume that a HB would fill the role, but it doesn't seem to work like that in the game.

Interesting, and worth flagging up

[XaW]

8 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Interesting, and worth flagging up

I'll see if I can play a bit with a HB and report it if I get any blatant examples of what the role does as compared to what one would expect.

[themadsheep2001]

5 minutes ago, XaW said:

I'll see if I can play a bit with a HB and report it if I get any blatant examples of what the role does as compared to what one would expect.

The HB role should be the perfect role for you

[herne79]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

I know I'm having an aggressive line (not very high, only one tick over normal)

How do you mean normal?  It's one tick over where the Positive Mentality sets it, which is higher than the middle ground (ie., Balanced Mentality).

27 minutes ago, XaW said:

Yes, and that is what I started with, but apparently that role is more of a playmaker

The HB isn't a playmaker role.

[XaW]

16 minutes ago, herne79 said:

How do you mean normal?  It's one tick over where the Positive Mentality sets it, which is higher than the middle ground (ie., Balanced Mentality).

I mean one tick above normal. For I can chose Much lower, lower, standard, higher, much higher. I have higher which in one tick above normal. If I tick it back once i get "standard":

16 minutes ago, herne79 said:

The HB isn't a playmaker role.

Agreed, but he really got on the ball too much in that role and he became just about the main passer in the team. So the role isn't a playmaker role, but it _seemed_ to work like one in my tactic.

Here is the screenshot from the game I posted in the bugs section. He had the most passes in my team:

Edited December 12, 2019 by XaW

[Enzo_Francescoli]

With high mentality, high lines, urgent pressing and counter-press, DM's will position themselves higher, though. There's nothing wrong with your player's position, it's what you told him to do via TI's. Also, you use shorter passing and play out of defence, so it's no wonder the DM will be your most prolific passer. Who do you think your fullbacks can pass to when they're instructed to keep it short but also forward (comes with positive mentality) and there's only one player in their vicinity?

If you want him to stay back deeper, lower the d-line or go with three CB's.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Enzo_Francescoli

[XaW]

2 minutes ago, Enzo_Francescoli said:

With high mentality, high lines, urgent pressing and counter-press, DM's will position themselves higher, though. There's nothing wrong with your player's position, it's what you told him to do via TI's. Also, you use shorter passing and play out of defence, so it's no wonder the DM will be your most prolific passer. Who do you think your defenders can pass to when they're instructed to keep it short and there's only one player in their vicinity?

If you want him to stay back deeper, lower the d-line or go with three CB's.

Thanks, but I don't want to change the core of my tactics, I only want him a bit deeper, I've told him in any way I can I want him to keep his position and drop back into the DC strata. I can't think of other ways, that's why I'm asking. I don't want to drop my D-line or have 3 DC's. I just want a DM that sits a bit lower.

And in regards to the playmaker-esque tendencies. Here are the three games before when I had him as an Anchorman. Look at his passes and compare it to the one above. Much less playmaker than than the Halfback:

Granted, one of them he got subbed at the 57th minute, but he only had 28 passes at that time. When playing as Halfback he gets a lot more passes from the players around him and he seems more like a playmaker in how the game actually runs.

I mean, I know I might be asking for the impossible here, but I don't know of any other place someone could help out than here, so I had a go.

And, to be clear, I'm not playing badly. I'm winning much more than I should from the players I have and I'm actually looking for a 2nd promotion in a row, and all without every buying a single player. I'm just looking for a small change in the offensive positioning for a single player, not a revamp of the tactics as a whole.

[XaW]

For what it's worth, I played another game with the Halfback and we won and the Halfback even got MoM, but he still didn't play as I wanted. And he once again had ALOT of passes...

[Enzo_Francescoli]

I don't think it's impossible, but I do think it comes with a compromise. With those TI's, every single one of your players will position themselves higher in possession than they would otherwise. Out of possession, you instructed your DM to engage the opponent in the central third of the pitch (high lines will do that), so that's exactly what he's doing.

By the way, your formation allows you to give up a bit of compactness and go with higher LOE and standard d-line. I had a very successful tactic on FM19 with those settings, haven't tried on FM20 yet. Worth a shot and see how it goes, in my opinion.

[XaW]

7 minutes ago, Enzo_Francescoli said:

I don't think it's impossible, but I do think it comes with a compromise. With those TI's, every single one of your players will position themselves higher in possession than they would otherwise. Out of possession, you instructed your DM to engage the opponent in the central third of the pitch (high lines will do that), so that's exactly what he's doing.

By the way, your formation allows you to give up a bit of compactness and go with higher LOE and standard d-line. I had a very successful tactic on FM19 with those settings, haven't tried on FM20 yet. Worth a shot and see how it goes, in my opinion.

Yeah, I suppose so, I would just like to tell the player: "Hey pal, when we have the ball in their pitch, stay about 10 meters further back than you do at the moment. You'll be more of an outlet to recyle, and you'll be helping out the defenders to cope with counters. Other than that, you're doing excellent".

[Johnny Ace]

It's frustrating as hell when a role doesn't work 100% like you want to, it's like you want to sit him down & tell him exactly how you want him to play!! 

Total stab, but the only other way I can think of without altering your tactic, have you tried having him man mark the striker?

[OJ403]

Another suggestion,

How about a straight up DM on defend? They've worked relatively well in the past for me in being incredibly dull and boring, which isn't a bad thing in this case

I also echo what your saying about the half back and anchorman. The half back is kind of playmakerish without being a ball magnet or anything like that, fully get where your coming from. And I've never actually managed to get an anchorman to actually "anchor" my midfield to my defence, they seem to more hover about trying to cut out potential danger (which is great when you want it, not that I ever have) as opposed to actually being an anchor.

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, XaW said:

Imagine how Fernandinho played for Man City last season, or how Henderson at Liverpool before the bought Fabinho. A player that, when in possession, steps down into the DC strata, but also can act as an outlet to recycle possession

It's the half-back. But even he will not stay so deep all the time. If you want a player that will always play as a 3rd CB, then use a 3-man back-line. I don't see another way.

[XaW]

28 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

It's frustrating as hell when a role doesn't work 100% like you want to, it's like you want to sit him down & tell him exactly how you want him to play!! 

Total stab, but the only other way I can think of without altering your tactic, have you tried having him man mark the striker?

Yeah, but I do understand the trouble of making all the roles, the AI need to be able to use them as well!

I could, but I suspect he would get pulled far out of position if the player were an AF or a role that wanders a lot.

22 minutes ago, OJ403 said:

Another suggestion,

How about a straight up DM on defend? They've worked relatively well in the past for me in being incredibly dull and boring, which isn't a bad thing in this case

I also echo what your saying about the half back and anchorman. The half back is kind of playmakerish without being a ball magnet or anything like that, fully get where your coming from. And I've never actually managed to get an anchorman to actually "anchor" my midfield to my defence, they seem to more hover about trying to cut out potential danger (which is great when you want it, not that I ever have) as opposed to actually being an anchor.

Hmm... Yeah, I guess I could try a basic DC on defend. I'll have a go and see if I like how it works. Thanks!

[XaW]

1 minute ago, Experienced Defender said:

It's the half-back. But even he will not stay so deep all the time. If you want a player that will always play as a 3rd CB, then use a 3-man back-line. I don't see another way.

Yeah, as I said, I know I might be asking for the impossible, but thought I'd have a go anyway. And I do think the halfback as I imagine it would be perfect. I do think he ventures a bit too much forward though, so I'll see what SI answers in my bug report. Thanks for the help! 

[XaW]

43 minutes ago, OJ403 said:

Another suggestion,

How about a straight up DM on defend? They've worked relatively well in the past for me in being incredibly dull and boring, which isn't a bad thing in this case

I also echo what your saying about the half back and anchorman. The half back is kind of playmakerish without being a ball magnet or anything like that, fully get where your coming from. And I've never actually managed to get an anchorman to actually "anchor" my midfield to my defence, they seem to more hover about trying to cut out potential danger (which is great when you want it, not that I ever have) as opposed to actually being an anchor.

Had a go with this now, and he didn't play as I wanted him to now either. Kind of an "inbetween" of how the Anchorman vs Halfback worked. Not as playmaker-esque, but not deep enough either.

This was a common position when we finished attacks:

So, far to advanced for what I would hope/want from the player.

We did win again though, and against a strong, already promoted Tromsø side, we were more comfortable than the scoreline suggest.

Edited December 12, 2019 by XaW

[acmilano112000]

I play a very similar setup and also model my DM after 2017-2019 Fernandinho.  In possession, I want him to sit in that space and connect the defense to the midfield and help us play out of the back and then be the central fixed player that everyone else can create triangles off of. But, similar to you it seems, I don't want him playing overly creative passes and thinking he has to unlock the opponents from back there. Just helping the ball move along is fine. So lots of the DM roles that are playmaker-ish have too many risky traits that I don't want. I often use a DM(d), sometimes in the past, an ANC, and sometimes to encourage the CBs to look for him rather than hoofing it I use DLP(d). Out of possession I want him sitting in that hole in front of the CBs. Covering for them when needed, blocking the space, etc. Not being too far up and not pressing people. I like him as the trailing press player. When my CMs rush up to press someone, he can follow in behind to deny a passing option, but he doesn't go press the ballcarrier himself.

I still need to do more testing on FM20 of the exact differences between ANC and DM(d). Don't have the game open now, but if I recall right I think they have one or two hardcoded PI differences which led me to choose DM(d).

For me in my save he's not too far up. And in your second post above I wouldn't feel concerned that the enemy striker is unmarked... its 1 striker vs your 2 CBs. I count that as sufficient. But do your thing. You say he's too far up naturally and pressing too much. So based on what I'm reading, you could try:

1. Tell him man mark their striker (you probably don't actually mean you want this).

2. Play him at CB as a ball playing stopper or Libero

3. Find a DM player with lower aggressiveness? This is sorta a last resort, but maybe you've done all you can tactically and just have a player with high aggressiveness that is making him try to win too many balls everywhere.

4. Use whatever role (DM, ANC...) that has the lowest possible option for pressing intensity.

5. Lower your defensive width... this is sort of a random try, but maybe this will bring your CBs closer together on that pesky striker you mention and then where the DM sits will feel appropriate to you?

6. Ohh just thought of this one. Try dropping your AMR/AML into the MR/ML strata. I know you have them up there for a reason, but sometimes playing around with your three midfield stratas can have effects on the other midfielders. When I play the same formation as you I try everything from 1DM 2CM AML AMR as you have it, to DM and 4 across ML CM CM MR, to 5 straight across with CM(D) as my "DM". Can't tell you why it changes so much but once in a while it unclicks something. I wouldn't be surprised if you notice your DM take up a different spot, subtly, if you drop your wingers one strata. They should be able to have same roles.

Edited December 12, 2019 by acmilano112000

[XaW]

8 minutes ago, acmilano112000 said:

I play a very similar setup and also model my DM after 2017-2019 Fernandinho.  In possession, I want him to sit in that space and connect the defense to the midfield and help us play out of the back and then be the central fixed player that everyone else can create triangles off of. But, similar to you it seems, I don't want him playing overly creative passes and thinking he has to unlock the opponents from back there. Just helping the ball move along is fine. So lots of the DM roles that are playmaker-ish have too many risky traits that I don't want. I often use a DM(d), sometimes in the past, an ANC, and sometimes to encourage the CBs to look for him rather than hoofing it I use DLP(d). Out of possession I want him sitting in that hole in front of the CBs. Covering for them when needed, blocking the space, etc. Not being too far up and not pressing people. I like him as the trailing press player. When my CMs rush up to press someone, he can follow in behind to deny a passing option, but he doesn't go press the ballcarrier himself.

I still need to do more testing on FM20 of the exact differences between ANC and DM(d). Don't have the game open now, but if I recall right I think they have one or two hardcoded PI differences which led me to choose DM(d).

For me in my save he's not too far up. And in your second post above I wouldn't feel concerned that the enemy striker is unmarked... its 1 striker vs your 2 CBs. I count that as sufficient. But do your thing. You say he's too far up naturally and pressing too much. So based on what I'm reading, you could try:

1. Tell him man mark their striker (you probably don't actually mean you want this).

2. Play him at CB as a ball playing stopper or Libero

3. Find a DM player with lower aggressiveness? This is sorta a last resort, but maybe you've done all you can tactically and just have a player with high aggressiveness that is making him try to win too many balls everywhere.

4. Use whatever role (DM, ANC...) that has the lowest possible option for pressing intensity.

5. Lower your defensive width... this is sort of a random try, but maybe this will bring your CBs closer together on that pesky striker you mention and then where the DM sits will feel appropriate to you?

6. Ohh just thought of this one. Try dropping your AMR/AML into the MR/ML strata. I know you have them up there for a reason, but sometimes playing around with your three midfield stratas can have effects on the other midfielders. When I play the same formation as you I try everything from 1DM 2CM AML AMR as you have it, to DM and 4 across ML CM CM MR, to 5 straight across with CM(D) as my "DM". Can't tell you why it changes so much but once in a while it unclicks something. I wouldn't be surprised if you notice your DM take up a different spot, subtly, if you drop your wingers one strata. They should be able to have same roles.

Thanks for the suggestions. We do seem to have similar views of how we want the team to play. I have experimented a bit with pretty much every role available in the DM spot, and so far I've not had success in having the player do what I want. I do have success, in winning quite a few games, with both Anchorman and Halfback, so the tactic itself is quite sound, I simply want the DM to protect the DC's a bit better. As I posted in the bug report for the HB-role, the role works well with the ball in our own half, and when the opponent have the ball in controlled possession, however it doesn't work as I want when we have the ball in the opponent's half, and because of that he is also misplaced when we lose possession and have to defend counters.

And while in several of the examples, I don't mind his position in a general sense as a DM, I still want him a bit further back specifically to cover for my full backs and be in control. I'd also think it would help in recycling the possession, because the opponent would have to push up more to close him down unless they want him to really control the match in that sense as well, and that should give the rest of my more attacking players more room to move around in. That is my general thought though, and it's only this one player's positioning I want to change. Everyone else are where I want them to be, that's the annoying thing.

I'll have a toy around with things and see what I experience and if I find something helps. I did something similar in FM18 and then the HB-role did pretty much everything I wanted, unless I'm romanticising it from memory.

It might be that I need a more defensively minded DM for this to work as I want.

[Rashidi]

The reason why he is so advanced is a combination of role, defensive line and the roles around him,

The BPD bringing out the ball will usually shift your attacking transition higher thus also pushing the DM higher.
If he is in the attacking third then he could influenced as well by his role, and a HB is a bit more aggressive so he does  venture forward. If you don't want him to drop the DL.

The LOE combined with the BPD and the DL could also influence you higher up the pitch. These can combine to give you those kind of situations. Say you were playing in the opponents half, lost the ball, regained it back, and your team transitioned back in attack. Here the HB because of the LOE would have been influenced to press since its set so high and in the opponent's third.

personally I would adjust the role of the defender, adjust the DL, LOE. As far as the role of the DM is concerned, I will also check his OTB, decisions and traits.

[OJ403]

26 minutes ago, XaW said:

Had a go with this now, and he didn't play as I wanted him to now either. Kind of an "inbetween" of how the Anchorman vs Halfback worked. Not as playmaker-esque, but not deep enough either.

This was a common position when we finished attacks:

So, far to advanced for what I would hope/want from the player.

We did win again though, and against a strong, already promoted Tromsø side, we were more comfortable than the scoreline suggest.

That is incredibly annoying. Maybe for what your after style of play wise youll have to compromise somewhere with the DM or play style as frustrating as that is maybe its just not meant to be. Out of interest what role has been the closest to what your after?

Another suggestion too, probably utter rubbish but its just popped into my head. It sounds incredibly counter productive I know but everything logical has totally failed so it might take something stupid to make it work. Or alternatively its as daft as it looks. How about trying him as a CM-D in the midfield strata? It sounds daft and it doesn't really have any logic behind it but it can't be much further away from what your after. If nothing else it'd be interesting to see how much different it plays compared to an actual defensive midfield role.

[Vali184]

Give him an instruction to mark DM zone?

[>LJ<]

Maybe try playing with a libero on support instead of a DM? Understand you're playing at a low level etc but might be worth a try to see if you get the positioning you're after. 

[khodder]

The only thing I can think that might achieve what our want is a three man backline with the central defender asked to be a touch more advanced than the others.

This might defeat the purpose a little bit though, because you'll end up defending with a flat 3 rather than a triangle.

I'd test a BPD/Stopper role with two CD/D either side and see how it plays out. You can play your DM in that BPD role too.

[XaW]

8 hours ago, Rashidi said:

The reason why he is so advanced is a combination of role, defensive line and the roles around him,

The BPD bringing out the ball will usually shift your attacking transition higher thus also pushing the DM higher.
If he is in the attacking third then he could influenced as well by his role, and a HB is a bit more aggressive so he does  venture forward. If you don't want him to drop the DL.

The LOE combined with the BPD and the DL could also influence you higher up the pitch. These can combine to give you those kind of situations. Say you were playing in the opponents half, lost the ball, regained it back, and your team transitioned back in attack. Here the HB because of the LOE would have been influenced to press since its set so high and in the opponent's third.

personally I would adjust the role of the defender, adjust the DL, LOE. As far as the role of the DM is concerned, I will also check his OTB, decisions and traits.

Yeah, the strange thing is that it works as it should when we have the ball in our own half. Then he drops deep and the DC's goes a bit wider and they for a nice trio in the buildup. It's only when the ball enters the opposition half he ventures too far ahead of the two DC's for my likening. To compile the issue they seem to stay wide as if the HB is further back.

I do understand there are other instructions influencing his positioning, but I've experimented with changing quite a few of them, and it changes they whole dynamic of the tactic too much for my likening.

The DPB however, is something I haven't done much with, so I might try to turn him into a normal DC to see if that allows the HB to stay further back and don't get pushed up. I'm also trying to give the player the trait of "stays back at all times" to see if that can help achieve what I want.

8 hours ago, OJ403 said:

That is incredibly annoying. Maybe for what your after style of play wise youll have to compromise somewhere with the DM or play style as frustrating as that is maybe its just not meant to be. Out of interest what role has been the closest to what your after?

Another suggestion too, probably utter rubbish but its just popped into my head. It sounds incredibly counter productive I know but everything logical has totally failed so it might take something stupid to make it work. Or alternatively its as daft as it looks. How about trying him as a CM-D in the midfield strata? It sounds daft and it doesn't really have any logic behind it but it can't be much further away from what your after. If nothing else it'd be interesting to see how much different it plays compared to an actual defensive midfield role.

Yeah, I might be after a unicorn, but why not strive for the ideal. I'll have a go at a MC-D, but I'm afraid that will push the other MC's out a bit too wide, but we'll see. Thanks!

8 hours ago, Vali184 said:

Give him an instruction to mark DM zone?

Hmm... would that get him to stay back in the DC strata only when in possession? 

6 hours ago, >LJ< said:

Maybe try playing with a libero on support instead of a DM? Understand you're playing at a low level etc but might be worth a try to see if you get the positioning you're after. 

Wouldn't the libero work as a third DC when the opposition have the ball though? I want him to stay ahead of the others as a DM would, and I think a libero would be too far back out of possession?

4 hours ago, khodder said:

The only thing I can think that might achieve what our want is a three man backline with the central defender asked to be a touch more advanced than the others.

This might defeat the purpose a little bit though, because you'll end up defending with a flat 3 rather than a triangle.

I'd test a BPD/Stopper role with two CD/D either side and see how it plays out. You can play your DM in that BPD role too.

Like the I answered above, I think that would set him too deep when out of possession, but I might try it out to see how it affects everything.

Thanks for your suggestions!

[DrPoods]

10 hours ago, XaW said:

Had a go with this now, and he didn't play as I wanted him to now either. Kind of an "inbetween" of how the Anchorman vs Halfback worked. Not as playmaker-esque, but not deep enough either.

This was a common position when we finished attacks:

So, far to advanced for what I would hope/want from the player.

We did win again though, and against a strong, already promoted Tromsø side, we were more comfortable than the scoreline suggest.

@XaW This might be a little left field, but how about a Libero on a support role? He would step up into midfield on occasion but slot back into the defence at other times. Wouldn’t he?

Oh. I see I’ve come late to that particular party...

Edited December 13, 2019 by DrPoods
Read later posts!

[XaW]

17 minutes ago, DrPoods said:

@XaW This might be a little left field, but how about a Libero on a support role? He would step up into midfield on occasion but slot back into the defence at other times. Wouldn’t he?

Oh. I see I’ve come late to that particular party...

Thanks! Yeah, but I doubt he would do it at the times I want. I would want him to be ahead of the defence, as a normal DM, when we are not in possession, but I would like him to fall back towards the DC's when we have the ball. I expect a Libero to do the exact opposite.

[Rashidi]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

Yeah, the strange thing is that it works as it should when we have the ball in our own half.

Thats how the HB has been designed to work. he splits the defenders forms a three in the defensive to midfield transition, if you are camping or in the opponents half he pushes up since he is more aggressive than a typical DM. If you want a role that sticks like glue then this isn't it, plus you need to account for the defensive line too.  I have a double BPD set up in some of my tactics with a halfback sitting in front of them to get the split in defence and when they are in the opponents third my halfback is sitting just between them and the midfield group like a quarterback. 

[OLLMEISTER1]

Im going to throw a curve ball into the equation and it may sound ridiculous to some but could you not put him as the middle CD as stopper? So in essence back 5 with 3 CBS and the man in question as stopper CB to move forward and curtail any threat around the DM area? You want him to stay close to your CBs right? 

Not tried it so it may not work as i visualize it but in my mind it is exactly what you claim to want.  

Let me know if you try it & what the results are.

[XaW]

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

Thats how the HB has been designed to work. he splits the defenders forms a three in the defensive to midfield transition, if you are camping or in the opponents half he pushes up since he is more aggressive than a typical DM. If you want a role that sticks like glue then this isn't it, plus you need to account for the defensive line too.  I have a double BPD set up in some of my tactics with a halfback sitting in front of them to get the split in defence and when they are in the opponents third my halfback is sitting just between them and the midfield group like a quarterback. 

Well, yes, but it's not like he ventures forward if we are camping them out, he bombs forward as soon as the ball passes the midfield line and becomes almost a DPL staying 20+ meters ahead of the two central defenders. In a few of my screenshots I've taken them almost just as we pass the halfway line. If we were to camp out their box, then I would be more inclined to agree with his positioning, but he does it even in counterattacks leaving my central defenders woefully unprotected in a 2v2 situation when we are facing 2 strikers.

This is not isolated to the HB role, I experience the same even with a defensive role like Anchorman, a role I would expect to really keep a close distance to the central defenders.

But when looking at how Fernandinho plays for City (when i the DM role), or Henderson for Liverpool before Fabinho. Isn't that the halfback role in essence? Splitting the central defenders in possession, and work as the main pivot, in addition to shielding the defenders to allow wingbacks/fullbacks to go forward without leaving the remaining defenders isolated? What other role would you call them? I'm talking real life here, and not necessarily reflected in FM. I would call them halfbacks and that is the role I'm trying to emulate here.

57 minutes ago, OLLMEISTER1 said:

Im going to throw a curve ball into the equation and it may sound ridiculous to some but could you not put him as the middle CD as stopper? So in essence back 5 with 3 CBS and the man in question as stopper CB to move forward and curtail any threat around the DM area? You want him to stay close to your CBs right? 

Not tried it so it may not work as i visualize it but in my mind it is exactly what you claim to want.  

Let me know if you try it & what the results are.

I think this would be the same as the Libero discussion, I think he would venture out of the DC strata at the wrong times, but I'm going to experiment (though it might be after Christmas....) and see how I get along.

[nugatti]

4 hours ago, Rashidi said:

Thats how the HB has been designed to work. he splits the defenders forms a three in the defensive to midfield transition, if you are camping or in the opponents half he pushes up since he is more aggressive than a typical DM. If you want a role that sticks like glue then this isn't it, plus you need to account for the defensive line too.  I have a double BPD set up in some of my tactics with a halfback sitting in front of them to get the split in defence and when they are in the opponents third my halfback is sitting just between them and the midfield group like a quarterback. 

Could you show/describe team instructions to go with these roles, please? 

Seems very solid and something I could change to for a tactic I'm working on

Edited December 13, 2019 by nugatti
Poor English