Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
ahmed.sg

Help with getting AMC to perform in a 4-2-3-1

Recommended Posts

Hello! I am playing with Spurs on FM 20 with a modified Control Possession 4-2-3-1. The changes I have made to the base template as you can see below are as follows:

  • Mentality changed to Positive from Balanced
  • Team shape is usually flexible not fluid
  • Ensure at least three defensive duties (as per Experienced Defender's helpful thread)
  • Overlaps on both flanks
  • Higher tempo instead of lower
  • Use offside trap
  • Played around with roles

In the screenshot I have one of the wingbacks on defend and both central midfielders on support but depending on personnel I sometimes have the wingback on support and one of the midfielders on defend.

I try to stick to the holder/runner double pivot (BWMsupport runner, DLP holder) but sometimes I play two holders (CM on defend/DLP on support). For the most part this tactic works well for me. It's not game breaking but I perform to the level I expect my team to (came fourth in the first season having not made any transfers for the first team, for example).

The one really annoying thing is I can't get my AMC, specifically Dele, to perform. I've tried him on AMC support, AMC attack, and Shadow Striker but I can't get him scoring. I have a feeling if I put him on Advanced Playmaker he might at least assist more but that's not what I am looking for from him and I also don't like using two playmakers.

I tried adding the individual instructions dribble more, move into channels, and get further forward, especially when I have him on AMC support, but it doesn't help much. He already has those as PPMs so not sure if that means no need to ask him as he will already do it or what?

My goal for him is to be a scoring/assisting hybrid. Any help is appreciated and feel free to critique the overall tactic as well.

Last season the AMR on support got 15 assists which I am happy with but the AML also disappointed, however I am chalking that down to me changing the role a lot because I wasn't sure what I wanted (cycled between IW support, IW attack and IF attack) so this season I am sticking with IF attack to see if Son actually scores enough goals before deciding there's a problem here too.

Screen Shot 2020-01-13 at 8.54.37 PM.png

Screen Shot 2020-01-13 at 9.08.03 PM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Ensure at least three defensive duties (as per Experienced Defender's helpful thread)

But not any (i.e. random) 3. Btw, my thread on 4231 was written for FM18.

 

6 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Team shape is usually flexible not fluid

Team shape does not exist in FM since FM19. There is just the "team fluidity" label, but you should not be obsessed with it, because it does not have the effect that the team shape once had. 

 

6 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Overlaps on both flanks

Not needed. You can create a natural overlap, which is less risky defensively, especially in a top-heavy formation like 4231. 

 

6 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Higher tempo instead of lower

Why not simply standard (default) tempo? Higher would make sense if you wanted to play counter-attacking football or some fast and gung-ho attacking style, but your other instructions are not suited to such style. 

 

6 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Played around with roles

But in a wrong way, I think. For example, a BWM in a 4231 is not the best idea from a defensive perspective, because of his overly aggressive manner of defending. And even more so when you play him on the side that is more attack-minded (as you did). 

Having 3 attack duties up front is okay in a 4231, but the roles should be picked and distributed in a more sensible manner. How about this:

DLFat

IFsu         AMat         Wat

Or maybe this:

DLFsu

IWsu          SS          Wat

However, if you go with a SS, you are likely going to need a bit more progressive setup in the central midfield (involving a role such as BBM or mezzala on support).

And remember: you don't need to have a lot of attack duties (either up front or overall) in order to be dangerous when attacking. 

6 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

The one really annoying thing is I can't get my AMC, specifically Dele, to perform. I've tried him on AMC support, AMC attack, and Shadow Striker but I can't get him scoring. I have a feeling if I put him on Advanced Playmaker he might at least assist more but that's not what I am looking for from him and I also don't like using two playmakers.

I tried adding the individual instructions dribble more, move into channels, and get further forward, especially when I have him on AMC support, but it doesn't help much. He already has those as PPMs so not sure if that means no need to ask him as he will already do it or what?

Tweaking a role or PIs of a single player is not going to help him to perform better if the tactic as a whole is not designed properly. So the problem is not Dele himself, but the tactic overall. 

Btw, your defending is needlessly too aggressive (even if you manage a top team like Spurs).

If you have any questions or want me to give you some examples of what a well-balanced 4231 tactic could look like for a team of Tottenham's quality and reputation, you are welcome :thup:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for getting back to me. I will answer some of your points to explain why I made the choices I did. I also have some more questions if that is okay.

17 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

But not any (i.e. random) 3. Btw, my thread on 4231 was written for FM18.

Yes I make sure it is always either a wingback or a central midfielder, unless I misunderstood your instructions in that thread. Have there been significant changes since FM18 that make some of the points in it not as valid?

19 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Team shape does not exist in FM since FM19. There is just the "team fluidity" label, but you should not be obsessed with it, because it does not have the effect that the team shape once had. 

Yes I was just listing the changes I made from the "default" control possession template, but I don't pay too much attention to it otherwise.

20 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Not needed. You can create a natural overlap, which is less risky defensively, especially in a top-heavy formation like 4231. 

How can I do that?

Also, currently my fullbacks are both performing very well, especially the left wingback who is getting decent assists. Do I risk seeing less of that by cancelling the overlaps?

21 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Why not simply standard (default) tempo? Higher would make sense if you wanted to play counter-attacking football or some fast and gung-ho attacking style, but your other instructions are not suited to such style. 

I *do* want to play fast and gung-ho attacking style *whilst also* maintaining possession. What other instructions do I have that contradict playing with a higher tempo? Is it the shorter passing?

23 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

But in a wrong way, I think. For example, a BWM in a 4231 is not the best idea from a defensive perspective, because of his overly aggressive manner of defending. And even more so when you play him on the side that is more attack-minded (as you did). 

What would you suggest instead? I also sometimes play with a CMd but in combination with a DLP (on either duty) I have found that it means the two midfielders both sit deep and no one carries the ball forward as much.

25 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Having 3 attack duties up front is okay in a 4231, but the roles should be picked and distributed in a more sensible manner.

I am not wedded at all to having three attack duties up front, it was just a way for me try to get some goals out of Dele. In fact my original idea had the AMC on AM support, it is only recently that I switched him to attack. Haven't seen much difference though.

27 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

How about this:

DLFat

IFsu         AMat         Wat

Or maybe this:

DLFsu

IWsu          SS          Wat

 

Out of curiosity why is the left side on support and the right side on attack? I am using Son and Lucas so it makes sense to me that Lucas is a Winger support (to assist) and Son is the IF attack (to score) but you think I should switch their roles? What would be the effect? Would Son still score as much from a supporting position for example?

Also, why switch the CF to DLF? Kane is a goal machine on CF for me, but that might just be because he is Harry Kane. Still, I am worried about changing the thing in my tactic that works the best. What is the desired effect of switching his role? Is is that he would bring Dele into play more often? Would that come at the expense of his own scoring?

Also, how do I pick between IF and IW? Especially if I have a player who can seemingly do both? What factors should go into that choice?

31 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

However, if you go with a SS, you are likely going to need a bit more progressive setup in the central midfield (involving a role such as BBM or mezzala on support).

What do you mean by "progressive"? And which role do I switch out for Mezzala or BBM? The BWM or the DLP? And how do I pick between BBM and Mezzala? I have Ndombele who can play both as well as DLP support, which is what I have him on now and he's assisting very well.

33 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Tweaking a role or PIs of a single player is not going to help him to perform better if the tactic as a whole is not designed properly. So the problem is not Dele himself, but the tactic overall. 

Got it. So other than the tactic being aggressive defensively and the issues with tempo, what exactly am I doing wrong that is specifically impacting Dele's performance? And why is it not really affecting any of the other players negatively?

35 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Btw, your defending is needlessly too aggressive (even if you manage a top team like Spurs).

How so? And how would you suggest fixing it?

35 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

If you have any questions or want me to give you some examples of what a well-balanced 4231 tactic could look like for a team of Tottenham's quality and reputation, you are welcome :thup:

Thank you so much. Yeah examples would be really great, I would very much appreciate it. And thanks so much for answering my thread in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Yes I make sure it is always either a wingback or a central midfielder, unless I misunderstood your instructions in that thread

The problem is not about who is on defend duty, but how it fits in with the rest of your setup. And this principle applies to any/every role and duty, not just defend. 

 

11 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Have there been significant changes since FM18 that make some of the points in it not as valid?

Basic principles remain the same. You still need to be careful about the 2 CMs, both in terms of their defensive reliability and role/duty assignment. The key difference is about the front 4: in FM18 I recommended against having more than 2 attack duties among them, whereas as of FM19 you can have 3. Of course, I'm referring - as always - to normal and balanced tactics, not exploit ones. 

 

12 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

How can I do that?

Natural overlap is when you assign roles and duties to both wide players on a given flank in such a way as to encourage the deep one (FB or WB) to overlap his more advanced partner (wide MF or wide FWD) without a need to use the Overlap team instruction. Here are the most common examples of natural overlaps in 4231 and 4123:

- FBat and IWsu/IFsu/APsu

- WBat and IWsu/IFsu/APsu (can be too risky in a 4231)

- WBsu and IWsu/IFsu/APsu

Even a combination of WB on support and IW/IF on attack can occasionally produce a natural overlap, but not as often. 

12 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

currently my fullbacks are both performing very well, especially the left wingback who is getting decent assists. Do I risk seeing less of that by cancelling the overlaps?

I cannot tell you whether removing the Overlap TI will negatively affect your LWB's attacking performance in terms of his assists, because I don't have a crystal ball. I just wanted to warn you about potential defensive risks, which in a 4231 are by default greater than in a more balanced formation (e.g. 4123 wide). Of course, if you haven't noticed any serious defensive issues caused specifically by your LWB's attacking movement and positioning, then you can keep the Overlap TI. Otherwise, you better be careful. 

 

12 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

I *do* want to play fast and gung-ho attacking style *whilst also* maintaining possession

Well, having both at the same time is a bit tricky. It's not impossible to play fast attacking football and dominate possession in terms of stats (a good example is Liverpool under Klopp), but the problem is that fast attacking football is not primarily about possession. It does not care about possession stats, even when it does dominate possession in purely statistical terms. And when teams that play fast attacking football have high possession numbers, it is more due to their aggressive style of defending (winning the ball back early and high up the pitch) or the opposition playing an "anti-possession" style than it has to do with using possession-friendly team instructions in attack. I hope you understand what I mean. 

Anyway, if you really do want to play a fast gung-ho style, then I would definitely recommend you switch from 4231 to 4123 (i.e. 4141dm wide). But keep in mind that such a style of football entails greater risk defense-wise and is generally more difficult to set up a good tactic. 

12 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

What would you suggest instead? I also sometimes play with a CMd but in combination with a DLP (on either duty) I have found that it means the two midfielders both sit deep and no one carries the ball forward as much

Between BWM (on any duty) and CM on defend duty, I would always pick the CMde when it comes specifically to the 4231 as a system. In other words, I would look to avoid the BWM as a role in a 4231 anyway (simply because his aggressive defending style can sometimes leave too big a gap between the midfield and defense).

A pair of CM on defend and DLP means you have both CMs in holding roles, which is good if you want to utilize the flanks by allowing both fullbacks to bomb forward more and support attacks more actively. However, for a top team like Spurs, such midfield setup might be a bit too conservative. So, depending on how other roles and duties are set up, you can go with some of these CM combos:

- DLPde / BBM

- DLPsu / BBM

- DLPde / CMsu

- DLPsu / CMsu

- DLPde / CAR

- DLPsu / CAR

- DLPde / MEZsu

- DLPsu / MEZsu (obvously the most risky/adventurous one)

If you don't want a PM role, then you can replace the DLP with CM on defend in each of the above combos. 

12 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Out of curiosity why is the left side on support and the right side on attack?

It's not about sides, but about roles. In your original setup, the winger (role) is on the right (AMR) and IF on the left (AML), so I assumed you had a  good and logical  reason why you put each of these two roles on their respective flanks. So the point is not about which duty is on which flank, but to which role it's assigned. And in this particular case, it makes more sense to have the winger on attack and IF (or IW) on support than the other way around - in relation to creating and exploiting space in attack. 

 

12 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

I am using Son and Lucas so it makes sense to me that Lucas is a Winger support (to assist) and Son is the IF attack (to score) but you think I should switch their roles?

It can make sense of course, but if you primarily want a winger on support to assist an IF on attack, then you should also set up the other roles/duties in a different manner. For example:

DLFsu

IFat        AMat/su       Wsu

Here you deliberately create space specifically for the IF in AML to make him the primary goal-scoring threat. Of course, it does not automatically guarantee that the IF on attack is going to be your primary goal-scorer, because it also depends on the type of player. I'll give you an example from my FM19 Newcastle save (4123). My front 3 setup (usually) looks like this:

TMsu

IFat                                     Wsu

So the basic idea is clear - I am looking to encourage assists primarily for the IF on the left to score. And when I play Muto (natural striker) in AML, then it does work exactly that way for the most part. However, when I play Kennedy in AML, it usually happens that he actually provides most assists, while my TM (Rondon) is the primary goal-scorer. But the most important thing is that the tactic overall works well. 

13 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Would Son still score as much from a supporting position for example?

As you could just have seen from my Newcastle example above, the support duty itself does not prevent a player from scoring goals. Just as the attack duty does not necessarily mean that a player is going to score a lot of them. 

 

13 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

why switch the CF to DLF? Kane is a goal machine on CF for me, but that might just be because he is Harry Kane. Still, I am worried about changing the thing in my tactic that works the best. What is the desired effect of switching his role? Is is that he would bring Dele into play more often? Would that come at the expense of his own scoring?

The problem is not the CF as a role in itself - and Kane absolutely can play as a CF, because he has all the necessary attributes (a real world-class striker). However, as a complete striker, Kane can also play any other role as effectively. So I did not change his role because it does not suit him as such, but because in this particular setup a DLF would make more sense and work better than a CF (from my overall experience). However, if Kane is your "goal machine" playing as a CF, then you should keep playing him in that role, nevertheless. 

 

13 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

how do I pick between IF and IW? Especially if I have a player who can seemingly do both? What factors should go into that choice?

There is not a big difference between these 2 roles, and most players that can play one can usually play the other. IF is slightly more attack-minded and straightforward in terms of attacking movement. IF is essentially a forward (albeit in a wide position), whereas IW is more of a wide attacking midfielder (more involved in the build-up than IF, but less focused on scoring goals). When it comes do deciding on which role to use, always pay attention to the overall tactical balance (do not consider any role in isolation from the rest). 

 

13 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

What do you mean by "progressive"? And which role do I switch out for Mezzala or BBM? The BWM or the DLP? And how do I pick between BBM and Mezzala? I have Ndombele who can play both as well as DLP support, which is what I have him on now and he's assisting very well

I said "a bit more progressive" central midfield. In this particular case - bearing the SS role in mind - it means that one of the CMs should be played in a role that offers more support in the attacking third (as opposed to having both holding CMs or generally  more conservative overall). Mezzala is obviously the more risky option than BBM, but it does not mean it cannot be employed, provided - once again - you set up other roles and duties in a proper way. 

As for the BWM, I already explained why I would look to avoid that particular role in a 4231 anyway. Therefore, possible CM combos would include:

- DLP / BBM

- DLP / MEZsu

- CMde / BBM

- CMde / MEZsu

In some cases you may even consider a CAR / MEZsu combo, but be wary of potential defensive risk. 

Ndombele can play any of the CM roles mentioned above (both holding and "more progressive"). He is a complete midfielder. 

13 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

Got it. So other than the tactic being aggressive defensively and the issues with tempo, what exactly am I doing wrong that is specifically impacting Dele's performance? And why is it not really affecting any of the other players negatively?

Now I have a question for you: does your tactic work well for you in terms of results and overall performance, with Dele being the only "problem"? Or the problem is both the tactic and Dele at the same time? 

 

13 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

How so? And how would you suggest fixing it?

If you are happy with your defensive record (goals and chances conceded), then forget what I said and do not change anything. 

 

13 hours ago, ahmed.sg said:

examples would be really great, I would very much appreciate it

Do you want examples based on a patient possession or progressive possession or a fast ("gung-ho") attacking style? Because each of these requires a different approach. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for such a detailed response, really appreciate it. I won't quote the parts of your post that I understood and have no further questions regarding, in the interest of not cluttering the thread with "got it" and "yes" etc. type responses.

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Natural overlap is when you assign roles and duties to both wide players on a given flank in such a way as to encourage the deep one (FB or WB) to overlap his more advanced partner (wide MF or wide FWD) without a need to use the Overlap team instruction. Here are the most common examples of natural overlaps in 4231 and 4123:

- FBat and IWsu/IFsu/APsu

- WBat and IWsu/IFsu/APsu (can be too risky in a 4231)

- WBsu and IWsu/IFsu/APsu

Even a combination of WB on support and IW/IF on attack can occasionally produce a natural overlap, but not as often. 

I cannot tell you whether removing the Overlap TI will negatively affect your LWB's attacking performance in terms of his assists, because I don't have a crystal ball. I just wanted to warn you about potential defensive risks, which in a 4231 are by default greater than in a more balanced formation (e.g. 4123 wide). Of course, if you haven't noticed any serious defensive issues caused specifically by your LWB's attacking movement and positioning, then you can keep the Overlap TI. Otherwise, you better be careful. 

The examples you give for natural overlaps don't include any true winger role but I am limited for now because both my main and backup right wingers (Lucas Moura and Jack Clarke) are out and out wide players, don't really have the option of playing them as play makers/inside forwards/inverted wingers.

On the left side I can potentially do it but like you said I have not noticed any defensive issues on my left flank (especially now in my second season in which I bought Chillwell) so while your theory is sound and you obviously understand this much better than I do, I am a bit of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" in these situations. If I notice defensive frailties as the season progresses I will look into removing the overlaps.

As a general point I don't mind some defensive weaknesses (I am not looking for the perfect tactic, will explain in detail lower down) so long as that weakness brings an attacking strength with it. But if I am sacrificing my defence for no reason then of course would like to fix.

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Well, having both at the same time is a bit tricky. It's not impossible to play fast attacking football and dominate possession in terms of stats (a good example is Liverpool under Klopp), but the problem is that fast attacking football is not primarily about possession. It does not care about possession stats, even when it does dominate possession in purely statistical terms. And when teams that play fast attacking football have high possession numbers, it is more due to their aggressive style of defending (winning the ball back early and high up the pitch) or the opposition playing an "anti-possession" style than it has to do with using possession-friendly team instructions in attack. I hope you understand what I mean. 

Ah I am less going for Klopp tbh and more for the Bielsa school and specifically Pochettino during his peak with Tottenham (so not the last 1-2 years) for my style. There are also other considerations like the board wanting all three of attacking football, entertaining football, and possession football. I lean more towards the aggressive defending/pressing over possession but they want both. Last season I focused too much on possession and they were delighted but only "satisfied" in the attacking category but after some changes this season they are now "pleased" with the attacking whilst still delighted with possession and entertainment.

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Anyway, if you really do want to play a fast gung-ho style, then I would definitely recommend you switch from 4231 to 4123 (i.e. 4141dm wide). But keep in mind that such a style of football entails greater risk defense-wise and is generally more difficult to set up a good tactic. 

I am very much wedded to playing 4-2-3-1. I have a 4-1-2-3 and a 5-2-2-1 (Wingbacks) as my second and third tactics but I rarely use the second one and never the third tbh. I have them on different mentalities (balanced and attacking) just so that my players gain familiarity in case I need to take things down or up a notch with the 4-2-3-1 mid game.

If I am really worried about getting thrashed sometimes I play the 4-1-2-3 with a halfback, DPL, and Mezala (rest of the team the same) but honestly a lot of the times also if I feel like there's no way I am winning a game I just go **** it and play my style anyway. It's stubborn and dumb I know but I can't help myself thinking well if we're getting destroyed we won't compromise our principles whilst going down.

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Between BWM (on any duty) and CM on defend duty, I would always pick the CMde when it comes specifically to the 4231 as a system. In other words, I would look to avoid the BWM as a role in a 4231 anyway (simply because his aggressive defending style can sometimes leave too big a gap between the midfield and defense).

Haha wish I knew that before buying Chaudry and alienating Dier. Problem is the upcoming midfielder in that slot is Skipp, also a BWM. So I am screwed now.

 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

A pair of CM on defend and DLP means you have both CMs in holding roles, which is good if you want to utilize the flanks by allowing both fullbacks to bomb forward more and support attacks more actively. However, for a top team like Spurs, such midfield setup might be a bit too conservative. So, depending on how other roles and duties are set up, you can go with some of these CM combos:

- DLPde / BBM

- DLPsu / BBM

- DLPde / CMsu

- DLPsu / CMsu

- DLPde / CAR

- DLPsu / CAR

- DLPde / MEZsu

- DLPsu / MEZsu (obvously the most risky/adventurous one)

If you don't want a PM role, then you can replace the DLP with CM on defend in each of the above combos. 

This opens up the very interesting possibility of starting my two favourite midfielders in the side Winks and Ndombele, I was thinking of them both as DLP support and thus one as backup for the other/can't play them both but if I switch Ndombele to BBM or MEZ I can. Especially as Winks unlike Ndombele can also play DLP defend not just support. I have read the role descriptions carefully but must admit that especially with the midfield ones I am a bit lost. I am not sure what a MEZ actually does, no idea what a CAR does, and am confused about BWM which I think of as defensive but seems is actually closer to a BBM. Also, what do you think about BWM in defend duty, I feel like that specific role/duty combo never gets brought up, why?

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

It's not about sides, but about roles. In your original setup, the winger (role) is on the right (AMR) and IF on the left (AML), so I assumed you had a  good and logical  reason why you put each of these two roles on their respective flanks. So the point is not about which duty is on which flank, but to which role it's assigned. And in this particular case, it makes more sense to have the winger on attack and IF (or IW) on support than the other way around - in relation to creating and exploiting space in attack. 

 

It can make sense of course, but if you primarily want a winger on support to assist an IF on attack, then you should also set up the other roles/duties in a different manner. For example:

DLFsu

IFat        AMat/su       Wsu

Here you deliberately create space specifically for the IF in AML to make him the primary goal-scoring threat. Of course, it does not automatically guarantee that the IF on attack is going to be your primary goal-scorer, because it also depends on the type of player. I'll give you an example from my FM19 Newcastle save (4123). My front 3 setup (usually) looks like this:

TMsu

IFat                                     Wsu

So the basic idea is clear - I am looking to encourage assists primarily for the IF on the left to score. And when I play Muto (natural striker) in AML, then it does work exactly that way for the most part. However, when I play Kennedy in AML, it usually happens that he actually provides most assists, while my TM (Rondon) is the primary goal-scorer. But the most important thing is that the tactic overall works well. 

As you could just have seen from my Newcastle example above, the support duty itself does not prevent a player from scoring goals. Just as the attack duty does not necessarily mean that a player is going to score a lot of them. 

So when it comes to the wingers I am flexible on what I want. I am good with option 1 of Son as my secondary goalscoring threat and Moura as one of the main sources of assists, but I am also happy with option 2 which is they both perform more mixed roles with Son scoring a bit less but assisting a bit more and Lucas assisting less to score more. I don't mind as long as they're contributing positively basically, though I have a very slight bias towards option 1. I don't want either to be the primary goal scoring threat, however. That has to remain Kane. I need him to break all Spurs records.

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

The problem is not the CF as a role in itself - and Kane absolutely can play as a CF, because he has all the necessary attributes (a real world-class striker). However, as a complete striker, Kane can also play any other role as effectively. So I did not change his role because it does not suit him as such, but because in this particular setup a DLF would make more sense and work better than a CF (from my overall experience). However, if Kane is your "goal machine" playing as a CF, then you should keep playing him in that role, nevertheless.

So from what I understand the alongside creativity to do whatever they want, a CF also has most of the individual instructions for both the advanced and deep forward role. If I make Kane into a DLF, would I see a drop in scoring at the expense of him trying to assist/hold up the ball/bring others into play? Also what about keeping him as CF but switching the duty to support from attack, would that help Dele? And would it affect Kane's scoring? He's on 15 in 16 this season. Scored 38 in 44 last season.

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

There is not a big difference between these 2 roles, and most players that can play one can usually play the other. IF is slightly more attack-minded and straightforward in terms of attacking movement. IF is essentially a forward (albeit in a wide position), whereas IW is more of a wide attacking midfielder (more involved in the build-up than IF, but less focused on scoring goals). When it comes do deciding on which role to use, always pay attention to the overall tactical balance (do not consider any role in isolation from the rest). 

I think I will stick to IF for Son because that's how he plays in real life. Behind him is a wingback support in the FB slot and on the opposite flank a winger on support. The right back switches between defend and support wingback depending on what duty I give one of my central midfielders, though having played a few games with a wingback defend now I actually like how the players (Aarons who I just bought and KWP who was my main man last season) perform in it. They are much better defensively but contribute much more to the attack than I thought they would. Might make this permanent and keep the two midfielders on support.

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

I said "a bit more progressive" central midfield. In this particular case - bearing the SS role in mind - it means that one of the CMs should be played in a role that offers more support in the attacking third (as opposed to having both holding CMs or generally  more conservative overall). Mezzala is obviously the more risky option than BBM, but it does not mean it cannot be employed, provided - once again - you set up other roles and duties in a proper way. 

As for the BWM, I already explained why I would look to avoid that particular role in a 4231 anyway. Therefore, possible CM combos would include:

- DLP / BBM

- DLP / MEZsu

- CMde / BBM

- CMde / MEZsu

In some cases you may even consider a CAR / MEZsu combo, but be wary of potential defensive risk. 

Ndombele can play any of the CM roles mentioned above (both holding and "more progressive"). He is a complete midfielder. 

The last bit is exactly my dilemma. Because he (Ndombele) can do a bit of everything I don't know what to do with him; what his best role would be. If I go with sentiment I would start him and Winks, but Winks would have to be the DLP as he's not much of anything else, however I currently have Ndombele on DLP support but he's actually moving the ball forward, dribbling and assisting, I suspect because of his PPMs, and I am worried about losing that. Honestly as I have already admitted, I am not sure what the MEZ does even after reading role guides on the forum and the game's description. Box to box feels like I would be wasting his talents but maybe I am wrong.

If I am going to go back to using a CMde then Dier reclaims his starting role.

 

These are my midfielders:

Ndombele (can do MEZ support, BBM, and DLP support)

Winks (can do DLP defend and DLP support)

Dier (can do CM defend, BWM defend, and BWM support)

Choudhry (can do BWM support, BWM defend, BBM)

Skipp (can do BWM support and BWM defend, maybe not too late to train him as BBM)

Lo Celso (mostly plays further up but can be a central mid if I need, can do DLP support and AP support)

What combo would you recommend?

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Now I have a question for you: does your tactic work well for you in terms of results and overall performance, with Dele being the only "problem"? Or the problem is both the tactic and Dele at the same time? 

 

If you are happy with your defensive record (goals and chances conceded), then forget what I said and do not change anything. 

My tactic works well for me in terms of results and overall performance but there are some small issues I want to iron out. However the main problem is for sure Dele. He can't even score a rating of over 6.5 anymore. And when I start Lo Celso instead he performs much better. So it's mainly him. Ideally what I want is:

  • Left wingback and right winger providing my team's width and assists.
  • Harry Kane as the point man and main goal threat.
  • Son as secondary source of goals.
  • One midfielder who moves the ball up the pitch, a ball carrier
  • One midfielder who shields my defence and allows everyone else to be more creative, but also he has help regain the ball quickly when we lose it
  • Dele as a hybrid scorer/assist maker or at least terrorising defences with slick moves. Right now he is the main problem and adds NOTHING to the team.

Obviously I can just drop him, but I really don't want to.

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Do you want examples based on a patient possession or progressive possession or a fast ("gung-ho") attacking style? Because each of these requires a different approach. 

Not patient possession but undecided between progressive possession or fast attacking. What exactly do you mean by progressive possession? I am assuming patient possession is lots of keeping the ball above all else tikki-taka style and fast attacking is more like Geggenpress/Klop style? I could be wrong. 

Once again thank you so much I really appreciate your time and thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

The examples you give for natural overlaps don't include any true winger role

Because the winger (role) is not instructed to cut or otherwise move inside to make space for the overlapping FB/WB. Wingers are more suitable for natural underlaps. There are exceptions based on player traits and preferred foot, but let's not complicate too much for now. 

 

14 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

I am limited for now because both my main and backup right wingers (Lucas Moura and Jack Clarke) are out and out wide players, don't really have the option of playing them as play makers/inside forwards/inverted wingers

First, you don't have/need to create a natural (or any kind of) overlap on both flanks at the same time (after all, in a 4231 it could prove a bit too risky btw).

As for Moura, as far as I know, he can play in both AMR and AML positions, so you can sometimes use him as an IW/IF on the left. I don't know about that other guy though. Plus. nothing prevents you from playing a right-footed player (e.g. Moura) as an IW or IF on the right flank, as long as it fits well into your overall tactic and you have a clear idea of what you want to achieve tactically. 

21 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

Haha wish I knew that before buying Chaudry and alienating Dier. Problem is the upcoming midfielder in that slot is Skipp, also a BWM. So I am screwed now

Players can play different roles. If a player has proper attributes for the BWM role, then he undoubtedly can play as a CM on defend duty as well. And probably/possibly also some other midfield role (carrilero for example). 

 

26 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

Especially as Winks unlike Ndombele can also play DLP defend not just support

Based on what exactly do you claim that Ndombele cannot play as a DLP on defend? His attributes or the "role suitability" circle? 

 

28 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

what do you think about BWM in defend duty, I feel like that specific role/duty combo never gets brought up, why?

As I said, I don't like to use a BWM on any duty in a top-heavy system without a DM (such as 4231 or 424). But when I play in a 4123 system (or any system with a DM), then a BWM on support in a CM position absolutely can be an option. Of course, you don't necessarily have to follow my suggestions. If you want to use a BWM in 4231, then do it. You have a good team, so it may not turn out to be too much of a risk defensively. 

 

35 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

If I make Kane into a DLF, would I see a drop in scoring at the expense of him trying to assist/hold up the ball/bring others into play?

How am I (or anyone) supposed to know that for sure in advance. If you fear it would damage his performance, then do not change his role and keep him as the CF. Simple. 

 

38 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

what about keeping him as CF but switching the duty to support from attack, would that help Dele? And would it affect Kane's scoring?

I personally would rather play him on support duty in case I played him in a CF role (which I probably wouldn't, but never mind). But as I already said above, I really can't tell for sure whether or how exactly that would possibly affect his goal-scoring record or Dele's performance. Because I only care about having a good tactic as a whole, not how many goals/assists this or that player will have or how good or bad nominal rating (which btw can be misleading information). 

 

45 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

The last bit is exactly my dilemma. Because he (Ndombele) can do a bit of everything I don't know what to do with him; what his best role would be

There is no "best" (or "worst") role. The fact that he is so versatile is great, because that allows you to play him in different roles depending on what you need in a given situation. He's the type of player I would always look to have in any team I manage. 

 

50 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

These are my midfielders:

Ndombele (can do MEZ support, BBM, and DLP support)

Winks (can do DLP defend and DLP support)

Dier (can do CM defend, BWM defend, and BWM support)

Choudhry (can do BWM support, BWM defend, BBM)

Skipp (can do BWM support and BWM defend, maybe not too late to train him as BBM)

Lo Celso (mostly plays further up but can be a central mid if I need, can do DLP support and AP support)

What combo would you recommend?

Any one that is well-balanced and fits well in with the rest of the tactic (taking into account the inherent defensive weaknesses of the 4231 as a system). Btw, with this number of good DMs and CMs, I would definitely always play in a 4123 as opposed to 4231, because it gives a lot more options. But okay :onmehead:

 

53 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

My tactic works well for me in terms of results and overall performance but there are some small issues I want to iron out

As long as it works well and you are either meeting or exceeding expectations, do not change it. Because changing a successful tactic only for the sake of an individual player is never a good idea IMO. 

 

56 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

Not patient possession but undecided between progressive possession or fast attacking. What exactly do you mean by progressive possession?

It is a possession-based style, but not focused on keeping possession for the sake of possession. Instead, possession is utilized pragmatically and players are generally allowed to be a bit more adventurous in terms of both movement and creative freedom. I personally think such style would ideally suit a team like Spurs. 

 

59 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

I am assuming patient possession is lots of keeping the ball above all else tikki-taka style and fast attacking is more like Geggenpress/Klop style?

Yes :thup: (although a fast attacking style is not necessarily associated with gegenpress, and even Klopp - thankfully! - does not play gegenpress anymore with Liverpool).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I currently use a BWM-D and BBM-S as my midfield combo in a 4-2-3-1

I use the BWM-D on the side of the formation with an IF-A. Because the IF-A doesn't track back defensively to often.

I also think it is an underrated role for the because it DOES have the PPM HOLD Position.

I use a BBM-S to move into channels (so he doesn't roam wide and get in my Winger-S's way) and train either  Gets forward or Arrives late in the Box

 

The AP-S that I use in AMC position has ppm Tries killer balls and tries long passes. I also notice he tracks back quite far to make himself available. (I don't know if this is due to High Teamwork and Workrate)

I get about 10-15 assists a season from him as well as 8-10 goals. In my system the Winger-S seems to be the star playmaker but that maybe because he is the Corner and Freekick taker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again for responding to me. Again, non-quoted parts are ones I understood and have no follow up questions about but I did read them.

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Based on what exactly do you claim that Ndombele cannot play as a DLP on defend? His attributes or the "role suitability" circle? 

Mostly attributes as his tackling and marking aren't amazing, as well as a third factor which is even if he *could* play it he would be underused as he can do other things *better* though.

I understand however that I should not put too much stock in this role suitability circle and that it is not a very good marker of things. Kane for example has only a half circle for Complete Forward but can of course actually do it very well. And Ndombele I reckon would have a full circle for BBM if it weren't for his bad finishing and long shots, but if I just individually instruct him to shoot less often then he would play as a BBM perfectly.

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

As I said, I don't like to use a BWM on any duty in a top-heavy system without a DM (such as 4231 or 424). But when I play in a 4123 system (or any system with a DM), then a BWM on support in a CM position absolutely can be an option. Of course, you don't necessarily have to follow my suggestions. If you want to use a BWM in 4231, then do it. You have a good team, so it may not turn out to be too much of a risk defensively. 

What is the closest central midfield role to a defensive midfielder? Player who protects the backline when we don't have the ball as his main priority and wins it back when we lose it as the secondary priority?

Follow-up question: is BWM a defensive position but the issue is that it's too aggressive for a two-man midfield/top heavy formation or is it not a defensive position at all?

My understanding of central midfielders (in real life, not sure how well that translates into FM) is there are two scales: runner vs holder and defensive vs creator, and that a team needs to have all four, but obviously a player can do more than one, so you can have two midfielders or three.

If using two midfielders you can have a defensive runner and a holding creator OR a creative runner and a holding defensive player. If for example I play a CM on defend and a DPL on support I have a defensive holder and a creative holder, but no runners, therefore no one to actually move the ball up. Is this accurate or flawed? And how can I translate it in FM terms?

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

I personally would rather play him on support duty in case I played him in a CF role (which I probably wouldn't, but never mind). But as I already said above, I really can't tell for sure whether or how exactly that would possibly affect his goal-scoring record or Dele's performance. Because I only care about having a good tactic as a whole, not how many goals/assists this or that player will have or how good or bad nominal rating (which btw can be misleading information). 

I care about having an overall good tactic but its not my number 1 priority. Both playing like Pochettino and using certain players (of which Dele is one) and getting them to perform are more important to me even if it means some tactical flaws (as long as it's not leading to us performing terribly and is not something super tactically unrealistic). Hence for me even though a formation change would solve several issues it is not something I am willing to do.

I am however hoping to eventually get to a point where I change formation in the space of one match several times to adapt to my opponent's tactics and changes (but still *starting* with a 4-2-3-1) but I recognise that my abilities and understanding are not yet at a level that allows for this.

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

There is no "best" (or "worst") role. The fact that he is so versatile is great, because that allows you to play him in different roles depending on what you need in a given situation. He's the type of player I would always look to have in any team I manage. 

Fair enough. Can you list some situations and the corresponding best roles to deal with them? When would you elect to use a MEZ over other roles? When is a BBM more effective? a DPL?

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Btw, with this number of good DMs and CMs, I would definitely always play in a 4123 as opposed to 4231, because it gives a lot more options. But okay :onmehead:

Spurs are really good in the game to a point that if I just use the most balanced effective 4-1-2-3 for example I would win everything and get bored, and it would not be due to my own skills either. This is why I impose other rules on myself (including non-tactical ones that are not mentioned in the thread) because I can also just never get myself to play as another team.

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

As long as it works well and you are either meeting or exceeding expectations, do not change it. Because changing a successful tactic only for the sake of an individual player is never a good idea IMO. 

I don't want to make wholesale changes to my tactic but I was hoping to find maybe changes to Dele's role/instructions or maybe some changes to one or two players around him that would get him to contribute more.

I am now considering using him as an AP on support (the only realistic -so not counting roles that don't make sense in the context of my overall tactic- role I didn't try him in) purely on a trial and error basis but I am worried about using two playmakers. What are the downsides to having two playmakers (deep and advanced) in the same side?

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

It is a possession-based style, but not focused on keeping possession for the sake of possession. Instead, possession is utilized pragmatically and players are generally allowed to be a bit more adventurous in terms of both movement and creative freedom. I personally think such style would ideally suit a team like Spurs. 

Perfect, how would you set up tactically in a way that uses that style?

And out of personal interest how would you characterise Pochettino's playing style?

19 hours ago, Hootieleece said:

I currently use a BWM-D and BBM-S as my midfield combo in a 4-2-3-1

I use the BWM-D on the side of the formation with an IF-A. Because the IF-A doesn't track back defensively to often.

I also think it is an underrated role for the because it DOES have the PPM HOLD Position.

I use a BBM-S to move into channels (so he doesn't roam wide and get in my Winger-S's way) and train either  Gets forward or Arrives late in the Box

 

The AP-S that I use in AMC position has ppm Tries killer balls and tries long passes. I also notice he tracks back quite far to make himself available. (I don't know if this is due to High Teamwork and Workrate)

I get about 10-15 assists a season from him as well as 8-10 goals. In my system the Winger-S seems to be the star playmaker but that maybe because he is the Corner and Freekick taker.

Thanks for responding Hootieleece.

As mentioned above might give AP a try. I always thought an AP on support would be a bit static/hesitant to join attacks because the role description says he will "stay in the hole" but maybe this is not very accurate if you're getting decent goals from yours? Dele has go further forward, dribble more, and move into channels so maybe this will counteract some of the role's stationary-ness?

I am also interested in BWM defend and how it differs from a CM on defend as well as how it differs from BWM on support.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

What is the closest central midfield role to a defensive midfielder? Player who protects the backline when we don't have the ball as his main priority and wins it back when we lose it as the secondary priority?

CM on defend duty is closest to what you described. DLP on defend can also do the job if the player has good defensive attributes. 

 

53 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

ollow-up question: is BWM a defensive position but the issue is that it's too aggressive for a two-man midfield/top heavy formation or is it not a defensive position at all?

Too aggressive for a 2-man midfield/top-heavy formation. Exactly that. 

 

55 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

If using two midfielders you can have a defensive runner and a holding creator OR a creative runner and a holding defensive player

What exactly do you mean by the "defensive runner"? 

 

57 minutes ago, ahmed.sg said:

If for example I play a CM on defend and a DPL on support I have a defensive holder and a creative holder, but no runners

Yes :thup: Which can be a good idea in a 4231 if you want to play both fullbacks in a bit more attack-minded roles (I said attack-minded roles, not duties, because WB on support is an attack-minded role even if not on attack duty). 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

therefore no one to actually move the ball up. Is this accurate or flawed?

How do you mean to "move the ball up"? By passing or running/dribbling with the ball? 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

Can you list some situations and the corresponding best roles to deal with them? When would you elect to use a MEZ over other roles? When is a BBM more effective? a DPL?

As I said, Ndombele can play all these midfield roles. So in whichever role I played him in a particular match, I would be careful how I select other roles and duties in order to keep good balance both in the attacking and defensive sense. But this principle applies to any other player/position/role/duty. I can give you examples with different midfield roles if you want, so that you can compare and understand the differences. 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

What are the downsides to having two playmakers (deep and advanced) in the same side?

I am generally opposed to using 2 (or more) PMs too close to each other, but there are a couple of exceptions. However, none of these exceptions include 2 PMs in CM and AMC positions. So if I have a DLP in central midfield, I would not use an AP in AMC. But I may use an AP in AMR or AML. The only combination of 2 PMs in CM and AMC positions I would use is DLP and trequartista. 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

how would you set up tactically in a way that uses that style?

I assume you are asking about a progressive possession style in a 4231. If so, this is one possible example (but there are others, of course):

F9

IWsu            SS            Wat

DLPsu   MEZsu

FBat   CDde  BPDde  IWBde

SKsu

Instructions for progressive possession football basically come down to this:

Positive mentality

- shorter passing, play out of defence, be more expressive, work ball into box and standard or slightly higher tempo

- start with no instructions in transition (you can occasionally add the Counter, sometimes you can also use the counter-press, depending on the situation)

- higher DL, standard LOE, offside trap (and split block via player instructions - front 4 to close down more) 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

out of personal interest how would you characterise Pochettino's playing style?

Progressive possession for the most part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for the late response got tied up with work stuff.

On 15/01/2020 at 21:38, Experienced Defender said:

Too aggressive for a 2-man midfield/top-heavy formation. Exactly that. 

And what are your thoughts about it in defend duty when he is told to hold his position? Just generally not only in a 4-2-3-1 I mean.

On 15/01/2020 at 21:38, Experienced Defender said:

What exactly do you mean by the "defensive runner"? 

I player who mainly performs a defensive function but isn't holding his position, so a BWM or a BBM that's told to focus more on defending.

On 15/01/2020 at 21:38, Experienced Defender said:

How do you mean to "move the ball up"? By passing or running/dribbling with the ball? 

Running and dribbling.

On 15/01/2020 at 21:38, Experienced Defender said:

As I said, Ndombele can play all these midfield roles. So in whichever role I played him in a particular match, I would be careful how I select other roles and duties in order to keep good balance both in the attacking and defensive sense. But this principle applies to any other player/position/role/duty. I can give you examples with different midfield roles if you want, so that you can compare and understand the differences. 

 Yes please on the examples.

Also, you're suggesting I choose a role for Ndombele's partner based on Ndombele's role, but surely it should be the other way round if Ndombele is the constant? What I mean is he is guaranteed to start both for being the best midfielder but also being the most versatile role-wise, so actually its *his* role that depends on what his partner is doing since he can do anything but his partner usually can do only one thing or two at best?

On 15/01/2020 at 21:38, Experienced Defender said:

I am generally opposed to using 2 (or more) PMs too close to each other, but there are a couple of exceptions. However, none of these exceptions include 2 PMs in CM and AMC positions. So if I have a DLP in central midfield, I would not use an AP in AMC. But I may use an AP in AMR or AML. The only combination of 2 PMs in CM and AMC positions I would use is DLP and trequartista. 

What happens when you use two PMs close to each other? I know the game has a hidden instruction to focus play through the playmaker if you have one, but I am not sure what happens if you have two or more. My instinct is to avoid it but I have seen pre-set tactics created by the game itself that employ it, for example the tiki-taka 4-1-2-3 has a DLP, RPM and AP all very much close to each other so I assume it doesn't break the game somehow?

On 15/01/2020 at 21:38, Experienced Defender said:

I assume you are asking about a progressive possession style in a 4231. If so, this is one possible example (but there are others, of course):

F9

IWsu            SS            Wat

DLPsu   MEZsu

FBat   CDde  BPDde  IWBde

SKsu

Instructions for progressive possession football basically come down to this:

Positive mentality

- shorter passing, play out of defence, be more expressive, work ball into box and standard or slightly higher tempo

- start with no instructions in transition (you can occasionally add the Counter, sometimes you can also use the counter-press, depending on the situation)

- higher DL, standard LOE, offside trap (and split block via player instructions - front 4 to close down more) 

Progressive possession for the most part. 

Thank you for this, it's really helpful. I am not going to use it 100% as is but it gives me an idea of a base to build on and tinker with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

nd what are your thoughts about it in defend duty when he is told to hold his position? Just generally not only in a 4-2-3-1 I mean

Okay, I already said I wouldn't use a BWM on any duty in a 4231. In a 4123, I would only use him in a CM position and on support duty. The only system where I might consider a BWM on defend duty is a 442 or 4411. 

But again, that's just my personal preference. 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

I player who mainly performs a defensive function but isn't holding his position, so a BWM or a BBM that's told to focus more on defending

How exactly do you tell a BBM to "focus more on defending"? 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

Running and dribbling

This was about a CM combo of 2 holders (CM on defend and DLP). Well, you can instruct either of them to dribble more (or even both) if that's what you want. 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

Yes please on the examples

Example 1 - with a mezzala:

DLFat/su

IWsu          AMat           Wat

DLPsu  MEZsu

FBat    CDde  BPDDe   IWBde

Example 2 - with a BBM:

DLFsu

IWsu          SS             Wat

DLPsu  BBM

FBat    CDde  BPDde  FBsu

Example 3 - with a carrilero:

DLFat

IFsu         AMsu       IWat

DLPsu  CAR

FBat   CDde  BPDde  WBsu

NOTE: These were just examples, so that you can understand the difference between setups using different roles in a particular position. I don't say that you should use any of them for your team or style of play. 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

Also, you're suggesting I choose a role for Ndombele's partner based on Ndombele's role, but surely it should be the other way round if Ndombele is the constant? What I mean is he is guaranteed to start both for being the best midfielder but also being the most versatile role-wise, so actually its *his* role that depends on what his partner is doing since he can do anything but his partner usually can do only one thing or two at best?

Okay. You should select a role for any player based not only on his immediate partner, but taking all other roles and duties into account, especially those behind, in front and next to him. 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

What happens when you use two PMs close to each other?

Depends on how close, in which particular positions and which 2 PM roles. 

 

1 hour ago, ahmed.sg said:

My instinct is to avoid it but I have seen pre-set tactics created by the game itself that employ it, for example the tiki-taka 4-1-2-3 has a DLP, RPM and AP

That's why I never use preset tactics, and particularly not any tiki-taka kind of stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I've always found, in the Amc position, a APa with the pi 'hold up ball' and 'get further forward' works.

Well,it has at Liverpool, Bolton and Inter Miami 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, I recently underwent surgery and was unable to respond. Will post more questions later but for now just wanted to express my thanks to @Experienced Defender and everyone else who has helped in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/01/2020 at 23:20, Experienced Defender said:

..snip

Hello, can you explain i.e. with 4231 deep i have issues with 2 dms half-back(ben godfrey,  franck kessie)  and segundo volante  support(Pogba, Romario baro) and trequasista (Olmo) i just cant keep possession for some reason 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cpt_Bl4ck_B34rD said:

Hello, can you explain i.e. with 4231 deep i have issues with 2 dms half-back(ben godfrey,  franck kessie)  and segundo volante  support(Pogba, Romario baro) and trequasista (Olmo) i just cant keep possession for some reason 

You need to start a separate thread and post a screenshot of your tactic there. I'll then come to analyze the tactic and give you suggestions :thup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...