Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
KI Heynckes

Back-3 with ball, Back-4 without it. Can it work?

Recommended Posts

I tried to replicate the tactic that tactial-genius Julian Nagelsmann used in the league match against Frankfurt a few weeks ago using LB Halstenberg as a third CB when recycling possession but playing a normal 4 at the back after losing it,

Here I illustrated how it looked with a squad formation creator. First pic is with the ball the second against it.

IuvAOi6.pngMKpNG5K.png

 

So in my longterm save after leaving Fenerbahce after three years going to ManCity in 2028 I want to try replicate it. Obviously people always say the shape you see on the FM screen should be your defensive formation. So at first I just set up a basic 4-4-1-1 with the right striker (Schick) in the AM strata and trying to replicate the Halstenberg role with a simple FB-D. But even with all imaginable instructions to make him act more like a CB  (Stay narrow, fewer risks etc. etc.) he'd still run up the pitch like a true FB and it never looked like a real back-three with CBs. So I'm now at the point to say screw all these clever FM experts with their opinion on having to have the defensive shape on the screen and put on this: (can't add picture for some reason so will post in first reply)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So whatever I'll put it as an attachment.

The roles and instructions are kinda random at this point, just what I thought what fit the role the player had in the RBL system. But shouldn't be too bad in general. The big question is if this can work with 3 CB and then no defensive player on that side. I added instructions close down more and mark tighter so he's more aggressive towards the wing player coming down his side, not staying in the line as rigid as a CB would be. But can this work? No idea. The scheme with the ball looks like I'd want it, but in defense it could be hard.

pushedengrind.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 2 Minuten schrieb Hilly1979:

Of course it can work, it’s called the half back role......

lol that's a totally different concept than using one of the FBs as the third CB. Also the HB after years is still a mess and leaves spaces open for counter attacks where there shouldn't be any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Hilly1979 said:

Of course it can work, it’s called the half back role......

what?

 

The HB role is a mess and will not replicate what OP wants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question was back 3 with ball, back 4 without, can it work? I was purely saying yes it can, by using the half back role you can achieve that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hilly1979 said:

I’m purely giving a way how it can work that’s all

I get you're trying to help but please stop being so obtuse. 

 

He wants a full back and sit narrow to the CBs while the other full back attacks down the flank. So the full back is the third CB, not the Halfback. It couldn't be any simpler than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bluebird123 said:

I get you're trying to help but please stop being so obtuse. 

 

He wants a full back and sit narrow to the CBs while the other full back attacks down the flank. So the full back is the third CB, not the Halfback. It couldn't be any simpler than that.

Just trying to give a way of achieving what the title of the post was asking, sorry for trying to help

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hilly1979 said:

Just trying to give a way of achieving what the title of the post was asking, sorry for trying to help

 Yes your comment is correct (to an extent) but its not what the point of discussion is here. What is being discussed is how get a full back to act as a centre back as opposed to a holding midfielder. So yes your correct but then its not particularly relevant here. However your "advice" could be turned to something constructive.

However, @KI Heynckes, I might offer my two pennies worth if thats appreciated. Its a concept that interests me for sure as its increasingly seen in modern football. From my personal philosophy I like to have a more dynamic playmaker deep, which makes an out and out holding midfielder difficult to facilitate. So my idea would be an IWB-D, perhaps long term with PPMs to "stay back at all times" or something like that and definitely not with "gets forward whenever possible". In fact I might consider using a retrained centre back with technical capabilities or a good defensive holder with decent technicals (perhaps your man Florentino Luis could be an option depending on how hes developed) but especially not a marauding full back. I'd also be tempted to play the centre back on that side on a cover duty too to try and create essentially a regulation back three just slightly shunted to one side so that one of the outside centre backs is actually a full back.

I'm not sure if any of that made sense or not or would even work cause its highly plausible that the IWB would sit too far in midfield line as opposed to a centre back but theres only one way to find out...

Fingers crossed we work something out between us

Good luck

Edited by Experienced Defender
inappropriate word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go with this and just see how it fares:

DeZGMfq.png

PIs

FB-su/WB-su: Sit Narrower
CD-de (R): Stay Wider
TM-su: Hold Position

Variants:

CD-de/co (C)
IW-su/W-su (R)
IW-su/at (L)
WB-de/IWB-de
RPM/BWM-su

You could use the RPM and VOL a strata above as RPM/BBM, too. That would be risky though.

Edited by gonefading

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...