Good or bad?

[toon army 06]

Planning to use this tactic as an option next season, it could work?

[Justified]

Personally I think you'll be to exposed to the counter. In 4231, both MC's should be a sort of double pivot. The mezzala doesn't really fulfill that requirement. He'll roam, your winger will attack and your right back is making runs forward. Boom 1-0 to the AI. I don't think you need a wide thinking MC anyways, the winger and WB has the width. 

A SS should be complemented with a support role up top as you're asking him to be your primary striker. Both him and the AF will occupy the same space. 

The Ti's are actually not bad, but the player roles are the complete opposite.

[toon army 06]

Change mezzala to something like AP? AF to CF(S) or DLF(S).

[Justified]

Try and see what works. I wouldn't do a double playmaker in the centre though. Try and think of it logically. If you were a defender and both players in centre mid are playmakers, who do you pass?? 

[Incubus1989]

I'd probably go DLF(s) up to because a CF needs a lot of space. In the middle probably just a CM(s) and use PIs to get to play how you want/what suits the player. 

[toon army 06]

CM(S) the best option?

[wixxi]

CM-S with 'Hold Position' added would be my choice - helps him to stay with the other pivot while still retaining a progressive play style as opposed to just a CM-D. Of course pay attention to the players PPMs that you play there since it is quite a vanilla role so they will use their PPMs quite often.

Edited June 30, 2020 by wixxi

[toon army 06]

28 minutes ago, wixxi said:

CM-S with 'Hold Position' added would be my choice - helps him to stay with the other pivot while still retaining a progressive play style as opposed to just a CM-D

I'll try that, would playing my main striker as a DLF(s) still get him a lot of goals compared to a more direct role like AF?

 

I won the PL playing this basically for about 90% of games last season. My IF(A) was my top scorer, would IF(A) work in my 4231?

 

 

Edited June 30, 2020 by toon army 06

[toon army 06]

Just beat Napoli 4-2 playing this, would sometimes playing the Winger(A) on support & IF(S) on attack work?

Edited June 30, 2020 by toon army 06

[wixxi]

1 hour ago, toon army 06 said:

Just beat Napoli 4-2 playing this, would sometimes playing the Winger(A) on support & IF(S) on attack work?

Judging by the result it would seem so paired with the WB-S it should be fine, I would consider dropping it to a FB-S if I'm playing a big team since the 'Get further forward' PI built into  the WB-S could leave me exposed on the counter with the other fullback also getting forward.

May I ask what the thinking is behind offsetting the DLF to the right? I would imagine you would do this to encourage him to play to a side in order to overload it, but you have the playmaker on the opposite side.

[wixxi]

1 hour ago, toon army 06 said:

I'll try that, would playing my main striker as a DLF(s) still get him a lot of goals compared to a more direct role like AF?

 

I won the PL playing this basically for about 90% of games last season. My IF(A) was my top scorer, would IF(A) work in my 4231?

 

 

I think an IF-A can work perfectly well in a 4231, it just depends on how you want to play with possession and what you want him to do. I can't say for sure about the striker without knowing what his attributes are like - for example if you were to play a Jamie Vardy type player as a DLF rather than a AF I would say probably not since that style of player relies on attacking space behind opponents rather than linking up with teammates and holding up the ball. For me I prefer a Giroud type as a DLF - strong, technically capable, solid teamwork and still maintains a presence in the box.

The main difference in choosing between a F9 and a DLF for me is about whether I want them to be more creative or not, and if they can hold up the ball well (since DLF has the 'holds up ball' PI) - with someone like Giroud he's not as nimble or technical as say a Firmino, but he is very strong and has the necessary attributes to hold up the ball well.

I do think the IF-A and DLF pairing would work well though - since you have the striker dropping off rather than playing off the last man you need someone else to attack that space, and the IF-A serves to do just that.

[toon army 06]

3 hours ago, wixxi said:

Judging by the result it would seem so paired with the WB-S it should be fine, I would consider dropping it to a FB-S if I'm playing a big team since the 'Get further forward' PI built into  the WB-S could leave me exposed on the counter with the other fullback also getting forward.

May I ask what the thinking is behind offsetting the DLF to the right? I would imagine you would do this to encourage him to play to a side in order to overload it, but you have the playmaker on the opposite side.

 

3 hours ago, wixxi said:

Judging by the result it would seem so paired with the WB-S it should be fine, I would consider dropping it to a FB-S if I'm playing a big team since the 'Get further forward' PI built into  the WB-S could leave me exposed on the counter with the other fullback also getting forward.

May I ask what the thinking is behind offsetting the DLF to the right? I would imagine you would do this to encourage him to play to a side in order to overload it, but you have the playmaker on the opposite side.

Yea that was the thinking, something different to try & unsettle a defence & also I thought it would create more space for the SS. Does it make no difference really to the SS? 

 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2020 by toon army 06

[toon army 06]

3 hours ago, wixxi said:

I think an IF-A can work perfectly well in a 4231, it just depends on how you want to play with possession and what you want him to do. I can't say for sure about the striker without knowing what his attributes are like - for example if you were to play a Jamie Vardy type player as a DLF rather than a AF I would say probably not since that style of player relies on attacking space behind opponents rather than linking up with teammates and holding up the ball. For me I prefer a Giroud type as a DLF - strong, technically capable, solid teamwork and still maintains a presence in the box.

The main difference in choosing between a F9 and a DLF for me is about whether I want them to be more creative or not, and if they can hold up the ball well (since DLF has the 'holds up ball' PI) - with someone like Giroud he's not as nimble or technical as say a Firmino, but he is very strong and has the necessary attributes to hold up the ball well.

I do think the IF-A and DLF pairing would work well though - since you have the striker dropping off rather than playing off the last man you need someone else to attack that space, and the IF-A serves to do just that.

This is my main Striker, a well rounded player.  

[wixxi]

1 hour ago, toon army 06 said:

Yea that was the thinking, something different to try & unsettle a defence & also I thought it would create more space for the SS. Does it make no difference really to the SS?

Can't say whether it does affect the SS since I've never tried it but I would imagine he will be inclined to move into the space on the left so if that's what you're looking for it should be fine.

With that striker's incredible pace and dribbling ability combined with his solid vision I would definitely be inclined to play him as a F9 to allow him to pick up the ball and run at the defence as well as pick a pass. That should work pretty nicely with the SS and W-A both making runs ahead of him too.

Interesting to see a 5'6 player with 4 jumping reach but 16 heading!

[toon army 06]

59 minutes ago, wixxi said:

Can't say whether it does affect the SS since I've never tried it but I would imagine he will be inclined to move into the space on the left so if that's what you're looking for it should be fine.

With that striker's incredible pace and dribbling ability combined with his solid vision I would definitely be inclined to play him as a F9 to allow him to pick up the ball and run at the defence as well as pick a pass. That should work pretty nicely with the SS and W-A both making runs ahead of him too.

Interesting to see a 5'6 player with 4 jumping reach but 16 heading!

I'll try that

Yea I noticed that to when I signed him 

Though it can happen? I guess a player can be a poor jumper, but still head great if say running on to the ball rather than having to jump high?

Edited June 30, 2020 by toon army 06

[Justified]

The "issue" you have with playing your striker in an attacking role is that he has "comes deep" as a PPM. However sometimes in attacking mentalities and attacking roles it gets slightly bypassed however he won't be optimal. You have a couple of choices really, unlearn the trait and he'll be a better threat in attacking roles or you could go with a support role. He is actually quite a good False Nine which would complement you wanting to implement a SS.

Personally I'd go with the former, I had a similiar issue when I was in League One with Bath City and found a striker in Spain who was a great attacking player but he had "comes deep" PPM. Normally I'd look elsewhere but he was way too good for League One at the time to ignore so I signed him and got him to unlearn the trait and he was much much better afterwards, top of the scoring charts. He even did it for me in the Championship the following seasons too. You can see when you're watching matches that if you play a player in an attacking role with "come deep" that they hold their runs at times when they should be attacking which can be slightly annoying  

[toon army 06]

13 hours ago, Justified said:

The "issue" you have with playing your striker in an attacking role is that he has "comes deep" as a PPM. However sometimes in attacking mentalities and attacking roles it gets slightly bypassed however he won't be optimal. You have a couple of choices really, unlearn the trait and he'll be a better threat in attacking roles or you could go with a support role. He is actually quite a good False Nine which would complement you wanting to implement a SS.

Personally I'd go with the former, I had a similiar issue when I was in League One with Bath City and found a striker in Spain who was a great attacking player but he had "comes deep" PPM. Normally I'd look elsewhere but he was way too good for League One at the time to ignore so I signed him and got him to unlearn the trait and he was much much better afterwards, top of the scoring charts. He even did it for me in the Championship the following seasons too. You can see when you're watching matches that if you play a player in an attacking role with "come deep" that they hold their runs at times when they should be attacking which can be slightly annoying  

Yea I'll get him to unlearn it, I'll try him as a F9 but I still want the AF option as well.  Could DLF(s) with dribble more selected work also?

Coming deep might explain why he didn't score a lot last season in my 451 formation. My IF(A) on his right scores about 20 goals in the league, no doubt him dropping deep helped get the IF's numbers up.

Edited July 1, 2020 by toon army 06

[toon army 06]

This was my main tactic for 3 seasons, 2 with positive then last season on Attack. I won the PL last season, what do yous make of it?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2020 by toon army 06

[toon army 06]

On 30/06/2020 at 13:47, Justified said:

Personally I think you'll be to exposed to the counter. In 4231, both MC's should be a sort of double pivot. The mezzala doesn't really fulfill that requirement. He'll roam, your winger will attack and your right back is making runs forward. Boom 1-0 to the AI. I don't think you need a wide thinking MC anyways, the winger and WB has the width. 

A SS should be complemented with a support role up top as you're asking him to be your primary striker. Both him and the AF will occupy the same space. 

The Ti's are actually not bad, but the player roles are the complete opposite.

If I wanted an AF would the SS as an AP be a good combination, or which role would you suggest?

Also would the DLP set to Defend rather than support work?

Edited July 2, 2020 by toon army 06

[Justified]

2 hours ago, toon army 06 said:

If I wanted an AF would the SS as an AP be a good combination, or which role would you suggest?

Also would the DLP set to Defend rather than support work?

If going AF then yes a AP or a simple AM would work. Depends on your player.

I wouldn't personally have a DLP on defence just because I don't like playmakers on low mentalities if I'm looking for him to be a creative force.

[toon army 06]

11 minutes ago, Justified said:

If going AF then yes a AP or a simple AM would work. Depends on your player.

I wouldn't personally have a DLP on defence just because I don't like playmakers on low mentalities if I'm looking for him to be a creative force.

AP or AM on attack or just support? My thinking for DLP was because I don't have a player in the DM position. I selected take more risks, so he'd still try & be more creative.

 The DLF with the SS, is putting the DLF on attack a good idea or stick with support? 

Edited July 2, 2020 by toon army 06

[toon army 06]

What do yous think of this set up?

[toon army 06]

A tactic i'm trying in my Rangers save, played one game so far. This can work or a change of roles etc needed to make it work?

I'm unbeaten in 56 league games , playing the same 451 with the HB I posted above from my Newcastle save.

Unbeaten last season & know why change it, I'm looking for 3 tactics that can work. The 451 is proven to work, I'm also trying the 4231 posted above from my Newcastle a save.

I like the idea though of 1DM, 2 CM's 2 wingers & 2 Strikers, It's more having 2 Strikers & 2 wingers I want most. I guess 442 could work?