Ever don't play wide when favorite?

[kimjjj]

If you're the favorite. have the better team, and the opponent is playing defensively, is there ever any reason not to have attacking width on extremely wide? Thanks.

[Keyzer Soze]

This is a great question, that i often made myself....

When i think about it, my immediate response is yes... go wide, stretch that defence.

But, when i start thinking with the image of my tactic formation also in my head.... then things gets tricky.

I play with the 4123 wide DM formation. So, going extremely wide i'll have both my my wide forwards further away from the box, leaving my center forward more isolated. Do i want this?

Perhaps i do, to give more space from my running midfielders. But those my tactic have those? 

Because of that i very rarely change the default width, that by the way changes when you change the mentality, and instead give more width to my tactic by giving, for example, my wingback the instruction to stay wide, or changing my IF for a winger.

[kimjjj]

3 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

This is a great question, that i often made myself....

When i think about it, my immediate response is yes... go wide, stretch that defence.

But, when i start thinking with the image of my tactic formation also in my head.... then things gets tricky.

I play with the 4123 wide DM formation. So, going extremely wide i'll have both my my wide forwards further away from the box, leaving my center forward more isolated. Do i want this?

Perhaps i do, to give more space from my running midfielders. But those my tactic have those? 

Because of that i very rarely change the default width, that by the way changes when you change the mentality, and instead give more width to my tactic by giving, for example, my wingback the instruction to stay wide, or changing my IF for a winger.

It makes sense — to me at least — that we would need midfielders charging ahead to make use of the space our wider forwards create. If they were stationary, the width would just push the forwards away from goal, as you say. I play a 4-1-3-2 Narrow with two mezzalas, so I guess extremely wide is useful for me.

[NotSoSpecialOne]

I normally only play on Extremely Narrow or Fairly Narrow, irregardless of whether a team is setting out to park the bus or not. But that slightly more compact nature makes sense as it's typically paired with shorter passing at a minimum. Depending on formation/roles, it doesn't really stop you from utilising the full width of the pitch anyway.

If I were looking to play a more direct passing style though, I'd probably be opting for far more width.

[WelshMourinho]

On 08/09/2020 at 13:51, Keyzer Soze said:

This is a great question, that i often made myself....

When i think about it, my immediate response is yes... go wide, stretch that defence.

But, when i start thinking with the image of my tactic formation also in my head.... then things gets tricky.

I play with the 4123 wide DM formation. So, going extremely wide i'll have both my my wide forwards further away from the box, leaving my center forward more isolated. Do i want this?

Perhaps i do, to give more space from my running midfielders. But those my tactic have those? 

Because of that i very rarely change the default width, that by the way changes when you change the mentality, and instead give more width to my tactic by giving, for example, my wingback the instruction to stay wide, or changing my IF for a winger.

It's a bit of both though. While they might be a bit wider, more importantly it means your players will look to pass it to the wingers too. 

[Blah_1123]

This has really got me thinking about my tactic. I play a 4-3-3 DM wide with a inside forward (A) on the left, Winger (S) on the right and Pressing Forward (S) in the middle. Also use a wingback (S) and fullback (S) on the left and right respectively. My tactic works pretty well but I often struggle against weaker teams who just park the bus. Sometimes I try playing wider and sometimes it works. Now in thinking actually of getting my team to play narrower but tell my wingback and fullback to stay wide. Hopefully be able to overload an area of the box and my full/wingbacks will either have plenty of space to keep putting crosses in or will drag defenders out of the box to be closed down.

 

Anyone got experience on this kind of tactic? Does it work?

Edited September 15, 2020 by Blah_1123

[Novem9]

I have a questions for wide in FM. For example there are I play wide, but look for opposite defence.

Looks like my wing attacking players marking opposite defenders.

Left is IW, right is W both support, but they play pretty narrow despite TI

[NotSoSpecialOne]

They move centrally in the final third to present as a goal scoring option and will happen regardless of width setting. And judging by the position of the winger and the full back marking him, I assume the ball was out towards left prior to coming centrally?

[goku4]

On 15/09/2020 at 13:00, Blah_1123 said:

This has really got me thinking about my tactic. I play a 4-3-3 DM wide with a inside forward (A) on the left, Winger (S) on the right and Pressing Forward (S) in the middle. Also use a wingback (S) and fullback (S) on the left and right respectively. My tactic works pretty well but I often struggle against weaker teams who just park the bus. Sometimes I try playing wider and sometimes it works. Now in thinking actually of getting my team to play narrower but tell my wingback and fullback to stay wide. Hopefully be able to overload an area of the box and my full/wingbacks will either have plenty of space to keep putting crosses in or will drag defenders out of the box to be closed down.

 

Anyone got experience on this kind of tactic? Does it work?

From my experience, if you set up team width narrow, your team will often play more through the middle and will just ignore/avoid the flanks. This is also my issue. I would like my two IFs to stay centrally and make room for the overlapping fullbacks, however I can only get my players using these fullbacks when I set my width to fairly wide...

[AFCBeer]

I tend not to touch the width settings. It’s still not clear to me whether width affects player positioning, passing direction or both and how it works in conjunction with the “focus play” instruction. Instead I can usually generate the width I require from the combination of roles and duty.

One think I do swear by is the “stay wider” PI for midfielders. I usually play a 4-1-2-3 and my midfield can get a bit congested. By having the 2 CM’s wider, it opens up better passing lanes and I can more effectively get the ball more high up the pitch in the half spaces.