4-6-0
- Thread starter Stann
- Start date
- Replies 17
- Views 6K
Jack Fulham
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2008
- Messages
- 6,850
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Its sort of thing Moyes loves to do ^_^ 4-6-0 was his wet dream last season with Cahill as Attacking mid
haha not really always at least 1 up top
Never heard of player mentality > inside foward?
Stann
please stay StevieP! <3
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,921
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
lol sounds like a disaster to me
I am going to use it when managing my reserves. I will post my result.
View attachment 16543
View attachment 16544
View attachment 16543
View attachment 16544
Last edited:
zamir_beck
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2009
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
i thumped real madrid 4-0 in group stages.thanx.
---------- Post added at 02:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:48 PM ----------
as roma use to play wid dis formation under spalleti.
---------- Post added at 02:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:48 PM ----------
as roma use to play wid dis formation under spalleti.
The idea of the formation is counter-rational in a way; 4-6-0 actually allows you to have three (or four) highly co-operative attacking players, because their starting positions are closer together - which in turn allows greater interchangeability. Wide midfielders can trade inside with the attacking midfielders easily, which makes man marking difficult and forces the opposition (in theory) to go zonal - which, when you have players with excellent movement, is a nightmare for defenders. It's kind of a dynamic system that goes from a de facto 4-4-2 to a de facto 4-3-3 (or 4-2-4) very rapidly, with the former on defence and the latter on attack. "Very fluid" is a requirement in FM, I think, to pull it off, so you need players with high positioning (defence) and high off the ball (attack) skills, preferably with good decisions as well.
Roma are widely held to have began the modern use of the system, but it began, naturally, in Brazil some years ago. Manchester United used it to great effect with Ronney-Ronaldo-Tevez a couple seasons ago.
Oh, and I use it a lot in my current game as Valladolid - usually against sides which my coaching staff point out do well against teams which play 4-4-2. Usually it means they play a man marking system (note: by this I mean that they play zonal, but appear to be choosing "stay tight" in their opposition tactics), so tearing them apart with a very fluid system like 4-6-0 is the way to go.
One final note... I strongly suggest you never, ever play this system against an extremely hard-working side on the defence. IE, Inter. They will destroy you.
Roma are widely held to have began the modern use of the system, but it began, naturally, in Brazil some years ago. Manchester United used it to great effect with Ronney-Ronaldo-Tevez a couple seasons ago.
Oh, and I use it a lot in my current game as Valladolid - usually against sides which my coaching staff point out do well against teams which play 4-4-2. Usually it means they play a man marking system (note: by this I mean that they play zonal, but appear to be choosing "stay tight" in their opposition tactics), so tearing them apart with a very fluid system like 4-6-0 is the way to go.
One final note... I strongly suggest you never, ever play this system against an extremely hard-working side on the defence. IE, Inter. They will destroy you.
Last edited:
There's a couple of ways. No screenie, I'm afraid, at the moment... I might sort one out if nobody else does though.
Firstly, you can play three flat midfielders across the middle, with a holding midfielder behind them and two attacking inside forwards wide.
Secondly, you can play a normal four across the middle with two attacking midfielders in front of them. Or, if you wanted to be very attacking, four attacking midfielders - maybe an advanced playmaker and a trequartista on the inside with two inside forwards on the outside. Then you can either have an out-and-out defensive midfielder holding in front of the defence, or you can play a ball-winning midfielder in the CM position.
Thirdly, you could play two defensive midfielders (I'd play one as an actual DM, and the other as a deep playmaker in support), with two inside forwards (AM L/R) high up the pitch and a playmaker in the middle of the park (CM) with a single man ahead of him (AM C), probably as a trequartista.
There are a few other iterations, though; it all depends on what resources you actually have available (IE, players and suitability for roles).
The system does require fairly talented (attacking) players and probably requires a fluid philosophy to get the best out of it.
I think the obvious correct way to go for a 4-6-0 is FB-CB-CB-FB and then 3 DMCs and 3MCS, using AMC's with inside forward is pretty much same as using strikers
or maybe 4-5-1
----------- MC
WB DMC DMC DMC WB
FB CB CB FB
?
or maybe 4-5-1
----------- MC
WB DMC DMC DMC WB
FB CB CB FB
?
I think the obvious correct way to go for a 4-6-0 is FB-CB-CB-FB and then 3 DMCs and 3MCS, using AMC's with inside forward is pretty much same as using strikers
or maybe 4-5-1
----------- MC
WB DMC DMC DMC WB
FB CB CB FB
?
There's no correct way to set up any formation; there's just what fits the players you have. Even then, player roles are actually more important than the formation itself, and you should fit your formation to the roles you need the players to play in, not vice versa.
