A standard - flexible approach with no TI's - Can it work?

[Gorstak]

I agree with absolutely everything wwfan says. You'd be a fool not to.

Then we have nothing else to discuss. 6 sec pressing is exactly it, 6 sec pressing after which barcelona stands off. And it's setup just by ticking stand off, although im not sure if 6 second pressing is implemented into fm. In fm11 it ceirtainly wasn't and wwfan claims there you should press heavily. I think I even got into an argument on that thread then, got bullied by mods, and quit visiting that forum. Either I'm wrong and everyone else is correct or the other way around, I'm not sure.

Regarding my setup I thought it would be nice for dlfs to drop deep and pull defenders and create space for my CMa's who would run into space from deep. They would create the chance with their vision, CMa's would score them with their finishing. DM's instead of sweeper so I give a passing option to my CD's. DMs acts mostly like a box to box, connecting the team, so he would be the linking player.

 

[callamity]

What about width

 

[Gorstak]

What about width

What about it? Contrary to popular belief, your players will always play wider in attacking phase, and always play narrower and try to channel opposition when defending. Playing wider or narrower is exactly that, it doesn't change this. Since I'm not changing my defensive line, or my passing style, width need not be touched.

 

[WJ]

Then we have nothing else to discuss. 6 sec pressing is exactly it, 6 sec pressing after which barcelona stands off. And it's setup just by ticking stand off, although im not sure if 6 second pressing is implemented into fm. In fm11 it ceirtainly wasn't and wwfan claims there you should press heavily. I think I even got into an argument on that thread then, got bullied by mods, and quit visiting that forum. Either I'm wrong and everyone else is correct or the other way around, I'm not sure.

FM isn't that advanced. You'd either press heavily or stand off here. As Barca do press relentlessly (most often winning the ball back within the 6 secs anyway) he went for the correct option. That Barca used to rest WITH the ball, not without.

Regarding my setup I thought it would be nice for dlfs to drop deep and pull defenders and create space for my CMa's who would run into space from deep. They would create the chance with their vision, CMa's would score them with their finishing. DM's instead of sweeper so I give a passing option to my CD's. DMs acts mostly like a box to box, connecting the team, so he would be the linking player.

The problem is, that both forwards will drop deep, so you're not creating space for anyone. The D-Line will simply push up to not give your DLFs the time they need. If you look at the most common striker partnership, one striker stays forward to stretch the defence/push them back, while the other drops into space with or without dragging a defender with. Either way, the opposition has an issue. You have both forwards dropping, so the defenders will all just push up.

The only way this might work (as you're creating space behind the defence) is if you have someone who will have time and space to hit those balls to the CM/As. I'd argue that you don't.

 

[WJ]

What about it? Contrary to popular belief, your players will always play wider in attacking phase, and always play narrower and try to channel opposition when defending. Playing wider or narrower is exactly that, it doesn't change this. Since I'm not changing my defensive line, or my passing style, width need not be touched.

He makes a good point. You're very central. It'll work against teams who are open. Against defensive teams, who are deep and narrow, you will definitely struggle. You're not pulling anyone wide with any of your players and the movement is symmetrical and one-dimensional. Teams who have no intention of defending high won't care if your DLFs drop deep. There won't be space for your CM/As to run into. The fullbacks won't pull defenders wide either.

The verticality (if there is such a word!) may work against the more attacking teams though.

 

[callamity]

What about it? Contrary to popular belief, your players will always play wider in attacking phase, and always play narrower and try to channel opposition when defending. Playing wider or narrower is exactly that, it doesn't change this. Since I'm not changing my defensive line, or my passing style, width need not be touched.

Not what I meant

 

[Gorstak]

Partially correct. FM is very advanced, and I doubt even the mods on that forum know the coders thought process. The game is actually brilliant, but still just software, with it's set of rules. Even if I wasn't correct about 6 sec pressing, if I remember correctly, my argument was about him picking stay on feet or no tackling instruction in one place, and then choosing get stuck in the other. My memory doesn't serve me that well, I just remember he gave some nonsensical explanation and I started getting threats into my inbox and public warnings. All I did was disagree, I wasn't insulting anyone. Anyway this is the result of my second match with two dlfs:

View attachment 255003

so far so good. Both liverpool and these guys were defensive. Liverpool only in first half though.

 

[Gorstak]

He makes a good point. You're very central. It'll work against teams who are open. Against defensive teams, who are deep and narrow, you will definitely struggle. You're not pulling anyone wide with any of your players and the movement is symmetrical and one-dimensional. Teams who have no intention of defending high won't care if your DLFs drop deep. There won't be space for your CM/As to run into. The fullbacks won't pull defenders wide either.

The verticality (if there is such a word!) may work against the more attacking teams though.

So I should use two wide attacking mids then?

 

[WJ]

Partially correct. FM is very advanced, and I doubt even the mods on that forum know the coders thought process. The game is actually brilliant, but still just software, with it's set of rules. Even if I wasn't correct about 6 sec pressing, if I remember correctly, my argument was about him picking stay on feet or no tackling instruction in one place, and then choosing get stuck in the other. My memory doesn't serve me that well, I just remember he gave some nonsensical explanation and I started getting threats into my inbox and public warnings.

The mods do know the thought process much better than you think. They communicate with SI and the coders themselves.

 

[WJ]

So I should use two wide attacking mids then?

Why do you want me to create a tactic for you? I have again explained what is wrong with the tactic. Use your brain to then create a tactic that has some (any!) width. There's more than one way to have width, you know. You have fullbacks which you could use. You can have wide attacking midfielders if you want to change shape. You can also ask players to run wide or move into channels.

 

[Gorstak]

Why do you want me to create a tactic for you? I have again explained what is wrong with the tactic. Use your brain to then create a tactic that has some (any!) width. There's more than one way to have width, you know. You have fullbacks which you could use. You can have wide attacking midfielders if you want to change shape. You can also ask players to run wide or move into channels.

Yup. I thought so too.

 

[WJ]

Any thoughts on what I said about using a Counter/Defensive mentality for a counter tactic?

And Team Shape?

 

[JohnR55]

Yup. I thought so too.

You told me to learn the rules of football, do you know the "rules"for football tactics

 

[Gorstak]

Any thoughts on what I said about using a Counter/Defensive mentality for a counter tactic?

And Team Shape?

I'm not sure what you are talking about. My memory isn't that good. Anyway, I think I'm off to bed. I don't even like Raymond today.

 

[WJ]

I'm not sure what you are talking about. My memory isn't that good. Anyway, I think I'm off to bed. I don't even like Raymond today.

You don't need memory to scroll up and read earlier posts.

 

[Gorstak]

If you wanted counter attacking, why not just simply use the Counter or Defensive mentality? You lose out on the benefits of those two mentalites because Standard doesn't have the 'counter attack' box ticked under the hood, for one thing.

I did explain the problems you have in that post.

I thought counters are done automatically in any mentality when requirements are met?

 

[WJ]

I thought counters are done automatically in any mentality when requirements are met?

Only Defensive and Counter. It could be for Attacking and Overload too, but I'm not 100% on that.

That's why I was against that initial setup. You're forcing a counter style through your duties, but you will struggle if a counter isn't on.

With the tactic in my Starting At a New Club thread, I had counter opportunities, but if the counter wasn't on I still had movement to create space and get goals.

 

[Gorstak]

Only Defensive and Counter. It could be for Attacking and Overload too, but I'm not 100% on that.

That's why I was against that initial setup. You're forcing a counter style through your duties, but you will struggle if a counter isn't on.

With the tactic in my Starting At a New Club thread, I had counter opportunities, but if the counter wasn't on I still had movement to create space and get goals.

You're missing the point here. Counters are something that happen when requirements for that are met. Of course you will have more counter opportunites with counter and defend mentalites, because you draw the opposition onto you. But that's about it. Just more opportunites. With standard mentality, you will simply have less counters. And you were right, I wasn't creating enough movement, and I focused on wining the midfield battle, which was wrong. I just created a 4231 DM wide formation, and so far undefeated in LLM. (weston super mare, english vanarama south)

 

[Gorstak]

1st four games:

View attachment 254840

zero goals conceeded, 3 out of 4 victories

 

[WJ]

You're missing the point here. Counters are something that happen when requirements for that are met. Of course you will have more counter opportunites with counter and defend mentalites, because you draw the opposition onto you. But that's about it. Just more opportunites. With standard mentality, you will simply have less counters. And you were right, I wasn't creating enough movement, and I focused on wining the midfield battle, which was wrong. I just created a 4231 DM wide formation, and so far undefeated in LLM. (weston super mare, english vanarama south)

No, you are missing the point. Standard mentality has no counter requirements that need to be met, because the counter attacking tick box isn't selected under the hood. There will be no counter situations as far as the ME is concerned.