Manchester United 4-3-3

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mugatu
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 15
  • Views Views 23K
M

Mugatu

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Good Day to you all!
View attachment 337602View attachment 337603


Here is my Alex Ferguson Tactic.

Once again i made no additions to my squad. This is the default squad. I believe adding to a squad when testing a tactic is kinda cheating :P (my own view). Even tho i bought Drogba in jan on my other liverpool save i never used him in league games.

Once again all training was left to default (Same as when game is first loaded). Only team talk i use is the calm- relax option.
I leave settings the same so every tactic i create and test keeep the same variables.
I believe with better training and good choice of match prep you could get greater results from this tactic then i did!

This is a pure Plug and Play tactic. No Shouts. No opposition instructions :D

Formation:
View attachment 337607

Here is the league:

View attachment 337606

Season Overview:
View attachment 337608

Cherry picked Fixture overviews :D:
View attachment 337609View attachment 337610View attachment 337611View attachment 337612View attachment 337613

Hope you Enjoy... ps This tactic is made for Manchester United. Please use it for them!

Please download and Enjoy:

Alex Ferguson Tactic 4-3-3
 
I hope you have success with this tactic, i'm a huge man utd fan and the formation they used this season is a 4-2-3-1 with wingers not a 4-5-1
 
​I suppose carrick isn't a dm in real life then? They constantly change formation all the time mate... multiple times even in game. Try the Tactic out. If you don't think it plays like the real Man U i'l be surprised.
 
this season man utd played 4-2-3-1 25 times, 4-4-2 5 times, 4-4-1-1 3 times, 4-1-2-1-2 once and 4-3-3 once
 
richy25 said:
this season man utd played 4-2-3-1 25 times, 4-4-2 5 times, 4-4-1-1 3 times, 4-1-2-1-2 once and 4-3-3 once
Click to expand...
Double checked with my mate who is a professional analyst with Swansea :D.
His data analysis on Man Utd for his research project included average position of players on pitch.
Guess what Carrick plays significantly deeper than his midfield counter parts.... therefore man u have never played 4-2-3-1, more like 4-1-1-3-1.


Any way lets not be pedantic about it......
In my tactic during games the Right CM drifts forward and usually ends up just behind the striker...

And lets face it formations nowadays are only used for broadcast televisions. Player roles and positions are far to complex to funnel into one place.

Don't wanna sound like a ***** but you were quite sure it was 4-2-3-1 when a dm clearly exists through hard evidence.

Therefore the 4-2-3-1 has never been played by man u this season.
 
Last edited:
Mugatu said:
Double checked with my mate who is a professional analyst with Swansea :D.
His data analysis on Man Utd for his research project included average position of players on pitch.
Guess what Carrick plays significantly deeper than his midfield counter parts.... therefore man u have never played 4-2-3-1, more like 4-1-1-3-1.


Any way lets not be pedantic about it......
In my tactic during games the Right CM drifts forward and usually ends up just behind the striker...

And lets face it formations nowadays are only used for broadcast televisions. Player roles and positions are far to complex to funnel into one place.

Don't wanna sound like a ***** but you were quite sure it was 4-2-3-1 when a dm clearly exists through hard evidence.

Therefore the 4-2-3-1 has never been played by man u this season.
Click to expand...

It's a 4-2-3-1, but in attack Carrick sits while his partner makes vertical runs.

But the shape is a 4-2-3-1, or a 4-4-1-1 when the wide players collapse back into medium block
 
Last edited:
Mike. said:
It's a 4-2-3-1, but in attack Carrick sits while his partner makes vertical runs.

But the shape is a 4-2-3-1, or a 4-4-1-1 when the wide players collapse back into medium block
Click to expand...
Lets agree to disagree. Everyone has an opinion.
Mine is based on the fact that on AVERAGE Carrick plays deeper.......
Therefore the MAJORITY of the time the shape is 4-1-1-3-1.

So just like you i'l make a SWEEPING statement that it's 4-1-1-3-1!

The truth is we both now the formation constantly changes and if we are going to give it a shape surely we would use the shape the team is in the MAJORITY of the time no?

Would be like me calling Barcelona a 8-1-1 cause they spent 1% of the game in that formation.

See where i am coming from...
 
Mugatu said:
Lets agree to disagree. Everyone has an opinion.
Mine is based on the fact that on AVERAGE Carrick plays deeper.......
Therefore the MAJORITY of the time the shape is 4-1-1-3-1.

So just like you i'l make a SWEEPING statement that it's 4-1-1-3-1!

The truth is we both now the formation constantly changes and if we are going to give it a shape surely we would use the shape the team is in the MAJORITY of the time no?

Would be like me calling Barcelona a 8-1-1 cause they spent 1% of the game in that formation.

See where i am coming from...
Click to expand...

All shapes are fluid, none of that stops the fact that United's starting shape is a 4-2-3-1. In which Carrick's midfield partner makes more vertical movement in game than Carrick. Average position is an average of their most advanced and most defensive movements, not where they stand the most

You dont use the fluid shape, because the fluid shape can be anything based on the opposition. If you were to ask SAF what we play, its a 4-2-3-1. If you ask any correspondents about the shape its a 4-2-3-1.

You would never say barcelona's formation is a 2-3-5 for example. It's a 4-3-3
 
Last edited:
Mike. said:
All shapes are fluid, none of that stops the fact that United's starting shape is a 4-2-3-1. In which Carrick's midfield partner makes more vertical movement in game than Carrick. Average position is an average of their most advanced and most defensive movements, not where they stand the most

You dont use the fluid shape, because the fluid shape can be anything based on the opposition. If you were to ask SAF what we play, its a 4-2-3-1. If you ask any correspondents about the shape its a 4-2-3-1.

You would never say barcelona's formation is a 2-3-5 for example. It's a 4-3-3
Click to expand...
But now your dealing with opinion not fact...
Fact is SAF would spare you the trouble of explaining his true shape and say 4-2-3-1 but i bet you he yaps on to carrick in person to hold deep the majority of the time to provide cover for his defense.
Average position is not a simple equation of 1(most advanced position found) + 2(most defensive position found) divided by 2....
Each player in the analyzing programe is coded and position is then generated from total movement. That average position is obv different for every game so each average position is added together an divided by the number of games to give a true indication of position.
Obv variables such as player personal, pitch size and time played play a factor.

As i said everyone has an opinion on formation and what it is

Mine is that formation is represented by average position statistical information.
Yours is based on an speculation and opinion.
SAF could say his starting formation is 4-2-3-1 and easily play as a 4-3-2-1 for the first 5mins of a game.

All in all who cares....
and i could have easily said last year that Barca played a 3-4-3 not a 4-3-3.
 
Mugatu said:
But now your dealing with opinion not fact...
Fact is SAF would spare you the trouble of explaining his true shape and say 4-2-3-1 but i bet you he yaps on to carrick in person to hold deep the majority of the time to provide cover for his defense.
Average position is not a simple equation of 1(most advanced position found) + 2(most defensive position found) divided by 2....
Each player in the analyzing programe is coded and position is then generated from total movement. That average position is obv different for every game so each average position is added together an divided by the number of games to give a true indication of position.
Obv variables such as player personal, pitch size and time played play a factor.

As i said everyone has an opinion on formation and what it is

Mine is that formation is represented by average position statistical information.
Yours is based on an speculation and opinion.
SAF could say his starting formation is 4-2-3-1 and easily play as a 4-3-2-1 for the first 5mins of a game.

All in all who cares....
and i could have easily said last year that Barca played a 3-4-3 not a 4-3-3.
Click to expand...

You've ignore the fact the average position does not show what he takes up defensively. the the static position is a 4-2-3-1, as he does stand consistently ahead of Carrick. He covers more area going forwards, which pushes his average position on a graph higher up, but he defends and starts alongside Carrick. Whether Carrick sits or not doesn't change the fact that its a 4-2-3-1. They simply have slight different roles. Cleverly drives higher from alongside Carrick, but drops back there, he does not stay higher and make it a 4-1-1-3-1.

It's usually defined a 4-2-3-1, but you're going to call it something else entirely? Eh?

And Barca did sometimes play a 3-4-3 diamond shape last year, notably against against Milan.

either way im done on this particular topic.
 
Last edited:
How about you guys have a read on zonal marking web site, in my opinion is very good website for quick reference on how teams play and they do it by game ! not average positioning per season etc....

yes it doesnt go too deep into the tactic throughout the game, but as far replicating real tactics in FM, it really doesn't get any better than Zonal Marking website!


this is for example how United lined up against Arsenal in the 1-1 draw, have a read and see what you think:

Arsenal 1-1 Manchester United: Arsenal start strongly but are unable to maintain early tempo | Zonal Marking
 
Goldenboy13 said:
How about you guys have a read on zonal marking web site, in my opinion is very good website for quick reference on how teams play and they do it by game ! not average positioning per season etc....

yes it doesnt go too deep into the tactic throughout the game, but as far replicating real tactics in FM, it really doesn't get any better than Zonal Marking website!


this is for example how United lined up against Arsenal in the 1-1 draw, have a read and see what you think:

Arsenal 1-1 Manchester United: Arsenal start strongly but are unable to maintain early tempo | Zonal Marking
Click to expand...

Preaching to the choir, it's one of my favourite sites.
 
What kind of fuckery is this thread going on about? Saying United play a 4-1-1-3-1 is as redundant as saying Villa play a 2-2-1-2-2-1 because each 'band' is slightly more advanced than the next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top