Tactics Testing Tactics - ‘Plug + Play’ with Man. United

[Chivers]

You can test my tactic it's called rock solid has its own thread cheers 

[DanEnglish]

Update - this thread is still active 👍

I’ve got most of the next post ready as a deep-dive on the past ‘Black Hawk’ tactic … however am still trying to figure out WHY that tactic scores more goals!

Update in the next few days 🙂 

[DanEnglish]

Tactic 03: @Black Hawk
Black Hawk 4123 (with IFs)

Welcome to the 'Analytics Hub'
our underground lair within the training ground, where we DELVE DEEPER into the tactic - looking 'under the bonnet' to see how it works.
 

You may remember this tactic - Black Hawk's 4123 which promises a quest to make IFs great again!

With the 'best-results' so-far - it provided 2.5 points per game, with 2.0 goals scored per game and a solid defense (8 conceded in 22 games). I gave it the official 'RECOMMENDED' badge. 

But ... WHY is it scoring more? WHAT do you need to make it work? And can it be further IMPROVED ?! Lets have a look ... 
 

🔴 SCORING
This Black Hawk tactic scored 2.0 goals/game, but that was boosted by the cups.

In the EPL, this only scored 1.5 league goals/game (22 goals in 15 games), which is only 2 league goals more than the previous best - the tweaked 'narrow 5230' tactic. So lets compare these two tactics.

Spoiler

This tactic scores more goals because we create 50% more CCC every match!

• The previous tweaked 'narrow 5320' only created 0.6 CCC/game in the league (average 0.9 in all competitions)
• However the 'Black Hawk' tactic creates a huge 1.5 CCC/game ✅ in the league (and an average 1.5 in the cups as well!) 

Now lets look at the front three ...

 

Oh dear. The IFs are ... pretty useless ... together they only scored 7 goals (in 22 games). They took less shots each game, and their on-target % was lower - compared to the two SS in the previous 'narrow 5230' tactic.

The good news is that our central Striker was on fire ✅ with 17 non-penalty goals (0.8 goals/game). That looks good.

Our B2B midfielders are also more attacking (vs the standard CMs in the previous 'narrow 5230'). Both B2Bs scored more often, though Bruno Fernandes was obviously the more clinical of the two. 

Summary:
So while the IFs disappointed 🔻- the central Striker and both B2Bs did well ✅
 

 

🔴 CROSSING
With two Wing Backs - are we crossing a lot & how effective are they with this Man. United team?

Spoiler

Ah. Only 15% of our crosses are successful - the other 85% are wasted (15 wasted crosses per game!)

You'll see in the next section that it's NOT our IFs who are crossing. Instead our WBs are crossing more often (with 1 more successful cross / game) than the previous 'narrow 5230' tactic with IWBs). That's not good. 
 

🔴 HEADING
Why are we wasting so many crosses? It seems our attackers' aerial ability is not good enough 🔻 for all these crosses. 

Spoiler

Ah. Together our three forwards have 14 attempted headers / game. They only win 2 headers / game. That's dreadful

That's a ~15% success rate, and matches the 15% crossing completion rate. What a waste.
 

 

🔴 PASSING
What about the team's key passes & possession?! How does it compare against the previous 5230 tactics?

Spoiler

Huh. Interesting. 

The % possession and # passes are roughly the same as the original @Mushy 5230 tactic (with WBs!). However compared to the tweaked 'narrow 5230', this Black Hawk tactic definitely has a drop in key passes & pass attempts - probably because we're crossing the ball so often instead.  

Looking at the front three - all three of them are fairly useless in possession & build-up play 🔻 Each game, they have <1 key pass each (per game) + around 10 successful passes each. 

The midfield three are a bit better ✅ - they provide more key passes, more attempted passes, and better pass completion %'s.

Summary:
Overall the Black Hawk's passing & possession is a bit weaker than I expected 🔻 The front three aren't involved in play, and the midfield three don't really play enough passes - explaining the average 50% possession. 
 

 

🔴 DEFENDING
Only conceding 8 goals in 22 games is pretty impressive - and was roughly as good as the previous 'narrow 5320' tactic - right?!

Spoiler

Very similar defensive stats as the 'narrow 5230'. 

The players' defensive actions were also quite similar - slightly better in terms of mistakes ✅ yet slightly worse in terms of interceptions & fouls 🔻 but overall very similar. 

The one defensive aspect to note is how solid this Black Hawk tactic is against many non-top teams.

Look at this stat - in 8 games, the Black Hawk tactic did not concede a shot on target - including against Leicester, Bournemouth, Brentford, Leeds, Everton and 3 non-league games. That's 5 better than the previous 'narrow 5230' managed. Wow.

🔴 SUMMARY
The Black Hawk 4123 is the best tactic tested so far - for Man. United's starting squad - with a 4.5 star rating & a 'RECOMMENDED' badge.

• Strengths - along with being defensively solid, it does score goals - mainly from the central striker & partly from the two B2Bs. It would probably perform better if you played better aerial STs (e.g. Ronaldo / Weghorst), due to the ~18 crosses/game. 
   
• SUITABILITY - compared with the previous 5230 variants - this Blavk Hawk takes advantage of Man. United’s pacy wide attackers + limited midfield depth - so no need to retrain players to pack the M/AMC positions. 
   
• Weaknesses - the IFs initially perform poorly (Black Hawk states they will improve with time - which seems very reasonable), there are a lot of wasted crosses if you have weak aerial attackers, and the~50% possession isn't great.
   

🔴 SUGGESTIONS
Unsurprisingly - here are my suggestions to improve it for Man. United's starting squad ...

Spoiler

1. Aerial Attackers - with so many crosses from the WBs, having a front three with high aerial & strength would surely be more effective in the box.

2. IWBs - without high aerial attackers, just like the tweaked 'narrow 5230', perhaps having IWBs (with through balls + pass through the center!) can give fewer wasted crosses + take advantage of our star central creators Fernandes & Eriksen? 

3. Width - instead of having 'narrow' width, I'd consider changing to 'normal' to give more space in-between the front three. The IFs would be less involved, but they'd be more space for the B2Bs to run into. One to think about ... 🤔

4. IWs / PFs / AFs - while it goes against @Black Hawk's 'quest' to make IFs great again - I'd maybe consider changing one to a different role, just to see what different movement & chances they'd provide. 

Note that I haven't tested any of these suggestions - they are just theoretical ideas.

Overall - this @Black Hawk 4123 tactic is a good choice for Man. United's starting squad and would be an even better choice for other teams with better crossing WBs & aerially strong attackers (Man. City?!).

The best news is that multiple Vibers have used this tactic with Man. United, they confirm it gets better and better as the seasons progress (and as your IFs develop!). Enjoy!

Any thoughts? 🙂 

Edited February 28, 2023 by DanEnglish

[DanEnglish]

 

Teaser

Am testing @Black Hawk’s 4123 - but with 2 IWBs …

… look at this incredible start 🔥…

… but can it continue?! 😲

[DanEnglish]

Tactic 04: @Black Hawk (featuring @StuartM)
Tweaked Black Hawk (IWBs)

Here is a tweaked version of the @Black Hawk 4123 - which @StuartMwas also using - with IWBs!

Theoretically - this should be more suitable for Man. United’s starting squad - right … ?!

Spoiler

This should address some of Man. United’s weaknesses:

• ❌ WBs with poor crossing, 
• ❌ front three all have weak aerial (for all those crosses!) 

 … hopefully ! …

I changed to ‘normal’ width - to (hopefully) avoid being too congested in central areas.

Plus turned on ‘through balls’ + a ‘center’ passing focus - as suggested by @Black Hawk recently on his thread.

Team Results:
An average 2.2 points per game, across 23 games in all competitions. This is 0.3 points per game worse than the original Black Hawk 2.5 points/game.

This had an average 2.0 goals scored 🔥 (same as the original) BUT 0.7 conceded 🔻 (double the original tactic).

After a great start - this test’s season fell apart … ! … 

Spoiler

League:
note - this tweaked tactic played 16 league games, one more than the original Black Hawk tactic.

• 33 points in 16 games 🔻 (3 less than the original)
• That’s 2.1 points per league game (vs the original’s 2.4)
• ✅ 30 goals scored (8 more)
• 🔻 12 conceded (8 more!)

 
Europe:
note - this tweaked tactic played 16 league games, one more than the original Black Hawk tactic.

• 14 points 🔻 (2 less than the original)
• That’s 2.1 points per league game (vs the original’s 2.4)
• 🔻 14 goals scored (6 less)
• ✅  only 2 conceded (2 less)

 
All Fixtures:
After a superb start - results dropped … 

• Average 2.2 points/game 🔻(0.3 points/game worse than the original Black Hawk)
• 🔥 Average 2.0 goals scored ✅ (similar to original) + 0.7 conceded 🔻(double the original)
• Overall 15 wins, 5 draws, plus a HUGE 3 LOSSES (all in the League) - across the 23 games.

  
Similar to the original tactic - one of the most impressive aspects is how half of the matches were ‘dominant wins’ … !

• *most* 11 dominant wins (by 2+ goals)
• 4 narrow wins
• 5 draws
• 3 narrow losses
• no humiliating loss (by 2+ goals) 
   

vs Big Teams:
This tactic had mixed results against the bigger opposition sides:

• winning 2 (vs Chelsea + Arsenal),
• drawing 2 (vs Man. City + Newcastle), 
• losing 2 (vs Liverpool + Spurs)

So both Black Hawk tactics struggled against the better teams - whereas the previous ‘narrow 5230’ did much better. 
 

Player Performances: 
Our standout players were similar to previous tests - though both IFs did slightly better than before!

Spoiler

Keeper:
While he conceded almost double, De Gea still rated well - with a +7.1 average rating in his preferred normal GK role.

Defenders:
✅ Lindelof continued to rate well (+7.2), while this was Varane’s worst average rating 🔻 down from his ~7.5 with the tweaked ‘narrow 5230’.

Both FBs did fine, obviously with almost no assists in their withdrawn IWB roles.

Midfield:
Impressive contributions from the midfield three. All three had 13 goal contributions EACH over 23 games (+0.5 / game!).

While Eriksen assisted the most - it was Bruno Fernandes as our 2nd highest scorer - with 10 in 23 games - spread across both the league + cups.

Attackers:
Both IFs did ok - with 14 and 9 goal contributions each ✅ plus good average ratings (which helps their development). This was slightly better than the original Black Hawk.

Unsurprisingly, Rashford was our top scorer - scoring 14 goals, mostly in the league ✅ He scored more in the league than with the original Black Hawk (12 vs 7), but less against weaker European opposition (1 vs 10)

 
Tactic Suitability:
(for Man. United’s current squad)
 4 stars (out of 5)

This tweaked tactic is rated a half-star lower than the original @Black Hawk 4123. 

• The good news is that this tweaked tactic has significantly fewer wasted crosses ✅ (see next post / deep dive) + surprisingly got slightly better output from the IFs ✅
   
• However it performed worse overall - fewer points/game 🔻 and double the goals conceded 🔻compared to the original.

Personally I prefer this tweaked tactic - BUT the original remains the only ‘RECOMMENDED’ tactic so far - for anyone using Man. United’s starting squad. 
 

Suggestions:
So how could we improve this tweaked 4123 tactic with 2x IFs and 2x IWBs … ?

Spoiler

1. Anchor - in big games + away in the league, I’d be tempted to play Casemiro as an Anchor, instead of a RP, for more defensive solidity. 
    
2. DFB - also in big games + against teams with 2 STs, I’d be tempted to have one IWB + one DFB (defensive full back) … to have better passing options out from the back. 
    
3. Midfield three - if we need to score, I also wonder if the IFs would be more involved if we moved Casemiro to the MC position (as an RP or Anchor) - to spread the two B2Bs a bit wider? Not sure.
    

 
Thanks @Black Hawk + @StuartM for this tweaked version! It was fun to test

THOUGHTS? 🙂

Edited March 1, 2023 by DanEnglish

[BatiGoal]

Great stuff, I'm really enjoying reading these analysis. Hope you do this for every available team 😂

17 minutes ago, DanEnglish said:

I changed to ‘normal’ width - to (hopefully) avoid being too congested in central areas.

Plus turned on ‘through balls’ + a ‘center’ passing focus - as suggested by @Black Hawk recently on his thread.

Once my team is stronger than the large majority of opponents I leave 'final third instructions' blank. I figure my players are intelligent and skilled enough to make the right decision at the right time.

When I'm building a team I often follow this:

Shoot On Sight - works well with AMs (deeper "forwards") with good Finishing / Technique.

Work In Box - especially for lone strikers struggling to score / needing support.

Run At Defence - having *at least* 4 in midfield not leaving center exposed in case of losing ball possession. IWB are great when opting for this.

Through Balls - great when strong opponents *don't* play offside line oftentimes having one of their FBs play your pacey striker onside. 👍 

Roughly my picks.

[BatiGoal]

40 minutes ago, DanEnglish said:

Plus turned on ‘through balls’ + a ‘center’ passing focus - as suggested by @Black Hawk recently on his thread.

Since you have 3 in midfield + iWBs for cover/support making it 5 potentially, I think run at defence would be a good alternative (if you feel you're lacking goals) as nothing is left exposed in case of being dispossessed.

[DanEnglish]

1 hour ago, BatiGoal said:

Since you have 3 in midfield + iWBs for cover/support making it 5 potentially, I think run at defence would be a good alternative (if you feel you're lacking goals) as nothing is left exposed in case of being dispossessed.

Thanks for both posts @BatiGoal - I also was wondering about the run with ball vs through ball option (IF running at goal vs IF plays a through ball) and decided to go with what @Black Hawk decided - as it is his tactic after all 🙂 I’m just ‘borrowing’ it!

[Black Hawk]

13 hours ago, DanEnglish said:

Tactic 04: @Black Hawk (featuring @StuartM)
Tweaked Black Hawk (IWBs)

Here is a tweaked version of the @Black Hawk 4123 - which @StuartMwas also using - with IWBs!

Theoretically - this should be more suitable for Man. United’s starting squad - right … ?!

  Reveal hidden contents

This should address some of Man. United’s weaknesses:

• ❌ WBs with poor crossing, 
• ❌ front three all have weak aerial (for all those crosses!) 

 … hopefully ! …

I changed to ‘normal’ width - to (hopefully) avoid being too congested in central areas.

Plus turned on ‘through balls’ + a ‘center’ passing focus - as suggested by @Black Hawk recently on his thread.

Team Results:
An average 2.2 points per game, across 23 games in all competitions. This is 0.3 points per game worse than the original Black Hawk 2.5 points/game.

This had an average 2.0 goals scored 🔥 (same as the original) BUT 0.7 conceded 🔻 (double the original tactic).

After a great start - this test’s season fell apart … ! … 

  Reveal hidden contents

League:
note - this tweaked tactic played 16 league games, one more than the original Black Hawk tactic.

• 33 points in 16 games 🔻 (3 less than the original)
• That’s 2.1 points per league game (vs the original’s 2.4)
• ✅ 30 goals scored (8 more)
• 🔻 12 conceded (8 more!)

 
Europe:
note - this tweaked tactic played 16 league games, one more than the original Black Hawk tactic.

• 14 points 🔻 (2 less than the original)
• That’s 2.1 points per league game (vs the original’s 2.4)
• 🔻 14 goals scored (6 less)
• ✅  only 2 conceded (2 less)

 
All Fixtures:
After a superb start - results dropped … 

• Average 2.2 points/game 🔻(0.3 points/game worse than the original Black Hawk)
• 🔥 Average 2.0 goals scored ✅ (similar to original) + 0.7 conceded 🔻(double the original)
• Overall 15 wins, 5 draws, plus a HUGE 3 LOSSES (all in the League) - across the 23 games.

  
Similar to the original tactic - one of the most impressive aspects is how half of the matches were ‘dominant wins’ … !

• *most* 11 dominant wins (by 2+ goals)
• 4 narrow wins
• 5 draws
• 3 narrow losses
• no humiliating loss (by 2+ goals) 
   

vs Big Teams:
This tactic had mixed results against the bigger opposition sides:

• winning 2 (vs Chelsea + Arsenal),
• drawing 2 (vs Man. City + Newcastle), 
• losing 2 (vs Liverpool + Spurs)

So both Black Hawk tactics struggled against the better teams - whereas the previous ‘narrow 5230’ did much better. 
 

Player Performances: 
Our standout players were similar to previous tests - though both IFs did slightly better than before!

  Reveal hidden contents

Keeper:
While he conceded almost double, De Gea still rated well - with a +7.1 average rating in his preferred normal GK role.

Defenders:
✅ Lindelof continued to rate well (+7.2), while this was Varane’s worst average rating 🔻 down from his ~7.5 with the tweaked ‘narrow 5230’.

Both FBs did fine, obviously with almost no assists in their withdrawn IWB roles.

Midfield:
Impressive contributions from the midfield three. All three had 13 goal contributions EACH over 23 games (+0.5 / game!).

While Eriksen assisted the most - it was Bruno Fernandes as our 2nd highest scorer - with 10 in 23 games - spread across both the league + cups.

Attackers:
Both IFs did ok - with 14 and 9 goal contributions each ✅ plus good average ratings (which helps their development). This was slightly better than the original Black Hawk.

Unsurprisingly, Rashford was our top scorer - scoring 14 goals, mostly in the league ✅ He scored more in the league than with the original Black Hawk (12 vs 7), but less against weaker European opposition (1 vs 10)

 
Tactic Suitability:
(for Man. United’s current squad)
 4 stars (out of 5)

This tweaked tactic is rated a half-star lower than the original @Black Hawk 4123. 

• The good news is that this tweaked tactic has significantly fewer wasted crosses ✅ (see next post / deep dive) + surprisingly got slightly better output from the IFs ✅
   
• However it performed worse overall - fewer points/game 🔻 and double the goals conceded 🔻compared to the original.

Personally I prefer this tweaked tactic - BUT the original remains the only ‘RECOMMENDED’ tactic so far - for anyone using Man. United’s starting squad. 
 

Suggestions:
So how could we improve this tweaked 4123 tactic with 2x IFs and 2x IWBs … ?

  Reveal hidden contents

1. Anchor - in big games + away in the league, I’d be tempted to play Casemiro as an Anchor, instead of a RP, for more defensive solidity. 
    
2. DFB - also in big games + against teams with 2 STs, I’d be tempted to have one IWB + one DFB (defensive full back) … to have better passing options out from the back. 
    
3. Midfield three - if we need to score, I also wonder if the IFs would be more involved if we moved Casemiro to the MC position (as an RP or Anchor) - to spread the two B2Bs a bit wider? Not sure.
    

 
Thanks @Black Hawk + @StuartM for this tweaked version! It was fun to test

THOUGHTS? 🙂

Fantastic. As always.

I tested that version at some time and didn't like it. Not that it can't or won't work, but I have a big problem with it: it's too narrow.

I'm playing now the 7th season on my save test with BVB (3rd with them), did a match with IWBs to show what I don't like.

 

 

For example, this. My IWB are inside (#02 and #03). Tom Bischof has the ball and everyone is so close and narrow that we are struggling to progress.

 

 

In the next 8 seconds, Tom Bischof progressed with the ball, but he is still without options. Karim Adeyemi (#27) is the only option. He played with him. Believe it or not, Adeyemi crossed at first touch and João Félix (#10) shot from outside the box (he has the role trait to arrive late at the box which enables him to be in great positions to shoot outside the box after crossings). It was a great goal.

 

 

Another example from the second half, Jude Bellingham (my RP) passes to João Félix. He shot from there and I can't complain about it, he didn't had anything else to do anyway.

We draw this game. Not that we played badly, had two clear cut chances, but most times we simply couldn't do anything with the ball.

 

 

After this, I did the same game with the tweaked version of my main tactic, which is essentially The Black Hawk one but with "through ball" instead of "running at defense" and the passing focus in the middle instead of mixed.

Some examples of why I can't get rid of WBs.

 

 

An example. João Félix was being chased down and my left WB Sergio Gómez run by the left and gave him a clear option to deliver the ball.

 

 

He progressed and delivered it to my left IF Donyell Malen. He is already in the box. We got the ball there in seconds.

From there, depending from the way we and our opponents are on the pitch, I've seen my IFs doing four different things: he can pass it to my left B2B, or to my left WB down the left, or pass it inside (for my PF, to the other IF or even to my RP), or simply running with the ball dribbling his opponent.

In this case, as my left B2B (Félix, #10) is too much behind, he is not an option. Usually they are an option if they are close to my IF and are able to enter the box. Both my PF and right IF are inside the box, but man marked. My RP (Bellingham, #22) didn't run ahead and is back there, not an option too.

So, he ended up passing to my left WB, who crossed from the byline.

 

 

A bit later, we had this play. Bellingham run with the ball, but everyone is so narrow and we couldn't progress by the middle. Dumfries, my right B2B, was alone at the right.

 

 

Here, exactly the same. My right B2B Tom Bischof saw how there was a gap at the right and passed it there. Notice how everyone is narrow but Dumfries.

He got the ball, run with it a bit and passed it to the box. We scored. Not from a header, mind you, it was a pass to behind their defenders to my PF.

 

 

The stats don't appear that much different from the previous match, but almost all our shots were on the first half. We got a 2-0 advantage by half time and essentially decided not to play second time - we are a control minded team after all.

So, this is the main reason I don't like IWBs. They work, I tested it with BVB in 2nd season with them and won all games during two months, but I can't put aside the things my WBs give to the team. That wide option when we can't go ahead by the middle comes in clutch sometimes.

[DanEnglish]

@Black Hawk - that is some fantastic analysis. I particularly love the screenshots & detailed comments 👍 Top work!

[DanEnglish]

Comparing Tactics 01-04: 
How do these tactics compare?

Welcome to the 'Analytics Hub'
our underground lair within the training ground, where we DELVE DEEPER into these tactics.  
 

🔴 SCORING
One style completely outscored the other ...

Spoiler

The @Black Hawk tactics easily out-score the @Mushy versions ...

Interestingly, both tweaks with IWBs resulted in more long shots (and more shots on target) - which makes sense - the IWBs support central play, but with limited wide options, so our attackers shoot from distance. 
 

🔴 CROSSING
A useful comparison of using WBs or using IWBs ...

Spoiler

Both original tactics with WBs provided more dribbles + more crosses. These are more suitable if your WBs have good crossing + your attackers have good aerial/strength.

However as Man. United are weak in these areas - most of these crosses were wasted. It seems the tweaked IWB versions significantly reduced these wasted crosses.
 

🔴 PASSING
Again the comparison between using WBs or IWBs shows clear differences ...

Spoiler

Probably as a result of fewer crosses - the tweaked IWB tactics had ~30 more completed passes each than their original versions.

Also to note - the tweaked Black Hawk tactic (with two IFs) resulted in more offsides. Is that because there were more through balls to advanced players, or just random? I'll look into the number of key passes later on to see if this explains it.
 

🔴 DEFENDING
One tactic stood above all others in terms of defensive actions - but why?!

Spoiler

Interestingly - the original @Mushy tactic had the largest number of defensive actions - perhaps because they are so compressed centrally in that 5230 formation?

Towards the other extreme - the original Black Hawk tactic had the least number of defensive actions (and the most fouls committed) - perhaps because the players are so spread out with WBs and IFs?
 

🔴 CONCEDING
All tactics conceded few goals - but two tactics did extremely well at this ...

Spoiler

Both the tweaked 5230 (actually a 41230) and the original Black Hawk only conceded 0.4 goals / game, with the fewest shots + shots on target conceded / game. Impressive.

Unfortunately I didn't collect up the detailed opposition shot statistics for the original @Mushy tactic - will try to add that in later.

Also am not sure WHY the tweaked Black Hawk tactic conceded more goals, shots on target, and shots. Not sure. 
 

🔴 SUMMARY
Overall - the original @Black Hawk tactic remains the only one with a 4.5 star rating & 'RECOMMENDED' badge for use with Man. United's starting squad.

Interestingly, both tweaked versions (with IWBs) improved the passes complete + the defensive actions

… but the original Black Hawk tactic both scored the most + conceded the fewest goals. Impressive!

Thoughts? 🙂 
 

Edited March 3, 2023 by DanEnglish

[DanEnglish]

Requested by 18 Vibers …

… I'm currently testing this beast - an intense press 451 - which I used to get 70% possession with Liverpool for the ‘Possession Cup’ badge of honour.

 
I am a bit scared though:

• ❓this was for a one-off game (not a season).
• ❓this was for possession (not for winning).
• ❓this was for Liverpool (not Man. United)

Am worried that it’s going to fail miserably! 😂 

[DanEnglish]

Tactic 05: @DanEnglish
Intense Press 451 + 4141

⚠️ This is the biggest FAILURE of a tactic tested so far ⚠️

 
The Tactic
Available <here> - it was created for a one-game challenge + to show how an INTENSE press could be setup, to get MAX possession.

Yes - that’s FIVE players across the AMRLC positions 😲  But there’s no real ‘plan’ or strategy going forward - I don’t know how they’re going to score! 🤔 

Spoiler

Its setup to counter a Man. City 41221 formation - by blocking their passing lanes, preventing their defense from passing out to their midfielders.

I don’t usually use THREE playmakers - but they are useful for maintaining possession as they drift into space looking to receive the ball.

You can see we have a high line + high press, but also ‘time wasting’ + short, slow passing on a ‘defensive’ mentality to maximise possession.

If the opposition play with 2 Strikers, then we move to the (FAR LESS EFFECTIVE!) 4141 - where we move one AMC back to be a 2nd DC.

 
Team Results:
Poor - a joint worst 1.8 points per game, which was even worse in the league + boosted by a 100% record in the Europa league …

Spoiler

League:
11th place in the league tells it all…

• 🔻 Just 20 points (in 16 games) - the worst so far!
• 🔻 16 goals scored - same as @Mushy solid 5230
• 🔻 16 conceded - the worst so far!

 
Europe:
A near perfect Europa League - potentially against the weakest group we’ve faced so far.

• ✅ Full points! 18 points from 6 games!
• ✅ 15 goals in 6 games. Decent.
• ✅ Just 2 conceded in Europe - the best so far?!

 
All Fixtures:
SIX losses + 5 draws in 23 matches tells the story

• 🔻 Just 1.8 points per game (in 23 games) - the joint worst so far!
• 🔻only 1.5 goals scored / game - similar to the tweaked ‘narrow 5230’.
• 🔻 0.8 conceded / game - the worst so far!

• *most* 9 dominant wins (by 2+ goals)
• 3 narrow wins
• 5 draws
• 4 narrow losses
• 2 humiliating losses (by 2+ goals) 

 
Observations:
This tactic was built for higher possession and on that (and only that), it kind of delivered:

60% possession (+10% more*)
320 passes complete (+100 more*)

*more than any of the previous 4 tactics tested so far

Spoiler

The Manchester Derby was a great example …

… we lost 1-0, BUT we dominated the possession + chances.

Look at Man. City’s 34 tackles (!) and 13 offsides (!) - our offside trap worked beautifully. Except we lost 😞 

The issues are:

1. when the better teams break through our press, it’s easier for them to score,
2. neither the 451 nor 4141 tactic works if the opposition plays 2 strikers - with one DC, any long ball is dangerous. With 2 DCs, our four AM press isn’t as effective.
3. we have no strategy to score 😞  

 
Player Performances:
You don’t want to see this - do you? Really?! Are you sure?! … well ok then …

Spoiler

Keeper:
Not bad. De Gea conceded a huge 19 goals, but with a decent +7.0 average rating. This wasn’t his fault.

 
 

Defense:
The back three did well + got great average ratings as a result. Casemiro as a DLP wasn’t that effective.

Attack:
We needed five attacking midfielders - so van de Beek was our weakest link.

Everyone else did ‘ok’ - with most goals/assists coming from lone striker Rashford + central playmaker Fernandes.
 

 
Tactic Suitability:
(for Man. United’s current squad)
 just ONE star (out of 5)

This could a great tactic for a top club, playing against a 41221 (like vs Man. City) and you want to dominate possession.

⚠️ However it is USELESS in a league season ⚠️ against a variety of opposition formations, where we need to score + win (not just dominate possession).

Let’s move swiftly on … yeah?! 

Thoughts? 🙂 

Edited March 4, 2023 by DanEnglish

[BatiGoal]

There's no way one could pass the ball in midfield being outnumbered that badly, unless .. long ball? Wonder if that improves anything. Not significantly tho I think. 

Looks cool tho, that formation. 1800's style of football.

[DanEnglish]

2 minutes ago, BatiGoal said:

There's no way one could pass the ball in midfield being outnumbered that badly, unless .. long ball? Wonder if that improves anything. Not significantly tho I think. 

Looks cool tho, that formation. 1800's style of football.

Do you mean WE are outnumbered, or the OPPOSITION? Do you mean WE need to play long ball, or THEM ? Not sure which you meant.

• Either way - our 5 AMs mean the opposition GK + defenders need to play long ball.
• Then it’s up to us to win either the 1st or 2nd ball. Liverpool can do that fine. But Man. United struggle with that against the better sides.

You can see it in action on these Gifs - copy and pasted from another thread <here>

Spoiler

Tip #1:
The obvious tip - keep the ball!

Here’s our tika-taka 15 pass move in the opening 45 seconds from the 1st half kick-off.

Tip #2:.
The less obvious tip - press! Don’t let the opposition keep the ball!

Here’s their 2nd half kick-off … I’ve paused the gif twice so you can see the lack of passing options for the opposition DLC + later their GK … in both cases they kick it long where we win the 1st or 2nd ball.

Tip #3:
The one I kept forgetting - remember to set most of your set pieces to a ‘short’ pass!

🙂 Great for 1 game, terrible for 1 season. Great for a top side, terrible for Man. United 😞 

[BatiGoal]

1 hour ago, DanEnglish said:

Do you mean WE are outnumbered, or the OPPOSITION? Do you mean WE need to play long ball, or THEM ? Not sure which you meant.

Technically both. 😀

I meant getting the ball into midfield with just 1 DM and no CMs. You're likely closed down before you get to any of the AMs. If the pass gets there, win win, if you lose the ball, bye bye 😆

1 hour ago, DanEnglish said:

Great for a top side, terrible for Man. United 😞 

That's not a nice thing to say. It's true, but don't say it 😂

[DanEnglish]

The 5 tactics so far were all tested BEFORE the March / Winter update. 

So next - I aim to continue testing tactics - but will do it AFTER installing the March / Winter update + therefore starting a new Man. United master save.

Next
The next tactic on my list is the @MarkD’Welcome to Wrexham’ - BOTH his 442 original (with wingers) AND then his later 23212 (with 2 IFs). Fun times!

Edited March 4, 2023 by DanEnglish

[DanEnglish]

The 5 tactics so far were all tested  l BEFORE the March / Winter update. 

So next - I aim to continue testing tactics - but will do it AFTER installing the March / Winter update + therefore starting a new Man. United master save.

[P.Rahul]

Can u tests this tactic ??

Test this formation though not 1 CD ..

And share ur thoughts about it.

 

 

[DanEnglish]

Tactic 06: @MarkD
Welcome to Wrexham 442

One of Vibe’s most popular tactics after FMM23’s initial release. But does it perform AFTER the March update?!

 
The Tactic
Available <here> - this looks like an early 1990’s Ferguson 442, with 2 wingers + 2 advanced forwards, direct passing + a high press. Exciting.

This is the @MarkD original tactic - without the @DutchTony tweaks (that’ll be tested next!)

Spoiler

Attacking mentality + narrow width

High line, high press + an offside trap!

Direct passing with ‘overlap’ + ‘through balls’ switched on

Plus @MarkD specified these 3 in-match tweaks:

 
Team Results
A decent performance, but not the best so far.

With an average 2.0 points per game, it performed worse than both the original + tweaked Black Hawk tactics.

It scored a reasonable 1.8 goals per game (decent) + conceded 0.7 per game (a little poor).

However a testing record 11 of our 42 goals were from penalties! 😲 that’s one penalty every two games!

Spoiler

League
in 16 league games, 1 more than the best tactic tested so far (the original Black Hawk 4123)

• 🔻 28 points from 16 games (8 points less)
• That’s 1.75 points per league game (much less than Black Hawk’s 2.4 points / game)
• ✅ 24 goals scored (2 more) including 4 pens.
• 🔻 12 conceded (8 more!)

 
Europe
A solid group stage:

• ✅ 16 points (same as Black Hawk)
• 🔻 16 goals scored (4 less) including 7 penalties.
• ✅ 4 conceded (same)

 
All Fixtures
Not bad. But not the best so far:

• Average +2.0 points / game (0.5 less than Black Hawk).
• Average 1.8 goals scored / game (0.2 less) including 11 penalties total.
• Average 0.7 conceded / game (double Black Hawk).

This tactic seemed to either win convincingly, or lose narrowly!

• *most* 13 dominant wins (by 2+ goals)
• 2 narrow wins
• 2 draws
• 5 narrow losses
• only 1 humiliating loss (by 2+ goals)  
   

 
Tactical Observations
Some quick insights - with GIFs in the spoiler!

• Penalties - 11 won in 23 games. Wow. 👍 
• Wingers - with a ‘narrow’ width, the Wingers drift inside like a wide AP, giving a central front four! 👍 
• Crosses - 17 crosses / game (exc. corners), mostly from the FBs, of which +85% are wasted. Ouch 😡 
• No DMC - without a DMC + with an ‘all over’ press, we get overrun in midfield + consistently concede goals from through balls 😡 

Spoiler

1. Penalties!
We won 11 penalties in 23 games - mostly against weaker European opposition. Including THREE here!

 
 

2. Wingers!
They don’t stay wide. Instead on a ‘narrow’ width, the Wingers drift centrally - creating a central front four!

 
3. Crosses!
We attempted 24 crosses / game (including 7 corners / game) - mostly from the FBs.

However we only had 3 successful crosses a game, meaning +85% were wasted.

Having better aerial STs would help - as this isn’t Rashford nor Sancho’s strength!

4. No DMC!
My big defensive issue. With no DMC + an ‘all over’ press - we are often overloaded in midfield …

Example A
Our MC tries to close down their DMC, and gets passed around…

… this leaves their MC in space. Our DC steps up …

  

… leaving space behind for a through ball …

Example B
The ST drops deep to receive the ball. Without a DMC, our DC steps up …

… creating space behind for a through ball …

… which gets converted

It’s a consistent problem against better opposition who outnumber us in midfield!

 

 
Player Performances
Right-back Dalot finally has showed up ✅ and the two wingers did well ✅ but defender Martinez + DLP Casemiro were both particularly poor 🔻

Spoiler

Keeper
Solid. De Gea conceded 16 goals in 23 games, which is a little high, but still has a decent +7.0 average rating.

 
Defense
Dalot was boosted in the March / winter update - and it shows here. A testing record of 5 assists + a solid 7.2 rating 👍 

The other defenders were fine - except Martinez, who was also boosted in the March / winter update, but was our worst performing defender, both in average ratings + visible in the highlights 🔻

 
Midfield
Eriksen seems great in the CM role, BUT that’s artificially boosted by scoring 10 penalties in all competitions + taking all our set pieces.

Casemiro was weak in the DLP role.

 
Attack
Our front four scored 26 of our 42 goals (~60%) BUT not one attacker reached 10 goals scored!

Fernandes and Antony did well in their (wrong-foot) Winger roles, but Sancho + Rashford were merely ‘decent’
 

 
Tactic Suitability
 3 stars (out of 5)

A good tactic - which uses the Wingers drifting inside with the narrow width to make a central front 4 👍 it’s NOT like a Ferguson 442 at all 😂 

Decent for Man. United - but would be better for other teams with better aerial STs (due to so many crosses). Also the lack of a DMC hurts against the better English + European teams. 
 

Next
Will now test this ‘welcome to Wrexham’ tactic again - but with @DutchTony’s tweaks!

Thoughts? 🙂 

Edited March 7, 2023 by DanEnglish

[DutchTony]

42 minutes ago, DanEnglish said:

Tactic 06: @MarkD
Welcome to Wrexham 442

One of Vibe’s most popular tactics after FMM23’s initial release. But does it perform AFTER the March update?!

 
The Tactic
Available <here> - this looks like an early 1990’s Ferguson 442, with 2 wingers + 2 advanced forwards, direct passing + a high press. Exciting.

This is the @MarkD original tactic - without the @DutchTony tweaks (that’ll be tested next!)

  Reveal hidden contents

Attacking mentality + narrow width

High line, high press + an offside trap!

Direct passing with ‘overlap’ + ‘through balls’ switched on

Plus @MarkD specified these 3 in-match tweaks:

 
Team Results
A decent performance, but not the best so far.

With an average 2.0 points per game, it performed worse than both the original + tweaked Black Hawk tactics.

It scored a reasonable 1.8 goals per game (decent) + conceded 0.7 per game (a little poor).

However a testing record 11 of our 42 goals were from penalties! 😲 that’s one penalty every two games!

  Hide contents

League
in 16 league games, 1 more than the best tactic tested so far (the original Black Hawk 4123)

• 🔻 28 points from 16 games (8 points less)
• That’s 1.75 points per league game (much less than Black Hawk’s 2.4 points / game)
• ✅ 24 goals scored (2 more) including 4 pens.
• 🔻 12 conceded (8 more!)

 
Europe
A solid group stage:

• ✅ 16 points (same as Black Hawk)
• 🔻 16 goals scored (4 less) including 7 penalties.
• ✅ 4 conceded (same)

 
All Fixtures
Not bad. But not the best so far:

• Average +2.0 points / game (0.5 less than Black Hawk).
• Average 1.8 goals scored / game (0.2 less) including 11 penalties total.
• Average 0.7 conceded / game (double Black Hawk).

This tactic seemed to either win convincingly, or lose narrowly!

• *most* 13 dominant wins (by 2+ goals)
• 2 narrow wins
• 2 draws
• 5 narrow losses
• only 1 humiliating loss (by 2+ goals)  
   

 
Tactical Observations
Some quick insights - with GIFs in the spoiler!

• Penalties - 11 won in 23 games. Wow. 👍 
• Wingers - with a ‘narrow’ width, the Wingers drift inside like a wide AP, giving a central front four! 👍 
• Crosses - 17 crosses / game (exc. corners), mostly from the FBs, of which +85% are wasted. Ouch 😡 
• No DMC - without a DMC + with an ‘all over’ press, we get overrun in midfield + consistently concede goals from through balls 😡 

  Hide contents

1. Penalties!
We won 11 penalties in 23 games - mostly against weaker European opposition. Including THREE here!

 
 

2. Wingers!
They don’t stay wide. Instead on a ‘narrow’ width, the Wingers drift centrally - creating a central front four!

 
3. Crosses!
We attempted 24 crosses / game (including 7 corners / game) - mostly from the FBs.

However we only had 3 successful crosses a game, meaning +85% were wasted.

Having better aerial STs would help - as this isn’t Rashford nor Sancho’s strength!

4. No DMC!
My big defensive issue. With no DMC + an ‘all over’ press - we are often overloaded in midfield …

Example A
Our MC tries to close down their DMC, and gets passed around…

… this leaves their MC in space. Our DC steps up …

  

… leaving space behind for a through ball …

Example B
The ST drops deep to receive the ball. Without a DMC, our DC steps up …

… creating space behind for a through ball …

… which gets converted

It’s a consistent problem against better opposition who outnumber us in midfield!

 

 
Player Performances
Right-back Dalot finally has showed up ✅ and the two wingers did well ✅ but defender Martinez + DLP Casemiro were both particularly poor 🔻

  Hide contents

Keeper
Solid. De Gea conceded 16 goals in 23 games, which is a little high, but still has a decent +7.0 average rating.

 
Defense
Dalot was boosted in the March / winter update - and it shows here. A testing record of 5 assists + a solid 7.2 rating 👍 

The other defenders were fine - except Martinez, who was also boosted in the March / winter update, but was our worst performing defender, both in average ratings + visible in the highlights 🔻

 
Midfield
Eriksen seems great in the CM role, BUT that’s artificially boosted by scoring 10 penalties in all competitions + taking all our set pieces.

Casemiro was weak in the DLP role.

 
Attack
Our front four scored 26 of our 42 goals (~60%) BUT not one attacker reached 10 goals scored!

Fernandes and Antony did well in their (wrong-foot) Winger roles, but Sancho + Rashford were merely ‘decent’
 

 
Tactic Suitability
 3 stars (out of 5)

A good tactic - which uses the Wingers drifting inside with the narrow width to make a central front 4 👍 it’s NOT like a Ferguson 442 at all 😂 

Decent for Man. United - but would be better for other teams with better aerial STs (due to so many crosses). Also the lack of a DMC hurts against the better English + European teams. 
 

Next
Will now test this ‘welcome to Wrexham’ tactic again - but with @DutchTony’s tweaks!

Thoughts? 🙂 

Do you think it could work better moving 1 or both cm's back to the DMC position?

[DanEnglish]

6 minutes ago, DutchTony said:

Do you think it could work better moving 1 or both cm's back to the DMC position?

Against better teams - yes I do - at least it’s worth testing.

But then I still worry that the DMC will run out of position to chase down the opposition MCs, leaving that DMC space open again … would have to test to see what happens.

[Reshetnikov]

1 hour ago, DutchTony said:

Do you think it could work better moving 1 or both cm's back to the DMC position?

Another option, as I see, to put defensive line 'balanced' and to have both CD on CD role.

I have this problem also, and deeper defensive line helps sometimes.

[DanEnglish]

9 minutes ago, Reshetnikov said:

Another option, as I see, to put defensive line 'balanced' and to have both CD on CD role.

I have this problem also, and deeper defensive line helps sometimes.

Agree. There are a couple of tweak options:

• Moves MCs to DMCs
• Change BPD to normal DC
• Change both DCs roles to Sweepers (?!) 😲
• Change to ‘balanced’ defensive line
• Change to ‘own half’ pressing 
• Turn off ‘offside trap’

Or some ‘more extreme’ formation options:

• Move an AF to a DMC (?!) - less attacking 😞 
• Move an AF to a SS (?!) - better for closing down opposition DMCs / help out our overloaded midfield
• Change the back four to 3x DCs and 1x DMC (?!) 😲  - but get less crosses as have no FBs

Am not sure which of the tweaks would be best

[Reshetnikov]

1 hour ago, DanEnglish said:

Agree. There are a couple of tweak options:

• Moves MCs to DMCs
• Change BPD to normal DC
• Change both DCs roles to Sweepers (?!) 😲
• Change to ‘balanced’ defensive line
• Change to ‘own half’ pressing 
• Turn off ‘offside trap’

Or some ‘more extreme’ formation options:

• Move an AF to a DMC (?!) - less attacking 😞 
• Move an AF to a SS (?!) - better for closing down opposition DMCs / help out our overloaded midfield
• Change the back four to 3x DCs and 1x DMC (?!) 😲  - but get less crosses as have no FBs

Am not sure which of the tweaks would be best

I played with 'balanced' defensive line, without 'offside trap' both fullbacks on FB role, and still high press - it was quit ok, like 1 goal against in 2 games with balanced-attacking mentality. Still can't attach screens, I don't have them right now.

I think to start new save with update related to this topic, and I have some questions - how many pre-season games do you usually play? Which nationality do you choose for the head coach? no Weghorst, no Sabitzer?

[DanEnglish]

Just now, Reshetnikov said:

I played with 'balanced' defensive line, without 'offside trap' both fullbacks on FB role, and still high press - it was quit ok, like 1 goal against in 2 games with balanced-attacking mentality. Still can't attach screens, I don't have them right now.

I think to start new save with update related to this topic, and I have some questions - how many pre-season games do you usually play? Which nationality do you choose for the head coach? no Weghorst, no Sabitzer?

For these tests: 

• The 3 friendlies automatically setup by the assistant, and I holiday’s through them (same for all tests)
• I am the head coach - English
• And I’m only playing that starting 11 - using the editor to keep their morale + fitness at max
• occasionally add a defender if we have a back three tactic, or add an attacker if we have more upfront - no using Ronaldo / Weghorst / loans in - as they won’t be at the club long-term.

When I do this as a proper career (not for these tests) I take pre-season MUCH more seriously (7-8 friendlies split between my 1st and 2nd team!)

[DanEnglish]

4 hours ago, DutchTony said:

Do you think it could work better moving 1 or both cm's back to the DMC position?

Sone some quick tests … seems that putting both MCs back to the DMC position doesn’t help.

They still push forward (‘all over’ press / closing down), leaving that DMC / central Anchor space in front of your DCs unmarked 😞 maybe a double Anchor role would work, but that’s super defensive.

[Scratch]

On 04/03/2023 at 12:09, DanEnglish said:

Tactic 05: @DanEnglish
Intense Press 451 + 4141

⚠️ This is the biggest FAILURE of a tactic tested so far ⚠️

 
The Tactic
Available <here> - it was created for a one-game challenge + to show how an INTENSE press could be setup, to get MAX possession.

Yes - that’s FIVE players across the AMRLC positions 😲  But there’s no real ‘plan’ or strategy going forward - I don’t know how they’re going to score! 🤔 

  Hide contents

Its setup to counter a Man. City 41221 formation - by blocking their passing lanes, preventing their defense from passing out to their midfielders.

I don’t usually use THREE playmakers - but they are useful for maintaining possession as they drift into space looking to receive the ball.

You can see we have a high line + high press, but also ‘time wasting’ + short, slow passing on a ‘defensive’ mentality to maximise possession.

If the opposition play with 2 Strikers, then we move to the (FAR LESS EFFECTIVE!) 4141 - where we move one AMC back to be a 2nd DC.

 
Team Results:
Poor - a joint worst 1.8 points per game, which was even worse in the league + boosted by a 100% record in the Europa league …

  Reveal hidden contents

League:
11th place in the league tells it all…

• 🔻 Just 20 points (in 16 games) - the worst so far!
• 🔻 16 goals scored - same as @Mushy solid 5230
• 🔻 16 conceded - the worst so far!

 
Europe:
A near perfect Europa League - potentially against the weakest group we’ve faced so far.

• ✅ Full points! 18 points from 6 games!
• ✅ 15 goals in 6 games. Decent.
• ✅ Just 2 conceded in Europe - the best so far?!

 
All Fixtures:
SIX losses + 5 draws in 23 matches tells the story

• 🔻 Just 1.8 points per game (in 23 games) - the joint worst so far!
• 🔻only 1.5 goals scored / game - similar to the tweaked ‘narrow 5230’.
• 🔻 0.8 conceded / game - the worst so far!

• *most* 9 dominant wins (by 2+ goals)
• 3 narrow wins
• 5 draws
• 4 narrow losses
• 2 humiliating losses (by 2+ goals) 

 
Observations:
This tactic was built for higher possession and on that (and only that), it kind of delivered:

60% possession (+10% more*)
320 passes complete (+100 more*)

*more than any of the previous 4 tactics tested so far

  Reveal hidden contents

The Manchester Derby was a great example …

… we lost 1-0, BUT we dominated the possession + chances.

Look at Man. City’s 34 tackles (!) and 13 offsides (!) - our offside trap worked beautifully. Except we lost 😞 

The issues are:

1. when the better teams break through our press, it’s easier for them to score,
2. neither the 451 nor 4141 tactic works if the opposition plays 2 strikers - with one DC, any long ball is dangerous. With 2 DCs, our four AM press isn’t as effective.
3. we have no strategy to score 😞  

 
Player Performances:
You don’t want to see this - do you? Really?! Are you sure?! … well ok then …

  Reveal hidden contents

Keeper:
Not bad. De Gea conceded a huge 19 goals, but with a decent +7.0 average rating. This wasn’t his fault.

 
 

Defense:
The back three did well + got great average ratings as a result. Casemiro as a DLP wasn’t that effective.

Attack:
We needed five attacking midfielders - so van de Beek was our weakest link.

Everyone else did ‘ok’ - with most goals/assists coming from lone striker Rashford + central playmaker Fernandes.
 

 
Tactic Suitability:
(for Man. United’s current squad)
 just ONE star (out of 5)

This could a great tactic for a top club, playing against a 41221 (like vs Man. City) and you want to dominate possession.

⚠️ However it is USELESS in a league season ⚠️ against a variety of opposition formations, where we need to score + win (not just dominate possession).

Let’s move swiftly on … yeah?! 

Thoughts? 🙂 

Behind on reading these great posts! 

For this one, I know you had a particular focus around possession, but I would have pushed the two IWBs and the DLP forward one line, gone Balanced instead of Defensive, maybe go Fast, but definitely not Slow, Balanced defensive line, turn off Time wasting, get rid of Overlap and definitely get rid of Work into Box, and probably make the two wide players wingers (even if they can't cross, there's benefit to keeping them wide to stretch the defense). Also AP to SS.

I think that'd give you a tactic where you would win by a lot a fair chunk of the time, with the occasional blow out. 

Anyway, that's all just theoretical and not expecting you to try it (and I have no time), but it got me thinking...

[TehSpaceGiraffe]

1 hour ago, Scratch said:

Behind on reading these great posts! 

For this one, I know you had a particular focus around possession, but I would have pushed the two IWBs and the DLP forward one line, gone Balanced instead of Defensive, maybe go Fast, but definitely not Slow, Balanced defensive line, turn off Time wasting, get rid of Overlap and definitely get rid of Work into Box, and probably make the two wide players wingers (even if they can't cross, there's benefit to keeping them wide to stretch the defense). Also AP to SS.

I think that'd give you a tactic where you would win by a lot a fair chunk of the time, with the occasional blow out. 

Anyway, that's all just theoretical and not expecting you to try it (and I have no time), but it got me thinking...

I'd be interested in trying this, if I get time this evening I'll give it a run

[TehSpaceGiraffe]

Hi guys sorry it's taken a while but I managed a whole season with the suggestions that @Scratch mentioned and made a few of my own. 

I did try to move the DLP and IWB's up but it left the lone defender so vulnerable, the DLP didn't track back and the IWB's left so much space on the wings it was free real estate for wide players.

So I have no idea what the hell happened in the last 1/3 of the season, still scored decent amount of goals but conceded loads, I had injuries and I made tweaks so they probably didn't help. The tactic instructions were what j used when we had that decent run of form from October to February, also just for information I don't have the editor sonhad to do this old school. 

As you can see the PF got most of the goals, with the SS's shortly behind. The attacking play on this tactic is really good, the idea of having Wingers is very helpful, they keep the width to stretch the defence but occasionally found them cutting inside and grabbing a few goals. Problem is it's so open at the back, anyone team with either pacy strikers or 2 strikers will have a riot of a time, God forbid there be teams with 2 pacy strikers them you're in trouble. 

As you can see here because the front 6 are all attacking minded they dont track back and recover, which means one decent pass and suddenly it could be 5 on 4, as shown in the screenshot, and the DM should probably be a different as he moves around too much and doesn't offer too much in terms of cover.

I am going to persevere with this as I think there's more to come from it. I'm either going to change the DLP to an anchor, or move the full backs into a back 3. I'm not the most tactically aware person in the world so if anyone wants to chime in it'd be greatly appreciated, also I haven't started the next season yet so if anyonenwamts screenshots of specific games or something I'll go back and find them for you.

Cheers!