Quote Originally Posted by LesterMind View Post
Great job.

Using your phillosophy about counter formations, I am trying to imagine which formation would be more effective to fight against next formation.....

DR---DC---DL
-----DMC----
MR---MC---ML
---AMC-AMC--
------ST-----

(reverse)

------ST------
---AMC-AMC--
ML---MC---MR
-----DMC-----
DL---DC---DR
(-----GK-----)
Maybe it can be called a (christmas) tree.

Allways supossing could be using attacking arrows for middlewings.

Any suggestion from you?
My suggestion trying to use your phillosphy as I understand, could be next ones...
having not any MR and not any DMR at my list players (I have for the others positions)

with 3 strikers...

--ST-ST-ST--
--------------
---MC--MC---
---DMC-DMC-
DL---DC---DR
with red arrows for wingsbacks?

or better...

with 2 strikers

---ST---ST--
--AMC-AMC--
-----MC-----
--DMC-DMC--
DR---DC---DL
and again red arrows?

or...

---ST---ST---
--------------
ML---MC---(MR) (dont have MR but may be using it excepcionally)
--DMC-DMC---
--DC-DC-DC--

red arrows for middelwingers?

or just enought 1 st with 2 amc maybe like this...

------ST------
--AMC--AMC--
ML---MC---(MR)
--DMC--DMC--
--DC-DC-DC-- (or DL---DC---DR)

red arrows at middlewingers?

Some of these looks like a tree as well.

Thank you if still are answering at this thread.

Cheers.
i think that the main weakness is the wide defensive line. Therefore I would go 4-3-3 or 4-3-2-1 or 4-2-3-1 (narrow AMs).