What instructions?

[Steve285]

I thought I would go with this formation thanks to reading what you guys think.

I will set for attack, down both flanks, mixed passing and no counter attacks
The defence will press high, normal tackling, zonal and no offside trap.
Do you agree

The match is this afternoon and I will let you know how I get on.

[HoofDaddy]

i'd only be concerned if your opponent goes butterfly

[Steve285]

Just checked out his team. As yet he is playing 3DC, 2 DML/R, 2CM, 1AM, 2ST and he is a level 12 against my level 10

[HoofDaddy]

go 3n142 or 3n412 depending on how strong his AMC is

[Steve285]

I got slaughtered 4-1

[HoofDaddy]

Did you stick with 451v? Against butterfly I would have been running 3142 with ca on and long passing middle low pressing.

[ponzu]

We did not talk win bonus money. In a cup against a higher rated opponent I would have gone all in. Sorry to hear about the outcome. In the end, it was probably mismatched formation rather than game orders or lack of bonus that did you in.

Question for all:

Is 3-2(DML/R)-2-1-2 what you guys call butterfly? I just played a league game against a guy who was 3 Q points below me and who used this formation. I thought it was going to be a walk in the park. It's an ugly looking formation, I mean what does one need 2 DMs for? (Was what I was thinking.) I switched from my favorite 4-1-5V to 4-1-2-1-2 (is it called narrow diamond?) and started with Normal, Pass down the middle, Mixed, Low, Normal tackling, forward arrow on AMC. I was playing away and had 8% possession bonus. By halftime the score was 0:0 and I began sweating it. Possession stat was in my favor but barely. I switched to attacking and my guys ran a play passing the ball a short distance back and forth down the middle over and over again, confusing both me and the opponent. My DC with no arrows scored at the end of the play. I considered going to Hard tackling based on some thoughts our Brazilian friend published about Hard being good against weaker teams and bad against stronger teams (different thread, still under discussion or should be), but at that point one of my guys grabbed a YC, which turned me off this idea. In the end, I eked out a 1:0 away win and kept my perfect league record, but based on this experience and OP's unfortunate cup outcome I have more respect for this formation.

So 3N-1-4-2 is a better counter?

[Joseph Sjarifudin]

Is 3-2(DML/R)-2-1-2 what you guys call butterfly? I just played a league game against a guy who was 3 Q points below me and who used this formation. I thought it was going to be a walk in the park. It's an ugly looking formation, I mean what does one need 2 DMs for? (Was what I was thinking.)

My formation also ugly and use 3 DMC , 3W-3DMC-1-2W-1

[HoofDaddy]

No butterfly has aml/amr with 1 ST, the aforementioned formation is a butterfly variant, with an amc and 2 ST. 3n-1-4-2 or 3w 4-1-2 would be what i would use against it. I've been using butterfly and butterfly variants more often lately and those are the formations that cause me problems and neccessitate formation changes.

See my latest league match.



I also subbed off gallego at halftime and put on an amc instead and went left flank instead of both flanks. I did this because i was sure he was going zonal marking and wanted to overload a side.

[HoofDaddy]

Sounds like Leicester CIty tactics, Joseph, long passing counterattacks?