...and we are back to the original subject.
Crushed (again) by an asymmetric formation, this time even stupider looking. Are you ready for this?
DL-DC-DC-DC-DR
----------DMC---------
-----MC----------------
-------------------AML
-----ST-------ST-----
Why would this even work? Okay, it's fairly solid at the back. He seems to be giving away the midfield. And throwing a few attackers our way. The challenge, it would seem, would be to score on him. Therefore, I switched from 4-5-1V I had been planning on to 3W-5-1V. Playing man-to-man with 4 men back should have taken care of his 3 attackers, right? Well, it did, sort of. His STs did nothing, low ratings. The AML scored one late in the game when my guys starting running around a bit too much. So how does his off-center MC come up with two goals? One of them in the first minute (before I got a chance to tune in). When that happens, there is a strong suspicion of a rigged (troll) game with predetermined outcome. But I don't want to make any excuses.
Lost 1:3 in a cup match, at home, with 15% possession bonus from fans plus full training bonus, which I used initially for possession and eventually for attack. Had a bit of Q advantage as well. 65-35 possession (actually, surprisingly small advantage considering), 86/84 completion. 23/19 tackles. 6/3 corners. The lads are gassed before the next game a few hours away. And nothing to show for it. It's almost like I didn't do anything wrong, just had "one of those games". But these losses sting when delivered by an off-kilter squad. That always introduced the nagging doubt: what if the other guy is a genius and I am missing something?
The only thing bothering me is my choice of the defensive line: In hindsight ---DC-DC----DR might have been a better idea. But I hate asymmetry.
And also in hindsight, couldn't the defenders, outnumbering the attackers, have sorted it out better with zonal? HoofDaddy once told me that off-kilter formations wreak havoc on zonal defence, and I have had success with man-to-man since then.