Need some advice for tomorrow's match

[Bukefal]

I'm facing this opponent tomorrow



We both have similar teams, mine is little better...



First match:


His team is much better now

Any advice ?

[Bukefal]

anyone ?

[tziortz]

4-1-4-1? tricky..

[cracicot]

yup, 4-1-4-1 motivated. wingers red arrows, DL/DR red arrows
attacking, mixed attack, zonal, normal tackle, mixed passing, no counter, no offsides.

[Razz]

yup, 4-1-4-1 motivated. wingers red arrows, DL/DR red arrows
attacking, mixed attack, zonal, normal tackle, mixed passing, no counter, no offsides.

I'd go 3n-1-4w-1-1, defensive, focus middle, zonal, mixed (or long), counter. Blue on MCs & DMC, red on MR, ML and AMC

Better yet, do some serious FA shopping tonight and upgrade that team. You should be able to find plenty of 1 or 2 token buys at this time of season.

[cracicot]

I'd go 3n-1-4w-1-1, defensive, focus middle, zonal, mixed (or long), counter. Blue on MCs & DMC, red on MR, ML and AMC

Better yet, do some serious FA shopping tonight and upgrade that team. You should be able to find plenty of 1 or 2 token buys at this time of season.

I agree with you that 3N-1-4-1-1 is most likely a better option, but whatever formation it is, Betjulai needs to be the left DC to counter his scout ST, with Brunklik in the middle to help out.

There is triple coverage no matter what you do so short passes up the middle to the AMC and ST would probably be best.
Attacking, not defensive, since he should be at home he will have more possession this way. No counter, no offsides. Red arrows on ML/MR.

[dv8r]

I'd go 3n-1-4w-1-1, defensive, focus middle, zonal, mixed (or long), counter. Blue on MCs & DMC, red on MR, ML and AMC

Better yet, do some serious FA shopping tonight and upgrade that team. You should be able to find plenty of 1 or 2 token buys at this time of season.

Perhaps 3N-1-4-2 would be a better formation to use. I don't fancy the AMC vs 2 DMCs, rather have the 2 STs vs the wide defence.

[cracicot]

Perhaps 3N-1-4-2 would be a better formation to use. I don't fancy the AMC vs 2 DMCs, rather have the 2 STs vs the wide defence.

It is a tough call no matter what. I like the short passing on the 1-1 up the middle though.

I just played that formation vs a 4-4-2 classic and dominated possession, and this formation he is up against is a bit more defensive 3-5-2, and can be treated as a 3-4-1-2.



Anyways, you cant miss with playing either. Well the NGE can have a say, but I think the formation should win.

[dv8r]

It is a tough call no matter what. I like the short passing on the 1-1 up the middle though.

I just played that formation vs a 4-4-2 classic and dominated possession, and this formation he is up against is a bit more defensive 3-5-2, and can be treated as a 3-4-1-2.



Anyways, you cant miss with playing either. Well the NGE can have a say, but I think the formation should win.

Personally, I look at it like AMC vs DMC and ST vs defenders. If the opponent has a weakness in the defence i would avoid the AMC and have more strikers. But I think either formation could still work.

I'm not a fan of using players when they are not needed, example being when I'm up against a 4-1-2-1-2 narrow diamond, I tend not to use DL/DR since I'm playing against a narrow formation. 3 DCs is enough and you can use the extra player in midfield or as a striker.

[Bukefal]

Thank you guys, you helped me a little to change my formation...

This was my starting team, I took off my AMC and add one more MC instead...

But unfortunately this is what happened in third minute...


I wasn't playing hard tackling style... I substitute Tancev (ST) with AMC, I didn't have another MC on the bench.

I thought that I'll lose this match, but surprisingly before the halftime break, my team was leading the match with 3-0