Countering the hordes of 4-3-3 / 4-1-2-3

Whether it is the Lobby, the Tactics chat room or the forums, people are always complaining about other users and the supposed successes they are achieving because of their 4-3-3 / 4-1-2-3 formations.

Basically, the formations looks a bit like this (image is the courtesy of FML-Tactics):

In some cases, the DM (defensive midfielder) is replaced by a regular MC (midfielder central), but this is pretty much how it looks. Depending on if you're facing a classic tactic or one created with the tactics creator, there will be some differences in the definitive setup, but this is the overal look of the thing.

Instruction-wise, these formations have one thing in common. They are ultra-narrow. I mean really narrow. What they rely on, is dominance in the centre of the pitch. Call it a glitch in the Match Engine or whatever, but playing very narrow upfront and in midfield seems to work wonders.

Your own narrow midfielders are perfectly capable of going wide to track an opposing winger, whereas the same winger or midfielder seems unable to cut inside to mark a run of the narrow player.

This generally leads to the three forwards overloading on the two central defenders, because the opposing wingbacks won't cut inside to help their centre-backs, unless you instruct them to man-mark, which most managers don't do by default (the default setting for most wingbacks is zonal).

When you leave a match versus a team like this to your AI, you're pretty much screwed. Your AI won't make the necessary changes and when it does, the other manager can just change his tactic around again and hammer you anyway.

Should you find yourself in a live match versus a 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-3, don't despair. You can beat them. I won't say it'll be easy and it definitely won't be a pretty match to see, but hey, it's not your fault they're all mindless sheep playing the same generic formation someone posted on the forums, right?

Taking in mind I'm using a 4-2-4 formation (basically a 4-4-2 with advanced wingers), this is how I counter the swarm of mindless sheep using the same formation.

First of all, my DR and DL are set to man marking. That doesn't mean just general man marking, but I assign them to a specific opponent. My DR picks up their FLC, whilst my DL picks up their FRC. That should leave my two centre-backs to deal with their remaining central forward.

That isn't enough ofcourse, as your defence will most likely still be spread wider than their offence, meaning your wingbacks still have to cut inside to mark their target, which they are generally not good at.

So the next thing we do, is change our style of play. I generally opt for a counter-attacking match strategy. This automatically narrows the own formation to match that of your opponent sufficiently to allow those wingbacks of yours to pick on those pesky all-speed winger-attackers.

As I said above, the 4-3-3 / 4-1-2-3 sheep usually employ very fast forwards, who can run at your defenders and skip past them. There's not much you can do about that, but you can limit the effective range of these speed demons.

The best way to do that is to use one of the in-game shouts. Tell the team to drop deeper. By dropping back, you effectively decrease the amount of space a forward can run into. More often than not, if a striker does run through your defence, he will find himself in a difficult angle or even running the ball out for a goal-kick.

Setting up your keeper as a sweeper-keeper also tends to help, as he can help sweep up any through-balls or pesky strikers chasing after such a through-ball.

That pretty much sorted out the defensive part of taking care of the mindless drones, but I'm quite sure none of you are satisfied with just keeping them at bay. No, we wish to punish them for their lack of imagination by actually winning the match or at least putting a few goals past them.

So here's what we do. Again, we look to use the in-game shouts. Since your own formation is by default wider than theirs, as you are using at least two wingers or inside forwards, your opponents weakness lies on his wings, where he basically has no players.

Sure, the central players will drop wide to get at your wingers if needed, but that will take time and we're not going to allow them that time. No, we are taking advantage of their Achilles' heel and we are hitting them where it hurts them the most. We're doing this by using the exploit the flanks shout, which does exactly what it says on the tin.

Next up is the get the ball forward shout. We don't just want to go wide, we want to go there fast, as we don't want to allow their central midfielders to drop wide and pick up on our runners. So get it out there and get it out there fast.

Last up is the pass into space shout. If your wingers start running with the ball in their feet, they're usually a bit slower, so let's not do that. Since the opposition has no-one directly picking up your wingers, they're going to have a fair amount of space, so let's use that to our advantage. Let the wingers chase after a ball that's not played into their feet.

More often than not, this will draw an opposing wing-back out of position as well, as he will try to intercept. When your winger is fast enough, he will usually skip past this wing-back, which leaves your man on the ball, plus your two regular forwards and other inside forward/winger on the other wing versus three defenders.

Sure, that won't always result in a goal, but in the end, you're always going to put a few of those chances away. Oh by the way, this isn't a 100% guaranteed way to success against a 4-1-2-3 or 4-3-3, but I reckon I've won about 80% of my live matches against one this way.

Why Can't I Get This Idea To Work?!

Okay, I'm trying something here and I can't get it to work... This is basically what I have in mind, tactically speaking. For the past two seasons, Barcelona have employed a formation where the deepest midfield player (either Yaya Toure or Sergio Busquets) drops into the centre of defence. The two centre-backs, Gerard Pique and Carles Puyol, will spread into extremely wide positions whilst Barcelona are in possession, almost on the touchlines. This spreading allows the wing-backs Dani Alves and Maxwell to bomb forward without fear of leaving the defence completely exposed.

The problem with attacking wing-backs is that they are never completely free to attack, they are always concerned about their defensive responsibilities. When I can create a more reliable and sturdy three-man defence, they could get to the opposition byline without leaving a huge hole at the back.

A big part in these bombing forward runs is the role of the wide players on my team. Rather than stay wide (which would hamper the ability of the wing-backs to get forward), they narrow, drifting into the box and almost a conventional front three with the central forward. This has the effect of narrowing the opposition defence, as their natural markers follow them into the centre.

Basically, I am combining the inside forward idea with more attacking wing-backs, as the inside movement of the wingers opens up a huge amount of space on the flanks, ready for the wing-backs to run into and exploit.

Apart from the regular problems the inside forwards present to any defence, the opponents wide midfield players are suddenly charged with an almost solely defensive job. When my wing-backs get to the byline and the opposing wide midfielders track them all the way, my opponent will end up with something approaching a flat back six, which means there is now space in midfield to exploit.

Intelligent movement as the key to unlocking an opponents defences. Intelligent movement, as stated earlier, implies position switching, which in turn means that players will often end up finishing an attacking move in a different position to which they started this attacking move, in an effort to exploit the gaps in defence created by other people's movement.

The only problem is that I can't get the bloody defensive midfielder to drop into or even right in front of defence. It keeps looking like a fucking pyramid with two at the back in a narrowish formation and one in front of those two.

This is a problem because the defence is too narrow, particularly if the opposing striker is or opposing strikers are faster than the defenders and able to move wide before outpacing tjheir marker to the ball. Add to that the fact that every team has at least one of these speedfreak forwards, and you can see the problem I am faced with.

Soooo... to cut a long story short, any ideas on how to bloody fix this?

The Come-Back Of The Inside Forward

This season in real life could very well mark the end of the traditional centre forward as we know him from the past as a traditional goal-scorer, as this central forward is being replaced by a new role, that of the old inside forward.

The winger as an inside forward, drifting into the penalty area from the wing to provide assists or score goals. It is a role which is becoming more and more popular in modern football. Just look at some of the teams in the semi-finals of this year’s Champions League. Lionel Messi and Arjen Robben are prime examples, whereas Cristiano Ronaldo holds a similar role at Madrid and used to hold this role for Man Utd.

Sir Alex Ferguson was last season quoted saying: "When forwards attack from wide to inside, they are far more dangerous," Ferguson explained. "It's funny when I see centre-forwards starting off in the middle against their markers and then going away from goal. Strikers going inside are far more dangerous, I think. When Henry played as a striker, and sometimes when Wayne does, they try to escape and create space by drifting from the centre to wide positions, when that actually makes them less dangerous." (source: The Guardian)

We’re basically noticing a shift away from central forwards who are supposed to score the goals. The stereotypical strikers such as Gabriel Batistuta and Ronaldo are being replaced by a new breed of goal-scorer. When we look at the last two World Footballers of the Year, we notice these have been primarily wide players who cut inside and score many goals, exploiting the space made by the central forwards moving around and luring defenders away as well.


Intelligent movement upfront has become the key to unlocking an opponents defences. Intelligent movement implies position switching, which in turn means that players will often end up finishing an attacking move in a different position to which they started this attacking move, in an effort to exploit the gaps in defence created by other people's movement.


These movements cause problems for a defence because the responsibility for marking the runner shifts between players. When a winger drifts into the centre of the pitch, the wingback is forced to make a choice. If he leaves his position to follow his marker, he leaves a lot of space on the wing, which happened to Lyon against Bayern.

With Ribéry (initially anyway) and Robben drifting into the centre, their opponents were forced to follow, leaving the Bayern wingbacks Contento and Lahm with a lot of space in the backs of the Lyon midfielders Delgado and Ederson. Philipp Lahm especially excelled in this role, as Lyon chose to focus on Arjen Robben, leaving Lahm with a lot of space to run into, which he frequently did.

Should the wingback decide to remain in his position, he creates a new problem, as the centre-backs run the risk of being out-numbered. In sticking to the Bayern vs Lyon game, I am going to sketch a possible scenario now.

If Cissokho and Reveillere had decided to remain stationary instead of following their markers, the Lyon centre-backs Cris and Toulalan would have to face not only Olic and Müller, but potentially one or two of the wingers as well, creating a numerical advantage for the forwards.

Thus, if the defensive responsibilities for picking up on moving forwards are not managed properly, the inside forward will find himself in acres of space, which leaves him more opportunity to assist the strikers or score himself.


So basically, when an inside forward such as Robben or Messi drifts inside, he creates confusion as the responsibility for marking him shifts from the full back or the side midfielder to the centre back. Not only does this create space in the “hole”, it also creates space in the “channel” between wing back and centre-back. With much more communication needed in the opposition defence, a good inside forward on the wing can create so much space for his team mates as he drags players out of position from all over the field.


The inside forward often starts wide, meaning the opposing team's wingback assumes he is the player he should be picking up. But then, the winger starts drifting inside, which means the opposing teams wing-back usually tracks him into the centre, which in turn opens up space for a deep-lying forward (such as for example Thomas Müller or Zlatan Ibrahimovic) on the flank to exploit with either a cross or a through ball.


In other variations, we have seen the deep-lying forward (again, Ibrahimovic or Müller for example) dropping into the gap between defence and midfield, luring his defender along, which leaves a gap in the centre of defence. A well placed through ball means either space for the second striker or for the inside forward drifting inside to pounce upon, as Arsenal fans can probably remember when Vermaelen was lured out of position as few times.

It’s not just in the Champions League where these inside forwards are gaining in popularity and impact. In Italy for example, Antonio di Natale is topping the goal-scoring chart, whereas in Holland, Bryan Ruiz and Luis Suarez are fighting for the top goal-scorer crown. All these players are mostly forwards who start on the flank and drift inside.

It should be very interesting indeed to see if the World Cup this summer catches up with this trend from club football and if this trend continues into next season. That the inside forward is highly effective in FM and FM Live is something I have been well aware of for a while now.

There Is A Reason Default Tactics Are Not Flawless...

Call it repetitive if you will, but lately I've noticed a lot of people are complaining about the tactical aspect of FM Live. On the one hand, people want to stop so-called supertactics, the very effective tactics which use and abuse the weaknesses in the Match Engine to get good results and require very little editing pro match. On the other hand however, they are asking SI to upgrade the default tactics. That seems a bit odd to me.

This isn't going to be a very long post, just one where I wonder where this contradiction in terms comes from. On the one hand, people want to stop the supertactics to create a more level playing field. Certain formations were supposedly overpowered (remember the big 4-6-0 drama and in Beta, similar discussions were had about the 4-3-3 with 3 central forwards formation) and people were branded as exploiters or even cheaters. On the other hand, the default tactics should be better to counter these so-called ME exploits or super tactics.

These requests seem contradictory to each other. Either you want total freedom, which means very basic default tactics in which people have to think for themselves and edit it, or you want a totally restricted tactical system, where everyone who creates a tactic that requires an opponent to switch things around and actually think about what to do next (GOOD HEAVENS!!!) is branded an exploiter.

Can you tell I'm trying to take the piss? Seriously, are we going to remove all tactical freedom from the game because a few muppets are too stupid to counter specific formations? Surely not?

Height Is No Longer Cosmetic

FM has for many years taken the approach that the Jumping attribute was based on HEIGHT + JUMPING. Beyond this Height had ZERO bearing on anything whatsoever. The leaden footed Peter Crouch has Jumping ~20 because of his tallness, the much springier Michael Owen has Jumping ~10 because of his shortness. Crouch wins the header of course.

The Jumping attribute was how high a player's HEAD gets. The Match Engine compared the two Jumping attributes and job done.

Hidden away in the release notes for the Match Engine upgrade it now says that the Jumping attribute is based solely on JUMPING. The leaden footed Peter Crouch would have Jumping ~5, the much springier Michael Owen would have Jumping ~15. Crouch still wins the header though because his Height is factored in by the ME.

As the stated above, and I am now quoting Marc Vaughan, jumping does NOT mean physically how many inches a player can jump - it is an indication of the height a player can reach while jumping, hence height is a large factor in this.

If you doubt this then consider the following - you're 1.60 tall, I'm 2 metres tall ... chances of you being able to jump heigher than me are pretty darn slim.

Even if I have absolutely NO jumping ability and can get barely 10 centimetres off the floor you'd still have to jump 40 centimetres in order to match my natural height advantage.

As such considering that 'jumping' is an indication of how high a player can jump in the game and as such has a factor of height in it I don't think its unreasonable to indicate what I did.

Obviously you can get short players in the game with reasonable jumping (ie. Mr. Owen - 1.80 & 9 jumping) and tall players who can't jump (ie. me in a previous game - 2 metres & 9 jumping ). But if both players are good jumpers than obviously the taller one will have a natural advantage (hence 20 jumping isn't likely to be held by a 1.60 tall player).

So in short, the Jumping attribute is now how high a player's FEET get. The ME combines the Jumping attribute with the player's Height and compares the two results, which is a significant change! As people have questionned earlier, how is this going to be reflected in the Jumping attributes of existing players? To reflect the new ME Crouch should have his Jumping adjusted down to ~5 (well, a fairly low figure - certainly not 20) and Owen should have his adjusted up.

Basically, if a ball is played to your 1.95 tall striker that is 1.90 off the ground then the striker can head the ball without jumping. The 1.85 defender will need to jump to reach this ball so his jumping skill comes into play. The player that does not need to jump will have the advantage in this case as he will not be affected by penalties to strength, agility etc.

If the ball is played higher than 1.95 off the ground then they both need to jump. In this case the player with the highest jumping would have advange (other secondary skills used in the calculation would include strength, determination, agility, positioning etc)

In short, your small DC with high jumping would generally be okay unless he comes up against a giant with good aerial and secondary skills.

My 4-4-2 / 4-2-4 Hybrid; An Alternative To The Ultra-Narrow Formations

The last week or so, I have been trying to come up with a way to counter the ultra-narrow formations dominating the GameWorld, without backing away from the formations and style of play I have been using since day 1. After an initial dramatic dip in form, I think I have now found a way to deal with the ultra-narrow formations, without abandoning my traditions.

These ultra-narrow formations rely on the fact that their central midfielders will drop wide to mark your own wide players, whilst forming a compact block defensively. Alternatively, when such a narrow formation attacks, the wide players of your own team seem very inept at picking up the narrow players moving out to the flanks from the middle on.

I have now found a way to make my 4-2-4 work against these narrow formations. Yes, I admit I have narrowed my formation a bit to bolster my defence, but I also re-distributed the roles within the team. Instead of two inside forwards, I am now only using an inside forward on the right and an actual winger on the left. Upfront, I am using a Trequartista on the right and a Targetman in the centre. In midfield, I am using an attacking deep-lying playmaker and a defensive ball-winning midfielders. At the back, there are two man-markers and two wing-backs in front of a sweeper keeper.

It works like this. At both ends of the pitch, the team’s shape adapts and evolves when in possession to expand the pitch and to create space for their flair players. In defence, the defensive midfielder Cleverley drops in as a centre-half to allow the actual centre-backs Miguel Ferreira and Samba Sylla to spread the width of the pitch, allowing Claudino and Jovanovic as wing-backs to venture forward.

The main effect of this is that is suddenly transfers a huge defensive responsibility onto the two opposition wide midfielders. When you're fielding a narrow formation, your main attacking threat was coming from the wings. My strategy meant it was very difficult for the opposition's wide players to track my wing-backs and then have the energy to attack them at pace. Many opposing wingers looked exhausted by the end of a game.

Upfront, the main movement was the combination of right winger David Hall and trequartista Ivan on the right-hand side. Hall starts wide, meaning the opposing team's wingback assumes he is the player he should be picking up. But then Hall starts drifting inside, which means the opposing teams wing-back usually tracks him into the centre, which in turn opens up space for Ivan on the right-hand flank.

How I Love The Trequartista

It's an underrated role really. Most people back away from it, mostly because they don't really know what to expect. Now in my eyes, the Trequartista is a classic Number 10 in Dutch football terminology.

The word trequartista is derived from the Italian language, where it literally means "three quarters", as he plays 3/4 of the way up the field. This player basically has a free role and is allowed quite a bit of freedom to roam the pitch and cause mayhem for the opposing side.

Typically, your Trequartista or Treq as I lovingly call him, is the best or one of the better players on the team. The offense tends to flow through the player, as he either drops deep to collect the ball and distribute it further forward or he stays forward to be on the receiving end of a pass.

Basically, the guy is the pivotting point for your entire offensive gameplay. If the Trequartista has a good day, your team will prosper. He will score or assist seemingly for fun, like for example
Ronaldinho at Milan, Messi in many Barca matches, Totti at Roma, Diego at Juventus, Bergkamp at Arsenal and Ajax and there are many more examples.

So why do I love this player role? These players are generally a nuisance to mark, because their movement between forward and deep positions can drag defenders out of position, allowing my team to capitalise with a cutting pass. The Treq's forward movement also allows them to catch the back line off guard by arriving from deep, after setting up the attack himself most of the time.

All in all, it's a highly unpredictable role for an opponent, as you never really know what this forward is going to do exactly. Basically, the Trequartista acts as a hybrid between a traditional playmaker and a striker, making them extremely difficult to find, but very rewarding when used properly.

I tend to use the Trequartista as the second forward in a two-forward formation, where the second forward plays a set up role for the Trequartista and the wingers, who often act as inside forwards. If needed, the fullbacks provide the offensive width.

Over the past seasons, I have had a few highly successful Trequartista's in my team. Guys like Takayuki Morimoto, Lulinha and more recently Donati Signani have been instrumental in the successes I have achieved in GW Miller so far. So yeah, Treq's, I love you!

How To Do An Outside Area Corner Properly

Love it or hate it, until they code this corner out of existence, it's here to stay because of it's tremendous effectiveness. As I promised yesterday, I would details my settings and those of others on how to use the corner.

As you will have deduced by now, there are more ways to actually set up this set piece routine. The first one I will mention is one I plucked off the beta forums, mentioned first by Paul Collyer himself.

Two players - Near post flick
Two players - Challenge Keeper
Two players - Wait on the Far Post
Two players - Lurk (one of them is corner taker)
Two players - Stay Back

Corners are set to penalty area.

That's just one setup, and in my opinion the most basic one which is easy to defend with just zonal marking. There's a number of variations to this setup flying around, including my own, which looks more like this.

Three players - Stay Back

One player - Designated corner taker

One player - Lurk

One player - Short option

One player - Challenge Keeper

One player - Attack Far Post

One player - Attack Near Post

One player - Wait at Far Post

Corner distribution is again set to Penalty Area.

The concept of the changes is provide some form of automated cover in case an opponent tries to mark out your lurker. Often, the markers will choose to follow the players attacking the posts, so the runners are providing some distraction inside the box. The short option player seems to guarantee a better distribution of the corner somehow. I have not quite figured out how and why, but the delivery seems to be far more accurate with this guy standing around.

Exploit Or Evolution?

Those of you who are active in the beta worlds have surely seen, experienced or even used this specific corner setup.

The corner swings out to the edge of the box, where a seemingly unmarked player gets a free crack at goal, more often than not resulting in a goal.

Now, the fact of the matter is that the default corner defence many teams are using is completely inept at defending these kind of corners. As one might expect, there is an outcry on the beta forums to have this kind of corner banned/binned.

My ideas regarding the matter are bit more controversial. Bug or not, loophole or not, it's tactical ingenuity by the managers who come up with this. They are thinking outside the box in an effort to create new opportunities for themselves. Do we really want to punish people for being creative by taking away every new option they find?

Making good tactics which people cannot counter immediately is an exploit? Making people actually think about their tactics and not just going with some default system is an exploit?Surely people can ask in the Tactics Chat or on the forum how to combat this specific setup if they're too lazy to use their own mind or simply lack the know-how regarding the FML engine?

When a setup can be countered with new default settings (and this setup CAN be countered with relative ease), does this not make it just another valid choice by the manager to use it and defend against it? Not every unusual and unorthodox piece of gameplay should be branded as an exploit just because people can't figure out how to counter it in under a minute.

If you want to talk proper exploits, take the old "Challenge Goalkeeper" setup of the 1.3 engine. It's much harder to mount an effective defence against these type of corners. It didn't matter how good your set piece defence was, if the opposing team had someone who was better in the air (someone like Neretljak, Zigic or Onyewu), they would score anyway, regardless of how your defence was setup.

Loophole or not, the "Outside Area" setup adds some extra depth to the tactical aspect of FML and its set pieces. It's no longer "lump the ball into the box and hope someone manages to head it in" combined with buying some header beast like Neretljak, Zigic or Onyewu to ram the ball home. A bit of variation is not that bad...

Also, in due time, when people get acquinted with this corner strategy, they will setup their defence to counter it and it will die out anyway. It's now only effective against teams who refuse to tinker with their set piece instructions, most people who want to take the effort to counter it have managed to do so (at least, the ones I am playing...).

We shouldn't have to cater for the people who are too lazy or too casual to change things around, as this is punishing the actually active managers who try to find new ways to score goals by being creative with the options the game is giving them.

People who cannot counter this setup immediately cry "exploit" but is it really that or is it just some form of evolution? Fourty years ago, the off-side trap was starting to be developed. Teams had to re-invent their ideas about attacking. Exploit or good tactics?

Total Football as played by Ajax, The Netherlands, Bayern Munich and the German national team of '74 (yes, they played their own form of total football...) was a completely new concept with players moving all over the pitch and switching positions, making the game a lot faster. Teams had to re-invent their tactics to cope with this. Exploit or good tactics?

I know this game is more static than real life and poor settings are not always easily repaired within a match, but is it really a serious bug that cannot be countered or is it a new step in the evolution of set pieces within FMLive?

PS. for those of you interested in the actual setup both offensively and defensively, keep watching this blog the next few days

Set Pieces; A Suggestion

I've always been rather active with the set pieces. In real life, they are becoming formidable weapons you can use to score a goal with even though you're not really playing all that well.In FMLive, you have various routines that work pretty effectively, but if you want to change your routines mid-way during a match, you have to have them either saved in seperate tactics you can switch between or you have to manually alter the individual settings of the players involved.

I propose something different. Whenever you get a corner or a free kick within 30 yards of the opposing goal, the game times out for ten to fifteen seconds and a pop-up appears which allows you to choose between three different scenario's for the free-kick (for example "Outside Area" , "Challenge Goalkeeper" and "Far Post"). Likewise, the defending party gets three options to select a method of defence. Both parties are ofcourse unable to see each others choice until the match actually continues after this short interruption.

Naturally, you should be able to edit existing scenario's and create new ones, both for offence and defence. This gives the tacticians something nice to play with, as they can vary between their various set piece setups. You could even include this into match plans, create conditions during which a team will switch to a new set piece routine.

Ofcourse, if a team does not want to use this option, the game should just select the default set piece routine. Also, I would not like to see this option being used in AI matches unless he has a match plan that allows for these switches, as that gives you too big of an advantage over an off-line opponent. Preferably though, just use it in the actual human vs human matches, to add some extra depth to these matches.

Any thoughts on this? Please let me know in your comments.

Going Old Skool; WW-Formation Remixed

Lately, I've been feeling a bit silly. I was in the mood to experiment, so I figured I might as well go totally old skool and revamp an old tactic into something new for usage within Altobelli. The concept of that is not entirely new, as we did this before in Miller under the inspiring leadership of Richard Claydon, who is known to most under his forum-guise as WWFan.

I've opted for the re-creation of the classic WW formation, but with a twist. The WW was a development of the WM created by the Hungarian coach Marton Bukovi, who turned the 3-2-5 WM, as designed by Herbert Chapman, upside down. The lack of an effective centre-forward in his team necessitated moving this player back to midfield to create a playmaker, with a midfielder instructed to focus on defence. This created a 3-2-1-4 which morphed into a 3-2-3-2 when the team lost possession, and was described by some as a kind of genetic link between the WM and the 4-2-4. This formation was successfully used by fellow countryman Gusztav Sebes in the Hungarian national team of the early 1950s.

That's pretty much what it looks like. I'm still tweaking the player roles and team instructions, but the basic formation gets you the same effects as the basic 4-6-0. You're flooding the centre of midfield with players and ensuring a lot of high-paced short passing. It's generally enough to drive most opponents mad. I'll get back to this with more detailed stuff as soon as I have more.

Combatting A 4-6-0 Formation

As a manager who actually used the dreaded 4-6-0, I also know how to counter it. It really isn't that dangerous as people seem to think and countering it doesn't take that much effort. I usually do the following things when I play against a 4-6-0 formation.

1. Employ a defensive midfielder

I mean a real defensive midfielder, a link between the midfield and defence. This guy is going to man-mark the opposing main AMC and play him out of the match. Or try to anyway. He's supposed to disrupt the attacking build-up from the opposition.

2. Remove all closing down from the centre-backs

The centre-backs are often drawn out of position because they close down an opposing midfielder, leaving the defence prone to a through-ball through the centre. Just have the defenders stand off, the opposing players will run at them and are usually easily muscled off the ball in such cases.

3. Push up the defensive line

Limit the time and space for their AMC's to move in. Basically make it harder for these guys to play their beloved counter-play by either catching them off-side or limiting their passing options by clogging up the centre of the pitch.

4. Harass their defence

When the centre of the pitch is congested, these AMC's rely on a a proper build-up from the back. When you pressure their defenders and mostly their wingbacks into lumping the ball forward, your defenders usually beat their AMC's in the air and win the ball back for you.

Now please note that these tips are not a sure-fire way to beat a 4-6-0. You obviously need a decent tactic of your own and the right players to execute it, but it should help you to get an edge over the opposition. I actually win 80%of my encounters with a 4-6-0 these days.

A Throw-In Tip

I received a little in-game message through the mailing lists which I think everyone who reads this blog might appreciate. I'm not going to hog the credit on this one, so honourable mentions for Rui Pintos Xutos and Diogo Martins for their initiative of sharing this.

It's basically a sort of Rory Delap style of tactic, where you have one long throw cannon and a lot of movement around the box. Works a treat if you have the players for it.

Anyway, under Team Instructions, put Throw Ins on Long for both the right and the left side. The individual instructions (based on a 4-5-1, alter according to your own formation...) look like this...

WBR - Default in both

DC - Stay Back in both

DC - Stay Back in both

WBR - Default in both

DM - Go Forward in both

MRC - Right near post Left go forward

MLC - Left near post right go forwrd

AMR - Go forward both

AML - Go forward both

SC - Go forward

If it all works, it looks a little something like this.

As you can see, this leads to one player being isolated in the box, with plenty of time to control the ball and get a good shot or header off.

A 4-6-0 Template

As I promised in the Altobelli Tactics Room, I’d show you all a template of the 4-6-0 I am using. The formation and team instructions are basically enough, since all the rest is down to your players and what you want them to achieve. I’ll do this the easy way by just giving you two screenshots.

Work In Progress; My Own 4-6-0 Part Deux

So far, I have basically set up three different formations, all using the “no striker” idea. The first one is the standard one I see most of the times when my opponent plays a 4-6-0. I have dubbed it the normal or standard version. It looks like this.

A solid back-four, complemented by a sort of pyramid-shaped midfield. The three attacking midfielders are the ones generally causing trouble for the defence, whereas the central midfielder is the one starting most attacks, whilst maintaining the defensive balance of the team.

The more defensive version I have seen features a real defensive midfielder and only one real attacking midfielder. It's a more conservative approach to the whole concept, aimed more at people looking to play a counter-attacking style.

This version offers more defensive stability, as there is less chance of players being caught out of position defensively. On the other hand, it's also a formation which has seen me draw a lot, as the offensive potency is somewhat limited.

Last but not least, there's my favourite formation, the most attacking formation of the whole bunch. This version offers nice matches to watch, whilst also ensuring I actually win most of them because my opponent is clueless how to counter it effectively.

With this version, you sort of have a 4-3-3 formation with wingers, just not with a real striker. The forward either runs onto crosses and through balls or lays the ball off for one of the midfielders to try his luck.

Next up, we're tweaking team instructions...

Work In Progress; My Own 4-6-0

Over the past few months, I have heard quite a few people moaning about the 4-6-0 and this tactic being an exploit of the match engine, since it overcrowds the midfield and uses no real striker. The main reason I have heard is that “using a tactic with no strikers just isn’t realistic as no real life team does this.”

I have read this excellent article on the development of tactics throughout history and the 4-6-0 in particular. Apparently it can be done and is done in real life, most notably by AS Roma two seasons ago, as they fielded Francesco Totti to operate in the hole between attack and defence, with no-one upfront.

Operating as a focal point as for example Didier Drogba was for Chelsea, he held up the ball, drifted, and created space for his team-mates to break into. Roma's 4-1-4-1 formation frequently became 4-1-5-0, a formation with no real striker, which resembles the 4-6-0 idea we encounter in FM Live.

Reading the information I have found, I decided to give this a go myself. After all, it’s all about learning new tricks and the concept sounds pretty solid in theory. As was stated in the article, the history of tactics is the story of the attempt to achieve the greatest balance of attacking fluidity and defensive solidity, which is pretty much what FM and FM Live are all about.

With all of this in mind, I started reading up on what others had achieved working with the 4-6-0. There’s no need to invent everything all over again, especially when others have left well documented settings. Threads I found particularly useful were this one and this one, as they provided me with some settings and tips.

As I started experimenting, I quickly noticed that a system with no forwards places a premium on fast, accurate passing through the midfield, which is fine on a good day. However, there will always be days when the passing fails to click, or when a team is forced on to the back foot and needs an outlet for holding the ball and relieving the pressure.

This is where your AMC becomes important. As general fitness improves, so the demands on attacking midfielders and forwards change, not least because defences cannot be relied upon to lose shape as they become exhausted. The AMC in this formation must be a universalist, a hybrid of the old strike-partnerships. He must be quick and strong, as he has to hold up the ball but he must also be able to chase after a through ball.

Ideally, you’re looking for an AM/FC in FM-terms. Players like Stevan Jovetic, Giuseppe Rossi, Antonio Cassano and Goran Pandev are ideally suited for this role. They are hybrids. A combination of the playmaker and the forward. They have the skill and technique to hold up the ball yet they are also blessed with stamina and the running power to move forward to pounce on loose balls.

From what I’ve seen so far, this formation works well enough. Defenders are having difficulties realizing who to pick up, as the running midfielders seem to catch the defenders off guard quite a bit. I will elaborate on settings and formations later on, as this is all work in progress at the moment.