Quote:
Originally posted by jascko:
If I wanted to make a tactic that doesnt work it would probably look like yours.
All I can see in your tactic are mistakes.
|
Nice and constructive.
Quote:
Originally posted by jascko:
First of all you have an attack formation with defensive mentality.
|
First of all 4-3-3 is considered to be a defensive formation when played from the start. Toutatis's system is a counter-attacking one that requires the team to stay stay deeper and utlise forward runs to hit the opposition when they are over-extended. You could play a possesion based 4-3-3 with and attacking mentality, but to suggest you could not play this system without an attacking mentality is an incorrect assumtion on your part.
Quote:
Originally posted by jascko:
You have short passing with formation that has to much space between players position.
The best thing to do in your situation would be to play more direct.
|
Playing a short passing game is very much an option. The midfield 3 will keep possesion and build up play before either looking for the center forward or playing it out to the wide forwards. Playing direct would probably see the wingers become isolated. In this system their weapon is pace and dribbling not aerial ability.
Quote:
Originally posted by jascko:
Second, you are playing defensive mentality with little time wasting.
Thats not good.
|
You make another assumption that defensive mentality and counter attacking means you have to play with high time-wasting. Again this could be true if you are an inferior side expecting defeat and trying to delay the inevitable, but the counter attack is a valid form of attacking for stronger teams. Man Utd play a counter-attacking for example.
Quote:
Originally posted by jascko:
At the same time you have def line high and def mentality.
That is not good either.
|
If you are playing a defensive mentality then you are reducing the risk of the space behind you defense from being exploited. However if you also deepen your line you are creating an area in front of the defense for the opposition strikers to exploit. This can either be closed by playing a defensive midfielder or increasing the defensive line to make the defense and midfield more compact. This formation isn't using a defensive midfilder to the higer line makes sense.
Quote:
Originally posted by jascko:
Third, you have targetman supply "to feet" and playing counter attack.
It would be better to have him to "run on to the ball" when you playing counter attack.
|
Again you make an assumption that this forward is a pacy striker, I would suggest he is more likely to be a strong player who can hold up the ball to find the runners from midfield. Play to their strengths not predfined assumptions about waht a counter attacking system is.
Quote:
Originally posted by jascko:
Fourth, you are playing "down both flanks" with to little width.
Contradiction like everything else in your system.
|
The system doesn't require much width and focusing down the flanks will cause the midfield to play the ball to the wider forwards.
Yes, I have made assumptions about how this system works, but rather than just dismiss it as poor tactical design on the part of the opening poster I attempted to see how it could work. Looking at the results, there must be something working right.
My post was simply due to the disrespect you showed to the OP, especially when your critisms do not hold water.
Anyway I don't want to hijack this thread any longer, so apologies toutatis.
Linear Mode
