The team

I’ve chosen to manage Vicenza in this test. I’m intending to do more of these reviews, all of those with Vicenza, so tactics can be compared with each other. Vicenza are a mid-table side, predicted to end 12th in the Italian Serie B. There were no specific instruction to bear in mind.

This is the team I will be using for the opening fixture.



The results

Vicenza 2 – 1 AlbinoLeffe
Modena 2 – 4 Vicenza
Vicenza 3 – 0 Rimini
Vicenza 6 – 2 Grosseto
Treviso 4 – 5 Vicenza

Benefits

+ The results.

This is the first tactic I have tested that has reached a 100% success rate in the five test games. All wins and a staggering 17 goals scored, averaging 3,4 goals scored pro game. A new record in this series!

+ A very generic tactic.

Truth be told, I have to resort to using catchphrases designed by someone else to describe this tactic. I think Philips said it before, “sense and simplicity” or, as SI’s Marc Vaughan would put it in regards to making tactics, “keep it simple, stupid.” This idea states that design simplicity should be a key goal and unnecessary complexity avoided. Complexity should be avoided—simplicity is a goal in itself. Extra features are not needed; an approach that seems “too easy to be true” is in fact the best way. A very straightforward approach may seem less glamorous and less dramatic, but the trivial approach should indeed be taken. Surprisingly, the very obvious approach is often the best.

The team instructions have barely been altered from the default tactic and only two or three individual instructions were changed. This tactic will pretty much suit any team, regardless of the players they have.

+ Best suited for counter-attacking.

Most of the goals we scored were goals we scored on the break-away. Midfield and defence collaborate to absorb an attack and launch a quick counter-attack over the wings or by giving a through ball towards one of the strikers. Hardly very complex, but as stated earlier, the easiest solutions and approaches are often the best. In this case, this certainly applies.

+ A proper striker will love this tactic.

Ricardo Zampagna does anyway. I’ve opted for the sniper / creative AM/FC approach upfront, pairing Zampagna and Matteini upfront. This worked like a charm. Zampagna bagged nine goals in the five games that I played, none of which were penalties or scored from corners. Matteini made room for Zampagna, Zampagna exploited the space and converted through balls into goals. Sounds simple enough and it works too.

+ Never a dull moment.

The downside to the 4-5-1 / 4-3-3 tactics you see a lot, is that it enables manager to shut up shop and effectively kill an entire match. This certainly wasn’t the case with this match. There’s no killing going on, it’s ninety minutes of high-paced attacking football. You can see this in the score-lines as well, generally pretty much goals, both for you and for your opponent. As I said, never a dull moment, which makes the matches interesting and exciting to watch. Should this be part of the criteria for passing judgement on a tactic? Who knows, I just know I like it.

Downsides

- A very generic tactic.

Yeah, we had this argument before. It’s a very generic tactic, which means you’re not making optimal use of the specific qualities of your players and you’re not optimally protected from the weaknesses of your players. See, that’s where the individual instructions come into play and this tactic basically has none of those.

- Defence looks wobbly at times.

We conceded eleven goals in five games. That’s a lot. That’s 2,2 goals a game. That’s too much by any standards. I’ll elaborate. The poor defence is probably caused by a lack of individual and team instructions. I’ll illustrate by giving you five examples of poor organisation. These were not incidents, but just the most flagrant mistakes. Not all mistakes costed us a goal, but some did.













For example, with a bit of extra Closing Down for the midfielders or tighter marking for the defenders, the goal in the first picture wouldn’t have happened. We see the huge gap between the wingbacks and the centre-backs, which is nicely exploited by the opposing #11. In all cases, the organisation of the defence is shockingly poor.

At first, I cast this aside as being individual errors, mistakes by individual players, who were just having a poor game. But when I looked at the ratings, I saw that most defenders had 6’s and 7’s as a rating, which generally means they did okay. If players really fuck up, their rating plummets to a 5 or 4, which in this case didn’t happen, even when a goal was scored. This is a sign, in my eyes, that the tactic lacks defensive structure and organisation.

Conclusion

He should’ve dubbed this tactic “Back to Basics” or something like that. It’s a very simple, easy to use tactic, which provides plenty of entertainment. I’m not so sure about how it’ll work in the long run, but in the five games I played, I saw lots of goals, attractive matches and good results. On the other hand, you’re not making the most of the player material you have and your defence is shaky to say the least. Still, a very nice and simple tactic, ideal for both players who are just getting started with FM and people who have lost their spirit to play. Use this tactic for a while, see some nice, attacking and attractive matches being played and you might actually start to enjoy the game a bit more.

Totale aantal views: 1093
Views in laatste 7 dagen: 6
Aantal keren geranked: 0

Ranking:

Jouw ranking: