Push The Right

This tactic uses two IFs for their goal scoring output and supports them with F9s and a DW on the right to push up the field and cross from the byline into the penalty area.

Set pieces are from ZaZ Blue 4.0.

Holiday test with Southampton. 68 points compared to 64pts from my previous tactic Somali 4-3-3 which tested well here on FM arena

I tried something similar with CM-At instead of DW and it worked pretty well.

ZaZ said: I tried something similar with CM-At instead of DW and it worked pretty well. Expand
Interesting, I think I underrate CM-At but I will do some testing to compare.

Here’s my previous anecdotal experience with a lone CM-At in the midfield. Possession regained is mostly in opponents or our penalty area so CM-At isn’t doing much to regain possession. In build up if CM-At gets the ball then it draws all the teammates to the centre. When CM-At doesn’t have the ball and team is in the penalty area then CM-At arrives unmarked for a goal attempt.

Have you tested Vol-At or do you always keep the same back 5?

Harrison said: Interesting, I think I underrate CM-At but I will do some testing to compare.

Here’s my previous anecdotal experience with a lone CM-At in the midfield. Possession regained is mostly in opponents or our penalty area so CM-At isn’t doing much to regain possession. In build up if CM-At gets the ball then it draws all the teammates to the centre. When CM-At doesn’t have the ball and team is in the penalty area then CM-At arrives unmarked for a goal attempt.

Have you tested Vol-At or do you always keep the same back 5? Expand

For now, one DM is always working better than two DM for me, which is why Vol-At isn't doing well for me. Three DM is even worse, so I gave up on trying more than one DM. I'm not saying it doesn't work, I just couldn't find a situation to make it work well. I mean, two DM can be decent, but I couldn't find a configuration that was on par with the top.

I tested CM-At in my testing league and the points per match is same/slightly worse but the goal difference is a lot worse. I only did 3 test runs though.

One suspect flaw with the testing league I use is wing positions tend to have players with higher acceleration, pace and dribbling which are known to produce better results even at same CA.

Looks really interesting, removes the SS position which always gets low ratings for me.

Would it work if you mirrored to be left hand side focussed?

Or changing F9s to AFs?

Pip said: Looks really interesting, removes the SS position which always gets low ratings for me.

Would it work if you mirrored to be left hand side focussed?

Or changing F9s to AFs? Expand

Yes, Changing the DW from MR to ML works fine.

If you change the F9s to AFs then you have to change the IFs to W-Su then you end up with a worse version of ZaZ Blue 4.0 haha.

Will give it a try then. How come you don't add the focus play down right team instruction?

Pip said: Will give it a try then. How come you don't add the focus play down right team instruction? Expand

Focus play down the right was worse in my testing but you can try it for yourself and share the results

Since Push The Right is one of the highest goals for tactics on FM Arena I decided to tweak the tactic to make it score even more goals while being almost as stable as the original tactic.

Changes made:
F9 on the right to AF

Here's the results I had with Leeds:

Harrison said: Since Push The Right is one of the highest goals for tactics on FM Arena I decided to tweak the tactic to make it score even more goals while being almost as stable as the original tactic.

Changes made:
F9 on the right to AF

Here's the results I had with Leeds:
Expand

I use it since the Milan game...Since the 433 tactic that I used is not consistent for me...
After the Milan game (marked with red) I started using this tactic with the AF.

Btw Bologna is marked with yellow because Its another manager that I added with the Calcite 6 tactic


So far grea tweak mate

DeviAngel said: I use it since the Milan game...Since the 433 tactic that I used is not consistent for me...
After the Milan game (marked with red) I started using this tactic with the AF.

Btw Bologna is marked with yellow because Its another manager that I added with the Calcite 6 tactic


So far grea tweak mate

Expand

I’m glad you like it.

Interesting that the AF didn't increase the amount of goals scored. Not sure if this means that F9 is better than AF on this match engine or IFs really benefit a lot from having a F9 paired with them.

Harrison said: Interesting that the AF didn't increase the amount of goals scored. Not sure if this means that F9 is better than AF on this match engine or IFs really benefit a lot from having a F9 paired with them. Expand

I think it should be obvious if something works well in your tactic then it doesn't mean it also must work well in other tactic too. So if in your tactic AF works works better than F9 then it doesn't mean that AF would also work better in any other tactic

Harrison said: Interesting that the AF didn't increase the amount of goals scored. Not sure if this means that F9 is better than AF on this match engine or IFs really benefit a lot from having a F9 paired with them. Expand

Look at the two tactics on the top of the table. They are the same, just changing the role of wingers and strikers. As you can see, results are very close, because W-Su + AF-At has similar performance to F9-Su + IF-At. Maybe they wouldn't work as well without the SS-At or the RPM-Su behind them, or even the IWB-At. In short, there are some roles that make other roles play better.

ZaZ said: In short, there are some roles that make other roles play better. Expand
I would add to the above that not only other roles make some role play better but the duties and tactical instructions also make a difference even including the formation. I mean, for example, if F9 or AF works great in some formation then you can't expect it'll also work great in all other formations.

ZaZ said: Look at the two tactics on the top of the table. They are the same, just changing the role of wingers and strikers. As you can see, results are very close, because W-Su + AF-At has similar performance to F9-Su + IF-At. Maybe they wouldn't work as well without the SS-At or the RPM-Su behind them, or even the IWB-At. In short, there are some roles that make other roles play better. Expand

Blue legacy has the AF + DW-Su pairing and other tactics use 1x F9 with 2x IF-At so I thought I had the pairings covered. But it must be more complex than that like you said with the other roles.

Would he score more if you changed the role of the AMR (winger or inverted winger) or Maybe switched the AF to the other side?