Tooj Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 What's your favourite formation? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-4-2, even though its not 'in' at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlacknWhiteArmy Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 1-2-1-3-1-2 Nah, 4-4-2's the way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-3-3 Barca style. Total football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-4-fucking-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorJ_01 Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-1-2-1-2 with a good DM capable of starting an attack, not just a clogger like De Jong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southerner Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-1-2-1-2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 I liked David Pleat's 4-5-1 in the Spurs side of 86-87.Fantastic to watch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 what about ossie ardiles's spurs formation, had 5 forwards on the pitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-3-2-1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-4-2, even though its not 'in' at the moment. This Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-2-2-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-2-2-2. No width. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-2-3-1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-2-2-2. No width. LAM + RAM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 2-3-5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-2-2-2. No width. LAM + RAM Too exposed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-4-fucking-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 That's why you have two DMs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-1-3-1-1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorJ_01 Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-1-3-1-1 I like this formation, and I know in practice it isn't like this, but it feels as if you are going to have 4 players playing in the same theoretical line down the middle. Obviously, in aforementioned practice, they will be pulling off on the wings and what-have-you but poorer players will probably be too rigid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 depends on the personnel, however any formation requires loads of movement to be succesful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 I play 3-1-3-1-2 on Fifa and love it. Realistically it's not going to work though, especially with the growing love of a single striker up top, having three guys cover one person is a waste. It kind of looks like this: X X X X X X X X X X X Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 Can't stand not having 2 wingers and 2 strikers, and have yet to see anything other than 4 at the back look comfortable. Plus overlapping fullbacks are fun on the attack. So 4-4-2 really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amir_9 Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 4-3-2-1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now