Tony Pulis and his Stoke Long Ball Anti Footballers.

I think ever since FM10 I've been trying desperately to do one thing, at the cost of my enjoyment of the game. That is, to take a side and perfect the Long Ball game and actually win things with it. I'm really not convinced its possible, but in my mind I imagine the ultimate Tony Pulis side. Well drilled, violent giants making no effort to keep possession but only to lump it up to the big man, score from set pieces and create a big fat wall in front of the opposition.

I've pretty much always tried to do this with Leeds United due their fallen giant status, their history as being a bit of a nasty side and also the players they have, especially when you start out in FM14.

Most write ups on Pulis' Stoke side seem to be reports of them screwing it up against the Man City or going out to prove just how terrible Long Ball football is, so its hard to find good analysis of it. Here is some reading:

http://eplindex.com/19124/tactics-long-ball-game-case-study-stoke-man-city.html

http://www.whoscored.com/Articles/out-rres3em6m5cx-b4bmg

http://eplindex.com/30325/scouting-report-stoke-city-stats-depth-tactical-analysis.html

Pulis' Game plan:

The basic plan seems to boot it up the big man up front, Crouch in this situation, for Crouch to knock it down for one of the runners, or for Stoke to win the second ball, and for the runners to push past him, create havoc or win a corner/free kick further up the field, in an American Football style kick and rush.

Possession is less important, controlling the areas that the opposition has possession is more important. Keeping possession out of the danger areas around the Stoke penalty box is vital. The team seems to defend as a flat 2 layers of four, very narrow. In fact Pulis often lines up with 4 center backs in defence (pretty sure he's done this recently at West Brom too) so that teams are encouraged to pointless cross it into the box, where Pulis' giant defenders can just easily head it away.

Like this:

My interpretation

This is my team at the beginning of my third season as Leeds, having won promotion last year with a sort of hybrid 4-5-1 that I had to alter later in the season because the long ball simply wasn't working against smaller sides who go defensive.

As you can see its set up like this:

Team Instructions

Route One

Narrower

More Disciplined

Get Stuck in

Personal Instructions

GK

FB- Defend

CB- Defend

LCB - Defend

FB-Defend

BWM - Defend

CM - Support

WM - Support ( Cut inside, Sit narrower, Get Further Forward)

WM - Attack (Cut inside, Sit Narrower)

AMC - Attack

TM - Support

My thinking is that long passes up to Matt Smith (who I've trained up as a decent target man) will come down to the tricky but pacey McGregor, or to even trickier pacier Joel Campbell, who will run at the defence and scare the beejesus out of people, and later will be supported by the left winger and the central mid. The defence simply do not get involved, they are there only to defend. Which I guess leaves me with a lack of creative options, but hey, thats just how I think I want them to play.

The main thing that has confused me is that Pulis likes to play with Wingers, which got me stuck a number of times. Having an out and out winger would mean that he wouldn't be that close to the target man for the knock down. So I think its basically deep lying inside forwards who also defend instead.

I haven't mentioned the Delap throw or Corners, because at the moment I don't really have anyone with those skills right now.

So I'd really like some input on this, anyone with any good knowledge on Pulis' style, how I can make it more authentic, or more successful as well would be great.

Personally I'd like to start with it on Defend and Stand off opponents to really create that low block, but I worry about how that will work with a target man, whether we'd be locked in our half the whole time.

I should know as I watched every home game and some away games under Pulis. Do your research and do it properly. When Tony Pulis had his Stoke side firing it was not set up with Peter Crouch anywhere near it. When Crouch arrived at the club his system failed because it lost all of the natural attributes that made it tick - pace and power. There are quite a few variants of it, so you can do it a number of ways.

Take a look at the promotion side and the side of the first few seasons in the Premier League, up to and including the Cup final season. 4 big lads across the back, all capable of playing centre back, none of them crossing the halfway line and all of them tight zonal marking. Two central midfielders, locked in what was famously called "The cage". Neither of them breaking lines, hard working tacklers that won the ball and knocked it wide to one of the wide centre halves, who in turn either hit the deep lying centre forward (Mamady Sidibe or later Kenwyne Jones) or gave it to one of the wide men.

The key to the Tony Pulis system was the deep lying forward. The number 10 that was actually a giant of a centre forward. Let's call it a false 10 for a laugh. In possession his job was to hold the ball up and lay it off to (this is where the variant comes in) the tucked in wide midfielder on the right (Liam Lawrence) who would then either put the ball in the channels for the advanced forward who could make something out of nothing (Ricardo Fuller) or cross to the back post for the wide target man (Richard Cresswell).

Later on in the advancement of the system, the wide midfielder Lawrence turned into a winger in Jermaine Pennant and the wide target man Cresswell turned into an attacking wide midfielder in Etherington.

When out of possession, the false number 10 is very important in sitting on the opposing deep lying playmaker - rushing his passes and forcing the long ball to the two massive centre backs that will win the ball 99 times out of 100. He basically man marked him to death.

That's basically it. The whole side had no creative freedom except one man - Ricardo Fuller. The furthest forward player who had little defensive duties but stayed forward, pulled wide and created havoc.

So drop Matt Smith into the No 10 position and play someone with high pace and high flair as the lone man up front.

Oh wow, excellent reply.

Yes thats very interesting. I always assumed Crouch was the perfect evolution of the Pulis style because hes 'got skillz for a big man', but actually I think he was pretty poor in the air and too scrawny to hold it up.

I might try to bring the TM back to the AMC position, but I like how the game works with Target men, what is the AMC equivilant of that?

So how did it work with Pennant and wingers? Or did it simply not work?

Oh wow, excellent reply.

Yes thats very interesting. I always assumed Crouch was the perfect evolution of the Pulis style because hes 'got skillz for a big man', but actually I think he was pretty poor in the air and too scrawny to hold it up.

I might try to bring the TM back to the AMC position, but I like how the game works with Target men, what is the AMC equivilant of that?

I haven't got a clue but if you watch some footage of the Pulis system, the false 10 most definitely plays >90% of his game in that No 10. space, and he is always a target man.

Crouch never worked because he never had the workrate or defensive ability of a Sidibe. Mama Sidibe was a weird footballer. Technically dreadful and scored very few goals but would run all day long, was very mobile and understood the defensive side of the game. Crouch, who we paid 10M for, looked out of his depth yet Mama fit into the system like a glove. Crouch was moved further forward because he offered nothing defensively (The number one attribute of everyone in the side except the furthest forward forward), couldn't be dropped because of his price tag and offered nothing that Fuller did going forward. It was check mate and the side really suffered.

In terms of FM. The closest thing you can get to it is play a flat 4-4-2 with the 'false 10' set to a defensive forward defend, and physically assign him to man mark the defensive midfielder of the opposition side.

Pennant and Etherington worked very well. The key to the wide men is something Pulis called "double banking". When out of possession they virtually sat on the full backs to create the block of 8 or two banks of four. They almost played as wing backs out of possession, with the wide centre haves tucking in to create almost a back 4 within a back 4.

They were both very fit lads that could easily get up and down the pitch. Pennant was the more wider of the two whereas Etherington was the grafter and played slightly narrower.

Shadow striker is the 'false 10', is it not?

Shadow striker is the 'false 10', is it not?

We're talking about the Tony Pulis version of the shadow striker, a version never seen in football before and never to be seen again!

We're talking about the Tony Pulis version of the shadow striker, a version never seen in football before and never to be seen again!

I know, but if you was playing with a very Structured philosophy, TI that was based upon a Pulis tactic - and with a Shadow Striker with say PI's of Close Down Much more and tighter marking - would that not be that type of Pulis deep target man which you want?

I know, but if you was playing with a very Structured philosophy, TI that was based upon a Pulis tactic - and with a Shadow Striker with say PI's of Close Down Much more and tighter marking - would that not be that type of Pulis deep target man which you want?

I feel like a Shadow Striker is more attacking than is required though, it seems to aggressively try to get into the box, and it is supposed to work with a support striker further up. It also doesn't allow 'hold position' which I think is needed.

Either way, I think I am quite happy with Target man for now. An AMC performs the role I think it should be doing, which is to buzz about the TM and get into the box. Possibly, this could be a shadow striker, but I'm unsure how well it works defensively.

I feel like a Shadow Striker is more attacking than is required though, it seems to aggressively try to get into the box, and it is supposed to work with a support striker further up. It also doesn't allow 'hold position' which I think is needed.

Correct, Mama Sidibe never got anywhere near the box!

actually, coincidentally, I was reading Guido's strikerless FM thing yesterday where he implemented a deep lying target man! Basically an Enghanche, because he is the most static of the AM's I think. Give it a read.

actually, coincidentally, I was reading Guido's strikerless FM thing yesterday where he implemented a deep lying target man! Basically an Enghanche, because he is the most static of the AM's I think. Give it a read.

Yeah I think I remember reading that. Having said that, I've changed the AMC to a SS and its working very nicely. They play very closely together and often the SS will get ahead of the TM when the TM drops deep to hold up the ball. Its pretty much what I wanted.

Have also changed my mentality to Defensive as a starting point, it seems to work quite well, and most pleasingly I'm scoring most of my goals from set pieces and breakaways. Having a large Target man plus 4 large defenders in the box is great to watch.

Yeah I think I remember reading that. Having said that, I've changed the AMC to a SS and its working very nicely. They play very closely together and often the SS will get ahead of the TM when the TM drops deep to hold up the ball. Its pretty much what I wanted.

Have also changed my mentality to Defensive as a starting point, it seems to work quite well, and most pleasingly I'm scoring most of my goals from set pieces and breakaways. Having a large Target man plus 4 large defenders in the box is great to watch.

What is your system now then? I am beginning to get a bit intrigued by this idea.

Its basically the same really, just Defensive mentality and the AMC is an SS now. I'm playing with Stick to positions as well to see if that gives me any more defensive stability but its hard to tell because I've been using my backup goalie so I ended up losing 5-2 to man city. But then the fact I scored twice against them I was pretty happy with.

This help?

http://www.pushthemwide.co.uk/long-ball-fm13/

Yeah I think I remember reading that. Having said that, I've changed the AMC to a SS and its working very nicely. They play very closely together and often the SS will get ahead of the TM when the TM drops deep to hold up the ball. Its pretty much what I wanted.

Have also changed my mentality to Defensive as a starting point, it seems to work quite well, and most pleasingly I'm scoring most of my goals from set pieces and breakaways. Having a large Target man plus 4 large defenders in the box is great to watch.

The problem with this is that in real life, Pulis' strikers never used to play closely together. They used to be very split.

Are you suggesting he played with more of a deep lying target man and a Poacher then? A bit like Fellaini at everton?

This help?

http://www.pushthemwide.co.uk/long-ball-fm13/

Oh yeah I've read this before, its a really good article, but it deals with how to play against long balls teams rather than how to set one up.

By the way, has anyone actually made a long ball tactic and made it work, consistantly at higher levels? I'm interested.

Tried it at lower leagues, I wasn't scoring enough, when I did try it at higher levels, soon as you come across a strong pair of CBs with a DM its hard to win anything and when you do its harder to get a good header at goal.

Another problem I found was sometimes the ball will go up early and my man wins the header, but just flicks it on to nobody, bit like Kenwyn Jones does at Cardiff...

Are you suggesting he played with more of a deep lying target man and a Poacher then? A bit like Fellaini at everton?

Yes but not a poacher. Fuller played more as an advanced forward who ran the channels.

This is a great thread with some interesting analysis. Good work!

I would love to see someone come up with this type of tactic.

Tried it at lower leagues, I wasn't scoring enough, when I did try it at higher levels, soon as you come across a strong pair of CBs with a DM its hard to win anything and when you do its harder to get a good header at goal.

Another problem I found was sometimes the ball will go up early and my man wins the header, but just flicks it on to nobody, bit like Kenwyn Jones does at Cardiff...

Was this maybe just something to do with the quality of your players not improving enough though? I'm very interested in seeing how effective long ball would be with the ideal players to make it work. Big strong players with excellent work rates, defenders with vision enough to not pass ludicrously, massive juggernaut target men, and linford cristies in midfield linking up. Thats the dream anyway.

It's a difficult formation to get working right in FM partly because of the attributes necessary to play it. It'd be quite difficult to set up right but I think generally it would be along the lines of:

Limited fullback

Central defender - stopper

Central defender - stopper

Limited fullback

Defensive Winger - Support - Get further forward if its an option

Central midfield - defend

Central midfield - support

Defensive Winger - Support - Get further forward

As the basic shell of the team with the front 2 in a setup of either an AM and ST player or two ST players.

The main problem from an FM perspective is how rigid that formation is, with little movement its really going to struggle and well that's somewhat reflective of how it was. You have to play the percentages and try to win corners, free kicks and throw ins to then load players into the box.

The team instructions would be something like clear ball to flanks, exploit the flanks and more direct passing would be a given with drop deeper or even much deeper defensive line.

The central defenders as stoppers may not seem right but when Stoke played teams, Huth and Shawcross would meet opposition players quite a bit out from their box at times without hesitation. The team shape allowed for this, either one of the two CM's would drop into the space behind or the fullback would pull in centrally and the winger would then take the full back position.

It lost a lot of its effectiveness when Etherington had fitness issues and Pennant fell out of favour. There are few players who can play the wide roles and have pace going forward, which is why in the latter part of his time with the club it was Ryan Shotton (originally a CB) and Jon Walters in the wide midfield positions because they offered the stability and solidity needed but lacked the winger aspects of their game.

Ultimately that's the reason why Stoke parted with Pulis, he was unable to find the replacements for these players and had numerous expensive signings wasting away in the reserves because they couldn't adapt to what was needed.

Yeah I can see how that formation could be used in big games in which you might occasionally be able to nick a draw or a win, but the fact that it would only have one player on attack duty, and that the wingers are really defensive players it would incredibly easy to defend against. Plus its very static.

I would consider using it as a second tactic, at the moment I've gone with just moving back to a 451 the AMC in more of an MC position for bigger games or when I want to hold a lead.

My interpretation of this is

GK

LFB-CB (s)-CB (s)-LFB

DW-CM (d)-BWM (s)-DW

EG

AF

DW - Get Further Foward, Sit Narrower,

EG - More Direct, Get Further Foward

AF - Roam From Position, Shoot Less Often, Close Down Much Less

LFB - Close Down Much Less

CM - More Direct

And then everybody on Tackle Harder

Standard/Very Rigid

Go Route One

Pass Into Space

Much Higher Tempo

Pump Ball Into Box

Exploit the Flanks

Play Narrower

Be More Disiplined

Drop Deeper

Get Stuck In

Drilled Crosses

This is working in my tycoon-fueled Villa save. Benteke is getting some knockdowns in there and heading in goals like Mama Sidibe

The problem with these systems is that they don't really work with Wingers, not so much as I can see when I try it anyway. What happens is that the 2 up front get very isolated, especially when playing defensively and any crosses into the box are easy to head out because they only have 1 or 2 people to mark.

This is why I'm playing with wide mids playing like inside forwards, making sure everyone is playing close to each other for knockdowns. I'm also still not convinced an engache is quite right for the TM role, a TM works just as well, especially with the goalie targeting him with passes.

I like the idea of limited fullbacks however, a role I've never used. I might try it.

One thing I want to do is create a philosphy in the club, try to get a lot of fitness coaches, and train physical attributes more than technical ones. The other idea I'm playing with is only buying UK players from lower leagues.. or maybe some scandinavians if they fit the bill. Certainly no skillful brazilians or spanish! ugh! To really get the Pulis legacy going

I do think Defensive Wingers helps out like a Wing Back in defense. I have flooded my own box with both of them when defending

Do you have setpiece setups to go along with this Jean? Ones close to the Pulis employs??

Do you have setpiece setups to go along with this Jean? Ones close to the Pulis employs??

I tried to set mine up like this, which is basically just aiming at the near post and trying to get flick ons. I score a reasonable amount from corners, but no more than normal I think.

You should make your players with throws attribute of 14 or more learn long bullet throws ppm. It's a pretty effective setpiece to get a few goals.

2 men back(not including the throw-in player), 1 tall and strong striker at near post, good long range shooter lurking, the rest all on forward.

Just having a read through this while I am at work. Could this work in this setup:

GK (D)

LFB (D) narrower

DC (D)

DC (D)

LFB (D) narrower

CWB (A)

DM - BWM (D)

DM - BWM (S)

CWB (A)

DF (D)

AF/CF (A)

Effectively creating two banks of 4 in defence? I agree Stoke were far better before Crouch because he didn't fit their system, despite his height.

Just having a read through this while I am at work. Could this work in this setup:

GK (D)

LFB (D) narrower

DC (D)

DC (D)

LFB (D) narrower

CWB (A)

DM - BWM (D)

DM - BWM (S)

CWB (A)

DF (D)

AF/CF (A)

Effectively creating two banks of 4 in defence? I agree Stoke were far better before Crouch because he didn't fit their system, despite his height.

Quite interesting but the CWBs will be wider than what the Pennants and Walters were IRL. Maybe "Cut Inside With Ball" PI could slightly negate that??

Are you guys replicating or trying to just make a long ball tactic with a withdrawn 10? I can try and whip one up.

Are you guys replicating or trying to just make a long ball tactic with a withdrawn 10? I can try and whip one up.

A little bit of both, it seems as Pulis did have a long ball tactic with a withdrawn target man in Sidibe or Jones or Jerome. So, most people are trying to emulate that...

Not too sure still to place that #10 as a TM and make him man mark the oppo's regista or DLP or to make him an EG...

If you can share your interpretations, that would be helpful

found a Pulis tactic very hard to emulate on this fm, it depends as has already been said, which Pulis era you're looking at, the 2010/11 side which was his best in my opinion, would probably be set up like this in fm terms gk-d, fb-d (sit narrow) ld-ld fb-d (sit narrow) dm-d dm-s dw-s (sit narrow, further forward) dw-s(sit narrow,further forward) df-s-af-a

team instructions: more direct, play narrower, be more disciplined,drop deeper,close down more,stay on feet

in addition to my last post, when Walters played with Jones he was very withdrawn as the team defended in a 4-4-1-1 shape, so you could look at maybe playing him as an am-a?

Lets define the style of the system:

1. Does it employ short passing at the back with direct passing on key players to move the ball up quickly?

2. Are wingers expected to bomb down the flanks with the fullbacks just supporting them without going to the byeline?

3. Are the midfielders expected to anchor the midfield? Or is one expected to be a playmaker who strings passes out?

4. Upfront, it would seem that you could either be playing with an attacking midfielder or 2 strikers one playing deep and linking up with midfield and being a ball carrier? Or do you expect him to be of a shadow striker coming in from deep to score with the advanced forward doing most of the knock downs and holding up?

Lets first come to a common consensus on how we want to play the system, your feedback will be appreciated.

Lets define the style of the system:

1. Does it employ short passing at the back with direct passing on key players to move the ball up quickly?

2. Are wingers expected to bomb down the flanks with the fullbacks just supporting them without going to the byeline?

3. Are the midfielders expected to anchor the midfield? Or is one expected to be a playmaker who strings passes out?

4. Upfront, it would seem that you could either be playing with an attacking midfielder or 2 strikers one playing deep and linking up with midfield and being a ball carrier? Or do you expect him to be of a shadow striker coming in from deep to score with the advanced forward doing most of the knock downs and holding up?

Lets first come to a common consensus on how we want to play the system, your feedback will be appreciated.

Thanks for your input Rashidi, would be great to get your thoughts on it.

My main problem with the tactic conceptually is combining a defensive 'anti football' style with a long ball 'hoof and hope' style. Seems to be a formula for just giving the ball away and inviting pressure. Thats why I think it needs to defend at least in a medium block to be effective, or the 'target man' is just too deep mostly to get the ball forward.

Either way, in answer to your questions, I'd imagine that:

1) I hadn't considered the back 4 as short passers, though potentially the ideal move would be to move the ball to the fullback who then goes direct with it.

2) I've always considered the wide midfielders playing close to the target man, close enough that the target man can play the ball to them simply when he knocks it down. Hard to get this to happen with actual wingers as they seem to be too far from him. Pulis often plays with 4 centrebacks, the fullbacks barely reaching the halfway line so thats how I imagined it working.

3) Ideally the midfield would be bypassed completely, its main job would be to guard the defence and join up in support as the ball is knocked long.

4) The most frequent pass in a lot of stokes play was the goalie to the 'crouch' player. The attacking mid would then run off the target man's knockdowns, operating as a sort of second striker role. There has been some discussion that he was more of an advanced forward in earlier Pulis tactics. But I want to defend as a 4411 and shadow striker feels better to me.

Are you guys replicating or trying to just make a long ball tactic with a withdrawn 10? I can try and whip one up.

Would love to see you conjure something up and I will give it a test.

Lets define the style of the system:

1. Does it employ short passing at the back with direct passing on key players to move the ball up quickly?

2. Are wingers expected to bomb down the flanks with the fullbacks just supporting them without going to the byeline?

3. Are the midfielders expected to anchor the midfield? Or is one expected to be a playmaker who strings passes out?

4. Upfront, it would seem that you could either be playing with an attacking midfielder or 2 strikers one playing deep and linking up with midfield and being a ball carrier? Or do you expect him to be of a shadow striker coming in from deep to score with the advanced forward doing most of the knock downs and holding up?

Lets first come to a common consensus on how we want to play the system, your feedback will be appreciated.

1) No, hoof ball all the way to the TM.

2) Wingers are expected to bomb down the wings but the Fullbacks never leave the midfield line.

3) The Former

4) A Target Man and an advanced forward. The Target Man marks the DLP or Regista and Holds his position throughout the match

Any further thoughts on this Rashidi? Would be great to get your input.

Actually Rashidi, I just saw your post on Evertons Long Ball on your blog. Interesting they were playing with wingers and a Treq as well.

Actually Rashidi, I just saw your post on Evertons Long Ball on your blog. Interesting they were playing with wingers and a Treq as well.

Yep, they were even playing with a WB. Not really Pulis-like

haha, yeah.. its really not really.

I did find it interesting that both strikers were on attack duty, but I guess it makes sense if you plan is to just lump it up to them.

It did occur to me that make Pulis' tactics are simply not world beating. Nobody here tends to advocate Route One, I've never seen any tactics which have utilised it, everyone seems to rely on shorter passing, even Cleons Defensive thread. Maybe if you set your team up then all you'll ever achieve is the same as Pulis.. ie .. not a lot.

Having said that I did get promoted with Leeds and get them just about mid table using mostly route one football.. which I think is decent.

*cough* Bump :o

Having said that I did get promoted with Leeds and get them just about mid table using mostly route one football.. which I think is decent.

Could we perhaps see that tactic/or could you upload it please mate?