Big Clubs, High Mentalities, Dead Ends?

So I've been going through my first season with Arsenal on a save, and I've been wondering something. Tactically, I've been playing a high-tempo / higher risk style. I want us to pass the ball around quickly and stretch opponents. Sometimes I think Arsenal IRL are way too slow and predictable, but I digress.

However, this isn't without its faults. Being one of the bigger clubs, especially after winning a lot of games, teams will adjust be sitting deep. Is there any hope of maintaining such an aggressive style, or will changes ultimately need to be made?

I ask this question because generally in all of my saves that went past 1 season I've used pretty cautious tactics that revolve around lower mentalities (Standard, Counter, Defensive). Breaking down teams that were scared of us has been tricky, but not nearly as tricky as it can be when playing a more aggressive tactical system.

Here's a snapshot of how things look:

Control Mentality

Fluid Shape

4-1-2-3 Formation (4-3-3)

(GK) SK-D

(RB) FB-A

(CB) CD-D

(CB) CD-D

(LB) FB-S

(DMC) DM-D

(CM) RPM-S

(CM) BBM

(AMR) AP-S

(AML) IF-A

(STC) AF-A

Logic behind the roles/duties I always get tripped up with roles and duties. Maybe this is because I still miss sliders, or something. I don't know. But anyway, I tried to come up with a system that creates problems for the opposition in different ways. I have two playmakers in the side, one in the middle, and one who comes from out wide. I felt this could do well to give us a bit of unpredictability. I have one side of the pitch where we have an IF-A / FB-S combo. The idea being that we have a very dangerous man ahead of a more supporting / cautious player. On the other flank, I expect my fullback to overlap the advanced playmaker. Again, variability, and keeping things interesting. Two very different looking flanks, I think. In the middle I've decided against any attack duties in midfield. I didn't want to use an AMC in this tactic, and if I used an AP-A or CM-A (in the CM slot, obviously) playing on Control would ultimately see that player acting too similar to an AMC in his positioning. The BBM is a role I love, and I felt fit the side quite nicely. I felt that I'd have 2 really great linking options between my DM and forward line. The striker stays up top to pressure the back line of the opposing team, as opposed to dropping deep. I also figured that having the AP-S at AMR would be more than enough to create a quality link with that striker, so he doesn't need to drop deep anyway.

Instructions: Retain possession, work ball into box, close down more, prevent GK dist, higher tempo.

Logic behind the instructions and Mentality:I want the team to play fast and also keep the ball. So I'm looking for quick combinations along the ground. Retain possession + the higher team mentality + higher tempo (to offset the drop in tempo by retain poss) is how I'm doing this. Obviously I want to press, but not in too high of a block. Arsenal don't have the quickest defenders, and I generally dislike playing a line above a medium-high block which is set by the Control mentality.

I think the issue I'm having is that we seem to run into too many cul de sac's. At times we look BRILLIANT, like murdering Liverpool away from home. At other times, we struggle to break down League 2 sides in the FA cup lol. I know that is a common issue, and I've read Cleon's thread about breaking down walls. However, I don't want to play a cautious style to draw the other team out. I want to overpower them. There is no way Arsenal should struggle to break down a League 2 side, for example. The tactics matter, obviously, but to a certain extent only, right? I mean if Alexis Sanchez takes on a League 2 fullback, he should be dominating that match up.

So is there something else going on here tactically, or are the bigger clubs better suited to playing less aggressive tactics against smaller sides who defend deep? And if there is something going on here, I'm guessing that perhaps my attack is a bit toothless?

There is no way Arsenal should struggle to break down a League 2 side, for example. The tactics matter, obviously, but to a certain extent only, right? I mean if Alexis Sanchez takes on a League 2 fullback, he should be dominating that match up.

Why should he? Why do people think this is a given, because they are weaker opposition? If they stay compact they can frustrate the hell out of bigger sides. It all comes down to space. If the opposition are sat back then the final third is going to be crowded. Now if you add your roles into the equation then it just makes it even worse and you have no space to play in or anyone who can find that extra yard you need. On top of the opposition's players you have 5 of your own all in the same space as them, where is the intelligent movement coming from? How do you expect to draw the opposition out or pull them out of shape? The roles you use all rely on coming centrally which makes play very predictable and easy to defend against.

The answer to your question is yes you can play an aggressive style and over power teams but not with the roles you use, not really on a consistent basis anyway. In order to do this you need a lot of variety in your play and you have to use the whole pitch and it's width. By using roles that naturally make you narrow when attacking, it won't really work.

I also figured that having the AP-S at AMR would be more than enough to create a quality link with that striker, so he doesn't need to drop deep anyway.

How does the role along make a quality link with the striker? As you use a lone striker system the striker will always be marked by two opposition defenders. I fail to see how the AP who is stuck out on the wing adds any quality to the issues the striker will have during the game. The AP will have his own marker a fullback of some kind so it's not like he will be occupying a defender for him. Then when he does pass the ball to the striker, what happens then? It's hard for a striker to play against two markers no matter how good he is. The fact that he stays high too doesn't really help the case as he will have very little space to move about in. IMO it makes much more sense to use a striker who drops deeper against systems that use a high line because any space or movement will generally have to come from in front of the defender. It's going to be rare you have much success in behind. Where as playing against sides who push up you'd do the opposite as the space is in behind the defenders so then it's worth while to use a striker who pushes high up the pitch and doesn't drop back.

Doing it the other way I can't see how you could be consistent. That's not to say it won't work but you want to build a system that works all the time don't you and not rely on luck or flukes? In your current set up I don't see anyone who is making space and dragging the defence out of shape or causing them issues. Sort this out and the results will become better and more consistent.

I wrote this a bit back and it applies to whether you are a cautious or aggressive side, the idea is the same in both types of systems.

~

The purpose of this article is to help people see the difference between sides who play attacking against you and sides who are willing to sit back and hit you on the counter attack. It focuses on how both strategies give you different types of space to play in and the defensive shapes they take up on the pitch. It will also shows you some examples that should be able to help you identify this in your own saved games and makes things more clear tactically for you. If you remember correctly I did two previous articles about this and said the third and final instalment would be a collection of them both combined. Well this is that but with some new stuff added too Understanding what type of opposition you are playing is really important in Football Manager as it determines how you need to play against them. Not all teams play the same way so this means if you don’t know what’s going on in a game then you’ll struggle to get the result needed. On the forums, blogs and on Twitter, I see posts that mention one week they beat top of the league then the week after get beat by the clubs near the bottom of the league, while playing the same way they did in the previous match. People can’t seem to get their head around why it happens so I thought I’d shed a bit of light on why it happens. The two main kinds of team you’ll face during the season are;

• Sides who are happy to attack you
  
• Sides who like to defend deep and hit you on the counter
  

If you can learn to differentiate the differences between the two then Football Manager can become a lot more enjoyable because you can ensure you have the correct game plan in place or at least know what different things you can try to get the result you need as the approach to beating both teams is vastly different. A large proportion of people would probably go more defensive against the stronger sides and more attacking against the weaker ones, but it’s not that black and white as there is always different ways to beat the opposition, there is not one set way.

Sides who attack you

From a defensive stand point playing against sides who attack you often during the match can be a daunting prospect especially if they are superior to your own team. But the up side is, they’ll leave lots of unprotected space for you to play in and use to your advantage. This can do done by mentality changes or just a simple role change.

What’s Important

The key aspects to take into consideration against these type of teams and to take advantage of space are;

• Look for open space and vulnerable areas when the opposition commit men forward
  
• Try and spot patterns in their play, i.e is one side of theirs more attacking than the other
  
• Try and overload the vulnerable areas by being more aggressive.
  

By focusing on the vulnerable areas you see you can really take advantage and hurt the opposition. Here are a few examples of what I’m talking about;

In this screenshot we can see that the team in the black kits (Corinthians) are playing a high defensive line and positioned high up the pitch. Now because they are a better side than me they are being quite aggressive against me and committing men forward. As you can see on the screenshot they actually have five men inside my own half and this includes their two central midfielders (they are playing a wide 4-2-3-1 shape) but if you look at the space they’ve left behind the midfield between the defense you’ll see there is lots yet I don’t actually have a player in that area to take advantage of it. Robinho who is marked with the number 1 icon is playing an advanced playmaker role on a support duty, so he’s moved down field to help out. However if I did a simple duty or role change and made him more attacking then he should be looking to use the space marked in red on the pitch. Ideally he should be taking up a position more in line with the number 2 icon rather than where he currently is.

By ignoring this and not trying to take advantage of it then I risk making it far too easy for their defense, as it currently stands you can see how easy they have it and they are just spectators currently with nothing at all to do. But by making one little change I’ll be making them do some work and getting in behind their entire attack and midfield which can only be a good thing. The opposition will then either have to be less aggressive against you making it easier to defend against or they’ll continue to do the same making it easy for you to attack them.

After changing the role to an attack duty rather than him being on support you can notice the change instantly in this next move.

This is more or less identical to the first screenshot but now look at the difference. By him being more advanced in the area I highlighted earlier he becomes more involved and should he get the ball, he is un marked and can either drive forward with the ball or he has passing options. The important thing is he is un marked though as this will allow him to dictate the game. Corinthians midfield due are their weak point in this set up and they aren’t picking him up at all. This is what I was on about further up the article when I mentioned looking for patterns, this is a regular occurrence through the match.

The next screenshot shows them attacking me and getting dispossessed and leaving their left flank exposed if I can get the ball out there quick enough.

Their back four is quite disjointed due to the left back bombing forward and then them losing the ball. This immediately opens up the full left side of their pitch and allows me to be able to exploit the space left down my right.

Those are just a couple of simple things you can look out for during a match, how you take advantage of them though is down to you as there is more than one way of achieving success against these sides. If you wanted you can do a role or duty change to be more attacking or you could even change the mentality and go more attacking if you find they are leaving lot of space. This bit could be risky though as then you yourself, would also leave space naturally. Another way of doing it would to be sit deep and hit them on the counter, allow them to come onto you and commit men forward, win the ball back then attack them in the space they’ve left behind with pace.

At the end of the day it comes down to how you play the game as some managers are braver than others, it comes down to what you think is an acceptable risk vs reward.

Sides who defend and hit you on the counter

One of the main reasons, we find it more difficult against these types of team is because they don’t give space away too easily in the final third. Space is the key to everything, if a player has space then he also has time and allows him to take his time and pick out runners. Against a side who defends deep and is quite compact, it’ll be really hard to play through balls, balls over the top, crosses and so on into the box as there will be no real space for the player to gain that half of yard they need. So you need to think of different ways to break them down when the above isn’t working.

What’s Important

The key aspects to take into consideration against these type of teams to break them down are;

• Space
  
• Movement
  
• Width
  
• Don’t overcrowd areas of the pitch than can work in your favour by being less aggressive.
  

To achieve all of these and make the most of those I always play on a low mentality, so either standard or counter. Obviously the roles you select will also play a part but for most parts if you can create and use space then you’ll force the opposition into making decisions. Which in turn will mean people have to leave their position to deal with the threats you pose. Movement is important because it snowballs and causes a chain reaction of events plus its harder to mark someone who is moving (especially from deep) compared to someone who is static or too advanced to really do anything. By using a lower mentality it alters my tempo, defensive line and closing down to match meaning I can be more patient in my build up. And from what you can see above it works due to the movement and space both in creating and using it.To achieve width you can either changes the roles/duties of the players or do what I did above and used the exploit the flanks shouts. That is all I did. If you don’t concentrate on your own side and always over think things then you are endlessly changing things that you might not need to change. Plus you then have no real identity or style because you constantly give in to the AI. So for me I always base any changes on what I see happening in a match and never try to guess what might happen by changing stuff before. I’d much rather change due to being forced into the change as then it means I can stick to my own style that I’m trying to create plus I have faith in the tactic I’ve made. I want the AI to worry about me not the other way around, after all they’re the ones being defensive

A lot of people like to go more attacking when sides sit deep but for me this only makes the issue even worse because you are making the little space you do have even more compact. That’s not to say it doesn’t work for some but for me it’s not really something I would do. The way I see it is if you push players further up the field space is reduced and its less likely you’ll have anyone making any runs that will really stretch or hurt the opposition due to their compactness. Let me show you an example of what I’m talking about:

This side was more than happy to defend deep which means all the space I have to work with exists in front of the defense and I’ll struggle to get in behind them. I was playing with a low mentality here in this game but if I’d been more attack minded and had players in the positions were the numbers are on the pitch it would become even more congested. Now this might give the opposition a bit of defending to do and needs them to keep their concentration but for me that’s no way to play, hoping the opposition makes a mistake or has a lapse in concentration. It also means where would my late runners be arriving from or where would I get movement from in general that could hurt the opposition if I was higher? Plus we are ignoring one major significant fact here, you’d also leave yourself vulnerable to counter attacks. Ever seen a post by someone claiming they dominate the game with 20+ shots and fail to win because the AI has 3 shots and scores 2 from them? It’s because they get hit on the counter. I don’t like to play this way and like to use space that I have to create movement and get runners from deep involved and also minimise the risk of being hit on the counter. So what I like to do is play deeper myself, so I can use the space in front of the opposition that they give up so easily and have no interest in defending properly. This then allows me to commit men forward from deeper positions which can instantly put the opposition onto the back foot, defenders dislike players running at them no matter how good/poor the players might be. They risk giving fouls away and even picking cards up and risking the dreaded red card. Let me show you an example of what I mean:

The opposition are happy to have eight men back behind the ball here. The solid red arrow shows where my player will run and the broken arrow represents a passing move my side will make.This is a video of the move;

It results in a under hit pass and the move comes to nothing on this occasion but do you see the use of space I was talking about and how quickly stretched the opposition became? Let me show you another example but this time when my team is pushed up playing high.

The circled players are too advanced to cause any real issue and the Rochdale defense is quite solid. So when Baxter gets the ball he doesn’t really have a clear option to pass to in front of him. The two circled central player aren’t options at all because he can’t see them and they’re marked even if he could.

He’s on the wrong side of Baxter so again he’s not a realistic option. The ref is blocking his view here but even so the player next to the ref (less so than the 2nd player tbh) or the one player on his own outside the box can easily move across and cut out the pass.

If Baxter controls the ball well the first time then this could be an option. But with the refs positioning and the seemingly free roaming Rochdale players, I don’t think he is a safe option. This leaves number 4 as the only real possibility because I have three static player positioned way too high up the pitch.

The lack of movement and runners from deep is a big issue as I’m relying on the opposition making a mistake before I can do anything useful. I’d much rather take matters into my own hands and be in control, so I play a less attacking mentality against sides who sit deep, I normally go Standard or Counter instead. The next screenshot shows what I was talking about a little earlier about leaving myself exposed if I am positioned high up the pitch.

Baxter attempts the pass but the Rochdale player cuts it out and then I get hit on a quick break. I am still playing attacking in this screenshot btw to highlight the issues and show why I avoid being so aggressive.

One simple ball down the channel and I’m completely exposed. I’m lucky in this instance and the sequence comes to nothing. Yet when you are high up the pitch or over commit men forward, this is the biggest risk you face and something you’ll see often should you give the ball away cheaply. If you’ve noticed one prominent thing so far in all the examples and all the screenshots is Baxter seems to be involved in everything. The reason for this is the amount of space he has to play in, he’s basically unmarked due to the opposition not caring about giving space away due to them sticking to their strict positions and being deep. The next screen shows the amount of room he actually has during a counter attack that I have just done myself but now the opposition are trying to clear their lines.

Even if the opposition do clear the ball like they intend on doing the chances are Baxter will still end up with the ball. He has lots of space and time and doesn’t come too high up the pitch. He actually does get

the ball and smashes it home to make it 1-0. This is another example of Baxter’s influence in a move started from deep. You can also see me attacking with numbers.

This shows Baxter yet again pulling the strings after we break from deep. The raumdeuter has checked his run, the complete forward is going to drop off to create space which the wide playmaker (haha just noticed on the image I put RPM instead of WPM opps) will run into and the complete wingback is busting a gut to get forward. Baxter passes the ball into the wide playmaker’s path who then feeds the complete wingback in.

Then my complete wingback has a few options, he can put in the cross (which he does) or he can pull it back. Either way I’ve created space and broke them down by movement its why I always bang on about space and movement, its this what wins you game.

Conclusion

The short version of the above is, the attacking sides naturally give up space so they do half the job for you. Even if you have a tactic that isn’t that great you should still be able to create chances against these type of sides. If you come up against the more stubborn sides though who sit back and hit you on the break, then creating and using that space falls solely on you and your tactic and this is when tactical set ups can be exposed and show faults. You need to create lots of movement both on and off the ball

--------------------

You can be aggressive still but do it in the right areas. Currently you don't do this, you do it all centrally which will normally be a team who sits deep's strength. Sooner or later something might give and you might eventually break them down or force an error but you can achieve much better results but using space and the whole pitch instead. Be more intelligent with the role allocation and really think about how they interact with each other.

Keep in mind that this is a PL issue as well : even if there's a gap in player quality between the big 4 and the rest of the league, you don't complete overpower other teams. That's not the case in italy/germany/spain where a couple of teams can play however they want and still dominate due to sheer player quality.

With that being said I've found that width is what works best against very defensive teams. You need to stretch them as much as possible. Have you tried playing wider ? Also the IF and AP both cut inside and FB aren't as fast to overlap so I think you could change them to WB with the same duty allocation. Use your fullbacks as an attacking throttle : give them an attacking role & duty if you're desperate for more space or switch them back to FB if you're ahead or feel that his wingers may be an issue.

#

Why should he? Why do people think this is a given, because they are weaker opposition? If they stay compact they can frustrate the hell out of bigger sides. It all comes down to space. If the opposition are sat back then the final third is going to be crowded. Now if you add your roles into the equation then it just makes it even worse and you have no space to play in or anyone who can find that extra yard you need. On top of the opposition's players you have 5 of your own all in the same space as them, where is the intelligent movement coming from? How do you expect to draw the opposition out or pull them out of shape? The roles you use all rely on coming centrally which makes play very predictable and easy to defend against.

The answer to your question is yes you can play an aggressive style and over power teams but not with the roles you use, not really on a consistent basis anyway. In order to do this you need a lot of variety in your play and you have to use the whole pitch and it's width. By using roles that naturally make you narrow when attacking, it won't really work.

How does the role along make a quality link with the striker? As you use a lone striker system the striker will always be marked by two opposition defenders. I fail to see how the AP who is stuck out on the wing adds any quality to the issues the striker will have during the game. The AP will have his own marker a fullback of some kind so it's not like he will be occupying a defender for him. Then when he does pass the ball to the striker, what happens then? It's hard for a striker to play against two markers no matter how good he is. The fact that he stays high too doesn't really help the case as he will have very little space to move about in. IMO it makes much more sense to use a striker who drops deeper against systems that use a high line because any space or movement will generally have to come from in front of the defender. It's going to be rare you have much success in behind. Where as playing against sides who push up you'd do the opposite as the space is in behind the defenders so then it's worth while to use a striker who pushes high up the pitch and doesn't drop back.

Doing it the other way I can't see how you could be consistent. That's not to say it won't work but you want to build a system that works all the time don't you and not rely on luck or flukes? In your current set up I don't see anyone who is making space and dragging the defence out of shape or causing them issues. Sort this out and the results will become better and more consistent.

I wrote this a bit back and it applies to whether you are a cautious or aggressive side, the idea is the same in both types of systems.

~

Eureka!

The purpose of this article is to help people see the difference between sides who play attacking against you and sides who are willing to sit back and hit you on the counter attack. It focuses on how both strategies give you different types of space to play in and the defensive shapes they take up on the pitch. It will also shows you some examples that should be able to help you identify this in your own saved games and makes things more clear tactically for you. If you remember correctly I did two previous articles about this and said the third and final instalment would be a collection of them both combined. Well this is that but with some new stuff added too Understanding what type of opposition you are playing is really important in Football Manager as it determines how you need to play against them. Not all teams play the same way so this means if you don’t know what’s going on in a game then you’ll struggle to get the result needed. On the forums, blogs and on Twitter, I see posts that mention one week they beat top of the league then the week after get beat by the clubs near the bottom of the league, while playing the same way they did in the previous match. People can’t seem to get their head around why it happens so I thought I’d shed a bit of light on why it happens. The two main kinds of team you’ll face during the season are;

• Sides who are happy to attack you
  
• Sides who like to defend deep and hit you on the counter
  

If you can learn to differentiate the differences between the two then Football Manager can become a lot more enjoyable because you can ensure you have the correct game plan in place or at least know what different things you can try to get the result you need as the approach to beating both teams is vastly different. A large proportion of people would probably go more defensive against the stronger sides and more attacking against the weaker ones, but it’s not that black and white as there is always different ways to beat the opposition, there is not one set way.

Sides who attack you

From a defensive stand point playing against sides who attack you often during the match can be a daunting prospect especially if they are superior to your own team. But the up side is, they’ll leave lots of unprotected space for you to play in and use to your advantage. This can do done by mentality changes or just a simple role change.

What’s Important

The key aspects to take into consideration against these type of teams and to take advantage of space are;

• Look for open space and vulnerable areas when the opposition commit men forward
  
• Try and spot patterns in their play, i.e is one side of theirs more attacking than the other
  
• Try and overload the vulnerable areas by being more aggressive.
  

By focusing on the vulnerable areas you see you can really take advantage and hurt the opposition. Here are a few examples of what I’m talking about;

In this screenshot we can see that the team in the black kits (Corinthians) are playing a high defensive line and positioned high up the pitch. Now because they are a better side than me they are being quite aggressive against me and committing men forward. As you can see on the screenshot they actually have five men inside my own half and this includes their two central midfielders (they are playing a wide 4-2-3-1 shape) but if you look at the space they’ve left behind the midfield between the defense you’ll see there is lots yet I don’t actually have a player in that area to take advantage of it. Robinho who is marked with the number 1 icon is playing an advanced playmaker role on a support duty, so he’s moved down field to help out. However if I did a simple duty or role change and made him more attacking then he should be looking to use the space marked in red on the pitch. Ideally he should be taking up a position more in line with the number 2 icon rather than where he currently is.

By ignoring this and not trying to take advantage of it then I risk making it far too easy for their defense, as it currently stands you can see how easy they have it and they are just spectators currently with nothing at all to do. But by making one little change I’ll be making them do some work and getting in behind their entire attack and midfield which can only be a good thing. The opposition will then either have to be less aggressive against you making it easier to defend against or they’ll continue to do the same making it easy for you to attack them.

After changing the role to an attack duty rather than him being on support you can notice the change instantly in this next move.

This is more or less identical to the first screenshot but now look at the difference. By him being more advanced in the area I highlighted earlier he becomes more involved and should he get the ball, he is un marked and can either drive forward with the ball or he has passing options. The important thing is he is un marked though as this will allow him to dictate the game. Corinthians midfield due are their weak point in this set up and they aren’t picking him up at all. This is what I was on about further up the article when I mentioned looking for patterns, this is a regular occurrence through the match.

The next screenshot shows them attacking me and getting dispossessed and leaving their left flank exposed if I can get the ball out there quick enough.

Their back four is quite disjointed due to the left back bombing forward and then them losing the ball. This immediately opens up the full left side of their pitch and allows me to be able to exploit the space left down my right.

Those are just a couple of simple things you can look out for during a match, how you take advantage of them though is down to you as there is more than one way of achieving success against these sides. If you wanted you can do a role or duty change to be more attacking or you could even change the mentality and go more attacking if you find they are leaving lot of space. This bit could be risky though as then you yourself, would also leave space naturally. Another way of doing it would to be sit deep and hit them on the counter, allow them to come onto you and commit men forward, win the ball back then attack them in the space they’ve left behind with pace.

At the end of the day it comes down to how you play the game as some managers are braver than others, it comes down to what you think is an acceptable risk vs reward.

Sides who defend and hit you on the counter

One of the main reasons, we find it more difficult against these types of team is because they don’t give space away too easily in the final third. Space is the key to everything, if a player has space then he also has time and allows him to take his time and pick out runners. Against a side who defends deep and is quite compact, it’ll be really hard to play through balls, balls over the top, crosses and so on into the box as there will be no real space for the player to gain that half of yard they need. So you need to think of different ways to break them down when the above isn’t working.

What’s Important

The key aspects to take into consideration against these type of teams to break them down are;

• Space
  
• Movement
  
• Width
  
• Don’t overcrowd areas of the pitch than can work in your favour by being less aggressive.
  

To achieve all of these and make the most of those I always play on a low mentality, so either standard or counter. Obviously the roles you select will also play a part but for most parts if you can create and use space then you’ll force the opposition into making decisions. Which in turn will mean people have to leave their position to deal with the threats you pose. Movement is important because it snowballs and causes a chain reaction of events plus its harder to mark someone who is moving (especially from deep) compared to someone who is static or too advanced to really do anything. By using a lower mentality it alters my tempo, defensive line and closing down to match meaning I can be more patient in my build up. And from what you can see above it works due to the movement and space both in creating and using it.To achieve width you can either changes the roles/duties of the players or do what I did above and used the exploit the flanks shouts. That is all I did. If you don’t concentrate on your own side and always over think things then you are endlessly changing things that you might not need to change. Plus you then have no real identity or style because you constantly give in to the AI. So for me I always base any changes on what I see happening in a match and never try to guess what might happen by changing stuff before. I’d much rather change due to being forced into the change as then it means I can stick to my own style that I’m trying to create plus I have faith in the tactic I’ve made. I want the AI to worry about me not the other way around, after all they’re the ones being defensive

A lot of people like to go more attacking when sides sit deep but for me this only makes the issue even worse because you are making the little space you do have even more compact. That’s not to say it doesn’t work for some but for me it’s not really something I would do. The way I see it is if you push players further up the field space is reduced and its less likely you’ll have anyone making any runs that will really stretch or hurt the opposition due to their compactness. Let me show you an example of what I’m talking about:

This side was more than happy to defend deep which means all the space I have to work with exists in front of the defense and I’ll struggle to get in behind them. I was playing with a low mentality here in this game but if I’d been more attack minded and had players in the positions were the numbers are on the pitch it would become even more congested. Now this might give the opposition a bit of defending to do and needs them to keep their concentration but for me that’s no way to play, hoping the opposition makes a mistake or has a lapse in concentration. It also means where would my late runners be arriving from or where would I get movement from in general that could hurt the opposition if I was higher? Plus we are ignoring one major significant fact here, you’d also leave yourself vulnerable to counter attacks. Ever seen a post by someone claiming they dominate the game with 20+ shots and fail to win because the AI has 3 shots and scores 2 from them? It’s because they get hit on the counter. I don’t like to play this way and like to use space that I have to create movement and get runners from deep involved and also minimise the risk of being hit on the counter. So what I like to do is play deeper myself, so I can use the space in front of the opposition that they give up so easily and have no interest in defending properly. This then allows me to commit men forward from deeper positions which can instantly put the opposition onto the back foot, defenders dislike players running at them no matter how good/poor the players might be. They risk giving fouls away and even picking cards up and risking the dreaded red card. Let me show you an example of what I mean:

The opposition are happy to have eight men back behind the ball here. The solid red arrow shows where my player will run and the broken arrow represents a passing move my side will make.This is a video of the move;

It results in a under hit pass and the move comes to nothing on this occasion but do you see the use of space I was talking about and how quickly stretched the opposition became? Let me show you another example but this time when my team is pushed up playing high.

The circled players are too advanced to cause any real issue and the Rochdale defense is quite solid. So when Baxter gets the ball he doesn’t really have a clear option to pass to in front of him. The two circled central player aren’t options at all because he can’t see them and they’re marked even if he could.

He’s on the wrong side of Baxter so again he’s not a realistic option. The ref is blocking his view here but even so the player next to the ref (less so than the 2nd player tbh) or the one player on his own outside the box can easily move across and cut out the pass.

If Baxter controls the ball well the first time then this could be an option. But with the refs positioning and the seemingly free roaming Rochdale players, I don’t think he is a safe option. This leaves number 4 as the only real possibility because I have three static player positioned way too high up the pitch.

The lack of movement and runners from deep is a big issue as I’m relying on the opposition making a mistake before I can do anything useful. I’d much rather take matters into my own hands and be in control, so I play a less attacking mentality against sides who sit deep, I normally go Standard or Counter instead. The next screenshot shows what I was talking about a little earlier about leaving myself exposed if I am positioned high up the pitch.

Baxter attempts the pass but the Rochdale player cuts it out and then I get hit on a quick break. I am still playing attacking in this screenshot btw to highlight the issues and show why I avoid being so aggressive.

One simple ball down the channel and I’m completely exposed. I’m lucky in this instance and the sequence comes to nothing. Yet when you are high up the pitch or over commit men forward, this is the biggest risk you face and something you’ll see often should you give the ball away cheaply. If you’ve noticed one prominent thing so far in all the examples and all the screenshots is Baxter seems to be involved in everything. The reason for this is the amount of space he has to play in, he’s basically unmarked due to the opposition not caring about giving space away due to them sticking to their strict positions and being deep. The next screen shows the amount of room he actually has during a counter attack that I have just done myself but now the opposition are trying to clear their lines.

Even if the opposition do clear the ball like they intend on doing the chances are Baxter will still end up with the ball. He has lots of space and time and doesn’t come too high up the pitch. He actually does get

the ball and smashes it home to make it 1-0. This is another example of Baxter’s influence in a move started from deep. You can also see me attacking with numbers.

This shows Baxter yet again pulling the strings after we break from deep. The raumdeuter has checked his run, the complete forward is going to drop off to create space which the wide playmaker (haha just noticed on the image I put RPM instead of WPM opps) will run into and the complete wingback is busting a gut to get forward. Baxter passes the ball into the wide playmaker’s path who then feeds the complete wingback in.

Then my complete wingback has a few options, he can put in the cross (which he does) or he can pull it back. Either way I’ve created space and broke them down by movement its why I always bang on about space and movement, its this what wins you game.

Conclusion

The short version of the above is, the attacking sides naturally give up space so they do half the job for you. Even if you have a tactic that isn’t that great you should still be able to create chances against these type of sides. If you come up against the more stubborn sides though who sit back and hit you on the break, then creating and using that space falls solely on you and your tactic and this is when tactical set ups can be exposed and show faults. You need to create lots of movement both on and off the ball

--------------------

You can be aggressive still but do it in the right areas. Currently you don't do this, you do it all centrally which will normally be a team who sits deep's strength. Sooner or later something might give and you might eventually break them down or force an error but you can achieve much better results but using space and the whole pitch instead. Be more intelligent with the role allocation and really think about how they interact with each other.

Thanks for the reply Cleon.

I see what you're saying here. When I first created the tactic I based my role/duty selection around the players (which I normally do) rather than looking at how they would work in regard to space. I did think, although slightly so, that we would already be quite wide based on the overall mentality setting (Control). So I suppose that's why I wasn't thinking much about it after the fact. I think this comes down to a visual thing where the movement we see on the tactics board is only represented up or down, rather than going narrow or wide. If I choose an IF-A there is no visual difference on the tactics board than if I choose W-A, which probably could help people if there was!

In terms of the middle of the pitch my thinking was this: I didn't want too many players moving into that AMC space in a hurried fashion. I wanted supporting players to link my forward 3 and back line + DM. However, I also wanted to use a playmaker in a different area than usual (wide right) and I figured that he would be in a good place to support the lone striker.

I look at the 3 forwards as strikers. Granted, the STC is the true "striker" but the other two (AMLR) are essentially wide forwards, are they not? So the thought was I'd have AML cutting inside like a 2nd striker, the STC staying high and running on to passes/through balls/crosses/pressuring the D-line, and then the AMR would sit behind a bit, but still on the right flank perhaps being narrow, putting in dangerous passes acting as our #10. But I'm guessing the reason this isn't working as desired is because the middle of the pitch is actually quite packed with the BBM and RPM getting forward in attack, with nobody pulling wide, correct? That was a dumb mistake on my part. But again, I figured the overall mentality setting would have us using width from the get-go.

Finally, and maybe ironically, that tactic had been smashing teams away from home who conceded a lot of space. Especially after reading your post there "eureka" I can see why that is the case. I had a hunch it had to do with overloading the middle, but a recent game against Benfica confirmed it (tons of balls over the top of their defense via CM's into Welbeck, who scored 3 or 4 goals this way). Whereas smaller teams like Crystal Palace were quite happy to sit deep and crowd the middle, thus we'd create 0 CCC's

I look at the 3 forwards as strikers. Granted, the STC is the true "striker" but the other two (AMLR) are essentially wide forwards, are they not? So the thought was I'd have AML cutting inside like a 2nd striker, the STC staying high and running on to passes/through balls/crosses/pressuring the D-line,

The opposition are deep though so you won't see many throughballs as there is no space behind for players to really run into and any balls to his feet he will be pressured with instantly due to being out numbered. As for crosses, who is going to provide them and more importantly how is that going to work when the striker you use is marked by two players? He'd struggle to play any kind of crossing game. The same with passes. He has no-one taking defenders from him or making movement to give the defenders something to think about. It's quite static really in terms of how it plays, everything is central.

The 3 forwards aren't strikers or wide strikers though if you don't use roles that are striker like ~

The opposition are deep though so you won't see many throughballs as there is no space behind for players to really run into and any balls to his feet he will be pressured with instantly due to being out numbered. As for crosses, who is going to provide them and more importantly how is that going to work when the striker you use is marked by two players? He'd struggle to play any kind of crossing game. The same with passes. He has no-one taking defenders from him or making movement to give the defenders something to think about. It's quite static really in terms of how it plays, everything is central.

The 3 forwards aren't strikers or wide strikers though if you don't use roles that are striker like ~

Right, I didn't want all 3 to be strikers. Just two. The IF-A and AF-A. My intention was to utilize the AP-S (AMR) as our #10

But I do see what you're saying about the space. I am slightly conflicted by the players I have... I have players like Ozil and Cazorla who obviously fit perfectly into that possession style where we can be more cautious and ball-control oriented. But then I also have Sanchez/Ox/Walcott who can really shine in a more direct and attacking style. So finding the balance between the two is very difficult, in terms of space.