The never ending search for consistency - a 4-1-3-1-1

Been a while since i posted in here, my frustrations and confusions at FM16 have continued over the past few months, but I decided to try and develop something once more. I am struggling a lot with "cause and effect" this year, things that in the past i could understand the effect they would have if i changed, or the cause of certain things on the field, this year it just doesnt seem to work as i expect it to. Something is amiss in my footballing brain......So decided to spend a lot of time figuring out something as a "base position", and then come here to see if i can draw on the wisdom of the forum to help me get back on track.

The Save / Team

Started out a new save, latest patch / db with no custom updates etc. I have had a bit of enjoyment out of managing in Italy this year, my last set of posts here were a save with Parma where i started to hit upon a system. This time around i fancied a bit higher level. I decide to play as Lazio. They have a nice enough starting squad, some interesting assets and a couple of good youngsters in there.

The Concept / Style of Play

I think it is important to have some idea of your preferred "Style" before you get into formations, roles and duties, let alone TI and PI. So for this system, the concepts i want to use are:

• Space creation is going to be a big part of this tactic. I want to make sure my key players have space in which to operate and execute their primary "aim"
  
• In attack, i want varied points of attack rather than just one single focal point, or two symmetrical focal points
  
• I want a true goalscoring forward in the team, not a false 9 type. I expect my centre forward to get a large % of my team goals
  
• In defence, we will have be a pro-active team. We will press in certain areas and whilst we want to create space for us, we will seek to compress space for the opponent
  
• We will have crosses as a big part of our game. Not because we will always get on the end of the first cross, but (a bit of a "pepism" here), the second ball from a cross can be very valuable
  
• Our board expect "attacking" football so i will aim to deliver that, front foot style rather than cautious / counter will be the headline approach
  

The Setup - Team Shape / Mentality / TI

Ok so to start, the mentality. Now i have been a little bit "anti" anything above "standard" as a base mentality since early in FM16. I found that the vast majority of people wanted to go control or attacking and that was the cause of many a tactical problem. However, i think i have become a bit stuck in my ways with that. The board wanted attacking football, and i want to play on the front foot. There are pitfalls to this, but we are a relatively big side. Other than the massive gulf to Juve, there is likely no other domestic team who can claim to be any notable amount "bigger" or "better" than me in terms of the playing squad. So Control it is.

Now team shape. Well this evolves from thinking a little later on. I want to create space, and as you will see below i am specifically interesting in creating space in the length of the pitch, as well as using width. For me, one of the basics (from reading threads here) of team shape is that it will influence how far apart your "bands" are on the pitch. As part of my attempt to create space for the TQ, i will go with "Structured" here. This should ensure my striker is already positioned a little further from my midfield (even before considering the effect of role /duty) and help to create the space i want for my Treq. It will mean a little less creative freedom, but i can adjust that on a PI or even TI level if i feel necessary. The choice of a couple of creative roles should also offset that issue somewhat.

On the TI side, i like to start fairly simple. Those chosen so far are:

- Push Higher up / Close down more - These are my defensive choices. The push higher is a risk for sure, given that i already have "control" mentality which moves the line up a bit, but if i am going to be a pressing team i will need to not leave gaps. I realise i do talk later about creating vertical space, and i chose "structured" with the rational of making a gap between my midfield and striker(s), and this somewhat offsets, potentially, the gap between defence and midfield. I am ok with that in principle, but in practice i have to see

- Shorter Passing - I have 2 creative forces (WP and T) and i do not want to bypass them. with the movement and spaces we create i think we are best served with shorter passing, but importantly with a slightly higher tempo which comes with "control"

- Look for the overlap - Mainly designed to get the WP / WB interplay working nicely. It does also seem to encourage the FB to push on nicely on occasions when the W uses his "roam from position" PI.

The Setup - Formation / Roles / Duties

Below is the basic formation, and the roles and duties i have selected

So this really is the key. It needs to all fit together and not be a serious of individual roles. I need to understand how the roles will compliment, or clash with each other. There is no point saying "i like treq's, so im gonna use a treq" - It needs to be part of an overall system. So roughly, here is each role and why its chose, and how it compliments the system.

GK - GK (d) - I find Sweeper Keepers tend to mess up distribution, so i have avoided. However with my high line, a sweeper keeper in concept might help, so i need to consider this further down the line (PI - Distribution ones only)

DC - DC(d) - Standard centre back here, nothing really of note. he should form a partnerhip with the cover defender, but also by keeping the left sided DC as "defend" i hope to avoid a vertical gap between him and the quite attacking LB (No PI)

DC - BPD© - A bit extravagant here. This is a recent tweak. I am struggling with through balls / balls over the top and moving him to cover is to combat that. As mentioned above, i prefer to keep him on the right hand side. The "BPD" is a little experiment. De Vrij can play this role, and the idea is something i saw in a Cleon thread about a BPD being able to release an early ball for an advanced striker. I am not averse to a direct ball, given my striker role. (No PI)

LB - WB(a) - One of two players in my side who's primary function is to supply width to the team. Of course he has to defend, but the presence of a DM should allow me to position at least one fullback as an attacking force. He is a WB(a) to overlap the player in front of him, and to make best use of the space which is created by the LM. He is also a supplied of crosses, which should compliment my chosen striker role. Senad Lulic, essentially a converted midfielder / winger, is ideal for this role with his attacking PPMs (No PI)

RB - FB(s) - to give us balance and a bit more defensive solidarity, this guy is more conservative. He has no need to overlap, and indeed not likely to be space to use. He should however support the RM and offer a backwards passing option. With "support" duty he will still get forward now and then and his default on this role/ duty is to cross from deep, which i believe will compliment my attacking approach. (PI - "Cross More Often")

DM - BWM(d) - This one was something i gave quite a bit of thought to. In my previous attempt at this shape (at Parma) i had a static Anchor here. However because i want to be proactive, and press more this time, i decided i wanted an attack dog in here. Someone who will provide a holding pressence, but will also close down. I grew tired of watching my players in other tactics be too placid. I do find this guy acts as a proper DM and doesnt go chasing too high. Lucas Biglia was ideal here, but i had to sell him to raise funds for other areas, Onazi is a capable replacement for now (No PI)

MC - CM(s) - The most vanilla of all roles. I had this as BBM, but whilst this gave an extra presence in the box at times, it was counter productive for 2 reasons. Firstly, the box got crowded. Secondly, it did not mesh with my aim to provide as much space as possible for the Treq. The BBM was moving into spaces which i wanted available for the Treq. CM(s) means he sits a bit more, does get up into a passing option type space for the Treq but without taking up his space. I also like that this role can be pretty much customised to anything, as almost all PI are available. i can use this as i get more confident (No PI)

RM - W(a) - A guy with a real dual purpose. Firstly, he is a provider for us. he gets the ball, runs at his man, beats his man, delivers crosses. All the things you want in a traditional winger. His starting point in the M strata and not AM helps him pick the ball up with more space (that word again) infront of him. His second purpose is a creator of space. The combination of the winger and the WB on the other side are to stretch the play horizontally, which in turn should then free up more space in the middle of the field for the Treq to take advantage of. Just to finish this guy off, i also see him as a maverick scorer. By adding the one PI, he will come into the box on occasion and get on the end of things (PI - "Roam from position")

LM - WP(s) - Another dual purpose role, and one i came to after some thought. Having a TQ and another playmaker is not that orthodox, however with a TQ in the AM strata, i believe there is also value in having a creator deeper in the park. I had experimented with both the DLP in the DM slot, and the RPM in the MC spot to fill that "purpose", but neither allowed the right balance. The addition of this role was my solution. Again, he serves multiple purposes. Firstly, he is a space creator. He moves infield, and opens up the flank for the WB behind. part of the reason he can move in field, is the formation should allow space for this. We have no play in the MCL slot, a defend duty in the DMC strata, and an attack duty in the AMC strata. This guy can move in and sit in the space behind the TQ and infront of the BWM. He can ping cross field passes to the winger on the right to help with stretching the game. He also will get in and around the box late on occasion, and lastly with support duty, will also not neglect the defensive side of things. A key player (No PI)

AMC - T(a) - In many ways, the role around which this system was first constructed. Although with the way i have set up, i have tried to avoid this guy carrying a huge burdon (partly due to personnel). I have set up a lot of the rest of the team with an aim of creating space for this guy. The AM strata is his to use. He should be roaming around in there, finding that space we have created. he should have passing options in front (the striker) and wide (the WB and W). But he should also have space to run at defenders. (No PI)

ST - AF(a) - This is a role i have rarely used in recent years, but if i can get it right, i think it really compliments the system. Where as the winger and wing back stretch the game horizontally, this guy stretches it vertically to create the space for the treq. He will always be on the shoulder, pushing the Dline back. He both creates space through this, and also closes down. However his primary function, is to score goals. He is a forward in the true sense. With this role, he can be on the end of through balls (from the treq or the WP). A big part of his game is also crosses. He can be lethal from an early / deep cross, because he is already on the shoulder. Destro here was partly bought because he has the PPM "Likes to try to beat the offside trap". However Matri has been surprisingly excellent in this role too. (No PI)

So that is the setup i chose and why. I have played half a season, and whilst the results and peformances are good, they are not great. We are in a dogfight for 2nd in Serie A, which is where i would expect to be (we are not at the level of Juve) but there are a few things i cant seem to get right. I will do a second post detailing the issues i have, and really keen to hear thoughts from others on how i might solve those, but also on whether the above actually is a balance and cohesive (and realistic) way to set up?

So, a bit of a "state of the nation" and summary of what i think i need to improve (and hopefully i can get some help with how to improve these things).

First up, its important, i think, to understand that this not just a game of tactics. There are a load of other aspects, some which are quite important, some which are minor. But a couple of key ones are squad management and having the right players for the job in the first place. The first, i think i do quite well. I rotate enough to keep most of the squad happy (making good use of the Europa league) but i dont rotate to the extent that our lineup is regularly weakend. The later, is a work in progress. I have laid out some quite specific roles and requirements in the OP, and to have both the right starting players who fit into the roles, and also some squad depth, is not that easy at Lazio. In short, i do not yet have the ideal squad for this tactic, but i do have some really great fits (In particular Candevra, Lulic, De Vrij, Basta, Destro). The Treq role was my key, and to start with Lazio dont have a natural "star" who is a Treq. I was intriqued by Felipe Anderson, but he didnt really fit that well with his PPMs and attribute balance. In Jan i sold him and brought in Bernado Silva, who i believe is the right fit for this role (he has one annoying PPM - "Stops play" which i think is contrary to what i want - i have him unlearning it!). Surprisingly, Ravel Morrison plays very well here.

So with the context of the fact i dont have a perfect squad, and i have also had a lot of injuries, here are the results since i started to use the system in its current guise (the first 10 games, before Carpi were various tweaks building up to getting a system i was happy with)

So overall, i cant grumble too much. Just the 2 defeats, both in cup competitions where i rotate my squad. However despite this, i do have a few issues that i dont feel happy with, and more worryingly, dont feel confident in how to fix them:

Issue 1 - Defending through balls - This one is an achilles heel for us. We do concede a lot of chances (if not goals) where an opposing striker gets onto a through ball in between my DCs or in behind them. I am sure most of you will scream "of course you do, you have a high line!!!" - and that is right, it feels like the obvious issue. But i lack the confidence to just drop the Dline, because in my FM16 experience, one simple change like that can turn a team from Brazil 1970 to Derby County 2008. Also more than that, i cant quite believe that it just isnt possible to defend high, effectively? I did dable with "play offside", but because of injuries i have not had a settled back 4, which makes me nervous of this. The introduction of the "cover" duty was to try and combat this, but thus far i cant say its helped hugely.

Issue 2- Tracking Runners from wide - I have noticed we seem to struggle a bit when the opposition play 1 striker and 2 IF types (rather than wingers). We seem to not track Inside forwards as they come in from the flank. They often can play one-two and get in between our fullback and DC. I am puzzled by what exactly in my setup leaves me so open to this (accepting the attack duty WB could be one reason, but it happens equally from both flanks). I am struggling here. Am i over reacting? Is it always the case that IF are dangerous, and should i concentrate more on the ST in these systems (who usually is the link man as they cut in).

Issue 3 - Consistency - This is the one that has killed FM16 for me, in a nutshell, and is the reason for the title of this thread. So often, i build something which in theory looks ok. I then play a set of games, and get 6 / 7 (or even 10) good performances and results (i dont expect to win 10 in a row, i mean that for a series of consecutive games, i watch the team and they play as i expect, and its effective). See the first 5 fixtures on the above screenshot, as an example. Then what happens every time to me, is we suddenly seem to lose our effectiveness in short order. Suddenly when i watch games, the things we were doing well, we are no longer doing. Through balls are too long or short, Finishing is off, passes go out for a throw. I tear my hair out. Then if i do persist, suddenly form comes back (see the set of games starting with Sion, middle of the above screenshot). Then repeat....... I know that the quality of opposition is clearly a factor. i shouldnt be upset at draws with the likes of Milan, Inter, Roma (all away), and i shouldnt get too excited by beating Frosinone and Carpi at home. But its more the performance factors which puzzle me. Normally i would say that inconsistency means the core system is flawed in some way, so maybe that is the answer - Either way really keen to hear thoughts on how to be more consistent. Is there something in this system which makes it particularly vunerable to a particular opponent strategy (I look at the patterns of systems used by those i face and its not immediately apparent).

I am also not 100% sure i have the treq being at his best yet, but i need to let the new player settle in, and let the injuries subside before calling out for help there!

Hopefully some of this makes sense

Two great post, well laid out. You have an aggressive mentality. Then you add push higher up, which also increases closing down, and then finallly on top of that you have close down more, which more than likely will cause you to loose youre defensive shape. You play a high pressing system, but the only player high up the pitch pressing the opponents is the AF-A and to an extent your W-A and Treq. I think it would be beneficial if you dropped the close down more so your players would keep the shape a bit better in the defensive phase, which suits your structured formation better imo.

Such a high line would also benefit from the use of an offside-trap as well, but then without the cover-defender and with the added inclusion of a sweeper-keeper who can deal with throughballs when the trap fails.

I think the attacking setup looks great.

Welcome back Jambo, well laid out as ever .

Issue 1 - Defending through balls - This one is an achilles heel for us. We do concede a lot of chances (if not goals) where an opposing striker gets onto a through ball in between my DCs or in behind them. I am sure most of you will scream "of course you do, you have a high line!!!" - and that is right, it feels like the obvious issue. But i lack the confidence to just drop the Dline, because in my FM16 experience, one simple change like that can turn a team from Brazil 1970 to Derby County 2008. Also more than that, i cant quite believe that it just isnt possible to defend high, effectively? I did dable with "play offside", but because of injuries i have not had a settled back 4, which makes me nervous of this. The introduction of the "cover" duty was to try and combat this, but thus far i cant say its helped hugely.

Personally I don't feel like your D line has much to do with it. ok, Control + push higher up gives a high line, but that will be somewhat tempered by using a player at DMC + a Structured Team Shape (which you identified as helping to create space).

If you're worried about the through balls, whereabouts on the pitch are they coming from? If high up then sure dropping the push higher TI may help, but I would expect using a DMC would actively mitigate a lot of through balls, at least from the centre of the pitch. You're using a BWM(D) at DMC, is he in the right place to help cut out the through balls in the centre? If through balls are coming from the wings, that may be a different story.

A couple of other thoughts, I think it was you who mentioned a while ago about using a Sweeper Keeper because "I don't see a down side" or something like that. So that could be an easy change to make. Also, I personally like using the offside trap with middle to high def lines, although central defender quality can be an issue. I don't know much about the Lazio central defenders, although I think De Vrij is good(?), but I'd make sure they have the mental attributes to carry it off well. I guess you could say a similar thing about using the close down more TI on top of the Control mentality. Perhaps a close down less PI here?

One final thing, and just to play devil's advocate, how much of an issue is it? You've only conceded more than one goal in a single match, and your defence looks very solid from that point of view. As you have raised the issue, I guess there are more through balls that you manage to defend after they occur, which is a good thing, although clearly reducing them in the first place would be better.

Issue 2- Tracking Runners from wide - I have noticed we seem to struggle a bit when the opposition play 1 striker and 2 IF types (rather than wingers). We seem to not track Inside forwards as they come in from the flank. They often can play one-two and get in between our fullback and DC. I am puzzled by what exactly in my setup leaves me so open to this (accepting the attack duty WB could be one reason, but it happens equally from both flanks). I am struggling here. Am i over reacting? Is it always the case that IF are dangerous, and should i concentrate more on the ST in these systems (who usually is the link man as they cut in).

Through balls and not tracking runners, yikes . Seriously though I agree it does seem a bit puzzling, although I'd again question the size of the problem when you're not conceding many goals. However, as you say, they play one-twos and get in between your fullback and DC. This may imply you are somehow getting caught out by an overload against your fullback? Is it a player quality issue, or perhaps you are just getting caught out by a little too much closing down along your back line? I'm guessing really, I think a pkm would help here.

Issue 3 - Consistency - This is the one that has killed FM16 for me, in a nutshell, and is the reason for the title of this thread. So often, i build something which in theory looks ok. I then play a set of games, and get 6 / 7 (or even 10) good performances and results (i dont expect to win 10 in a row, i mean that for a series of consecutive games, i watch the team and they play as i expect, and its effective). See the first 5 fixtures on the above screenshot, as an example. Then what happens every time to me, is we suddenly seem to lose our effectiveness in short order. Suddenly when i watch games, the things we were doing well, we are no longer doing. Through balls are too long or short, Finishing is off, passes go out for a throw. I tear my hair out. Then if i do persist, suddenly form comes back (see the set of games starting with Sion, middle of the above screenshot). Then repeat....... I know that the quality of opposition is clearly a factor. i shouldnt be upset at draws with the likes of Milan, Inter, Roma (all away), and i shouldnt get too excited by beating Frosinone and Carpi at home. But its more the performance factors which puzzle me. Normally i would say that inconsistency means the core system is flawed in some way, so maybe that is the answer - Either way really keen to hear thoughts on how to be more consistent. Is there something in this system which makes it particularly vunerable to a particular opponent strategy (I look at the patterns of systems used by those i face and its not immediately apparent).

Rather than a consistency issue, is it instead a scoring issue? In a little over 50% of your games, you've only scored one goal or not scored at all. Your defence looks solid as you aren't conceding (or losing) many, but if you don't score many the opposition just needs to get a lucky goal and you don't win. If your AF gets marked out of the game (which may be more of an issue as you are doing well and teams are perhaps playing more conservatively against you), where else are your goals coming from? Who else is regularly getting into the box to help out? Is the CM(S) a little too conservative perhaps?

Alternatively, if teams are playing more conservatively against you now, I personally find switching up the Team Shape during a match to add a little more creativity throughout the team can help break down stubborn sides. However, no idea if that's how teams are lining up against you - I'm just going by the results which seem to have turned since the start of the new year and your league position.

Keep at it, you've clearly got a decent system going, we just need to turn some of those draws into wins .

Good analysis herne79. I read this earlier and couldn't see any glaring issues, the "poorer" results are against good/decent sides and 2nd to Juve.

The only changes I would make are what you mentioned: SK-D and maybe Offside trap. I've been using a SK-S + Offside trap with a high line + closing down (Sakho + Skrtel) and its worked well so De Vrij should be able to (not sure about rest of defense).

I think as the flaws/exploits in the ME have been fixed and tweaked out over the years the importance of the players has increased. Have you checked your players Consistency rating in their report? Especially your playmaker roles if you aren't making chances or the players missing chances. Do you have good backups who might step up during a dip in form? The WP in your screenshot isn't full comfortable in that position yet which might affect his decision making and consistency?

The only extra change I might suggest is looking at your set pieces which no one really mentions. Do you score many counters from defensive corners? Do you score from attacking corners? Do you move players around at the start of games or after subs to put the players in the best positions? It might only get a few extra goals a season but could get you that "win whilst playing badly".

Two great post, well laid out. You have an aggressive mentality. Then you add push higher up, which also increases closing down, and then finallly on top of that you have close down more, which more than likely will cause you to loose youre defensive shape. You play a high pressing system, but the only player high up the pitch pressing the opponents is the AF-A and to an extent your W-A and Treq. I think it would be beneficial if you dropped the close down more so your players would keep the shape a bit better in the defensive phase, which suits your structured formation better imo.

Such a high line would also benefit from the use of an offside-trap as well, but then without the cover-defender and with the added inclusion of a sweeper-keeper who can deal with throughballs when the trap fails.

I think the attacking setup looks great.

Thanks Vizzini, some good points there. I guess if i look at the 2 points seperately.

Firstly the pressing - Yes its a fair point that it will be quite high when you layer the 3 different pressing triggers (the 2 x TI and the mentality). That is somewhat by design, but your post did make me think i need to watch a game or two and focus purely on whether we do lose shape (at times it can be easy to try and analyse both attacking and defending and everything else in the same match, and as a consequence you miss details). Having watched a game in detail looking at just this aspect, i find myself compromising a bit. I did not feel we totally lost shape with the pressing, and it seemed to work well in the middle of the park and forward, but what was apparent is that our DC's are liable to lose shape. The age old issue of DC's charging 15 yards forward to close someone down needlessly, leaving a gap in behind, did come up. This could certainly link to my issue around through balls. My current solution is to go half way - leave the TI and mentality as they are, but add PI to the 2 DC of "Close down less". I will however keep an eye on this as ultimately you may be correct, i may need to drop the pressing TI altogether.

On the high line stuff, yes you are right. I have been holding off on offside trap, and probably over thinking it. My 2 starting DC should be more than capable of executing it (they are not massively fast but not slow either, and both have good mental attributes). As you say, doing this means the cover defender needs to be gone (the experiment didnt work particularly well anyway, we were just as vulnerable to through balls it seemed). Likewise the Sweeper keeper i am going to go with. My trepidation is that in my experience sweeper keepers discard all short passing PI and always kick long, but i will give it a go and see if the benefits out weigh the negatives.

Thanks again for the feedback

Welcome back Jambo, well laid out as ever

Personally I don't feel like your D line has much to do with it. ok, Control + push higher up gives a high line, but that will be somewhat tempered by using a player at DMC + a Structured Team Shape (which you identified as helping to create space).

If you're worried about the through balls, whereabouts on the pitch are they coming from? If high up then sure dropping the push higher TI may help, but I would expect using a DMC would actively mitigate a lot of through balls, at least from the centre of the pitch. You're using a BWM(D) at DMC, is he in the right place to help cut out the through balls in the centre? If through balls are coming from the wings, that may be a different story.

A couple of other thoughts, I think it was you who mentioned a while ago about using a Sweeper Keeper because "I don't see a down side" or something like that. So that could be an easy change to make. Also, I personally like using the offside trap with middle to high def lines, although central defender quality can be an issue. I don't know much about the Lazio central defenders, although I think De Vrij is good(?), but I'd make sure they have the mental attributes to carry it off well. I guess you could say a similar thing about using the close down more TI on top of the Control mentality. Perhaps a close down less PI here?

One final thing, and just to play devil's advocate, how much of an issue is it? You've only conceded more than one goal in a single match, and your defence looks very solid from that point of view. As you have raised the issue, I guess there are more through balls that you manage to defend after they occur, which is a good thing, although clearly reducing them in the first place would be better.

Cheers Herne, as always, for the guidance and feedback. There is a load of food for thought there, but let me run through my thoughts thus far having read through and absorbed your feedback.

The through balls issue first - As you can see above, i do agree with the offside trap bit and have added that now based on your thoughts and the previous post above you. In terms of sweeper keeper, i think there is no downside in defensive terms to it, but the downside is long kicks. For now, i am willing to try and solve this issue and worry about keeper distribution later! So in summary, yes i have changed the Gk to SK(a) so he really acts like a sweeper (i find its impossible to spot a difference between regular GK defend and SK defend).

The second aspect of this is supply - This is the advice i always see from the experts, focus on the supply rather than the outcome of the through ball. I can get on board with that thought process, but practically, how do you stop all through balls? They do come from central rather than out wide (deep crosses is an entirely different issue, ME related im certain). Below is a quick example of a goal conceded to a through ball:

When i look at this, i dont think we could reasonably have marked / closed down the supplier any quicker, given where he is on the pitch. You can never mark everyone, all the time. Perhaps this one is down to poor defending. Eder is just better than my DC (the keeper doesnt help tbf either, leaves the near post open).

I will go with the Offside trap and sweeper keeper related changes first, and also look more carefuly at the other examples of when it happens. You are right, its not like im leaking 3 a game to these, but i am worried that there have been quite a few missed chances against us from the same scenarios, and we cant sustain that really.

Through balls and not tracking runners, yikes . Seriously though I agree it does seem a bit puzzling, although I'd again question the size of the problem when you're not conceding many goals. However, as you say, they play one-twos and get in between your fullback and DC. This may imply you are somehow getting caught out by an overload against your fullback? Is it a player quality issue, or perhaps you are just getting caught out by a little too much closing down along your back line? I'm guessing really, I think a pkm would help here.

yeah this one is defo less of an issue than through balls, and its been quite specific to one or two teams (Sassuolo in particular, with Berardi and Sansone cutting in all the time). I actually partly wonder if this one is closing down related. Sometimes the issue is the DC getting out of position and leaving the space between himself and the fullback. I will see if the changes to the DC closing down via PI start to address this. Overload can happen with attacking fullbacks, but that tends to lead to crosses rather than tracking runners issues. We are as ok as you can be in FM16 against crosses i believe, but if i can just improve against these scenarios a little bit, that will help me.

Rather than a consistency issue, is it instead a scoring issue? In a little over 50% of your games, you've only scored one goal or not scored at all. Your defence looks solid as you aren't conceding (or losing) many, but if you don't score many the opposition just needs to get a lucky goal and you don't win. If your AF gets marked out of the game (which may be more of an issue as you are doing well and teams are perhaps playing more conservatively against you), where else are your goals coming from? Who else is regularly getting into the box to help out? Is the CM(S) a little too conservative perhaps?

Alternatively, if teams are playing more conservatively against you now, I personally find switching up the Team Shape during a match to add a little more creativity throughout the team can help break down stubborn sides. However, no idea if that's how teams are lining up against you - I'm just going by the results which seem to have turned since the start of the new year and your league position.

Keep at it, you've clearly got a decent system going, we just need to turn some of those draws into wins .

I think your somewhat right, although its one in the same thing in my head (?). The lack of consistency of performance, means we dont score enough goals. If we dont play well, and the system doesnt execute as designed, then the outcome will naturally be less goals, which as you say leads to draws.

In terms of the opponents adjusting, i have considered that, and it might be that i am underestimating the impact of this but Lazio are pre-season expected to be 5th. Outside of Juve, there is very little between the teams in terms of reputation and although we currently sit second, second to 6th is a matter of around 3pts, and we do flick between 2nd/3rd/4th each week as results vary. The upshot for me, is that i would not think i should expect teams to have changed approach on me through the season. If i were Chievo and sitting 3rd, I would be more inclined to see this as the problem. Am i looking at this wrong perhaps?

Marking the AF out of the game is a very good point, i suppose its unavoidable that this will happen now and then. Mattia Destro is a good striker, well suited to the role i am asking him to play, but he is not Suarez / Ibra etc. He will have games where defenders can mark him out. I laid out in my OP my thoughts around the fact that he cant be the only threat, and my view was that the treq and the Winger should be my main supplementary sources of goals. I intend to actually do a specific post below on my views of how i expect goals to be spread, and how they are actually spread, but in short the winger is chipping in as expected (more probably), but the Treq is not. That is partly player related, but it could well be that the treq is the key to getting more consistent performances.

Interested in your throughts re the CM(s) in this system. You mention conservative and you might well be right. But if i make him more aggressive, i saw 3 potential issues. Firstly, him taking up the space that i want for the Treq. Secondly, too many players in the box (i think that can be an issue, ironically, rather than too few) and thirdly, leaving me short defensively. The last of the 3 might well be unfounded, since the WP shouldnt be too far forward. Do you have a role / duty in mind that you think would compliment the overall system better in the MC slot?

Cheers for the detailed thoughts, defo a few tweaks for me to make and also for me to think about expectations v results.

Good analysis herne79. I read this earlier and couldn't see any glaring issues, the "poorer" results are against good/decent sides and 2nd to Juve.

The only changes I would make are what you mentioned: SK-D and maybe Offside trap. I've been using a SK-S + Offside trap with a high line + closing down (Sakho + Skrtel) and its worked well so De Vrij should be able to (not sure about rest of defense).

I think as the flaws/exploits in the ME have been fixed and tweaked out over the years the importance of the players has increased. Have you checked your players Consistency rating in their report? Especially your playmaker roles if you aren't making chances or the players missing chances. Do you have good backups who might step up during a dip in form? The WP in your screenshot isn't full comfortable in that position yet which might affect his decision making and consistency?

The only extra change I might suggest is looking at your set pieces which no one really mentions. Do you score many counters from defensive corners? Do you score from attacking corners? Do you move players around at the start of games or after subs to put the players in the best positions? It might only get a few extra goals a season but could get you that "win whilst playing badly".

Thanks summatsupeer great points, especially the last 2.

I agree with you that players are more important than ever, both in terms of quality and suitability. In terms of the key "playmaker" roles, i think it is something worth thinking about. Looking at each

Treq First choice = Bernardo Silva - A January signing, and he has been stop start. He missed 3 games through injury, and is ineligible in the Europa so is in and out of the team every other midweek when we play those. In 7 appearances thus far, he has 2 goals, but worryingly zero assist. According to his report he is a "consistent performer" in the positive column. I think there is more to come from him certainly, as i tweak his PPMs over time as well

Treq backup = Ravel Morrison - Not exactly lived up to the hype IRL, but circumstances have forced me to play him quite a bit and he was surprisingly effective at times. He has 24 starts and 8 sub appearances, 5 goals and 4 assists. I am inclined to say he is just about ok as a backup given my level of play. He does however have "fairly inconsistent performer" noted in his negative column of his report.

WP first choice = Oguzhan Ozyakup - Another Jan signing, and as you noted not a natural at ML. I find for a WP, you generally want a player who is more of a CM / AM but can play wide, rather than a natural wide man. He has some ability in the position so i dont think that makes a huge difference. In 10 games since joining, just the 1 assist and zero goals. However as he sits deeper, i dont expect lots of direct assits, more likely to be starting moves which end in a goal. Has a good ave rating and pass completion. He averages 51 completed passes per game, and has 73 key passes in those 10 games. No mention of consistency either way in his report, making me assume is his middle of the road

WP backup = Stefano Mauri - A weak area for me. Mauri is at the end of his career, although he still has remarkable mental attributes and good technical. Injuries mean he has actually started 15 games as well as 7 sub appearances (some at Treq, most at WP) and just the 1 goal and 1 assist. This is an area i will defo look to strengthen. Lulic has filled in here, but i like him as an attacking wingback.

In the striker position i have also been hit by injuries. Both Destro and his backup, MAtri are well suited but missed various amounts of time. Luckily most of the time at least one is fit, but it has meant Ricardo Kishna (whom i cant stop myself from refering to as "hari") has played much more than i would like, particularly from the bench.

Re your second point, again its really valid. I have not adjusted set pieces at all. Its a bit ironic really, a couple of years ago i was the author of a specific thread on here preaching the need to focus on the small things, like set pieces and PPMs . One could say i should be taking my own advice here, however instead i will take yours and spend an hour tonight looking at all aspects of set pieces (PPMs i have already to some extend, and OI i am staying away from at the moment).

Thanks again.

but practically, how do you stop all through balls?

I think you already know the answer to that lol, you can't stop "all" through balls . I'm being too literal I know, but I think that clip is quite interesting. I don't know when you lost possession, but at the start your def line is very high. Perhaps because of this(?), Onazi is trying challenge on the half way line - great if you want to play a very high pressing game, but if you get caught out (which you do), a quality attacker + through ball will expose the frailties of your defence (which happens).

High press + aggressive DMC role + high line + lots of closing down + questionable quality of players = what may be happening there. I'd probably try a small tweak to central defenders less closing down PI, along with the offside trap and sweeper keeper for now. Keep less subtle tweaks like lower def line and less closing down up your sleeve for now, take them out if nothing improves then add them back in again as you get better quality players in.

I think your somewhat right, although its one in the same thing in my head (?). The lack of consistency of performance, means we dont score enough goals. If we dont play well, and the system doesnt execute as designed, then the outcome will naturally be less goals, which as you say leads to draws.

Yeah I understand where you're coming from here. To me, if you play well and score well in the majority of matches but don't play well and score few (if any) in a significant minority of matches, that's more indicative of consistency. That's just an opinion of course. However, you aren't scoring well (and playing well?) in the majority, you are only scoring/playing well in less than 50% of matches. So again, just for me, that becomes more indicative of something lacking in attack - therefore if this were my system I'd start to look at how I can improve that side of things.

However, looking at results (lets ignore January onwards for now), I actually think they are quite "realistic". Teams irl do tend to win 1-0, 2-1, 2-0 etc on quite a lot of occasions, with 3-0, 4-0 etc being the exception, so (excluding January onwards) you've hit the nail on the head. So it probably comes down to the question of are you satisfied with that?

But, that leads us on to January where there is a definite consistency issue. 6 draws in 8 matches isn't good enough to sustain a top 4 position. Something has happened there, and it's not just because you have been playing some big teams. I'd be interested to know how these teams have been playing against you. You're already thinking about this though:

In terms of the opponents adjusting, i have considered that, and it might be that i am underestimating the impact of this but Lazio are pre-season expected to be 5th. Outside of Juve, there is very little between the teams in terms of reputation and although we currently sit second, second to 6th is a matter of around 3pts, and we do flick between 2nd/3rd/4th each week as results vary. The upshot for me, is that i would not think i should expect teams to have changed approach on me through the season. If i were Chievo and sitting 3rd, I would be more inclined to see this as the problem. Am i looking at this wrong perhaps?

Interested in your throughts re the CM(s) in this system. You mention conservative and you might well be right. But if i make him more aggressive, i saw 3 potential issues. Firstly, him taking up the space that i want for the Treq. Secondly, too many players in the box (i think that can be an issue, ironically, rather than too few) and thirdly, leaving me short defensively. The last of the 3 might well be unfounded, since the WP shouldnt be too far forward. Do you have a role / duty in mind that you think would compliment the overall system better in the MC slot?

In my 442 system, I play an AF at STCL with a TQ at AMCR, so identical to you (well, mirrored). At MCL I use a Box to Box Midfielder, and the last thing he does is get in the way of the TQ. My widemen are both Wide Midfielders, one attack duty, the other support. The WM(A) is played at ML, so alongside the BBM. Typically I see the AF in the box, the TQ basically wherever the hell he wants to be, with both the WM(A) and the BBM up in close support. I have no concerns about players getting in each others' way. I was actually using Candreva at one point, who is absolute dynamite, and it sounds like you are getting similar performances from him.

That being said, as ever it all comes down to having the right player. I've come to love the Aggression attribute, especially when combined with Work Rate. If you get the time, just as an experiment start a dummy save with Carlos Tevez in your team at AMC as a TQ. You'll see what I mean.

Use a SK and offside trap, that should stop most of the through balls.

@Herne79

Rather than quote everything, just to pick up on the points you make.

On the through balls issue, i think we are of the same thinking based on the few posts above. I have made the changes as follows:

- BPD© changed to DC(d)

- Added TI "Play Offside"

- Added PI "Close down less" to both DC (Didnt go to the lowest setting, allows further tweaking if i am still not happy)

- Changed GK(d) to SK(a)

On the consistency issue, yes you make a good point re the results changing in Jan, and that was where i have an issue in every save, with every tactic. Can it really be teams adjusting every time, even when i am only just exceeding expectations? So a team like Empoli coming to my ground when i sit 2nd/3rd, as opposed to when i was predicted 5th? My own view is that seems a massive over-reaction on the part of FM if it is what happens, but clearly i need to watch and perhaps compare a few games at points in the season to understand. Teams dont seem to set up any different tactically based on formations, but that is only part of the story.

I do need to improve the goals, but the question is how, without ripping up core elements of the system. Part of the issue is players still, i cannot get a decent run of fitness and form from Destro. I do wonder if his PPM "Moves into channels" is detrimental here, as it takes away from the AF role slightly. Matri has performed better than Destro - he has the "postive" PPM (Offside trap) without the "Negative" one. When i have a system which heavily looks to the main striker for goals, its important that main striker is of the right quality.

Re the CM slot - interesting. I actually started off with a BBM in this slot but changed it. I might need to go back and try it again and see if i was over reacting to the issue of too many players in the box. I will give the BBM another go for sure. Not much i can do to get Tevez in this safe sadly, but i do recall he was amazing for you at Treq. Bernardo Silva not yet started to show his best form, maybe i prioritised the wrong things in this role....(although he has 17 work rate).

Will do some more work tomorrow night. I also want to lay out my goals target for a season, and how i want them split by position.

Thanks again for the extra input

I actually think the addition of a BBM can be helpful even if said use is situational. Especially if the opposition CBs are preoccupied with stopping your AF get behind them.

Ironically, I've been messing around with essentially the same shape although I'm going about it rather differently One thing we do have in common is I'm currently paying extra attention to how and when my team loses shape. I've been saved by a few too many last ditch tackles for my liking.

Goals - Where do they come from (Quick and dirty analysis)

Ok so i mentioned above that in creating the system i had a good idea of roughly where i expected the goals to come from. I decided to get a bit more detailed on this.

Firstly, in season 1 i expect to challenge for 2nd place. I dont expect to get near Juve. A very rough finger in the air suggests that 2 goals per game would be great average in Serie A, but probably slightly out of our reach in season 1. I am going to go with an assumption that to finish second, we will want to average 1.8 goals per game. That means over 38 games (league only, for the purpose of this), i will need to score 69 goals

So if i forget individual player names for a moment and just focus from where on the pitch i think i can accumulate 69 goals. I did a quick spreadie showing the split of the 69 based on my initial (somewhat finger in the air) expectations. As you can see, i heavily weight this towards the AF, which is because in this system, i do seem is as the main goal threat by a distance. He is not a creator (although he creates space). He should bang them in. THe others, i feel i can expect calls from my Treq and from my winger, particularly based on his roaming instruction (there is a slight other consideration here. I know Candevra takes my pens and DFKs and he is my winger - probably 2/3 of his total will come from that).

I then put in what the current actual totals were, through 30 games, by position. Finally i extrapolated those actuals to what i can expected over the full 38 game season. The findings were surprisingly consistent.

Key points:

- My ST is set to be not far off my expected total. Maybe i was not aggressive enough with the target, or maybe the ST is actually playing better than i think. It can be misleading to the mind, because i have not had one individual play say 27 of 30 games. The split between Destro, Matri and even the odd one from Ze Gomes and Kishna probably gets me worried, because i dont have a 25 goal individual in the squah. However 25 goals split between 4 strikers is no different from 25 from the same guy, in the end game.

- The Treq is actually on target to meet my 15 goal estimate. Again the split between players, including the transfer changes, probably masked this for me

- My DC's have not chipped in much - This is down to something a poster above highlighted, i have not optimised my set pieces. Management failure

- My ML has not contributed a single goal, i only expected a tiny amount, because he is a deep creator but i was hoping for one long shot or similar. Still time

What are peoples thoughts? Is 1.8 goals per game to low to be competitive in Serie A? Bearing in mind that this system is also designed to be relatively robust defensively, and i believe i can achieve less than 0.9 conceded easily enough.

It was an interesting thought exercise to do this and look at the goal spread, if nothing else

Interesting exercise, especially if compared to real life.

This season, 1st, 2nd, 3rd (Juve, Napoli, Roma) scored 75, 80 & 83 respectively.

The previous season, 1st, 2nd, 3rd (Juve, Roma, Lazio) scored 72, 54, 71 respectively.

And 2013-14, 1st, 2nd, 3rd (Juve, Roma, Napoli) scored 80, 72, 77.

From that perspective, 69 may be a tad low for an overall target - although with a tight defence, goals scored become slightly less of a concern.

Good to see your estimates are not wildly different from your actual goals scored.

I was going to say I would perhaps expect my midfield to chip in with a few more goals, until I looked at my own latest results . In the most recent season, out of 88 league goals total, my 2 players that I played as my Box to Box Midfielder scored just 4 between them. Shows what I know .

My AF scored 34, the TQ scored 19, attacking winger 15. So a broadly similar ratio to yours. My Central Defenders managed 7 between them however, so definitely get those set pieces looked at.

Keep it up .

With the treq and winger roaming around my guess is that they could both be competing for the same spaces to exploit and could be the reason why your winger might not be contributing as many goals as you would have projected for him. How about just simply removing the roam from position PI and just give him mark tighter. I know this sounds like a defensive PI but in my saves i notice the player to be aggressively going into forward positions especially when closing down players in his zone and with a winger on attack duty, his zone is more or less quite forward and during turnovers, he could be there to provide a simple pass to your striker or score himself.

With the treq and winger roaming around my guess is that they could both be competing for the same spaces to exploit and could be the reason why your winger might not be contributing as many goals as you would have projected for him. How about just simply removing the roam from position PI and just give him mark tighter. I know this sounds like a defensive PI but in my saves i notice the player to be aggressively going into forward positions especially when closing down players in his zone and with a winger on attack duty, his zone is more or less quite forward and during turnovers, he could be there to provide a simple pass to your striker or score himself.

Thanks for the comment Jyaun, but not sure i understand where you are coming from? The Winger is actually the one player who is contributing than expected? Infact he is by quite a distance my best performer. Candevra's final season figures:

I have never noted any issue with him coming into the same space as the treq. The treq us offset to the left (partly for that reason) and the wingers "roaming" movement tends to be more late arrival in the box from an angle (almost somewhat RDM like). I will keep an eye out, but not sure if perhaps you misread something in the post above?

The mark tighter thing is a bit of a strange one. Sounds like a bit of a case of a knock on effect of something, but if it gives you the right outcome, fair play :-) Whilst i have no need for a tweak to my winger, if i continue to have slight issues with the Treq not being as aggresive as i would like, i might consider that tweak for him.

Season 1 in review and next steps

So after making the defensive tweaks described above, i played through to the end of the season. We exited the Europa to West ham, which was annoying, but i had played a lot of backups. So i could focus just on league games.

The final table shows we did acheive our aim, and finished in the end a reasonably comfortable second place

In terms of that goals analysis and how it shook out in the end, well, all in all reasonably close to expectations:

In terms of our performance comparative to the rest of the division, worth noting that we were second in both defensive and attacking goal categories, showing that on the whole, we have a good balance:

The tweaks around offside trap, sweeper keeper and PI on the DC's certainly helped us defensively. We still conceded a share after those, but the goal types are more.......acceptable. The odd one where you just tip your hat to a well worked opposition goal, the odd one where our players were just beaten one v one and a couple of failing to track runners type goals (as well as one insane one from our own attacking FK....).

What next?

So what can i do to improve this for season 2? What are the areas i want to address.

- Defensively, i am happy with the tactic as it operates. Further improvement here, for the moment, would likely come via improvement to players. De Vrij is world class, but the partners i used for him were a step below. Basta at RB is great with assists but perhaps a more solid DR is out there. Lulic at DL is designed to attack and im ok with him (although both fullbacks are now 30 or over)

- Attacking wise, is where i can see some improvement. Firstly from the ST position. I need to find a consistent striker, either Destro staying fit and with tweaked PPMs, or look to the market. I want to up the goals from my ST and have a real golden boot type player here. Secondly, i need to see an improvement from the Treq. Part of this is giving Bernardo time to settle, but i also might need to look closely at whether any tweaks might make him more potent, both in assists and goals (again PPMs might be important)

- In the midfield, late in the season i did make the change from CM(s) back to BBM. I am happy with my options here player wise, so its a bit of wait and see if the tweak helps up the goals

- Set pieces need to be completely revamped, and all scenarios looked at, including takers. I really neglected this last year

- The squad balance needs to be addressed. As always in season 1 in italy, you have about 4000 players out on loan. Now i can shape my entire squad to my liking a bit better.

- Biggest challenge will be to hold onto my key men. De Vrij and Candevra are subject to bids from the likes of Real and Barca. I might have no choice other than to sell and try and re-tool the team using the funds. Not ideal, but otherwise i will end up with morale blown to bits

I will do some more analysis on the attacking tweaks and see if i can do some scenario type screenies as we start S2 and continue to look for consistency (by far and away still my biggest annoyance. I can beat Roma then lose to Carpi, etc).

I'm loving this thread, looking forward to your progress. And I'm so jealous of your treq goals numbers, probably it's a matter of personel available, but in a similar formation I struggle to make my players score more than 5 goals in total as a treq.

The search for consistency continues. And tbh, its starting to bore me

In the close season, i did all the things i felt were right, namely:

- Spent time studying and setting up set pieces for all scenarios (Corners, Free Kicks, Throw Ins).

- Spent time optimising the coaching staff, an area i had not touched.

- Trained suitable PPMs in a couple of players

- Created a mirror version of the formation, for variety (with the roles / duties / formation all "flipped")

- Did a full pre-sesaon to get tactical familiarity up to max, everyone match fit and morale high (played a few cannon fodder teams for moral)

In addition, i spent a lot of time focussing on getting a better quality squad, and top players in key positions. The key acquisitions being:

Eder Alvarez Balanta - The quality CB i needed to play alongside De Vrij. He is strong, big, left side and has good mentals which helps with the offside trap. A clear upgrade over what i had

Oliver (from Athletico) - A player i really like, a maestro play maker, who can operate from wide. Perfect for my WP role in my judgement. This also gives me real depth. With Oliver, Ozyakup and Bernardo Silva i have 3 top class players who can cover both WP and TQ roles.

Davy Klaasen - An upgrade to the BBM role. He has perfect PPMs for this (including "arrives late in the area) and a great balance of attributes. I have seen him go on to star for Barca and Real in other saves so he really is top quality.

I also retained my 2 key men, De Vrij and Candevra and added a couple of other squad pieces (Thiago Maia and Balde Keita came back from loan).

The one bad decision i made, was to role the dice on Destro having a fully fit season and being my big goalscorer. Second game of the season, he picked up a 4 month injury, leaving me with Balde Keita as my only main striker, and Rey Manej as the back up who is no where near good enough.

Even taking account of that, the results this season take inconsistency to a new level. Only once all season so far have we won back to back league games. Only twice have we won back to back games full stop.

Its crazy. One week we play great, the offside trap works nicely, we create chances for our strikers, our winger drifts in and is a threat, even the Treq is scoring. Then the next game, we are letting teams through on goal with failed offside attempts, our finishing is awful, passes go out for throw ins..........Clearly its something i have done either in the tactic / system or with my squad, but its just annoying now.

I did make one tweak, which in line with everything, worked lovely for a game or two, then awful looking for a game, then back to looking good the 4th game (only played 4 games with this tweak so far).

I felt that my ST was not being enough of a threat in the box, was drifting into channels and as he did, the treq was not really going beyond him. To counteract this a bit and make him more of a right down the middle threat, i have changed his role to poacher. Kieta is far from a natural poacher, but the movement and position on the field look better so far, (even if the results do not).

I have had to put down the save for a few hours to avoid just rage quiting The search goes on.....consistency, must be out there somewhere.

It's disheartening to see someone put so much effort into the game and gain so little. Especially someone like Jambo98 who, in FM 15, was one of the main proponents of "simple tweaks are enough" approach.

Its crazy. One week we play great, the offside trap works nicely, we create chances for our strikers, our winger drifts in and is a threat, even the Treq is scoring. Then the next game, we are letting teams through on goal with failed offside attempts, our finishing is awful, passes go out for throw ins..........Clearly its something i have done either in the tactic / system or with my squad, but its just annoying now.

I did make one tweak, which in line with everything, worked lovely for a game or two, then awful looking for a game, then back to looking good the 4th game (only played 4 games with this tweak so far).

I felt that my ST was not being enough of a threat in the box, was drifting into channels and as he did, the treq was not really going beyond him. To counteract this a bit and make him more of a right down the middle threat, i have changed his role to poacher. Kieta is far from a natural poacher, but the movement and position on the field look better so far, (even if the results do not).

I have had to put down the save for a few hours to avoid just rage quiting The search goes on.....consistency, must be out there somewhere.

Can I say I share your pain. I've been trying to get some basic success in a couple of saves and we occasionally score a lovely goal eg a nice bit of interplay outside the opponents box, giving somebody running into the box a 1-on-1 and a goal. The next match, it seems all the movement just goes out the window and players will start lashing shots into row Z because there's nothing else on. I also seem to end up with wingers and WMs nearer the centre circle then their wing.

I keep coming back for more though - I've no idea why!

Hi Jambo, I am by no means good at this game but I have two suggestions that might possibly help you out. Firstly have you considered trying a role in the AM role that doesn't drop as deep as the Treq as I was wondering since the WP-S comes in and moves into the centre of the pitch and the Treq drops deep into the same space do they perhaps get in each others way a bit and leave the striker a bit isolated? Perhaps an Engache would do the job you are after better? Its just a thought and obviously may not be relevant but I figured worth a look right?

The second and I hope much more useful suggestion, is that have you considered that sometimes when you have a tactic that looks to attack in a specific way you will sometimes come up against an opponents setup that is designed to counter that exact system just by chance. Therefore, it makes sense to me to have a second system that attacks in a different way, ideally from different positions. For example in my current save I am using a 4-4-1-1 formation. The first system has its primary goal threats from central positions with a CF-s and an AM-a (although a WP-A does also contribute). The second system has two holding CMs (CM-s with hold position and DLP-d) and an AP-s in front of them but the goal scorer is a WM-a and to a lesser extent a winger-A out wide (still behind a CF-S). The point is although the formation is the same the threats come from different angles and the creativity comes from different positions too. Therefore I find that if my first strategy isn't working I switch to the 2nd one and see if that does better and 9 times out of 10 it does. Obviously if your better tactically than I am and better at spotting the exact problems and figuring out how to correct for them you can do things in a totally different way without modifying roles or anything but I find this works for me and might be worth considering for you too.

Jambo, forgive me if you've mentioned this somewhere already and I've overlooked it - what "live" in match tweaks and adjustments do you make during a match as it plays out?

Hi Jambo, I am by no means good at this game but I have two suggestions that might possibly help you out. Firstly have you considered trying a role in the AM role that doesn't drop as deep as the Treq as I was wondering since the WP-S comes in and moves into the centre of the pitch and the Treq drops deep into the same space do they perhaps get in each others way a bit and leave the striker a bit isolated? Perhaps an Engache would do the job you are after better? Its just a thought and obviously may not be relevant but I figured worth a look right?

The second and I hope much more useful suggestion, is that have you considered that sometimes when you have a tactic that looks to attack in a specific way you will sometimes come up against an opponents setup that is designed to counter that exact system just by chance. Therefore, it makes sense to me to have a second system that attacks in a different way, ideally from different positions. For example in my current save I am using a 4-4-1-1 formation. The first system has its primary goal threats from central positions with a CF-s and an AM-a (although a WP-A does also contribute). The second system has two holding CMs (CM-s with hold position and DLP-d) and an AP-s in front of them but the goal scorer is a WM-a and to a lesser extent a winger-A out wide (still behind a CF-S). The point is although the formation is the same the threats come from different angles and the creativity comes from different positions too. Therefore I find that if my first strategy isn't working I switch to the 2nd one and see if that does better and 9 times out of 10 it does. Obviously if your better tactically than I am and better at spotting the exact problems and figuring out how to correct for them you can do things in a totally different way without modifying roles or anything but I find this works for me and might be worth considering for you too.

Hey, thanks for the comments and thoughts

On the first point, it is something i have kept an eye on. The treq is in this team to be a creator and scorer. I did consider a few other roles here, but a lot of the system is built around making room for the treq. I have looked at ave position graphs retrospectively, and also had a look at a few games in detail, and i must admit i dont find that the TQ and WP look for the same space. The TQ is generally more advanced and the WP doesnt try to get into his areas (the support duty helps). It is an intertesting thought though, and make me wonder how the tactic would work if i moved the TQ more central rather than offset. Not sure i see that working, with the BBM but its something worth considering.

On your second part, yes i think its fair to point out that. However part of what this initial system was designed for was to attack from different angles, between the AF/Poacher, the drifting winger, the Treq and the BBM we should have multiple angles of attack. Do i think it should be a "one and done" tactic? No, probably not. There should always be the odd scenario where you have to change (although some threads on here seem to disprove that). But my issue is i cant even get a 70/80% reliable base tactic, which could then be adapted. Its interesting you note that, and it saddens me to put it like this, but in online games ive played, i have found that simply randomly changed tactics once or twice in a game, or for a game or two, seem to improve my teams performances. I find that to be complete b*llocks, if i am honest, but it seems to work> I have not yet gone there in this save.

Jambo, forgive me if you've mentioned this somewhere already and I've overlooked it - what "live" in match tweaks and adjustments do you make during a match as it plays out?

Hey Herne. Not said much on this.

Generally, i will apply a few basic tweaks in game, but i am trying not to use them too much still. I want a base tactic which should be effective 75% of the time, but then needs tweaking if i hit a very defensive side, or an unusual opposition system / formation. I dont feel i am close to that yet. The ones i apply tend to be:

- Play wider when i can see an opponent is middle heavy and / or is leaving the flanks undefended (This rarely seems effective though - i can play against diamond midfields, or 4312 and try and exploit the flanks and nothing seems to happen).

- Against a very defensive opponent, i try to move the team shape from "structured" to "flexible" or even "fluid" - again not had many positive effects thus far

- When leading late in games i make a series of tweaks - sometime add "take a breather" and "retain possession" and sometimes go to "contain" and "waste time". These are very effective. I think i have only concede one goal when using this approach over a season and a half.

I actually closed down FM16 mid game just now for the first time in a while. I loaded this save again to check a few things, decided to play one more game. 20mins, after the 5th pass straight to an opposing player, from a player in my team who has an ave rating of 7.54, i just quit. It was nil nil, but the variation in performance doesnt feel like its tactical any more. I admire that some here can get things working (although this year more than ever, it looks like only with superb squads) but this is starting to get really dull. I loaded up FM15.

I will come back to this with a fresh mind, so feel free to give any guidance...

Well damn, I'm stumped then.

Asking if you watch matches and make adjustments was my last idea, although I know from past experience you do this - just a long shot.

When I get a mo over the weekend I'll fire up a test save with Lazio and plug in your system as outlined in the OP to see if I can see anything else.

I know the feeling. I think this game has a very fragile morale system. One draw or loss can turn a confident team into spineless, incompetent fools.

Hey Jambo.

Sorry to hear you're struggling. I'm by no means an expert but i've had a play around with you tactics and have a few observations:

> Asymmetrical formation + structured mentality + trequartista + heavy pressing = gaps can open up in defence - Often I see the BWM or BBM pushing up to cover a man left by the Treq which triggers a waterfall of people being pulled out of position. Good teams exploit this when the ball is moved quickly.

> Asymmetric + structured = lower passing %? - Something i'm not sure of the cause of, but sometimes i've noticed passing percentages are very low. Sometimes I observe players being isolated, especially the WA. Sometimes this leads to great goals (e.g. when the ball get's quickly moved from one side of the pitch to the other). But sometimes it can result in a disjointed passing game.

> All 4 midfielders with Roam From Position = sometimes no passing options - Linked to the above. The structured mentality counters this somewhat but I think having all 4 roaming sometimes means there's sometimes situations with no passing options. This is especially true if a) your player's technical & mental skills aren't great b) you're playing a good side.

> Space between the WA + FB S - With a structured mentality there's a lot of space to exploit here.

> AF getting played out the game - As mentioned above they can disappear in games.

> Bias of build up play on the right - To be expected I would have thought. Currently lots of assists coming from the right back.

Potential things to try:

> BBM > CM (perhaps even with Hold Position) - This will at least mean there's a consistent outlet higher up in the centre of the pitch.

> Structured > Flexible - This may help get some more support from the WA and Treq in defence and means the team defends together a bit more.

> FB S > WB S - Close down the gap between him and the WA in attack and defence. Also will benefit the Look For Overlap shout.

> Play narrower - To bring the passing options closer together and counter the asymmetric/structured combo.

> AF A > CF A - If you've got the right player (i.e. good mentals) this could help them find more space when they're getting marked out the game. Although may be going against my point about having lots of players with Roam ticked.

Hopefully food for thought!

If I think of anything else will let you know.

Hey Jambo.

Sorry to hear you're struggling. I'm by no means an expert but i've had a play around with you tactics and have a few observations:

> Asymmetrical formation + structured mentality + trequartista + heavy pressing = gaps can open up in defence - Often I see the BWM or BBM pushing up to cover a man left by the Treq which triggers a waterfall of people being pulled out of position. Good teams exploit this when the ball is moved quickly.

> Asymmetric + structured = lower passing %? - Something i'm not sure of the cause of, but sometimes i've noticed passing percentages are very low. Sometimes I observe players being isolated, especially the WA. Sometimes this leads to great goals (e.g. when the ball get's quickly moved from one side of the pitch to the other). But sometimes it can result in a disjointed passing game.

> All 4 midfielders with Roam From Position = sometimes no passing options - Linked to the above. The structured mentality counters this somewhat but I think having all 4 roaming sometimes means there's sometimes situations with no passing options. This is especially true if a) your player's technical & mental skills aren't great b) you're playing a good side.

> Space between the WA + FB S - With a structured mentality there's a lot of space to exploit here.

> AF getting played out the game - As mentioned above they can disappear in games.

> Bias of build up play on the right - To be expected I would have thought. Currently lots of assists coming from the right back.

Potential things to try:

> BBM > CM (perhaps even with Hold Position) - This will at least mean there's a consistent outlet higher up in the centre of the pitch.

> Structured > Flexible - This may help get some more support from the WA and Treq in defence and means the team defends together a bit more.

> FB S > WB S - Close down the gap between him and the WA in attack and defence. Also will benefit the Look For Overlap shout.

> Play narrower - To bring the passing options closer together and counter the asymmetric/structured combo.

> AF A > CF A - If you've got the right player (i.e. good mentals) this could help them find more space when they're getting marked out the game. Although may be going against my point about having lots of players with Roam ticked.

Hopefully food for thought!

If I think of anything else will let you know.

Thanks for the feedback Fhex, worth exploring as its quite different to quite a bit of the discussion thus far. You say you had a "play around" with the tactic - im assuming not with the same squad? I only ask as, for me, a tactic like this would very much rely on having suited players in key positions. None the less, valuable feedback which will make me look through some things and comment on each part:

> Asymmetrical formation + structured mentality + trequartista + heavy pressing = gaps can open up in defence - Often I see the BWM or BBM pushing up to cover a man left by the Treq which triggers a waterfall of people being pulled out of position. Good teams exploit this when the ball is moved quickly. Interested in a bit more of your thoughts around this. I have not seen it, but that is not to say it doesnt happen. Why do you specifically think that the asymetrica, and the structured would lead to gaps? The treq does close down. However, in the course of looking for this, i did find that i was having some issues with the BWM closing down wider areas, and leaving the DM slot free. One goal caught they where my LB gets beaten by the RM, fairly harmless, but the BWM rushes over, leaves a space that the first striker (in a 442) drops into, DC has to come with him, leaves a space for the second striker......goal. Interesting.

> Asymmetric + structured = lower passing %? - Something i'm not sure of the cause of, but sometimes i've noticed passing percentages are very low. Sometimes I observe players being isolated, especially the WA. Sometimes this leads to great goals (e.g. when the ball get's quickly moved from one side of the pitch to the other). But sometimes it can result in a disjointed passing game. Again, first time i have heard a suggestion as to asymetric having such an impact? We have the 4th best pass completion in the league, and the second highest possession. You could be right about the winger being isolated, but that is somewhat by design - he is there to stretch the opposition. I might just be lucky with Candevra, but as you might see above this is probably my strongest position by far.

> All 4 midfielders with Roam From Position = sometimes no passing options - Linked to the above. The structured mentality counters this somewhat but I think having all 4 roaming sometimes means there's sometimes situations with no passing options. This is especially true if a) your player's technical & mental skills aren't great b) you're playing a good side. - Thats an interesting spot actually. The BWM hsa the opposite, but yes the other 3 midfielders and the treq do have this all active. Its an aspect i had not been looking for, and now will a bit more carefully. I suppose in my mind, with the WM, the roaming should add a passing option (because it allows the WB to overlap). But you are right, there is a risk they could end up all going the same way. I will look at some scenarios. The only obvious solution is to re-consider the BBM role once more.

> Space between the WA + FB S - With a structured mentality there's a lot of space to exploit here. Not sure i agree, but i will check back on goals against. The attack duty influences when we have the ball. Without the ball the Winger does plenty tracking back.

> AF getting played out the game - As mentioned above they can disappear in games. - Yup this is defo a bit of an issue. My original concept was that there should be goal threats from other places, but that is the key part of the tactic which has not consistently worked at all. The move to poacher seemed to help a little, but the issue could easily still remain. This season, interestingly, the treq is more of a goal threat. What i need to work out is, how to make him a threat in the games where the striker is not! Answers on a postcard for that one......

> Bias of build up play on the right - To be expected I would have thought. Currently lots of assists coming from the right back. Actually, interesting the opposite is true. My most common assist in the last 50 games are weighted to the left wing (30 v 22). What is more interesting, is that i also concede far more down that flank. I need to look at that

Potential things to try:

> BBM > CM (perhaps even with Hold Position) - This will at least mean there's a consistent outlet higher up in the centre of the pitch. - You might see further up that i actually did the reverse move a while bcak. Went from CM to BBM following some good feedback. However, it would be hard to argue that this changed really helped, given the continued issues i face. It is worth looking at going back to CM. I would probably not add "hold position" though as this player needs to get forward. The addition of "get further forward", as opposed to "roam from position" might actually force the movement to be a bit more up and down the pitch, and less drifting into wide areas.

> Structured > Flexible - This may help get some more support from the WA and Treq in defence and means the team defends together a bit more. - This is something i will really consider. I laid out the rationale for "structured" in my OP, but actually, im at the stage where im thinking "well it isnt working, try something different". Maybe the team shape isnt what is creating the good space i see for the Treq anyway.

> FB S > WB S - Close down the gap between him and the WA in attack and defence. Also will benefit the Look For Overlap shout. - Interesting thought. Given that i concede a lot down this side, i do worry it would be leaving me even more exposed? Is your thought process that the more aggressive role might actually help defensively? Open to considering that.

> Play narrower - To bring the passing options closer together and counter the asymmetric/structured combo. - I am still not sure i fully see where the issue with asymetric comes in, and also playing narrower sort of counters one of the core aims of the tactic - to use the width to create space? However one aspect that you might have there, is the passing options distance. My solution to that might be different however

> AF A > CF A - If you've got the right player (i.e. good mentals) this could help them find more space when they're getting marked out the game. Although may be going against my point about having lots of players with Roam ticked. - Yes think this again would totally change what the tactic is about, and not really looking to go that route yet. As mentioned elsewhere in this post, i am currently trying a poacher, and i do feel the type of player here is vital. I have suffered badly without my first choice striker.

It's disheartening to see someone put so much effort into the game and gain so little. Especially someone like Jambo98 who, in FM 15, was one of the main proponents of "simple tweaks are enough" approach.

Mhm, this is quite a common feature of Football Manager! XD

My only thoughts are, to go one of two routes:

Continue to tinker, or scale back everything to a blank slate. Just set up the formation, with generic roles, and balanced/static mentalities. My instinct is the crux of the issue may well be a mentality problem, not necessarily the consistency of results, but in terms of the issues on the field (rushed/misplaced passes). But also, because (correct me if I'm wrong Jambo) a lot of the focus has been on the roles and individual/team instructions which may just be exacerbating the problem because you're tweaking the wound without cutting out the infected bit.

I do wish I could offer more help myself though.

I have just skimmed through so apologies if this has been mentioned but I couldn't see it anywhere so here goes but, with the offside trap it is all or nothing for me personally. Sometimes it works like a dream and sometimes it just takes 1 player to lose concentration and bang 1-0 down. That for me isn't consistency. Anyway i've rambled on but my thought is to drop the offside trap and play a central defender with high anticipation (massively underrated attribute all over the pitch) as a covering defender. If they have the necessary skills they see it before it comes and sweep up.

Mhm, this is quite a common feature of Football Manager! XD

My only thoughts are, to go one of two routes:

Continue to tinker, or scale back everything to a blank slate. Just set up the formation, with generic roles, and balanced/static mentalities. My instinct is the crux of the issue may well be a mentality problem, not necessarily the consistency of results, but in terms of the issues on the field (rushed/misplaced passes). But also, because (correct me if I'm wrong Jambo) a lot of the focus has been on the roles and individual/team instructions which may just be exacerbating the problem because you're tweaking the wound without cutting out the infected bit.

I do wish I could offer more help myself though.

I would change the first line of your replay to say "this is a common feature of Football Manager 16"

Yes i got bored of this massively to be honest. I did try a number of the tweaks suggested above, some subtle changes to roles, some TI changes. Same inconsistent results. There is defo a core issue with the tactic, the concept and perhaps even the type of players chosen. The only option really is to go the nuclear option and go back to the drawing board.

Hey Jambo.

First of all, I've been a fan of many of your threads but if I may be blunt, you can sometimes be a bit blinded by your initial logic when creating a tactic

After reading through carefully, most of what you mention in your opening posts makes sense from an attacking perspective; the testing runs of the striker, the width on the right, the overlap on the left, the creativity from the Treq and WP... it's when you consider the defensive structure that things just don't look right and I personally believe you can achieve what you want without the crazy levels of positional indiscipline and risk.

Now if I'm correct, your current tactic looks like this:

The first thing that draws my eye is the natural hole in your midfield, so I take a look at the roles around it and think what could possibly happen with opposition players that find themselves on the ball in that space (which will 100% happen). Well as you transition to defence, the WP(S) is mostly concerned with covering his full back (I love this role for this reason as he is a very willing tracker) and the Treq could easily be caught upfield along with the BBM and W(A) - which leaves the BWM to close this gap with his pressing. That doesn't sound too alarming until you consider the fact that the opposition will probably have other midfielders exploiting the central space - the knock on could cause one of your central defenders to step up (regardless of being told to Close Down Less) meaning your offside trap is pointless and the opponent suddenly has space in front of, between and behind your defence. It looks like a disaster waiting to happen IMO.

Now I know you'll point towards the Structured team shape giving your players more tactical discipline, but I see a WP(S) who is willing to roam, a Treq whose entire duty is to roam, a BBM willing to roam, a Winger pitching his tent on the touchline and a BWM biding his time, waiting for the opportunity to leave his DM position. When you factor in the fact the WB(A) could possibly be caught upfield too, it really does look like it could end up a mess at times...

I'd like to say that I'm not posting to lambast your tactic creation or anything - obviously there's every chance I'm wrong and I'd love to see a PKM to get a proper flavour - but I do think you need to reconsider your defensive/transitional structure and how it may give the opposition lots of joyous space in which they can control proceedings.

FWIW, I'd start by using an Anchorman at DM due to the overlapping WB(A) and all the roaming ahead of him. You could do with a dash of discipline centrally to help your offside trap function better, as well as delaying those space exploiters whilst your roaming players regain some semblance of shape.

Hope this at least helps you a bit. Good luck

Hey Jambo.

First of all, I've been a fan of many of your threads but if I may be blunt, you can sometimes be a bit blinded by your initial logic when creating a tactic

After reading through carefully, most of what you mention in your opening posts makes sense from an attacking perspective; the testing runs of the striker, the width on the right, the overlap on the left, the creativity from the Treq and WP... it's when you consider the defensive structure that things just don't look right and I personally believe you can achieve what you want without the crazy levels of positional indiscipline and risk.

Now if I'm correct, your current tactic looks like this:

The first thing that draws my eye is the natural hole in your midfield, so I take a look at the roles around it and think what could possibly happen with opposition players that find themselves on the ball in that space (which will 100% happen). Well as you transition to defence, the WP(S) is mostly concerned with covering his full back (I love this role for this reason as he is a very willing tracker) and the Treq could easily be caught upfield along with the BBM and W(A) - which leaves the BWM to close this gap with his pressing. That doesn't sound too alarming until you consider the fact that the opposition will probably have other midfielders exploiting the central space - the knock on could cause one of your central defenders to step up (regardless of being told to Close Down Less) meaning your offside trap is pointless and the opponent suddenly has space in front of, between and behind your defence. It looks like a disaster waiting to happen IMO.

Now I know you'll point towards the Structured team shape giving your players more tactical discipline, but I see a WP(S) who is willing to roam, a Treq whose entire duty is to roam, a BBM willing to roam, a Winger pitching his tent on the touchline and a BWM biding his time, waiting for the opportunity to leave his DM position. When you factor in the fact the WB(A) could possibly be caught upfield too, it really does look like it could end up a mess at times...

I'd like to say that I'm not posting to lambast your tactic creation or anything - obviously there's every chance I'm wrong and I'd love to see a PKM to get a proper flavour - but I do think you need to reconsider your defensive/transitional structure and how it may give the opposition lots of joyous space in which they can control proceedings.

FWIW, I'd start by using an Anchorman at DM due to the overlapping WB(A) and all the roaming ahead of him. You could do with a dash of discipline centrally to help your offside trap function better, as well as delaying those space exploiters whilst your roaming players regain some semblance of shape.

Hope this at least helps you a bit. Good luck

Thanks for input felley. Not sure i follow the bit about blinded by my initial logic here. Maybe im missing something, but i had an initial idea in the OP, which has had several tweaks based on the points made by Herne, and others in this thread?

That said, there is logic in your analysis for sure. The gap in the midfield, and the use of a role in the DM slot which does not "sit" are both valid concerns.......however.....

From the posts above, you can likely see that by far and away (since the defensive tweaks suggested by a couple of posters), attacking is the problem. Not to say our defending cant be improved (was second best in the league, but we had spells where sure it could be improved), but the issue is our attack goes from lethal to blunt very easily. There are likely quite a few explanations for this, many of which are around whether the original concept was correct.

FWIW, some of the tweaks i made involved initially changing the BWM to a DM(d), then eventually to an Anchor. In fairness, i only gave the Anchor role 2 games before i gave up, so there could be more mileage in that, but the DM didnt make any difference to the consistency issue.

In summary, no i dont think you are necessarily wrong at all, but there is a bigger problem

I will probably start from scratch again, re-use some of the concepts but not all. Thanks for taking the time to post

I'm not sure you necessarily need to start from scratch again. When things are going a bit wrong, I usually find it gives me more control to reign in the extremities in my role choices like reducing an attack to a support and maybe some support to defend. It could also be an issue that you have too many ball carriers/creators and only 1 (1 and a half if you include the Winger) that is willing to get on the end of chances. Not saying that isn't a good plan of course, it just might be harder to pull off than a more simple attacking strategy.

I know you may feel it's a large alteration to your original idea, but I reckon giving your tactic a go like this might be a good start:

The more disciplined roles in midfield would hopefully give you a bit of a platform for the Treq to roam without worry and the support duty for the Wing Back should tone down his intent whilst still causing an overlap. IMO you have enough attack duties anyway - to these ends I've also made the SK(A) a SK(S).

Don't give up just yet

Thanks again for the input felley.

I have actually tried almost all those tweaks over the last 3/4 season, but to be fair likely never all at the same time (eg i experimented with an anchor, i had a CM(s) in the tactic before).

I am open to giving it a try, however my worry is that it doesnt address the main flaw with the tactic (unless i am mis-reading your rationale perhaps?). The main flaw was always the attacking, not so much the defending. In many ways, this could somewhat blunt the attack more, because the BBM was introduced to give more of a goal threat from the middle of the park.

That said, sometimes things have knock on and unintended consequences..... Maybe this will open up more space in a different way than i envisioned. I will give it a go, i quite like the squad i have built at Lazio so not going to quit the save, just was of a mind to try something different tactically. Asymetric (formations at least, as opposed to attacking / defending shapes) doesnt seem to get the rewards this year, from a general look around the forums (Accepting that the usual suspects can make anything work - i am not that clever!)

Thanks again for the input felley.

The main flaw was always the attacking, not so much the defending. In many ways, this could somewhat blunt the attack more, because the BBM was introduced to give more of a goal threat from the middle of the park.

Been following this thread closely, one thing though that I have found is that there is usually a kind of price you pay for getting a really solid defensive tactic. Sometimes its the lack of goals, in my 4141 I certainly produce a lot of clean sheets and I have to sometimes take some risks.

I would note the following:

There is no need to push up the defensive line it tends to compress the depth of your pitch, and it messes with closing down instructions, so if you are using anything akin to a gegenpressing system you will have pockets of space emerge that gets exploited by OTT balls.

Frankly nearly any system with a DM is rock solid, it should be rock solid. The only reason why it could fail is if a spot on the pitch is too exposed. The spot that could get exposed is the hole, when that happens he gets pulled out too easily or too late, leaving you open to an OTT ball.

My options would actually be to use a bog basic DM, and that CM in the middle, he would have max closing down instructions. I can understand the need for a T, since you need some form of deep creativity. I could be inclined to play an AM there with dribble more, move into channels. The key as some have pointed out actually lies with the DM slot and the MC slot. Fix that and you have a winner. Honestly you probably don't even need a WB on support. FB on attack means that that player won't roam. I am also not inclined to use any shape less than fluid.

PS> for the new..OTT is a term I have been using since 98 to describe those hoofed balls that rise above midfield and land behind your DLINE

Been following this thread closely, one thing though that I have found is that there is usually a kind of price you pay for getting a really solid defensive tactic. Sometimes its the lack of goals, in my 4141 I certainly produce a lot of clean sheets and I have to sometimes take some risks.

I would note the following:

There is no need to push up the defensive line it tends to compress the depth of your pitch, and it messes with closing down instructions, so if you are using anything akin to a gegenpressing system you will have pockets of space emerge that gets exploited by OTT balls.

Frankly nearly any system with a DM is rock solid, it should be rock solid. The only reason why it could fail is if a spot on the pitch is too exposed. The spot that could get exposed is the hole, when that happens he gets pulled out too easily or too late, leaving you open to an OTT ball.

My options would actually be to use a bog basic DM, and that CM in the middle, he would have max closing down instructions. I can understand the need for a T, since you need some form of deep creativity. I could be inclined to play an AM there with dribble more, move into channels. The key as some have pointed out actually lies with the DM slot and the MC slot. Fix that and you have a winner. Honestly you probably don't even need a WB on support. FB on attack means that that player won't roam. I am also not inclined to use any shape less than fluid.

PS> for the new..OTT is a term I have been using since 98 to describe those hoofed balls that rise above midfield and land behind your DLINE

Cheers for the input rashidi. I was actually reading your website today trying to get some more ideas. I was thinking a lot about your view on the need for the defensive shield.

I suppose that is also one of the great things about this forum - Different people achieve success in different ways (not me this year!). Herne, i know has advocated the use of the BWM role (albeit in a middle 4 in his case), and yet a couple of others would say the opposite! Similarly with the BBM v CM debate......

That said, as always, you make a lot of sense in your points. I will try out your suggestions. I think you also touch on a good point re the Treq. I want a Treq type player in the terms of what we envisage one to be. A Roberto Baggio or Totti etc. Just because i want that type of performance does not mean i need to use what the game defines as the "Treq" default role. I can create it using, as you point out, the AM role and the fact it is highly customisable. Throw in the ability to use PPMs and perhaps i should have not stuck to the game default role for as long.

I also will look again at my player types. I was quite struck by all the stuff on your website about club DNA. Very similar to my approach last year with Athletic, i had never read any of your DNA stuff before then, but retrospectively its very similar to how i went about it.

I have got away from that a bit here. i have signed "good" players, but are they the "right" players, and the right "balance" of squad? My most talented players, almost certainly, are:

Bernardo Silva

Marco Asensio

Antonio Candevra

Oliver

Oguzhan Ozakup

Firstly, there is pretty much not a tactic in the world which would allow me to start all 5 of those. Secondly, they are all similar types. High in flair and technical ability, but do they give me the right attributes in key positions?

Another retrospective example is my old favourite DC signing. Alvarez Balanta is eye catching. His tackling, marking, heading and strength are awesome. But are his mentals good enough..........im not so sure they are.

Thanks again, will see how i get on over a few more games

I must say it's quite a breath of fresh air to actually see someone putting in so much time and thought in to the game and not effortlessly fixing the mistakes and creating a super system (like some of the people around here). You trying to create a stable base tactic is something I try to accomplish as well (only to fail, just more crashing and burning in my case), there for reading about your frustration in not seeing the tweaking pay off is quite a comfort. Unfortunately I cannot offer you any advise, but I hope you will figure out the problems you are encountering and I can learn something about it!

Hope you can find some success with this Jambo. I feel your pain sometimes with the ME and almost not knowing where to look but going back to basics has definitely helped me and most of the time I've been able to battle through the slumps.

I don't have any specific advice but note your point about the Treq. When I was newer to the game I used all of these fancy positions because I could and they sounded good, but actually I've tried reverting to using very generic roles and looking more at PI's and PPM's as a way of getting players doing what I want. It feels more predictable to me and almost easier to analyse when watching the game as there aren't things influencing the player 'under the hood' that the role dictates that I may not realise are happening, if that makes sense.

Also about Balanta, he is not good enough for a European competition team in my opinion, certainly not as a starter anyway, maybe a squad player. His mentals are not up to standard, but these are often overlooked by a lot of people.

Cheers Repsalty and Craigus89. I do agree about Balanta, he will be sold this summer

I implemented pretty much all of the tweaks suggested by rashidi (with due credit to others further up, including felley, who also made some of the similar suggestions). At the point of making the change, we had only 7 games left in the season which is not a great amount to analyse, but it was worth trying i felt. We were also hit by injuries (at one point playing a youth CB and a LB as a central defensive pairing).

The results were better. We started out by losing at home to Pro Vercelli, which was awful, but i wasnt about to jump the gun based on one fixture. The rest were good. The draw with Atalanta i will give my team a pass on, because we had our LB sent off after only 30mins.

The updated tactic

Here is how the system now looks:

There are quite a number of changes from the original setup, but many of the core concepts are still the same. We still aim to create space by stretching the play vertically and horizontally (the use of an AF, winger and overlapping FB). We still aim to press, and we still hope for varied points of attack. Some of those things are only working moderately, even with the latest tweaks, but they are working somewhat closer to how i first envisaged.

The way in which we are achieving it, is very different. If i take one example:

I had a vision of the width being created by the winger on the right, and the flying overlapping left back. My way of executing this was to set up a wingback on attack, who also has attacking PPMs, have a control mentality, and throw in "look for the overlap" TI. That was too much. Way too much. Effectively 4 factors all influencing my LB to attack. It turns out, 2 of those are fine. As it stands now,he has a fullback role (more conservative), still the attack duty, which paired with his PPMs moves him forward at the right times. Maintaining the TI, even whilst notching back the mentality, keeps the right balance.

The system is not perfect, at all. But in a limited sample, it is better. The next key for me is getting the perfect players for the job. Not just the "best" players available, or the most flashy, but someone who is perfectly suited to every role in the system. I have a bit of a head start. I would argue i have 4 nailed on suited players already in Rulli, De Vrij, Thiago Maia and Candevra. I can probably add Bernardo Silva, but need to look at him more closely. Destro is an enigma up top. He should be quite well suited (although his 13 for composure concerns me a lot) but in practice he has not worked out.

I will keep going with the save for sure and see if can eek out a bit more, possibly with PI added to the mix.

Cheers for the input rashidi. I was actually reading your website today trying to get some more ideas. I was thinking a lot about your view on the need for the defensive shield.

I suppose that is also one of the great things about this forum - Different people achieve success in different ways (not me this year!). Herne, i know has advocated the use of the BWM role (albeit in a middle 4 in his case), and yet a couple of others would say the opposite! Similarly with the BBM v CM debate......

That said, as always, you make a lot of sense in your points. I will try out your suggestions. I think you also touch on a good point re the Treq. I want a Treq type player in the terms of what we envisage one to be. A Roberto Baggio or Totti etc. Just because i want that type of performance does not mean i need to use what the game defines as the "Treq" default role. I can create it using, as you point out, the AM role and the fact it is highly customisable. Throw in the ability to use PPMs and perhaps i should have not stuck to the game default role for as long.

I also will look again at my player types. I was quite struck by all the stuff on your website about club DNA. Very similar to my approach last year with Athletic, i had never read any of your DNA stuff before then, but retrospectively its very similar to how i went about it.

I have got away from that a bit here. i have signed "good" players, but are they the "right" players, and the right "balance" of squad? My most talented players, almost certainly, are:

Bernardo Silva

Marco Asensio

Antonio Candevra

Oliver

Oguzhan Ozakup

Firstly, there is pretty much not a tactic in the world which would allow me to start all 5 of those. Secondly, they are all similar types. High in flair and technical ability, but do they give me the right attributes in key positions?

Another retrospective example is my old favourite DC signing. Alvarez Balanta is eye catching. His tackling, marking, heading and strength are awesome. But are his mentals good enough..........im not so sure they are.

Thanks again, will see how i get on over a few more games

I know it can be so frustrating at times. I advocate strongly that people should create their own supersystems. I don't believe in tactics. I believe in a way of playing football. When playing with Kingstonian, my goal has been simple - don't concede and hope to score. Knowing that I will have problems with my defense my club dna focused on fitness, acceleration and I made sure we at least had the players who could score. From there the DNA of the club was set. I knew that we couldn't pass from the back. So i told my keeper to hoof all balls, I packed my midfield IN ALL MY TACTICS, so I could win the ball back and then hustle it to the flanks as quickly as we could. Halfway through a season and I still wasnt sure who'd start my matches. I had a rough idea, but I couldn't say for sure. It was roundabout the final third of the season where I knew. And then slowly I started moulding the style together. By now i was defensively solid, I knew the best way they could defend. And then, I worked slowly to release the rest.

It certainly takes time, at least with an LLM side with no money, my choices are limited. Figure out your style of play, how you want your football to play. I have to admit I don't use TQ in any of my systems, but I have a DLF on support who drops deep into the final third and then picks the ball up sprays it to the playmaker who plays it wide. Funny thing I noticed is I seem to be one of those rare guys who hasn't used an engache, tq, shadow striker, any of those creatively named dudes in any of his matches :-).