Need help! Defensive formation.

Hey guys!

So I had a decent season with Wolverhampton in championship where I just barely made it to promotion to the prem, which was quite incredible since I didn't win a single game the last 2 months of the first season. So now I find myself incredibly in the premier league, and as I knew it would be hard work to stay up, I didn't expect it to be this hard to find a working defensive formation.

So what I try to do with my formation is that I focus on keeping things tight at the back and optimally counter with pace in open spaces.

The problem is I rarely go a game without conceding, so I feel I am doing something wrong tactically.

I would love for any of you to take a look at my tactic and see if there's any obvious lacks in it and feed it back to me

Now, to start off, I have made ALOT of personnel changes, meaning my squads togetherness obviously isn't very good yet.

My formation, set pieces and results can be seen here:

http://imgur.com/a/dtlPX

or :

<blockquote class="imgur-embed-pub" lang="en" data-id="a/dtlPX"><a href="//imgur.com/a/dtlPX">Wolves</a></blockquote><script async src="//s.imgur.com/min/embed.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

PI's:

RB: shoot less often, more direct, stay wider, close down much less

LB: shoot less, run wide, close much less

RCB: close down much less

LCB: default

Anchor: pass it shorter

CMD: shoot less often, dribble less, fewer risky passes

BBM: shoot less often, dribble more, close down much more

BWMSU: shoot less, dribble less

DF: close down much more

Poacher: close down more

So the idea here is to have a bank of 6 holding defenders, meaning the back 4, anchor and CMD. The two other midfielders are meant to provide a bit of an edge to the ball winning with more closing down.

I am conceding goals from obviously crosses, but also sometimes my defenders seem just completely misplaced, and I don't know the reason why. Another reason I concede is when I get caught on the counter, which, with this system I thought almost shouldn't be possible because of the emphasis on the defensive side of things?

So please guys, if you can help me by improving the obvious flaws in my tactic (which I cannot spot), you would help me a lot and I would be super happy

Btw hope you can see the images I have posted

Edit: Direct link to the images posted - rashidi1

Images at Imgur

Next time just copy the image address (right click) and then paste it into "Insert Image"

Formation:

TI's:

Results:

You are playing narrow plus wbs that'll get fwd leaving space down your flanks, also your bbm and bwm will be aggressive and leaving space.

Try changing your wbs to fb supports and look at more static roles in midfield.

Your obviously going for counter attack, but when there's not a counter attack on your asking your players to:

- Play More Direct + Higher Tempo so trying to force counters even when they might have defender back. A direct game isn't bad, but do you have the players for it and at high tempo do the front two get any support?

- Play Out Of Defence + Work Ball Into Box so then asking them to be more patient, but does that work with Direct + Higher Tempo

- Narrow Width only applies when you have the ball, your formation is already very narrow so will make it easy to defend.

- A 4141 would offer more support to your DL+DR and help prevent crosses, will also more likely trigger a proper counter attack compared to leaving two players forward.

- Your playing counter attack, trying to draw them deep but are using a BWM who will look to close down, doesn't really fit with your plan. If he wins it whats the plan if they haven't committed players forward for you to counter attack?

- WB-D is very negative and will mean you have no width on the left with only a BWM in the LCM position. Remember a player doesn't just magically become a better defender because you give a defend duty, a player will play as per there attributes but will try to follow the instructions you give.

- Structured reduces creative freedom, your then further lowering it but you have no creative roles in the side and no width so will be very predictable. Who is going to create for your Poacher?

I would:

- Have a read of http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/444680-The-Art-of-Counter-Attacking

- Decide what your plan B is if a counter attack isn't on. Do you want the patient (play out of defence + work ball into box) or faster more direct style?

- Remove the width setting

- Have at least support fullbacks so you have some width going forward.

- Change your midfield three, with an Anchor man I would have 3 support roles. Depends on your "plan b", if more possession and you have the players you could have RPM-S, CM-S, BBM-S (you can give the CM-S a Hold Position to be a bit more reserved if needed). If going with a more direct high tempo then I would try CM-A, CM-S, BBM-S.

- Consider changing your Structured Team Shape and More Disciplined depending on the other changes.

- Can your poacher offer a bit more as a AF-A or DLF-A?

Thanks for very constructive advice guys.

To discuss your input:

- As support for the front two, I had in mind the BBM and the wingbacks, perhaps mostly the right one.

- WB(D): Yeah I understand the negativity of the role, but I think I have gotten increasingly frustrated that I just seem to continue conceding goals, making my tactic more defensive in nature as I did.

- On the topic of passing style, I change that during the game, so if I struggle with possession, I go shorter and retain, etc.

- I tried a 4141 once and it seemed very negative and hardly any goals scored.. Have any of you had success with the formation?

- The BWM in midfield was actually inspired by the guide "lines and diamonds", when reading about defensive shapes. So as I wrote above, was just to give the defense a little more aggressiveness, but I will try a more contained approach. and see how that goes.

Now I will go to it with your advice and hopefully see some improvements, your advice is much appreciated

Very quickly.

1. Know your systems weak points in defense:

a. Your flanks are exposed.

You have opted to get the MC on the right to be on Defend duty which makes sense, but it also means that to some extent the anchorman will be underutilised. When the anchorman wins the ball what are his outlets..if you want to play counter then it looks like its only the wingback who has the assertiveness to move forward. The other 3 in midfield are going to etither carry the ball forward or just stay locked down with hardly any horizontal movement. So as an outlet for countering its not going to be ideal. DLP? is an option, alternatively he can be a DM and you could opt for the MC to be a playmaker

b. When you play a shout like "play out of defense" you are planning on getting someone to play it short to someone else to string a magical pass. If you don't have that option, then the ball becomes a punt. Cos they may have no one to do any creative work. At the moment you have a solitary poacher who is on attack. Here I would check his contributions in a game. Is he top scoring for your team, does he finish all chances, is he that good that he can be left to be a poacher. Are his off the ball running, balance good enough? If not then you need other options.

In terms of attack I see some issues and these could be down to the lack of variety in attack. In midfield you have a good screen, you can afford to pick one to be attacking or even 2. If you choose 2 then the fullbacks need to be on support. If its one then the outside MCs can be on support and high closing down. Please note the only role that gives that is the BWM, but the problem with that role is the hardcoded hard tackling, so you may want to go with a generic MC on support and elect to give him PIs.

Upfront, its a concern. You should try other variations with that extra attacking man in midfield.

- On the topic of passing style, I change that during the game, so if I struggle with possession, I go shorter and retain, etc.

This seems like your trying to do everything. Is your aim to play counter attacking or a possession style? Are your players good at defending (since you should be defending to create counter opportunities), good counter attackers and also good at possession style? I think you need to decide how your going to play and focus on making that as effective as you can rather than changing your whole style just to get a higher possession %.

This seems like your trying to do everything. Is your aim to play counter attacking or a possession style? Are your players good at defending (since you should be defending to create counter opportunities), good counter attackers and also good at possession style? I think you need to decide how your going to play and focus on making that as effective as you can rather than changing your whole style just to get a higher possession %.

This is very good advice. In my first season I was knocking by with less then 40% possession, but we won the title. Whats more important to track is the way you defend and how you create your goals. Having a clear idea of how you want to get the goals is the trick in mastering the game. There is no luck in FM, its pure numbers, maybe there is some luck...but most of the time I make sure its on my side.

Very quickly.

1. Know your systems weak points in defense:

a. Your flanks are exposed.

You have opted to get the MC on the right to be on Defend duty which makes sense, but it also means that to some extent the anchorman will be underutilised. When the anchorman wins the ball what are his outlets..if you want to play counter then it looks like its only the wingback who has the assertiveness to move forward. The other 3 in midfield are going to etither carry the ball forward or just stay locked down with hardly any horizontal movement. So as an outlet for countering its not going to be ideal. DLP? is an option, alternatively he can be a DM and you could opt for the MC to be a playmaker

b. When you play a shout like "play out of defense" you are planning on getting someone to play it short to someone else to string a magical pass. If you don't have that option, then the ball becomes a punt. Cos they may have no one to do any creative work. At the moment you have a solitary poacher who is on attack. Here I would check his contributions in a game. Is he top scoring for your team, does he finish all chances, is he that good that he can be left to be a poacher. Are his off the ball running, balance good enough? If not then you need other options.

In terms of attack I see some issues and these could be down to the lack of variety in attack. In midfield you have a good screen, you can afford to pick one to be attacking or even 2. If you choose 2 then the fullbacks need to be on support. If its one then the outside MCs can be on support and high closing down. Please note the only role that gives that is the BWM, but the problem with that role is the hardcoded hard tackling, so you may want to go with a generic MC on support and elect to give him PIs.

Upfront, its a concern. You should try other variations with that extra attacking man in midfield.

Thanks for reply, as you might have guessed my style is with inspiration from yourself and your journey with west brom which was very inspiring.

- so when you say DLP or DM, you mean one of the three midfielders to drop down to dm so that I have two dms?

-the up front concern you address, is that the poacher you mean, and perhaps a different role for him or something else with the one midfielder with attack duties?

Thanks again.

I see, well what I see it as is adaptations to different situations and opponents, but of course I do get your point here. The problem is that I am not quite sure whether a player or a group of players are best suited for direct style or possession style? I mean, won't both styles require good decisions, passing, crossing, vision, composure and some others?

This reply was aimed at summatsuper

Thanks for reply, as you might have guessed my style is with inspiration from yourself and your journey with west brom which was very inspiring.

- so when you say DLP or DM, you mean one of the three midfielders to drop down to dm so that I have two dms?

-the up front concern you address, is that the poacher you mean, and perhaps a different role for him or something else with the one midfielder with attack duties?

Thanks again.

No looking at your first image, it has an A in the DM slot which I assume is an anchorman, I would change that to a DM. I would try out different combinations with your players, without knowing how their attributes line up, its hard to say. All I can add is this: the Poacher may do nothing for you, its something you need to verify.

I see, well what I see it as is adaptations to different situations and opponents, but of course I do get your point here. The problem is that I am not quite sure whether a player or a group of players are best suited for direct style or possession style? I mean, won't both styles require good decisions, passing, crossing, vision, composure and some others?

This reply was aimed at summatsuper

If you can't afford the luxury of all round star players and need to buy more specialized players then you will need to prioritize certain attributes.

Think about how a high tempo direct style plays, its hard fast physical work. Yes better decisions, vision etc will help but your looking to beat the opponents by attacking them before they get back and organized. Your chasing balls trying to get there before the defender and causing issues or if they do get there first you can pressure them in a risky position if they lose it. Your midfielders are trying to get forward to support and capitalize on a mistake or run from your forward.

A possession style will be slower and will require more technical and mental attributes to break down an organized defence and not waste possession. Yes good physical attributes will help but your looking to beat the opponents by your off the ball movement, pulling markers out of position or by doing something they didn't see coming or technical skill.

Defensively if your playing a deep line with lower closing down (counter with no instructions) you need defenders who are good at being in the right position consistently as they won't have time to chase after an attacker to recover from a mistake. If your playing a high line with high pressing then your looking for better physical attributes to defend the space your leaving and to pressure the other team quickly into a mistake.

Guys, I have to share this... So after the Man U game I posted on here, desperately hoping to get something to get my season going.. And thanks to you guys I managed to change things around, sweet!!

btw the friendlies were just for morale/tactical familiarity. Much appreesh!

Just out of interest what did you end up with ?

PI:

DR: shoot less, more direct, stay wider, close down less

CBDE: close down much less

CBCO: -

LB: shoot less, run wide, close down much less

CMR: Hold position, fewer risky passes - my holding CM

CM: shoot more (bentancur is great at long shots), dribble more

CML: close down more, further forward, more direct, more risky (my creative CM)

CFSU: tackle harder, close down much more

Does it look better? I thought maybe I even went too attacking with the CML the creative midfield force and go further forward.

I did also lose home to Newcastle the last game, so I will try and tweak a bit more. The CML spot may not have get further forward.. Just thought it was OK since he's on the side where the WB is on support, if that makes sense?

Another question.. What is your experiences with WB closing down much less? I feel I am a bit squishy at the flanks still, so thinking about going just "normal" closing down on them.

Oh and btw, the reason for going down from higher tempo to normal is, I discovered that my team is one of the worst in the league when it comes to decision making, which I assume would make it a bad idea to go high tempo right? The thought is I want to give them a bit more time to decide on their actions.

Was that second image meant to be team instructions ?

Interesting forward combination. See how your CML plays (not just his rating). I never give closing down PI's to DL/DR so don't know.

Even if you give them more time there's no guarantee they'll make the right decision if they lack that attribute.

Don't just change things because of the result of one game. Even with a great tactic and 5 star players you might have bad games where it just won't go in and they score some scrappy lucky goal. You can't improve your players attributes by changing your tactic, you can only minimize there weaknesses and maximize there strengths, sometimes there's nothing you can do until you can train/replace the player. Telling a player to close down more just increases the range at which they will try to engage, the players aggression, work rate, tackling, strength, acceleration, etc will dictate how effective that closing down is.

Was that second image meant to be team instructions ?

Interesting forward combination. See how your CML plays (not just his rating). I never give closing down PI's to DL/DR so don't know.

Even if you give them more time there's no guarantee they'll make the right decision if they lack that attribute.

Don't just change things because of the result of one game. Even with a great tactic and 5 star players you might have bad games where it just won't go in and they score some scrappy lucky goal. You can't improve your players attributes by changing your tactic, you can only minimize there weaknesses and maximize there strengths, sometimes there's nothing you can do until you can train/replace the player. Telling a player to close down more just increases the range at which they will try to engage, the players aggression, work rate, tackling, strength, acceleration, etc will dictate how effective that closing down is.

Yeah team instructions. I can post when I get home from work tho there's no upsets there.

In regards to the CML, especially look at him cause it would be vulnerable to use those pi's, you mean, or?

No not improve their decision making as stat, but I want to, as you say, minimise my weak spots which is decision making. Wouldn't it then make sense to give my indecisive players more time to assess their options so that they are less stressed and forced into making a perhaps bad decision? Or am I understanding it wrong?

And of course I see that closing down at the end of the day comes down to several factors, what I aim to do is for my players to have the best possible base to succeed, given all their flaws, and then I will replace weak spots as we go:) and through that best combination of roles, duties, pi's etc. if that makes sense?

I have been giving the shape a bit of thought lately as well. I feel I have a good grasp of what the different settings mean, but sometimes I am afraid that structured creates too much space for my opponents to play into. On the other hand, I'm afraid fluid would cast my poor players and their low teamwork ratings all over without managing to cover the open spaces. Sometimes I change the shape during a match from lack of better options, perceivably. So my question is, and I know it's contextual, but what shape would you choose for this system and which in game indications would make you wanna change the shape?

I honestly don't know if the MCL will be a vulnerability, I was thinking more about how a CM-S with those PI's will put them into practice with those roles around him. With the F9 dropping deep how will the MCL interact with him, will he make runs past him etc?

Giving a player more time won't increase a decision attribute of 10 to 15+. All it does is give more time to see more options (vision etc dependent) and then make the best decision they can. If they're not good at making decisions, then hopefully they can make up with technical / physical attributes to exploit space and stretch play so much even they can see what the best option is.

I take Flexible as being the default and work from there. Mentality + Roles + Duties make the most difference with your Team Instructions. Team shape is minor compared to them unless you go from one extreme (very structured) to another (very fluid). Some use it more for the creative freedom, making players stick more closely to the roles or playing more freely. Others use it more to just extend or compress the team vertically if they feel a forward isn't close enough to the midfield or is too close etc.

The more you constantly change things the harder it will be to get a feel for how the tactic plays. Player form, the tactics / players you come up against etc will all have an effect. You should only be changing something if its a mistake caused by what you've told them to do or the situation you've put them in rather than the players lack of execution.

I honestly don't know if the MCL will be a vulnerability, I was thinking more about how a CM-S with those PI's will put them into practice with those roles around him. With the F9 dropping deep how will the MCL interact with him, will he make runs past him etc?

Giving a player more time won't increase a decision attribute of 10 to 15+. All it does is give more time to see more options (vision etc dependent) and then make the best decision they can. If they're not good at making decisions, then hopefully they can make up with technical / physical attributes to exploit space and stretch play so much even they can see what the best option is.

I take Flexible as being the default and work from there. Mentality + Roles + Duties make the most difference with your Team Instructions. Team shape is minor compared to them unless you go from one extreme (very structured) to another (very fluid). Some use it more for the creative freedom, making players stick more closely to the roles or playing more freely. Others use it more to just extend or compress the team vertically if they feel a forward isn't close enough to the midfield or is too close etc.

The more you constantly change things the harder it will be to get a feel for how the tactic plays. Player form, the tactics / players you come up against etc will all have an effect. You should only be changing something if its a mistake caused by what you've told them to do or the situation you've put them in rather than the players lack of execution.

P1: ye thats a valid point I honestly didn't consider. They did in fact run a bit into each others tracks, I've changed the F9 to a targetman and going more direct passing and lowered my red line. This because I feel I am much more sound defensively as I refuse the opposition space in my final third and due to the fact that I've acquired a very good TM and Charlie Adam as maestro in the DLP slot in dm. Last match we won 3-0, all three goals on set pieces cause of Adams sweet foot ?

I do understand I can't improve players stats by giving them more time on the ball, but you said yourself (I think it was you) that we need to mask our weaknesses in the team and highlight our strengths, but what you basically mean is that if my team is bad at decisions, they're % faults will be just as high as with higher tempo in theory?

I now feel I've found a good balance tactically thanks to your sweet advice, so I'm currently only making minor minor tweaks as fx WB on support if I meet a particularly fierce winger.

I don't consider the % of errors, I'm thinking about the effect of the errors. If you play a possession style that needs to break down defences through lots of passing and movement, if bad decisions are likely to happen your just give the ball away before you can create a chance. I think the best way to minimize the effect of bad decisions is to attack quickly, there will probably be fewer options to choose from but hopefully more space and less defensive organization to use technical / physical ability to actually create something.