Pep's Manchester City 17/18

[NabsKebabs]

The way Man City are playing this year is just a class above the competition. So naturally, replicating this in FM is the first thought that comes to mind 

I've been toying around a bit and here are 2 similar systems I think that replicate how they have lined up most games this season. 

Against lesser teams:

Against top teams:

I'd be interested to hear what people think on how accurate these systems are to replicating Pep. Testing them out yourself would be great! No OI's and only PI is to tell GK to distribute to fullbacks. 

[BillHoudini24]

I don't think Guardiola plays a Very Fluid style, probably Structured. The players are doing exactly what he tells them to and certain more creative players have more Freedom. (KDB, Silva, Aguero, etc)

I would also play the Wingers in the Midfield strata and increase their mentality.

[jc577]

I agree, Pep’s teams are definitely structured. This spacing between players in build-up and the width both Sane and Sterling hold, makes it difficult for the opposition to successful press them. Also, In your first tactic, I’d go with W-S, CF-S, IF-S with get further forward on both wide players. Walker’s role then becomes a WB-A or FB-A.

[hawkgg]

Dont think F9 is the right role, Pep has only used it a couple of times with KDB vs Barca and in the end of matches to keep possession. CF on support would be right. I would say that KDB is playing as a roaming playmaker with PI to move into channels. Also, when Mendy is playing, both wide players are inside forwards imo. In terms of the tactic vs top teams i think the mentality drops to counter, but the player roles maintain the same, apart from some examples (Chelsea away in real life, both wide players as wingers, Walker and Delph as inverted wing backs).

[shadster]

I agree with the structured. If I went to replicate Pep's tactics, my first instict would surely be very fluid, but if we think about it, he plays structured. To achieve the short space between lines, maybe high defensive line would do that.

[Rashidi]

22 hours ago, hawkgg said:

Dont think F9 is the right role, Pep has only used it a couple of times with KDB vs Barca and in the end of matches to keep possession. CF on support would be right. I would say that KDB is playing as a roaming playmaker with PI to move into channels. Also, when Mendy is playing, both wide players are inside forwards imo. In terms of the tactic vs top teams i think the mentality drops to counter, but the player roles maintain the same, apart from some examples (Chelsea away in real life, both wide players as wingers, Walker and Delph as inverted wing backs).

When you want to choose a role for a player...think about what the role does in terms of movement and how it plays others in.

[Draktor]

This just dropped by @Rashidi, he probably didn't want to post his own videos here, but it might give you more ideas @NabsKebabs as well. In fact his MC setup isn't too dissimilar to yours.

 

[hawkgg]

4 hours ago, Rashidi said:

When you want to choose a role for a player...think about what the role does in terms of movement and how it plays others in.

I dont disagree with that. Just pointing out my opinion on which player roles in game that is the best to replicate City in real life. People might disagree, and thats fine. 

From my observations when Aguero/Jesus plays as a lone striker, they drop deeper to play one-twos and roam from position to receive the ball in space, and sometimes tries to beat the offside trap. In my view, a false 9 is a playmaker and i dont think Aguero and Jesus plays like that. 

The description of the roaming playmaker is "the player is the heartbeat in team", and KDB certainly fits that. He often receives the ball deep, sometimes in the left half spaces, sometimes in the right half spaces / the right wing. On top of that he scores most of his goals outside the box. The roaming playmaker is the role that replicates that the best in game in my opinion.

 

[Rashidi]

2 hours ago, hawkgg said:

I dont disagree with that. Just pointing out my opinion on which player roles in game that is the best to replicate City in real life. People might disagree, and thats fine. 

From my observations when Aguero/Jesus plays as a lone striker, they drop deeper to play one-twos and roam from position to receive the ball in space, and sometimes tries to beat the offside trap. In my view, a false 9 is a playmaker and i dont think Aguero and Jesus plays like that. 

The description of the roaming playmaker is "the player is the heartbeat in team", and KDB certainly fits that. He often receives the ball deep, sometimes in the left half spaces, sometimes in the right half spaces / the right wing. On top of that he scores most of his goals outside the box. The roaming playmaker is the role that replicates that the best in game in my opinion.

 

Whats cool about the game is that we can get players to play in so many different ways 

[yonko]

@Rashidi can you please explain your choice of not using playmaking roles in midfield? I'm interested in your reasoning. Also pass shorter vs retain possession. 

[Rashidi]

@yonko I don't use any playmaking roles because both David Silva and KDB are playmakers in their own right. They pivot off each other, if you observe how they play, KDB and DS normally swap positions when they need arises too. So in order to ensure that both players get equal attention, I opted not to go with a playmaker.  My CM(S) role for KDB is heavily customised. I don't expect it to be 100% like how City play and in fact, in my own personal tactic I have David Silva and KDB swapping positions along with Sane and Sterling. I will do a video soon explaining how you can use the Swap instruction more effectively, creating my LFC tactic with swap instructions now for Can and Hendo.

[Brasmuss]

I think that David Silva as a Playmaker is past tense. I think due to his age he is used in a slightly different role than earlier in his career, and the signing of KDB freed him from to pursue a new role in the team. Much like Ronaldo, he dont have the same mileage over 90 minutes, which is why i see him filling other shoes after KDB arrived. I seem him now as a Mezzala or a CM-A (PI's included after taste).

The Heatmap from their former match against Arsenal also shows this imo. KDB is all over the place (I know this can differ in some matches, but that's just the Guardiola effect), where DS is sticking more to his positioning, waiting to make a difference.

Just my 2 cents.

KDS: (Almost DLP style)

DS:

[yonko]

9 hours ago, Rashidi said:

@yonko I don't use any playmaking roles because both David Silva and KDB are playmakers in their own right. They pivot off each other, if you observe how they play, KDB and DS normally swap positions when they need arises too. So in order to ensure that both players get equal attention, I opted not to go with a playmaker.  My CM(S) role for KDB is heavily customised. I don't expect it to be 100% like how City play and in fact, in my own personal tactic I have David Silva and KDB swapping positions along with Sane and Sterling. I will do a video soon explaining how you can use the Swap instruction more effectively, creating my LFC tactic with swap instructions now for Can and Hendo.

I have observed how they play, as I've watched all Man City games since Pep took over. I agree about the natural swapping. They also drift into wide channels often - Silva to the left and KDB to the right. Of course I noticed your heavily modified CM role for KDB. This leads me to the next question - why that role and not BBM for example, which more dynamic?

I have achieved sort of natural swapping by setting Silva as MEZ and KDB as RPM with Moves into Channels PI. The instructions make both players drift off and pivot off each other. But I feel like KDB is the driving force in the team and want him more on the ball. I play Fernandinho as DLP-D because I also feel like he's attracting the ball and recycling it.

[Rashidi]

I didn't want the dynamism of the box to box midfielder, instead I wanted to have the option of swapping them and switching roles with the swaps without impacting the system too much. What I did was also to swap Sane and Sterling, having one play as a winger and when they swap they become IFs. I plan to release a feature video for Personalising Player Instructions with Swaps as a strategy ,should be a short 5 minute guide.

[Oenone87]

9 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

I didn't want the dynamism of the box to box midfielder, instead I wanted to have the option of swapping them and switching roles with the swaps without impacting the system too much. What I did was also to swap Sane and Sterling, having one play as a winger and when they swap they become IFs. I plan to release a feature video for Personalising Player Instructions with Swaps as a strategy ,should be a short 5 minute guide.

Off topic here but I couldn't get your Custom Views working in FM18, however saw you have them in your FM18 videos. Excellent content by the way!

[Rashidi]

4 minutes ago, Oenone87 said:

Off topic here but I couldn't get your Custom Views working in FM18, however saw you have them in your FM18 videos. Excellent content by the way!

They haven't been uploaded yet

[Oenone87]

Ah no worries, guess i'm using FM17's!

[yonko]

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

I didn't want the dynamism of the box to box midfielder, instead I wanted to have the option of swapping them and switching roles with the swaps without impacting the system too much. What I did was also to swap Sane and Sterling, having one play as a winger and when they swap they become IFs. I plan to release a feature video for Personalising Player Instructions with Swaps as a strategy ,should be a short 5 minute guide.

Got it. So when you swap DS and KDB do they swap roles also or they keep their roles and PIs with them? KDB still CM heavily customized at MCL and DS as MEZ at MCR?

EDIT: I just wanted to add that I still do not like the False 9 role in FM. Too many long shots and drifts wide too much for my liking. I think a customized simple DLF-S plays more like I would want a false 9 to play or I think it plays IRL.

[Fritz13]

1 hour ago, yonko said:

Got it. So when you swap DS and KDB do they swap roles also or they keep their roles and PIs with them? KDB still CM heavily customized at MCL and DS as MEZ at MCR?

EDIT: I just wanted to add that I still do not like the False 9 role in FM. Too many long shots and drifts wide too much for my liking. I think a customized simple DLF-S plays more like I would want a false 9 to play or I think it plays IRL.

If you swap doesn’t the player just take on the other role and inherit the other PIs etc?

So KDB would become the MEZ and Silva the heavily customised CM

to keep the same roles but swap sides it’s a manual change sadly .... shame really as it’s a nice concept 

(if someone tells me I’m wrong here I willl be very happy)

[yonko]

50 minutes ago, Fritz13 said:

If you swap doesn’t the player just take on the other role and inherit the other PIs etc?

So KDB would become the MEZ and Silva the heavily customised CM

to keep the same roles but swap sides it’s a manual change sadly .... shame really as it’s a nice concept 

(if someone tells me I’m wrong here I willl be very happy)

I think with the new personalization option the player can be set up to play any role with any instructions in that position.

So at MCL Silva can be set up as MEZ-S with one set of PIs, while KDB can be set up to play there as CM-S with custom PIs.

I don't know....I haven't used swap positions in awhile.

[yonko]

I just wanted to add this here:

http://www.thefalse9.com/2017/01/football-tactics-for-beginners-juego-de-posicion.html

I have read it before of course, but I stumbled on it and on that site for other reason and I thought it would be interesting for others. Read it carefully.

The interesting part is in the last paragraph:

"So basically, in Juego de Posición, the pitch is divided in to separate zones and all the players have specific duties to carry out within these zones depending on the nature of the play. Players make runs, create overlaps to maintain superiority over the opposition. The ball is circulated between various players combined with the non ball players providing various passing options and creating problems for the opposition with their runs. The main criticism of this system is that it is too rigid and that it is not reactive."

The bold parts are particularly interesting - specific duties....rigid...as in structured or very structured......hmm

[NabsKebabs]

2 hours ago, yonko said:

I just wanted to add this here:

http://www.thefalse9.com/2017/01/football-tactics-for-beginners-juego-de-posicion.html

I have read it before of course, but I stumbled on it and on that site for other reason and I thought it would be interesting for others. Read it carefully.

The interesting part is in the last paragraph:

"So basically, in Juego de Posición, the pitch is divided in to separate zones and all the players have specific duties to carry out within these zones depending on the nature of the play. Players make runs, create overlaps to maintain superiority over the opposition. The ball is circulated between various players combined with the non ball players providing various passing options and creating problems for the opposition with their runs. The main criticism of this system is that it is too rigid and that it is not reactive."

The bold parts are particularly interesting - specific duties....rigid...as in structured or very structured......hmm

That doesn't suggest structured at all to me. It says depending on the nature of play so really it suggests players actually have multiple duties, it just depends on the nature of play. 

The too rigid criticism suggests that it is not reactive to all possibilities they may face from the opposition. 

[yonko]

1 hour ago, NabsKebabs said:

That doesn't suggest structured at all to me. It says depending on the nature of play so really it suggests players actually have multiple duties, it just depends on the nature of play. 

The too rigid criticism suggests that it is not reactive to all possibilities they may face from the opposition. 

How do you interpret "depending on the nature of play"? What is nature of play to you?

[NabsKebabs]

Just now, yonko said:

How do you interpret "depending on the nature of play"? What is nature of play to you?

Nature of play is just the situation. 

For example, in Pep's system, the inside forwards play very wide in the build up, When the ball is in the final third, they generally come inside and create chaos in the box, players can actually do whatever they want in the final third under Pep. The forwards don't run at defenders from deeper positions but in the final third you will often see them being very direct and running at defenders.

[yonko]

21 minutes ago, NabsKebabs said:

Nature of play is just the situation. 

For example, in Pep's system, the inside forwards play very wide in the build up, When the ball is in the final third, they generally come inside and create chaos in the box, players can actually do whatever they want in the final third under Pep. The forwards don't run at defenders from deeper positions but in the final third you will often see them being very direct and running at defenders.

So how is that fluid or very fluid? 

[Brasmuss]

Does "Structured" and then the selection of "Roam from Position" not contradict each other? I find it odd to do this, could you please explain your thoughts around this @Rashidi ?

Btw. Love your videos, and watch 'em all as soon as they are out

[hawkgg]

Anyone else struggle to dominate games in terms of possession? I have used both my own version and Rashidis City tactic in 10 games each. Possession numbers between 46-53% each game. 

I thought the tactic maybe were too agressive so i changed to standard/structured with TIs WTIB, and retain possesion. Still only managed 53%.

Maybe its a beta issue?

[yonko]

10 hours ago, Brasmuss said:

Does "Structured" and then the selection of "Roam from Position" not contradict each other? I find it odd to do this, could you please explain your thoughts around this @Rashidi ?

Btw. Love your videos, and watch 'em all as soon as they are out

Structured shape creates space between your lines. And Roaming allows players to use that space better with their movement. The players need good off the ball, anticipation, decisions and workrate. I do not see what is the contradiction.

[Jessan]

1 hour ago, hawkgg said:

Anyone else struggle to dominate games in terms of possession? I have used both my own version and Rashidis City tactic in 10 games each. Possession numbers between 46-53% each game. 

I thought the tactic maybe were too agressive so i changed to standard/structured with TIs WTIB, and retain possesion. Still only managed 53%.

Maybe its a beta issue?

I have struggled to consistently dominate possession too, there is the odd game where I will have 60+% and other were I only have 45%, it does seem to even out at around 50%.  Where as in FM17 I had over 55+% for the large majority of my matches. 

[Cleon]

60% in FM terms is quite extreme due to how possession is calculated. 53-55% is more the average for a possession side.

Nothings changed between 17 and 18, possession still works the same and its still as easy to achieve the numbers you did on 17.

[Jessan]

32 minutes ago, Cleon said:

60% in FM terms is quite extreme due to how possession is calculated. 53-55% is more the average for a possession side.

Nothings changed between 17 and 18, possession still works the same and its still as easy to achieve the numbers you did on 17.

Yeah the 60+% possession really is the rare game where we fully dominate the opponent. While I'm sure it's possible to consistently get 55% possession, the way I achieved that in FM17 doesn't seem to translate to FM18.  I have been tweaking my tactic and numbers are going up again, there still is the occasional blip against weaker sides though, looking back at my last couple of matches it really bothers me I only got 49% possession against Pullis' West Brom.

[hawkgg]

 

2 minutes ago, Jessan said:

Yeah the 60+% possession really is the rare game where we fully dominate the opponent. While I'm sure it's possible to consistently get 55% possession, the way I achieved that in FM17 doesn't seem to translate to FM18.  I have been tweaking my tactic and numbers are going up again so we're almost there.  Looking back at my last couple of matches it really bothers me I only got 49% possession against Pullis' West Brom.

I am assuming you play similar to City, how do you set up and which changes did you make to increase possession?

[Jessan]

8 minutes ago, hawkgg said:

 

I am assuming you play similar to City, how do you set up and which changes did you make to increase possession?

I made two changes, one was that I noticed on a lot of highlights my players would just pass the ball against an opponent where they were trying to force the short pass, after I changed my passing from short to mixed it seems to happen less often.  Second change was one I made after reading comments from Rashidi and Cleon how playing without a playmaker can make your play seems more fluid and natural, cause with playmaker you're kinda forcing your team to play through him.  So I removed any playmaker role and started with Rashidi's example of a mezzala and a heavily customized central midfielder on support, I am liking the mezzala but the central midfielder isn't working that well for me, it was heavily customized so I'm tweaking that role to do what I want it to do and what my player is capable of doing.  Those 2 changes seemed to up my possession by a bit, was getting 53-54% on average now although I just played two games against Juventus and in the away leg I only had 43% and at home I had 46%, but I'm just blaming that on the difference between player quality.  I'm not playing with a team in one of the top 4 leagues.

[hawkgg]

35 minutes ago, Jessan said:

I made two changes, one was that I noticed on a lot of highlights my players would just pass the ball against an opponent where they were trying to force the short pass, after I changed my passing from short to mixed it seems to happen less often.  Second change was one I made after reading comments from Rashidi and Cleon how playing without a playmaker can make your play seems more fluid and natural, cause with playmaker you're kinda forcing your team to play through him.  So I removed any playmaker role and started with Rashidi's example of a mezzala and a heavily customized central midfielder on support, I am liking the mezzala but the central midfielder isn't working that well for me, it was heavily customized so I'm tweaking that role to do what I want it to do and what my player is capable of doing.  Those 2 changes seemed to up my possession by a bit, was getting 53-54% on average now although I just played two games against Juventus and in the away leg I only had 43% and at home I had 46%, but I'm just blaming that on the difference between player quality.  I'm not playing with a team in one of the top 4 leagues.

Interesting. I have given up trying get everything right in terms of how City play (unrealistic anyway), and instead i have taken Rashidis version and made changes that seems effective in terms of possession in the game: 

Mentality: control. Shape: very fluid. Team instuctions: shorter passing, play out of defence, retain possession, lower tempo, work ball into box, fairly narrow,close down much more, offside trap, tighter marking, get stuck in, prevent goalkeeper short distribution, roam from positions.

wingbacks on support with PI to stay wide, inside forwards on support with PI to get further forward & stay wide. Complete forward on support. Apart from that player roles are the same as Rashidis version.

Possession numbers now 53-59%.  vs West Brom 67% 

Defence is quite solid, only conceded 4 goals in 7 games. The attack isnt good enough though, so that will be my next task. 

 

 

 

[Brasmuss]

3 hours ago, yonko said:

Structured shape creates space between your lines. And Roaming allows players to use that space better with their movement. The players need good off the ball, anticipation, decisions and workrate. I do not see what is the contradiction.

I just did'nt understand the connection. Thank you for explaining

[yonko]

16 minutes ago, Brasmuss said:

I just did'nt understand the connection. Thank you for explaining

No problem.

 

[Gee_Simpson]

6 hours ago, hawkgg said:

Anyone else struggle to dominate games in terms of possession? I have used both my own version and Rashidis City tactic in 10 games each. Possession numbers between 46-53% each game. 

I thought the tactic maybe were too agressive so i changed to standard/structured with TIs WTIB, and retain possesion. Still only managed 53%.

Maybe its a beta issue?

Slightly off topic but still related to possession; I wanted to dominate possession with the 'control' mentality on FM 17 but I couldn't do it. I used the same 4123 formation as it's supposed to be a good formation to retain possession but no matter what TI's, roles or duties I used I struggled to reach my target of 60% in each match. I found that the 4231 got me higher possession numbers for some reason even though it's more known to utilise possession better vs retaining it. I don't have FM 18, not sure if I will buy it yet. I want to achieve 60% on 'control' in FM 17 first 

[Fritz13]

Tempo - higher?, lower ? ..... or average to encourage best of both worlds?

would assume higher would be ok as first Touch, technique etc is good for most for the squad

[hawkgg]

 

On 9.11.2017 at 17:41, hawkgg said:

Anyone else struggle to dominate games in terms of possession? I have used both my own version and Rashidis City tactic in 10 games each. Possession numbers between 46-53% each game. 

I thought the tactic maybe were too agressive so i changed to standard/structured with TIs WTIB, and retain possesion. Still only managed 53%.

Maybe its a beta issue?

Using Rashidis version again now that the full game is out. Works like a dream. If anyone struggle to make their own City version, i really recommend it.

[yonko]

19 hours ago, Gee_Simpson said:

Slightly off topic but still related to possession; I wanted to dominate possession with the 'control' mentality on FM 17 but I couldn't do it. I used the same 4123 formation as it's supposed to be a good formation to retain possession but no matter what TI's, roles or duties I used I struggled to reach my target of 60% in each match. I found that the 4231 got me higher possession numbers for some reason even though it's more known to utilise possession better vs retaining it. I don't have FM 18, not sure if I will buy it yet. I want to achieve 60% on 'control' in FM 17 first 

Checkout Cleon's thread The Art of Possession. He achieved high >60% possession stats with Control mentality using 4123 wide formation.....playing as Swansea. I'm not saying copy him, but have a look for ideas. His aim wasn't high possession numbers but more purposeful possession. If you tweak some roles and instructions, you can achieve higher possession stats, if that is what you want.

[Gee_Simpson]

Yeah I have read it multiple times but no luck so far. I'm not great at creating my own tactics but I don't want to copy/use others either.

[yonko]

3 hours ago, Gee_Simpson said:

Yeah I have read it multiple times but no luck so far. I'm not great at creating my own tactics but I don't want to copy/use others either.

Just think what changes need to be made to fit your players into it - I don't mean player suitability for the role, rather how their attributes will have them perform those roles. Think what changes need to be made so the roles still link together and give you nice control over possession. Create something a little more traditional. Try a few different things, one at a time.

[Gee_Simpson]

13 hours ago, yonko said:

Just think what changes need to be made to fit your players into it - I don't mean player suitability for the role, rather how their attributes will have them perform those roles. Think what changes need to be made so the roles still link together and give you nice control over possession. Create something a little more traditional. Try a few different things, one at a time.

By traditional do you mean a basic tactic without many TI's or fancy roles? Then experiment form there?

[yonko]

5 hours ago, Gee_Simpson said:

By traditional do you mean a basic tactic without many TI's or fancy roles? Then experiment form there?

By traditional I mean simpler roles and just essential TIs. You want to achieve this on Control mentality, right? Why? What is your reason for wanting this mentality and not say Counter for example?

[Gee_Simpson]

22 minutes ago, yonko said:

By traditional I mean simpler roles and just essential TIs. You want to achieve this on Control mentality, right? Why? What is your reason for wanting this mentality and not say Counter for example?

Because I know it is more of a challenge to get it working on Control and I would like my team to not just play sideways and backwards passes in our own half like Counter brings. I want to dominate in the opposition's half.

[Jambo98]

I always find these threads interesting, people trying to recreate "Pep's system" - It does not take a huge amount of detailed reading or watching to understand that Pep does not have "a system".  He will apply anywhere between 3 and 10 (roughly) different systems across any 90mins.  He is the ultimate "anti FM" coach, because he prepares for each individual game and creates a different plan based on the opposition, his available players, the upcoming fixtures, even the weather. 

He certainly has key principles but they evolve and change. He is a pupil of Juego de posicion, but he applies it in his own and avoids the pitfalls (mostly...) which come with the rigid application of it. If you read about how and why he used the vertical lanes in setting up his Bayern team initially, it was almost exclusively focussed on the fullbacks and wingers - They should never occupy the same vertical lanes. If one goes inside, they other must go outside, and vice versa.  The variety is the part which is hard to re-create on FM. 

In theory the entire reason for the IWB position being in FM is to replicate how Pep uses that, but he rarely has those operating for a full 90mins.  I am personally not seeing FM properly implement the role as of yet, but the theory behind it is to let his two "number 10s" (Silva and KDB at City, at Bayern a variety of players including at times Muller and Gotze) to break the lines and become attackers, overloading the opposition centrebacks, and making the fullbacks decide between tucking in and leaving space for the wingers, or staying on the winger and leaving the channel for the forward breaking number 10s.  

That last paragraph is probably the part of Peps "game" that you can have a good go at recreating. But to argue over whether he uses an F9 type, or a AF type is fruitless. He will ask his striker to do both, or neither, many times per game. At times at Bayern he had Lewandowksi do everything. At times he also will tell you he played 6 attackers.......create that - its fun   

[themadsheep2001]

On 08/11/2017 at 09:44, Rashidi said:

@yonko I don't use any playmaking roles because both David Silva and KDB are playmakers in their own right. They pivot off each other, if you observe how they play, KDB and DS normally swap positions when they need arises too. So in order to ensure that both players get equal attention, I opted not to go with a playmaker.  My CM(S) role for KDB is heavily customised. I don't expect it to be 100% like how City play and in fact, in my own personal tactic I have David Silva and KDB swapping positions along with Sane and Sterling. I will do a video soon explaining how you can use the Swap instruction more effectively, creating my LFC tactic with swap instructions now for Can and Hendo.

I've also gone along those lines. I think the closest we'll get to is it perhaps a general way of how Pep wants to control space, but then a lot of that becomes match specific in roles, duties and compactness. I think it was Chelsea were he played two "inverted wing backs" then push the wide players high and wide, and Silva And KDB flooded into the space created

[yonko]

13 hours ago, Gee_Simpson said:

Because I know it is more of a challenge to get it working on Control and I would like my team to not just play sideways and backwards passes in our own half like Counter brings. I want to dominate in the opposition's half.

But if you want high possession numbers you need a tactic with sideways and backwards passes. Mentality in FM is a risk factor and possession tactics are not high risk factor. So if you want to create one on Control Mentality, then you need to balance that out with player roles and duties plus TIs. The same thing needs to happen if your starting mentality is Counter - you can balanced that out with more adventurous roles and duties. You can dominate the opposition in their half with Counter mentality too if you choose the other variables correctly. 

9 hours ago, Jambo98 said:

I always find these threads interesting, people trying to recreate "Pep's system" - It does not take a huge amount of detailed reading or watching to understand that Pep does not have "a system".  He will apply anywhere between 3 and 10 (roughly) different systems across any 90mins.  He is the ultimate "anti FM" coach, because he prepares for each individual game and creates a different plan based on the opposition, his available players, the upcoming fixtures, even the weather. 

He certainly has key principles but they evolve and change. He is a pupil of Juego de posicion, but he applies it in his own and avoids the pitfalls (mostly...) which come with the rigid application of it. If you read about how and why he used the vertical lanes in setting up his Bayern team initially, it was almost exclusively focussed on the fullbacks and wingers - They should never occupy the same vertical lanes. If one goes inside, they other must go outside, and vice versa.  The variety is the part which is hard to re-create on FM. 

In theory the entire reason for the IWB position being in FM is to replicate how Pep uses that, but he rarely has those operating for a full 90mins.  I am personally not seeing FM properly implement the role as of yet, but the theory behind it is to let his two "number 10s" (Silva and KDB at City, at Bayern a variety of players including at times Muller and Gotze) to break the lines and become attackers, overloading the opposition centrebacks, and making the fullbacks decide between tucking in and leaving space for the wingers, or staying on the winger and leaving the channel for the forward breaking number 10s.  

That last paragraph is probably the part of Peps "game" that you can have a good go at recreating. But to argue over whether he uses an F9 type, or a AF type is fruitless. He will ask his striker to do both, or neither, many times per game. At times at Bayern he had Lewandowksi do everything. At times he also will tell you he played 6 attackers.......create that - its fun   

The HB role in FM was also created because of Pep using it with Busquets. 

We have a ST role that does everything - Complete Forward.

Yes, I agree, Pep makes changes based on many conditions but mostly with the aim to always put his team in position to dominate possession and control the game. He uses possession to attack and defend at the same time.

Most coaches make changes too. That is why when trying to recreate something in FM, we can only take snippet from what coaches IRL are doing. We create 3 variations of a tactic in the 3 slots and alternate.

[Jambo98]

1 hour ago, themadsheep2001 said:

I've also gone along those lines. I think the closest we'll get to is it perhaps a general way of how Pep wants to control space, but then a lot of that becomes match specific in roles, duties and compactness. I think it was Chelsea were he played two "inverted wing backs" then push the wide players high and wide, and Silva And KDB flooded into the space created

Whilst i have no great desire to "recreate Peps tactics" (see above post), this part is something i have been working on trying to emulate, if not recreate.  Creating and controlling space are so important in football, and have to go hand in hand. The other linked factor which compliments this is overloads. A lot of Peps tactical approach is premised on creating an overload in one area. Will try to do a few screenshots below to show what i mean: 

Situation 1 - Double Overload 

In the shot below, we have created one overload already, and are on our way to creating a second. In the black box, you can see Gagliardini has the ball and has team mates either side of him. The opposition here have 2 CMs (The DM is naturally too deep to become involved at this point) and one of the CMs (number 4) has had to pick up our #77 who is breaking forward.  

This initially gives us a 3 v 1 overload on the remaining CM for Roma (#6). Of course Roma need to help this guy out, so what happens is there wide men (AML and AMR in this game) have to come infield to help. In particular i have highlighted #8 who has been drawn quite far in field, which then gives us our second overlap developing, and this time in a more dangerous area. We have a 2 v 1 overload now down our right on the opposition LB 

This actually leads to a lovely constructed goal, which i would show if i could get FM to properly upload clips to youtube  

 

Situation 2 - Central Overload and Half Space

So this one starts without standard shape in place. In actual fact, the opposing keeper has just taken a goal kick and it is about to land on the head of Valero (yes, i am using Borja Valero at LB...). Interestingly, you could look at this shape in quite a few ways. Almost a diamond in the middle there, but key is we have a standard solid looking back 4, in the event that Valero does not win possession, 

As it happens, Valero does win it and takes it down, now what happens is he pops it quickly into Gagliardini, who you can see has started to move toward him.  At the same time, Cancelo has come infield to recieve the next pass, and this is where we pause to see what situation we have created. By having the RW playing as wide as possible, and stretching the field side to side, we create a lovely half space for our #10 to run into if he so chooses. The reason we have created this, is because the opposing LB has started to drift out to cover our wide man. The opposing wide man cant do that, partly because at this stage Roma are behind and gone attacking, but also because he has been drawn in to deal with the start of a central overload again. 

As it happens on this occasion, our #10 does not choose to go into that half space (it is the 93rd minute, and he knackered to be fair), but instead drops back in and again we create a central overload, 4 v 2 this time which makes retaining possession easy.  It also frees up the RM (who is cut off this shot - oops) to be an easy passing option on his own out wide. 

 

Is that a recreation of Peps tactic? No, i would not say it is. Some of the roles likely are, but other aspects are just me using (or trying to use - honestly i am not that good at it) the options available to me in game to try and recreate those 3 principles - Space Creation, Space Control and Overloads. 

[Jambo98]

12 minutes ago, yonko said:

The HB role in FM was also created because of Pep using it with Busquets. 

We have a ST role that does everything - Complete Forward.

Yes, I agree, Pep makes changes based on many conditions but mostly with the aim to always put his team in position to dominate possession and control the game. He uses possession to attack and defend at the same time.

Most coaches make changes too. That is why when trying to recreate something in FM, we can only take snippet from what coaches IRL are doing. We create 3 variations of a tactic in the 3 slots and alternate.

indeed, evidently Miles is a fan.......

I think you misunderstood (or i badly articulated) what i meant by the fact that Pep asks his striker to do everything. He does, but not all at the same time. You could make an excellent argument that Robert Lewandowski is a prefect definition of a "complete forward" - he really can do most things in the forward area of the pitch. However Pep would specifically want him do one aspect (slight over simplification here for the purpose of discussion) for 10mins, then something entirely different for 20mins when he changed the system. So in effect, for 10mins Lewan might be asked to operate as an Advanced Forward - Play right on the line, push back the defenders to create the space for his advanced midfielders. Then, Pep notices something, and changes it all. Now Lewan is to drop deeper and drag defenders with him so the wide men can come inside, and then the fullbacks can advance beyond them to........create an overload. 

Long story short, to recreate how Pep uses a "complete forward", you cannot really use the FM complete forward role. You will need to alternate the role given to your striker multiple times during the course of the game, depending on many factors. 

All coaches make changes, very few do anything even close to what Pep does. I dont have the sources to hand, but Phillip Lahm has talked eloquently about it in the past. At Bayern, Pep had the team completely versed in around 8 or so main "systems" and they would be asked to seamlessly move from one to the next during a game. During most games Bayern will, at times, have operated with a back 5, a back 4, a back 3 and a back 2.  The same player have moved from pivote to number 10 and back several times. Wide men will have changed from hugging the line to cutting inside. The key is all the changes must happen in unision. Other managers would make one of the tweaks at a time, maybe 2. 

The challenge that comes with that, and one of several reasons why last season was not a run away success, is that it requires 11 men to learn a vast discipline and depth of tactical knowledge, and not only that to 100% buy into it and make the changes without giving it a second thought. Lahm has stated it took well over a year for Bayern to adapt to this, and that was with a squad including many of the most intelligent football players you will ever find 

Sorry - bit of an essay and not overly relevant to the thread, hopefully my other post is more tactical relevant