Suggestions for my West Brom

[KaramazovB]

Hello, guys, I've just started a new career with West Bromwich Albion and I'm trying to fit a tactic to the team.I created a 4-1-2-2-3 tactic with the aim of creating posession based tactic (2 wingbacks, one BPD and one CD, a deep lying playmaker, an advanced playmaker, a mezzala, two inside forwards and a F9) but it didn't work.I watched my first match and realized that my team can't advance in the attack, they are playing at their own field, passing, dribbling, but they can't open up the game.After so many passing, they play a long ball, if one of inside forwards catch the ball, he just dribbles towards the middle and makes some clueless things, like shooting from a very long range.My striker, literally, doesn't do anything.First match was 0-0, but in the second match, somehow I managed to win 3-1.If I upload my game, or the screenshot of my team, could you suggest something to add or change? I want to create possesion based tactic, but not exactly Tiki-Taka.

[Experienced Defender]

13 minutes ago, KaramazovB said:

I created a 4-1-2-2-3 tactic

41223 ??? There is no such formation mate, unless you are allowed to play with 13 players  

 

13 minutes ago, KaramazovB said:

2 wingbacks, one BPD and one CD, a deep lying playmaker, an advanced playmaker, a mezzala, two inside forwards and a F9

Ah, you meant 4141dm wide (as the game calls it) or 4123 (as most people call it). 

These are just roles, but you said nothing about duties, mentality and instructions. 

13 minutes ago, KaramazovB said:

If I upload my game, or the screenshot of my team, could you suggest something to add or change?

Post a screenshot of your tactic in the first place. You can also post screenshots of your player's profiles, it would be more than welcome 

[KaramazovB]

52 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

41223 ??? There is no such formation mate, unless you are allowed to play with 13 players  

 

Ah, you meant 4141dm wide (as the game calls it) or 4123 (as most people call it). 

These are just roles, but you said nothing about duties, mentality and instructions. 

Post a screenshot of your tactic in the first place. You can also post screenshots of your player's profiles, it would be more than welcome 

Oh, sorry, mate, it was meant to be 4-1-2-2-1  

I've uploaded the team formation and some player informations.

 

[Experienced Defender]

37 minutes ago, KaramazovB said:

Well, as i could have supposed - the setup of roles and duties is pretty one-dimensional with the flanks mirroring each other. This makes you attacks too easily predictable.

Let's now analyze the tactic from the perspective of the possession-based football you want to play:

- the predominance of support duties makes sense for a possession tactic, so that's basically okay

- however, an AP on attack duty is more suited to faster counter-attacking styles

- therefore, I would suggest a swap of duties between the AP and MEZ -  i.e. APsu and MEZat, which would give you better penetration from the midfield as well (because even in possession football, you need to have some attacking potency and more direct support to the lone striker)

- while JR can generally play as an AF, when it comes to a possession style, I would rather play him either on support duty or on attack duty, but in a less advanced role (PF or DLF)

- hold shape goes hand in hand with possession football, but is not necessary, especially as it tends to prevent the players from utilizing some potentially good counter-attacking opportunities

Now on the defensive side:

- while much higher DL makes sense in possession football, I fear that it could be a bit too risky for a team like WBA

- and then you have LOE set to standard, but it in fact should be higher if you are to play a possession style

- which together brings us to a conclusion - both DL and LOE should be set to higher (or higher DL and much higher LOE, given that you play with a multi-strata formation that employs a DM)

- aggressive instructions such as more urgent pressing and get stuck in can be very risky, especially when you play with a high DL and on a high-risk mentality (which already makes your style of defending aggressive enough)

- therefore, my suggestion is to leave them both on default settings

- prevent short GKD is okay

- counter-press is a possession-friendly instruction, but always be careful when you use it (think whether your players are good enough to execute it effectively and with a minimal defensive risk)

(to be continued a bit later, in my next post...)

[KaramazovB]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Well, as i could have supposed - the setup of roles and duties is pretty one-dimensional with the flanks mirroring each other. This makes you attacks too easily predictable.

Let's now analyze the tactic from the perspective of the possession-based football you want to play:

- the predominance of support duties makes sense for a possession tactic, so that's basically okay

- however, an AP on attack duty is more suited to faster counter-attacking styles

- therefore, I would suggest a swap of duties between the AP and MEZ -  i.e. APsu and MEZat, which would give you better penetration from the midfield as well (because even in possession football, you need to have some attacking potency and more direct support to the lone striker)

- while JR can generally play as an AF, when it comes to a possession style, I would rather play him either on support duty or on attack duty, but in a less advanced role (PF or DLF)

- hold shape goes hand in hand with possession football, but is not necessary, especially as it tends to prevent the players from utilizing some potentially good counter-attacking opportunities

Now on the defensive side:

- while much higher DL makes sense in possession football, I fear that it could be a bit too risky for a team like WBA

- and then you have LOE set to standard, but it in fact should be higher if you are to play a possession style

- which together brings us to a conclusion - both DL and LOE should be set to higher (or higher DL and much higher LOE, given that you play with a multi-strata formation that employs a DM)

- aggressive instructions such as more urgent pressing and get stuck in can be very risky, especially when you play with a high DL and on a high-risk mentality (which already makes your style of defending aggressive enough)

- therefore, my suggestion is to leave them both on default settings

- prevent short GKD is okay

- counter-press is a possession-friendly instruction, but always be careful when you use it (think whether your players are good enough to execute it effectively and with a minimal defensive risk)

(to be continued a bit later, in my next post...)

Thank you so much for your suggestions Before seeing your post, I had changed my wingbacks from support to attack and mezzala to MC.With these changings, I played against Arsenal and the match ended in a draw, but my statistics were much better than Arsenal's.Like shoots, possession and so on.I'll apply your suggestions without any doubt, because they seem incredibly logical.But before applying, I would like to ask another question.Despite the fact that I have much more shoots (like 20-2, 25-1), possession and so on, I can't score.What's the reason for this? By the way, I'm looking forward to seeing your post

 

[Experienced Defender]

30 minutes ago, KaramazovB said:

Before seeing your post, I changed my wingbacks from support to attack and changed mezzala to MC.With these changings, I played against Arsenal and the match ended in a draw

I would never suggest playing both fullbacks as WBs on attack duty, especially not against a top team like Arsenal. I am really curious to know why did you do that in the first place? Thankfully, they did not punish you for such a risky move, but I am curious to hear your reasoning anyway.

[KaramazovB]

Just now, Experienced Defender said:

I would never suggest playing both fullbacks as WBs on attack duty, especially not against a top team like Arsenal. I am really curious to know why did you do that in the first place? Thankfully, they did not punish you for such a risky move, but I am curious to hear your reasoning anyway.

I thought that when inside forwards tend to play in the middle, they always leave spaces at their original positions.Changing wingbacks to attack duty would fill the spaces created by IFs.Because wingbacks with attack duty are more likely to fill those spaces than wingbacks with support duty, I think.That was my reasoning  Another question popped up in my mind.What is the use of AP with support duty in possesion football? And the same question for Mezzala with attacking duty.

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, KaramazovB said:

thought that when inside forwards tend to play in the middle, they always leave spaces at their original positions.Changing wingbacks to attack duty would fill the spaces created by IFs.Because wingbacks with attack duty are more likely to fill those spaces than wingbacks with support duty

That's true attacking-wise, but completely disregards the defensive side of play. Plus, the system is still one-dimensional, as you again have entirely the same roles and duties on both flanks (only now the FBs are a lot more aggressive and adventurous).

 

4 hours ago, KaramazovB said:

Another question popped up in my mind.What is the use of AP with support duty in possesion football?

Well, in possession football you don't want to rush your attacks, but to build up with some patience (unlike counter-attacking and/or fast attacking football). So if you have a PM on attack duty, his mentality will be higher, which encourages him to look for more direct and risky forward passes as soon as possible. On support duty, he will still look to play risky passes on occasion, but in a more measured manner (i.e. when the probability that a risky pass will succeed is high enough). 

 

4 hours ago, KaramazovB said:

And the same question for Mezzala with attacking duty

Mezzala does not necessarily have to be on attack duty. That's an option. In this particular case - as I already explained in my first reply - I gave him the attack duty in order to get some penetration from midfield and thus also help the lone striker get more support from deeper areas. Because I suppose you don't want to control possession purely for the sake of it?

[Experienced Defender]

As I promised yesterday: 

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

(to be continued a bit later, in my next post...)

So it's time to add some more input. 

 

23 hours ago, KaramazovB said:

I watched my first match and realized that my team can't advance in the attack, they are playing at their own field, passing, dribbling, but they can't open up the game

I would explain that by your use of both lower tempo and short passing at the same time, which needlessly slows play down too much and thus produces an overkill (except under Attacking and Very attacking mentality, in which case(s) this combo makes sense). Playing with two playmakers - especially if they are played in nearby positions (like your DLPsu and APat) - additionally contributes to this needlessly slow and somewhat sterile build-up. Therefore, retain just shorter passing, but change the tempo back to standard (default). And retain just one PM, but remove the other. More precisely, remove DLP on support from the DM position and play with a sole PM (either DLP or AP) on support duty in a CM spot.

However, the biggest problem that I potentially see here is that I am not so sure that your players - at least those from the screenshots - are optimally suited for possession-based football in terms of their attributes (especially mentals). In other words, I would advise you to consider a bit different style of play (some hybrid style, which is neither purely possession-based nor entirely counter-attacking).

But if you insist on possession football at all costs, then this is how I would set up a basic tactic with your players within a 4141dm wide system (based on my analysis of your players):

DLFsu

IFsu                                IFat

DLPsu    MEZsu

DMde

FBat    CDde    CDde    FBsu

SKde

And this is how I would use your players from the screenshots:

MCL/DLPsu - Johansen/Field - mark tighter, dribble less

MCR/MEZsu - Harper - close down more

AML/IFsu - Montero - no PIs

AMR/IFat - Phillips - no PIs

ST/DLFsu - Rodriguez - roam from position, close down more (optional/occasional PI - shoot more often)

As for your other players:

GK/SKde - Johnstone - take fewer risks

DL/FBat - Gibbs - no PIs

DR/FBsu - Mears (if he is really your best option for this position) - sit narrower, take fewer risks

DCL/CDde - Hegazi - stay wider

DCR/CDde - Adarabioyo - take fewer risks

DM/DMde - Livermore - mark tighter

Mentality and team instructions:

Positive

- shorter passing, play out of defence, default (standard) tempo, whipped crosses (optional/occasional TI - fairly narrow)

- distribute to CBs and FBs, counter

- higher LOE, standard DL, default pressing, default tackling, prevent short GKD

I think this is the safest way for a team like yours to play a possession-based style of football. If you have any questions, you are welcome 

 

[KaramazovB]

On 14/07/2019 at 18:50, Experienced Defender said:

As I promised yesterday: 

So it's time to add some more input. 

 

I would explain that by your use of both lower tempo and short passing at the same time, which needlessly slows play down too much and thus produces an overkill (except under Attacking and Very attacking mentality, in which case(s) this combo makes sense). Playing with two playmakers - especially if they are played in nearby positions (like your DLPsu and APat) - additionally contributes to this needlessly slow and somewhat sterile build-up. Therefore, retain just shorter passing, but change the tempo back to standard (default). And retain just one PM, but remove the other. More precisely, remove DLP on support from the DM position and play with a sole PM (either DLP or AP) on support duty in a CM spot.

However, the biggest problem that I potentially see here is that I am not so sure that your players - at least those from the screenshots - are optimally suited for possession-based football in terms of their attributes (especially mentals). In other words, I would advise you to consider a bit different style of play (some hybrid style, which is neither purely possession-based nor entirely counter-attacking).

But if you insist on possession football at all costs, then this is how I would set up a basic tactic with your players within a 4141dm wide system (based on my analysis of your players):

DLFsu

IFsu                                IFat

DLPsu    MEZsu

DMde

FBat    CDde    CDde    FBsu

SKde

And this is how I would use your players from the screenshots:

MCL/DLPsu - Johansen/Field - mark tighter, dribble less

MCR/MEZsu - Harper - close down more

AML/IFsu - Montero - no PIs

AMR/IFat - Phillips - no PIs

ST/DLFsu - Rodriguez - roam from position, close down more (optional/occasional PI - shoot more often)

As for your other players:

GK/SKde - Johnstone - take fewer risks

DL/FBat - Gibbs - no PIs

DR/FBsu - Mears (if he is really your best option for this position) - sit narrower, take fewer risks

DCL/CDde - Hegazi - stay wider

DCR/CDde - Adarabioyo - take fewer risks

DM/DMde - Livermore - mark tighter

Mentality and team instructions:

Positive

- shorter passing, play out of defence, default (standard) tempo, whipped crosses (optional/occasional TI - fairly narrow)

- distribute to CBs and FBs, counter

- higher LOE, standard DL, default pressing, default tackling, prevent short GKD

I think this is the safest way for a team like yours to play a possession-based style of football. If you have any questions, you are welcome 

 

Thank you so much for your efforts and experience  No, it's not problem, I can change my playing style to counter-attack or something different, but when I checked the team report first day, I saw that the team is overally good at passing, vision and so on.After this, I decided to make a possession based tactic, but any tactic different from mine is more than welcome  So, what would you suggest? What should I play? After watching some games, I can conclude that the team isn't bad at possession football.Yeah, not sufficient to dominate the league, but enough to promote  

[Continum]

On 14/07/2019 at 16:50, Experienced Defender said:

As I promised yesterday: 

So it's time to add some more input. 

 

I would explain that by your use of both lower tempo and short passing at the same time, which needlessly slows play down too much and thus produces an overkill (except under Attacking and Very attacking mentality, in which case(s) this combo makes sense). Playing with two playmakers - especially if they are played in nearby positions (like your DLPsu and APat) - additionally contributes to this needlessly slow and somewhat sterile build-up. Therefore, retain just shorter passing, but change the tempo back to standard (default). And retain just one PM, but remove the other. More precisely, remove DLP on support from the DM position and play with a sole PM (either DLP or AP) on support duty in a CM spot.

However, the biggest problem that I potentially see here is that I am not so sure that your players - at least those from the screenshots - are optimally suited for possession-based football in terms of their attributes (especially mentals). In other words, I would advise you to consider a bit different style of play (some hybrid style, which is neither purely possession-based nor entirely counter-attacking).

But if you insist on possession football at all costs, then this is how I would set up a basic tactic with your players within a 4141dm wide system (based on my analysis of your players):

DLFsu

IFsu                                IFat

DLPsu    MEZsu

DMde

FBat    CDde    CDde    FBsu

SKde

And this is how I would use your players from the screenshots:

MCL/DLPsu - Johansen/Field - mark tighter, dribble less

MCR/MEZsu - Harper - close down more

AML/IFsu - Montero - no PIs

AMR/IFat - Phillips - no PIs

ST/DLFsu - Rodriguez - roam from position, close down more (optional/occasional PI - shoot more often)

As for your other players:

GK/SKde - Johnstone - take fewer risks

DL/FBat - Gibbs - no PIs

DR/FBsu - Mears (if he is really your best option for this position) - sit narrower, take fewer risks

DCL/CDde - Hegazi - stay wider

DCR/CDde - Adarabioyo - take fewer risks

DM/DMde - Livermore - mark tighter

Mentality and team instructions:

Positive

- shorter passing, play out of defence, default (standard) tempo, whipped crosses (optional/occasional TI - fairly narrow)

- distribute to CBS and FBs, counter

- higher LOE, standard DL, default pressing, default tackling, prevent short GKD

I think this is the safest way for a team like yours to play a possession-based style of football. If you have any questions, you are welcome 

 

Could you explain your reasoning on the personal instructions?

[Experienced Defender]

18 hours ago, Continum said:

Could you explain your reasoning on the personal instructions?

Which particular ones?

[Experienced Defender]

19 hours ago, KaramazovB said:

I can change my playing style to counter-attack or something different, but when I checked the team report first day, I saw that the team is overally good at passing, vision and so on.After this, I decided to make a possession based tactic

Passing and vision are not the only attributes needed for possession football. Maybe you have better players in the squad who could play that style more effectively, but I know just those you posted the screenshots of as your preferred 11. 

 

19 hours ago, KaramazovB said:

but any tactic different from mine is more than welcome  So, what would you suggest? What should I play? After watching some games, I can conclude that the team isn't bad at possession football.Yeah, not sufficient to dominate the league, but enough to promote

I think that for now you should not make (big) changes to the current style of play. It's never a wise idea to change the tactic too much. Once you finish the season, we can possibly discuss a different style of football.

[KaramazovB]

3 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Passing and vision are not the only attributes needed for possession football. Maybe you have better players in the squad who could play that style more effectively, but I know just those you posted the screenshots of as your preferred 11. 

 

I think that for now you should not make (big) changes to the current style of play. It's never a wise idea to change the tactic too much. Once you finish the season, we can possibly discuss a different style of football.

Okay, I'm doing well so far, 10 wins, 1 draw and 1 lose.But the problem is that the team can't creat chances, doesn't play good football.If I promote to the Premier Division, then we can talk about new tactic  I've applied some of your suggestions and they seem to work well.

[Continum]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Which particular ones?

All of them. Always interesting in hearing the reasoning. I bet I'll learn a thing or two.

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, Continum said:

All of them. Always interesting in hearing the reasoning. I bet I'll learn a thing or two

I really don't have time to go so deep into details, but can give you some examples that should help you understand the logic. Some PIs are related specifically to a player used within the system, i.e. his attributes. For example, if a player (especially defender or defensively-minded midfielder) has poor passing (vision, decisions), I may tell him to take fewer risks, whereas otherwise this PI would not be necessary).

The other type of PIs have to do with the tactical style you want to play. For example, you can tell an IF to sit narrower to encourage the FB/WB behind him to make overlaps (without actually using an Overlap TI). 

There are also PIs that can be deliberately used to somewhat counteract a certain TI. For example, I may use the Work ball into box TI, but at the same time tell my FBs to cross more often (or some of the midfielders and forwards to shoot more often).

And so on...

 

[Continum]

8 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

I really don't have time to go so deep into details, but can give you some examples that should help you understand the logic. Some PIs are related specifically to a player used within the system, i.e. his attributes. For example, if a player (especially defender or defensively-minded midfielder) has poor passing (vision, decisions), I may tell him to take fewer risks, whereas otherwise this PI would not be necessary).

The other type of PIs have to do with the tactical style you want to play. For example, you can tell an IF to sit narrower to encourage the FB/WB behind him to make overlaps (without actually using an Overlap TI). 

There are also PIs that can be deliberately used to somewhat counteract a certain TI. For example, I may use the Work ball into box TI, but at the same time tell my FBs to cross more often (or some of the midfielders and forwards to shoot more often).

And so on...

 

Makes sense. Thank you!