4-3-3 Bayer Leverkusen, Advice?

[jax9320]

So I won the league in my 1st season with Leverkusen, but that was down to the defense; conceded 16 goals. Always had a real problem scoring goals. The 1st screenshot is the tactic I used that season. The player instructions were; Tah and Bailey stay wider, Wendell cross and dribble less, and Havertz take more risks. I played a possession game, and I wanted to have a few different routes to goal so we weren't one dimensional. Here are the ideas;

 

1. The main one was to overload the left side of the pitch to force the opposition to commit more players to this area, and leave the two wide players on the right free. In theory the IWs, RPM and FBs on the left would be supported by the DLFa dropping deep, the DLPd drifting to that side of the pitch (as I believe playmakers move towards the ball more??) and the left BPD, who has the PI stay wider. This would mean we keep possession easily on the left, pulling the opposition to that side, and creating space on the right. This definitely worked, but I feel I'm not using the resulting space on the right correctly.
2. My 2nd route to goal is for Havertz to play through balls to the striker, as the two wide players on the right keeping wide should stretch the defense to create space for that. This happened only a few times. I have Havertz as a central midfielder with the take more risks PI, and not a playmaker because I don't want the team to pass to him instead of creating the overload on the left. Also, I realize the DLFa role doesn't make a lot of runs in behind, but Edouard has 15 off the ball, and last season it was Kevin Volland playing there, and he has 17 off the ball, so I thought that would still work.
3. My 3rd route to goal is for Havertz to arrive late in the box to get on the end of cutbacks, and I feel like the CMs role is a late runner. I am currently training him to learn this PPM, but he hasn't acquired it yet.

 

So that was my original tactic. The 2nd screenshot is how I have started the second season, having made a few changes to try to score more goals. The same 3 ideas for routes to goal, but this hasn't worked at all. I made Havertz a playmaker because I felt I was wasting him as a CMs. And I have the left back as a WBs now, still with cross less and dribble less, because I like how they play through balls from out wide, but I will change this. I've also changed the RB to a WBs because I still want him to get forward a lot but I don't want him to dribble so much. He has the PIs dribble less, cross more, cross from deep, stay wider, and take more risks.

 

So guys please tell me what you think I could do better, and where I'm going wrong, any help is much appreciated.

 

[wixxi]

7 minutes ago, jax9320 said:

So I won the league in my 1st season with Leverkusen, but that was down to the defense; conceded 16 goals. Always had a real problem scoring goals. The 1st screenshot is the tactic I used that season. The player instructions were; Tah and Bailey stay wider, Wendell cross and dribble less, and Havertz take more risks. I played a possession game, and I wanted to have a few different routes to goal so we weren't one dimensional. Here are the ideas;

 

1. The main one was to overload the left side of the pitch to force the opposition to commit more players to this area, and leave the two wide players on the right free. In theory the IWs, RPM and FBs on the left would be supported by the DLFa dropping deep, the DLPd drifting to that side of the pitch (as I believe playmakers move towards the ball more??) and the left BPD, who has the PI stay wider. This would mean we keep possession easily on the left, pulling the opposition to that side, and creating space on the right. This definitely worked, but I feel I'm not using the resulting space on the right correctly.
2. My 2nd route to goal is for Havertz to play through balls to the striker, as the two wide players on the right keeping wide should stretch the defense to create space for that. This happened only a few times. I have Havertz as a central midfielder with the take more risks PI, and not a playmaker because I don't want the team to pass to him instead of creating the overload on the left. Also, I realize the DLFa role doesn't make a lot of runs in behind, but Edouard has 15 off the ball, and last season it was Kevin Volland playing there, and he has 17 off the ball, so I thought that would still work.
3. My 3rd route to goal is for Havertz to arrive late in the box to get on the end of cutbacks, and I feel like the CMs role is a late runner. I am currently training him to learn this PPM, but he hasn't acquired it yet.

 

So that was my original tactic. The 2nd screenshot is how I have started the second season, having made a few changes to try to score more goals. The same 3 ideas for routes to goal, but this hasn't worked at all. I made Havertz a playmaker because I felt I was wasting him as a CMs. And I have the left back as a WBs now, still with cross less and dribble less, because I like how they play through balls from out wide, but I will change this. I've also changed the RB to a WBs because I still want him to get forward a lot but I don't want him to dribble so much. He has the PIs dribble less, cross more, cross from deep, stay wider, and take more risks.

 

So guys please tell me what you think I could do better, and where I'm going wrong, any help is much appreciated.

 

So you want the team to overload the left and unlock the right with a quick ball switch, but you have 3 central playmaker roles + very narrow TI? Would definitely remove the very narrow TI and try the LCM as a lone playmaker so the ball gravitates to that side more. As for changing Havertz to a playmaker, in what way did you feel you were 'wasting him'? I would assume with the way you want to set up he's not going to be particularly involved in the build up on the left, and the CM-s with PIs should have sufficed for the through balls you wanted him to play. As for him being a late runner, you could try him as a B2B, or even as a CM-a to help encourage that behaviour until he learns the PPM.

[jax9320]

7 minutes ago, wixxi said:

you have 3 central playmaker roles + very narrow TI? Would definitely remove the very narrow TI and try the LCM as a lone playmaker so the ball gravitates to that side more.

I thought having the defensive midfielder as a DLP would mean he would move towards the ball more, and assist with the overload on the left, even though he would receive the ball more. Is it not the case that playmakers move towards the ball? I will definitely try changing him, maybe just DMd? As far as going very narrow, I thought the players being closer to each other was necessary for the shorter passing, and it would help with maintaining possession on the left for long enough to pull the opposition in? Would you suggest standard width?

[wixxi]

10 minutes ago, jax9320 said:

I thought having the defensive midfielder as a DLP would mean he would move towards the ball more, and assist with the overload on the left, even though he would receive the ball more. Is it not the case that playmakers move towards the ball? I will definitely try changing him, maybe just DMd? As far as going very narrow, I thought the players being closer to each other was necessary for the shorter passing, and it would help with maintaining possession on the left for long enough to pull the opposition in? Would you suggest standard width?

I believe the playmaker roles just cause teammates to look to pass the ball to them more often than other players, but does not cause the playmaker to move towards the ball. Using the DM as a DLP could be useful as an outlet to quickly switch the ball from one flank to another, but I would just pay attention to make sure that the team doesn't recycle the ball to him more than necessary. An alternative to this could be to use a DM-D or DM-S with more risky passes or more direct passes as PIs, but again you would have to watch matches to ensure he doesn't hoof the ball away in build up. As for the width, in my opinion it would be better to leave it on standard since you would want to maintain spacing between players to ensure that multiple options can't be covered/pressed by a single defender, and I think the role setup should allow for the overload to occur often enough on the left without it. Of course, if you have players who are capable of playing in tight spaces with possession and they have PPMs to aid this such as 'plays one-twos' you could certainly play with narrow, but personally I think it's more conducive to possession to allow for optimal spacing between players.

Edited June 16, 2020 by wixxi

[Experienced Defender]

Looks like a possession-for-the-sake-of-possession type of tactic: shortest possible passing + slowest possible tempo + PoD + WBiB + hold shape + extremely aggressive defending + too many playmakers. In short, overkill after overkill. 

[jax9320]

@wixxi I'll definitely give that a go with the DM. But as far as the width goes, how can they pass shorter if the players are further apart? What is the point of playing narrow if not this, is it purely defensive? 

[jax9320]

@Experienced Defender Thanks for the input, I think that's a trap I fall into all too often. Definitely getting rid of 2 of the playmakers makes sense, and maybe I will take WBIB off. I like the aggressive defending and playing out of defense though, these work for me.  As for the others, I have a few questions. In what ways am I holding shape, I don't have be more disciplined on or anything like that? And also what is the point in low tempo if not for short passing? I like the idea of maintaining control of the game and keeping the ball, thus drawing the opposition onto me, in this case towards my left overload. Also, what's your take on the width? 

 

[Experienced Defender]

14 hours ago, jax9320 said:

In what ways am I holding shape, I don't have be more disciplined on or anything like that?

I was referring to the Hold shape team instruction you are using in your tactic(s) along with all other possession-friendly instructions (plus the playmakers), which combined produce tactical overkill. 

As for the Be more disciplined, you definitely don't need it, given what you described as your tactical issue(s). But I don't understand why did you mention the BMD instruction in the first place, when there had been no discussion about it? And btw it's a different type of instruction than Hold shape. 

14 hours ago, jax9320 said:

And also what is the point in low tempo if not for short passing? I like the idea of maintaining control of the game and keeping the ball, thus drawing the opposition onto me, in this case towards my left overload

I was not talking about low tempo and/or short passing per se. I was talking about the tactical overkill of much lower tempo and much shorter passing used at the same time - and again, along with a number of other instructions that also tend to slow play down. The problem is when one insists on applying too many tactical elements - whether roles/duties or instructions - that are all aimed at basically the same tactical objective (controling possession in this case). That is called tactical overkill and is generally counter-productive, regardless of a style of football you want to play. You can play possession football - or any other style of play - without going into any kind of extremes (i.e. overkill). That's the point. 

 

15 hours ago, jax9320 said:

Also, what's your take on the width?

Like everything, it depends on the tactical context. In this particular case, given that you struggle to break down defenses and score goals, the (very) narrow width is certainly not a good idea, because it limits your players' options in attack. But it does not mean that you should switch to the opposite extreme and go with extremely wide. Absolutely not. I would leave it on default and possibly tweak it a bit during a given match as I see fit, but only if/when it really makes sense (not just for the sake of it). 

[jax9320]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

I was referring to the Hold shape team instruction you are using

Ah I had actually barely noticed that one, as it's in transition. I never planned to focus much on countering so the transitions didn't come into it for me, only counter pressing. It makes sense to me though, not to always look for the counter when we win the ball back, if we want to play possession. Would you suggest no TI there, and let the players decide on a case by case basis?

 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Why did you mention the BMD instruction in the first place, when there had been no discussion about it? And btw it's a different type of instruction than Hold shape. 

 Oh I wasn't thinking of adding BMD, I was just confused when you said Hold shape, I had forgotten about that instruction altogether. Would BMD make them Hold shape? 

 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

along with a number of other instructions that also tend to slow play down. You can play possession football without going into any kind of extremes (i.e. overkill). That's the point.  

I totally get what you mean here about overkill.  I have only had time to play a couple games, but I have changed it to just one playmaker, removed WBIB, upped the tempo to lower, and upped the width to fairly narrow. The team played much better in these games. I will play on and see how we do, and if anything else needs to change. 

Just a couple of questions though, when you said;

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

I was not talking about low tempo and/or short passing per se.

I get what you meant, you were talking about that in combination with all the other possession elements of the tactic being overkill, but without some or all of those, short passing and low tempo go together very well, no? At least that's what I remember reading on the older FMs, in the loading screens. Can this work, hypothetically, or is it just depending on everything else in the tactic? Can any tempo work on any passing length? Also with the very narrow width setting, what kind of tactic would make that a good idea, as if not this kind then I don't understand when it wouldn be useful? Thanks again 👍👌

[Experienced Defender]

On 17/06/2020 at 18:24, jax9320 said:

Would you suggest no TI there, and let the players decide on a case by case basis?

It's usually the best idea to start with no TIs and then possibly tweak during the match as you see fit. 

 

On 17/06/2020 at 18:24, jax9320 said:

Would BMD make them Hold shape? 

As I already said, these are different types of instructions.

Be more disciplined is about limiting your players' creative freedom and freedom of movement. 

Hold shape, on the other hand, discourages the players from attempting a counter-attack when they win the ball (attacking transition) and instead encourages (more patient) positional play. 

On 17/06/2020 at 18:24, jax9320 said:

I get what you meant, you were talking about that in combination with all the other possession elements of the tactic being overkill, but without some or all of those, short passing and low tempo go together very well, no? At least that's what I remember reading on the older FMs, in the loading screens. Can this work, hypothetically, or is it just depending on everything else in the tactic?

Exactly that - depending on everything else. Because all elements of a tactic work in conjunction, not in isolation. And the team mentality automatically affects all (other) instructions, which is something you always need to keep in mind as well.