Tactical IQ = -2

[Mr_Demus]

51 minutes ago, permanentquandary said:

By the way if you feel like the BBM is not giving you enough threat in the final third, try selecting the Get Further Forward PI.

I find that often it's better to play support duties but tell players you would have normally given attack duties to get further forward. That way they take less risks on the ball, are more available for passes and drag defenders away from their positions but they will also make selective runs in behind.

That makes sense. Will see how it goes. 

I will post an updated tactic after tuck in time

[Mr_Demus]

This is where I am at now.

PI's:

Close down more - ST, AML, AMR, MCR, MCL

Take fewer risks - MCL

[Experienced Defender]

53 minutes ago, Mr_Demus said:

PI's:

Close down more - ST, AML, AMR, MCR, MCL

If you want to use a full split block, then better drop the LOE by a notch so as to improve your compactness. But I am not sure if your players are good enough for this full split block anyway. Perhaps the lighter version would make more sense for your team specifically.

I don't know, but maybe you are asking of your players more than they are actually capable of. 

[Mr_Demus]

7 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

If you want to use a full split block, then better drop the LOE by a notch so as to improve your compactness. But I am not sure if your players are good enough for this full split block anyway. Perhaps the lighter version would make more sense for your team specifically.

I don't know, but maybe you are asking of your players more than they are actually capable of. 

With the lighter version, do you mean only ST and most advanced CM?

[Experienced Defender]

Just now, Mr_Demus said:

With the lighter version, do you mean only ST and most advanced CM?

Yes. But in this particular case, I would go with the BBM, rather than the AP (even though the AP is nominally considered a bit more attack-minded role than BBM). 

[Mr_Demus]

Just now, Experienced Defender said:

Yes. But in this particular case, I would go with the BBM, rather than the AP (even though the AP is nominally considered a bit more attack-minded role than BBM). 

Ah, cool. Will try that.

Still only close down more? No tighter marking etc.?

[Experienced Defender]

Just now, Mr_Demus said:

Still only close down more? No tighter marking etc.?

No tight marking. You might consider hard tackling (along with close down more), but make sure the player can tackle effectively and without getting many yellow (let alone red) cards. But start with closing down only and then see if hard tackling needs to be added or not. 

[Mr_Demus]

Just wanted to share some encouraging news.

We played our first league match with this setup.

PI's: 

ST - Close Down More

MCL - Close Down More, Take Fewer Risks, Get Further Forward

 

Went fairly well.

We are in a 12 team league. We are predicted 5th. OB are predicted 8th, so I should be the better team, but this was never on the cards. An overall excellent performance. Plenty of chances, good defensive effort. We didn't have a huge amount of possession, which is what we are aiming for, but when we use the ball like this, I'll take it. I'll keep an eye on it though.

I will still watch for potential flaws and such, but a great start to the season. And the first time in more than 100 matches on this save where I have scored more than 4 goals.

[Feddo]

Interesting thread to follow, I've had similar issues, but with a far better team (Arsenal) 

I ended up with a similar tactic. I do put a ap on the flanks fairly regularly to fill in the gap behind the dlf-a. Always combined with a bwm in cm on the same side.

But I always play with a bwm, no mather what the tactic is. Can't help myself

[GianniM]

That's looking a lot like what I'm working with at the moment:

And very succesfully. 

Pacey fullbacks provide lots of assists. I used to have Borna Sosa on the left FBa who found my right winger a lot. He wanted to go to a bigger club so I sold him to PSG and brought in Garske. Somehow he's finding the CF more often. 
HB with good positioning and work rate.
AP has lots of key passes, mostly to the wide players who then assist. His assists are mostly corners and free kicks. Gets into the box sometimes too. 
The CM either recycling or getting into the box. 
A fairly well-rounded CF. 

Sometimes I use the right WB as an IWBa, with the AP on support. He's helping in the build-up then and regularly finding himself in a good position at the edge of the box. But you're loosing width then. 

I don't tell my players to close down more individually, but I'm using the opposition instructions to close down their wide players and mark the creative central players. 

[Mr_Demus]

So, in the 5-1 match, OB played an adventurous 532, and chances were plenty for me. In the two other games I have faced more defensive teams with 4 at the back, and I still have a lot of chances, but they are from far out and of low quality. 

How do I counter that? 

[GianniM]

Standard LOE may help to draw them out a bit, so you create a bit more space to attack. Same if you go wider. 

Having the AP on attack duty may help as well. 

Sometimes I change the midfield. Remove the DM and have a CMd - DLPs - AMC (usually a shadow striker). Then I do use a higher LOE and prevent short GK dist. 

Edit - also in my experience the DLF combined with all those wide players pumping in crosses wasn't the best choice. My striker as a DLF was just not getting in the box when there was a cross coming in. 

Edited July 26, 2020 by GianniM

[Mr_Demus]

2 hours ago, GianniM said:

Standard LOE may help to draw them out a bit, so you create a bit more space to attack. Same if you go wider. 

Having the AP on attack duty may help as well. 

Sometimes I change the midfield. Remove the DM and have a CMd - DLPs - AMC (usually a shadow striker). Then I do use a higher LOE and prevent short GK dist. 

Edit - also in my experience the DLF combined with all those wide players pumping in crosses wasn't the best choice. My striker as a DLF was just not getting in the box when there was a cross coming in. 

Thanks for the advice.

 

It's actually working. It might not always bed the DLF, but players are there to lay it off to the DLF if he arrives late, or take the shots themselves

[Feddo]

When playing against defensive sides that play with 1 or 2 dm's I usually switch my DLF to AF. Because the area where you want your DLF to operate is full and there's little to no room for him to do its thing. Resulting in lots of shots being blocked, or from to far or endless playing around without really achieving something. 

By switching to a more aggressive role your forward will push the dline back and thus creating space for your runners. Also depending on the kind of forward he is he might be usefull as target in the air. 

 

[Mr_Demus]

11 hours ago, Feddo said:

When playing against defensive sides that play with 1 or 2 dm's I usually switch my DLF to AF. Because the area where you want your DLF to operate is full and there's little to no room for him to do its thing. Resulting in lots of shots being blocked, or from to far or endless playing around without really achieving something. 

By switching to a more aggressive role your forward will push the dline back and thus creating space for your runners. Also depending on the kind of forward he is he might be usefull as target in the air. 

 

Will try that the next time I encounter such a team

[Mr_Demus]

After 10 league games, I will update with a small "the season so far".

We have 6 wins, 1 draw and 3 losses. Two of the losses were against better opposition. The last one was a 50-50 game, which we lost 0-1 on a late goal in a game where we dominated every aspect. We have two big victories (5-1 and 3-1) against teams who are roughly as good as we are, and who we punished for playing adventurous. Otherwise, it has been 2-0, 1-0, 1-0, 1-0. 

Home stats: PLD 5 W 5 D 0 L 0 9-2

Away stats: PLD 5 W1 D 1 L 3 3-6

It would seem like, our apporach is not that good away from home, but our away games have been much harder than the home games. I am very interested to see, how it will go in the other half of the season, when the games are reversed.

I may have to look at a more cynical approach for away games.

 

How do I make it more cynical?

I would guess dropping LOE and DL to standard could either do the trick or be part of the solution.

[Feddo]

To make it more cynical start with expecting to loose because everything you will try doesnt really change anything 😜 

Their are a couple of questions you might want to ask yourself before you change your plan. All about why don't we win the games. 

1 are we supposed to be winning? 

2 are we fit enough to play (are they're injuries and or are we to fatigued) 

3 do we score too little

4 do they score too much

5 can we keep the ball

1 if the answer is no then it's not a problem with the tactic but with the quality of your team. You can offcourse over achieve and then the answer lies within answers  3 to 5

To answer those question I would suggest you rewatch the first half of the season. Find out what's happening usually works better without the adrenaline of the match. Just watch a little bit more then the goals (comprehensive?), don't know the English term for it. Take notes about where the goals come from, set pieces, crosses from the flanks etc. And when they occurred. Do the same with your own goals. 

And adjust your tactic making sure you won't give up your scoring threat. And if you found out theres a specific moment in the match you concede the most goals only change your approach for that periode.

If for example you concede a lot in the first 15 minutes, then be cautious at start. Let them do their thing and when the slow down a bit it's your time to put the pressure on. Or if you find out de dribble thrue the middle see if you can decrease the amount of space they have. Something I usually do is start with players that are more defensive solid without changing anything about the tactic. But just the fact that a player is less likely to make a mistake or more likely kills an attack can make the difference. 

I wouldnt change to much to be honest because what you've got works pretty well. Better teams will always give you a problem, definitely if your playing at their home. And if you can't find a pattern then don't change anything. 

[summatsupeer]

7 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

I would guess dropping LOE and DL to standard could either do the trick or be part of the solution.

Why change either of these?  Are teams playing in behind you that its a problem?

Don't just assume being deeper is better, sometimes more pressure is needed but depends on the big picture.  Sometimes its personnel and not tactical choices for the game that might of made a difference.  Don't just change things for the sake of it, the change needs to be to fix a specific issue you've seen or you'll forever be tweaking.

[mikcheck]

Em 26/07/2020 em 21:42, Feddo disse:

By switching to a more aggressive role your forward will push the dline back and thus creating space for your runners. Also depending on the kind of forward he is he might be usefull as target in the air. 

I think I've heard from Rashidi that the bold it's not true. Playing a more aggressive role won't make their defensive line deeper per se.

Plus that doesn't make sense to me. If you want to create space for runners, why would you use a more aggressive role there and why would you want them to be deeper?  If there's something I wish for, is the other team to play a normal or higher line.

Edited July 27, 2020 by mikcheck

[Feddo]

1 hour ago, mikcheck said:

I think I've heard from Rashidi that the bold it's not true. Playing a more aggressive role won't make their defensive line deeper per se.

That could be true. Maybe it's just that dropping deep means the striker runs into the dm. 

What I do know is that it helps me, the playing field opens up a bit and I usually become more dangerous by doing this. 

[Feddo]

@mikcheck I am curious now about why it helps me, so will definitely look into that

[Mr_Demus]

12 hours ago, Feddo said:

To make it more cynical start with expecting to loose because everything you will try doesnt really change anything 😜 

Their are a couple of questions you might want to ask yourself before you change your plan. All about why don't we win the games. 

1 are we supposed to be winning? 

2 are we fit enough to play (are they're injuries and or are we to fatigued) 

3 do we score too little

4 do they score too much

5 can we keep the ball

1 if the answer is no then it's not a problem with the tactic but with the quality of your team. You can offcourse over achieve and then the answer lies within answers  3 to 5

To answer those question I would suggest you rewatch the first half of the season. Find out what's happening usually works better without the adrenaline of the match. Just watch a little bit more then the goals (comprehensive?), don't know the English term for it. Take notes about where the goals come from, set pieces, crosses from the flanks etc. And when they occurred. Do the same with your own goals. 

And adjust your tactic making sure you won't give up your scoring threat. And if you found out theres a specific moment in the match you concede the most goals only change your approach for that periode.

If for example you concede a lot in the first 15 minutes, then be cautious at start. Let them do their thing and when the slow down a bit it's your time to put the pressure on. Or if you find out de dribble thrue the middle see if you can decrease the amount of space they have. Something I usually do is start with players that are more defensive solid without changing anything about the tactic. But just the fact that a player is less likely to make a mistake or more likely kills an attack can make the difference. 

I wouldnt change to much to be honest because what you've got works pretty well. Better teams will always give you a problem, definitely if your playing at their home. And if you can't find a pattern then don't change anything. 

@1: No, I am obviously not looking for ways to win matches, that we can't win. I am simply looking for ways, where I might pull off an upset, instead of being able to predict a 2/3-0 scoreline, and 25-2 in number of shots. 

9 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

Why change either of these?  Are teams playing in behind you that its a problem?

Don't just assume being deeper is better, sometimes more pressure is needed but depends on the big picture.  Sometimes its personnel and not tactical choices for the game that might of made a difference.  Don't just change things for the sake of it, the change needs to be to fix a specific issue you've seen or you'll forever be tweaking.

Because what I see against bigger teams, especially away, is that they beat us over the top because they are more willing to play attacking football. So I assumed that dropping those two might make us better at defending. As it is right now, if I am playing away to one of the two big teams in the league, I lose 2/3-0 and they have more than 20 shots and I have less than 5. I am not that much worse than them, so obviously something is off. And often it is closer to 4-0 than 3-1.

[summatsupeer]

8 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

Because what I see against bigger teams, especially away, is that they beat us over the top because they are more willing to play attacking football. So I assumed that dropping those two might make us better at defending. As it is right now, if I am playing away to one of the two big teams in the league, I lose 2/3-0 and they have more than 20 shots and I have less than 5. I am not that much worse than them, so obviously something is off. And often it is closer to 4-0 than 3-1.

Is the ball going over the top because of lack of pressure higher up the pitch?  If you drop deeper are you just going to give up more of the ball?

That might reduce number of clear chances you give up, will it help you create chances though?  

[Mr_Demus]

3 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

Is the ball going over the top because of lack of pressure higher up the pitch?  If you drop deeper are you just going to give up more of the ball?

That might reduce number of clear chances you give up, will it help you create chances though?  

I just played the by far best team in the league. At home though. I have a terrible record against them. I managed to snag a 1-1 draw, and keep their dangerous attack at bay.

 

For that game, I dropped LOE and DL to standard and removed Counter press. Added counter.

[GianniM]

7 minutes ago, Mr_Demus said:

I dropped LOE and DL to standard

When I face opposition with really quick forwards that's what I do. For example Sevilla in my save plays with a 4-2-3-1 and those four forwards all have pace and acceleration 16+. I struggle to win then though. 

[Mr_Demus]

If we, just for a minute, assume that it is not my players, but my tactics: How do I make my team score more goals?

I have so far scored 22 goals in 20 matches, which is clearly not enough.

 

This is my current setup in games where I am the clear favourite. The DR will sometimes be Automatic, the AP will sometimes be Support and sometimes I will change the W A to IW S/A

[Experienced Defender]

You have an obvious contradiction in this tactic - instructions are basically possession-oriented, whereas the setup of roles and duties is rather suited to a counter-attacking or fast attacking style (but is also fairly unbalanced at that).

So that's the primary issue you should look to address first. Define your style of play clearly, and then work from there. But do not try to impose on your players a style of football they are not suited/good enough for. 

[Mr_Demus]

4 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

You have an obvious contradiction in this tactic - instructions are basically possession-oriented, whereas the setup of roles and duties is rather suited to a counter-attacking or fast attacking style (but is also fairly unbalanced at that).

So that's the primary issue you should look to address first. Define your style of play clearly, and then work from there. But do not try to impose on your players a style of football they are not suited/good enough for. 

See, I did not know that.

As I have stated previously, I am trying to build something that can keep possession, and still have an attacking intent. Then I have tried to adapt from the advice in this thread, and the above screenshot is where I am currently at.

If I have analyzed my squad correctly, I actually do have the players suited for that style, if you compare to the rest of the league. 

[Experienced Defender]

Well, I am not familiar with the Danish league, so maybe I am wrong. But from what I saw in the screenshots of your player profiles, they didn't look good enough to play a style of football that is more demanding IMHO. They probably can play some sort of possession-based hybrid style, but your tactic looks a lot more ambitious than that and - as I already mentioned - has an obvious contradiction between instructions and the roles/duties setup.

[permanentquandary]

A combo of:
Dribble Less
Lower Tempo

usually does the trick for possession.

Have you considered using an IWB on DR slot? Winger stays wide, so IWB comes inside. That will add to more ball possession. I find the support duty tends to sit on top of other players too much. IWB(D) may cover in DB for the HB(D) who slots into the back line, IWB(A) will surge ahead of the AP and BBM at times or arrive late into the box but overall by a big help in possession of the ball whatever duty you choose.

Edited August 1, 2020 by permanentquandary

[Mr_Demus]

8 hours ago, permanentquandary said:

A combo of:
Dribble Less
Lower Tempo

usually does the trick for possession.

Have you considered using an IWB on DR slot? Winger stays wide, so IWB comes inside. That will add to more ball possession. I find the support duty tends to sit on top of other players too much. IWB(D) may cover in DB for the HB(D) who slots into the back line, IWB(A) will surge ahead of the AP and BBM at times or arrive late into the box but overall by a big help in possession of the ball whatever duty you choose.

Isn't the IWB a quite demanding role? 

The TI's might be worth a shot. 

9 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Well, I am not familiar with the Danish league, so maybe I am wrong. But from what I saw in the screenshots of your player profiles, they didn't look good enough to play a style of football that is more demanding IMHO. They probably can play some sort of possession-based hybrid style, but your tactic looks a lot more ambitious than that and - as I already mentioned - has an obvious contradiction between instructions and the roles/duties setup.

Which roles are wrong, then? The AP I guess, but who else? 

Let's put it the other way around. I might have chosen a style, that is not suitable. How do I change things up to make it more suitable, without changing everything? 

[Mr_Demus]

I just thought, that it could be a good idea to post an updated squad. Players have been sold and bought, and youth players have developed. (I have more players, but they are either leaving in 3 months or only used in an emergency)

Comparison:
 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Goalkeepers:
 

Spoiler

 

 

Defenders:
 

Spoiler

 

 

Midfielders (incl. wingers):
 

Spoiler

 

 

Strikers:
 

Spoiler

 

 

As I have previously stated, I would greatly appreciate if anyone could take a look, and show me/tell me how they would play with this exact squad and where they would strengthen. Style and formation really doesn't matter. I think I have become too attached to certain players and a certain formation, so a pair of fresh eyes on the subject would really help

 

[Experienced Defender]

6 hours ago, Mr_Demus said:

Which roles are wrong, then? The AP I guess, but who else? 

No role is wrong (or right) per se. It can only be wrong (or right) within an overall tactical setup. AP on attack is a very good role for fast attacking and/or counter-attacking football. However, it is one of the most demanding PM roles and therefore requires a player who is really very capable both technically and mentally + needs to be relatively fast. 

But even if you have such a player, the roles around him are problematic. First look at the right side/flank - along with the AP on attack, you also have an attacking winger and attack-minded fullback (WBsu). So how (who) do you mean to protect that flank defensively?

Then look at the CM duo - with the attacking AP and a runner (BBM), it looks pretty shaky. You do not need to have (too) many players on attack duties or/and in attack-minded/adventurous roles in order to be potent in attack. 

The left flank is also not well protected - an attacking fullback naturally overlapping the IF has no adequate defensive cover in the midfield, because you use a runner role (BBM) instead of a holding or covering one (DLP, CAR, BWM). 

I already explained the contradiction between your possession-friendly instructions and fast-attack oriented setup of roles and duties in my previous comment, so there is no need to repeat myself.

[Mr_Demus]

5 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

No role is wrong (or right) per se. It can only be wrong (or right) within an overall tactical setup. AP on attack is a very good role for fast attacking and/or counter-attacking football. However, it is one of the most demanding PM roles and therefore requires a player who is really very capable both technically and mentally + needs to be relatively fast. 

But even if you have such a player, the roles around him are problematic. First look at the right side/flank - along with the AP on attack, you also have an attacking winger and attack-minded fullback (WBsu). So how (who) do you mean to protect that flank defensively?

Then look at the CM duo - with the attacking AP and a runner (BBM), it looks pretty shaky. You do not need to have (too) many players on attack duties or/and in attack-minded/adventurous roles in order to be potent in attack. 

The left flank is also not well protected - an attacking fullback naturally overlapping the IF has no adequate defensive cover in the midfield, because you use a runner role (BBM) instead of a holding or covering one (DLP, CAR, BWM). 

I already explained the contradiction between your possession-friendly instructions and fast-attack oriented setup of roles and duties in my previous comment, so there is no need to repeat myself.

I know there are no right/wrong roles. I obviously meant for this setup. That is why I specifically mentioned the AP, as you have mentioned (either in this thread or another) that they are not good for possession oriented systems. The reason for having the BBM/AP combo was, that I didn't have much central support in attack.

[Mr_Demus]

I am entering my fifth season, and I have decided that it will become a make or break season for the save. If I don't see any progress, I will quit. I have thought hard about a lot of the things said in this thread, and what I have seen, and I have decided to try a small revolution. Possession has worked so-so, but I want to be better than so-so, which I should be capable of. I have manged expectations roughly, but I have seen so much that could be better. As this might be my last season here, let's go out with a bang.

I will try to develop a more direct attacking approach, and hopefully it will work.

This is my starting point.

PI's:

MCR - Get further forward, close down more

DR - Cross from deep

[Mr_Demus]

I have changed the midfield roles a bit.

DLP -> HB

BBM -> AP S/A

BWM -> BBM

Changes made to populate my central attacking area a bit more.

Also changed

W A -> W S

 

Moved passing slider to standard, higher tempo added, high DL and high LOE. Sometimes counter press. Changes based on what I saw in pre season.

[Mr_Demus]

I have officially given up. I could get nothing to work.

[Bitner]

22 horas atrás, Mr_Demus disse:

I have officially given up. I could get nothing to work.

I've read everything to get to this conclusion. In anyway, i'll show my 4-3-3 Wide who plays posession style, as you may want some inspiration from what others are doing. Bear in mind it's a formation who have won titles in Korea, China and South Africa. (i'm saying this because i didn't played with some star players and stuff, so it was suited to a good team to their league, but not good overall)




Cheers,
Bitner 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Bitner

[HanziZoloman]

On 08/08/2020 at 20:11, Mr_Demus said:

I have officially given up. I could get nothing to work.

Haha I‘ve been at this point so many times... 

don‘t get mad ... just think about everything the Guys here have said and then start a-new. There is a very interesting thread which is describing to keep things simple 442 style. Works fine

[Mr_Demus]

On 09/08/2020 at 22:58, HanziZoloman said:

Haha I‘ve been at this point so many times... 

don‘t get mad ... just think about everything the Guys here have said and then start a-new. There is a very interesting thread which is describing to keep things simple 442 style. Works fine

Yeah, but apparently the team is not good enough to play any style. If I should follow every single piece of advice in this thread.

I spent 4½ seasons, and I could get things to work so-so, but it never came to a point where I felt something just worked and clicked, and I could actually enjoy the save. I ended up going into every game only looking for tactics, and not actually enjoying the matches because I needed to focus so much on how it played out. When you play more than 100 matches like that it gets tedious. 

Another problem I faced is that the Danish league is unbalanced. I tried to keep a lot of Danish players, but the other teams went and loaned insanely talented PL teenagers from France and Spain. 

[HanziZoloman]

On 11/08/2020 at 12:48, Mr_Demus said:

Yeah, but apparently the team is not good enough to play any style. If I should follow every single piece of advice in this thread.

I spent 4½ seasons, and I could get things to work so-so, but it never came to a point where I felt something just worked and clicked, and I could actually enjoy the save. I ended up going into every game only looking for tactics, and not actually enjoying the matches because I needed to focus so much on how it played out. When you play more than 100 matches like that it gets tedious. 

Another problem I faced is that the Danish league is unbalanced. I tried to keep a lot of Danish players, but the other teams went and loaned insanely talented PL teenagers from France and Spain. 

Know what you mean... I am playing Scottish League with the Hearts. It is insane to get past Celtic. To keep things simple has been good to me as my players are not as good as Celtic or even Motherwell of course I‘ll try to have a Scottish Irish squad... which makes things even harder.

Danish League sounds great! Try a simple 442 it works wonders sometimes and I can enjoy my save now much more