4-3-3 Poor Chance Creation + Conversion

[Snootch]

It's pre-season in my first season with Bayer Leverkusen. Below is my base tactic: 

 

Key (intended) Philosophies: 

- Keep plenty of possession 
- Win the ball back quickly when we lose it 
- Stretch defensive opposition as wide as possible 

 

Tweaks When Playing Weaker opposition: 

- Lower the line of engagement to Standard/Low/Lowest LOE + switch on Counter (in an attempt to invite the parked bus forward) 

Tweaks When Playing Stronger Opposition: 

- Place greater emphasis on possession: Work ball into box, lower tempo

 

Problems: 

- Practically no goals scored from open play in pre-season 

- Poor chance creation 

- CM(a) intended to add a deep runner to support attacks, is too often getting into the way of the RW as seen here: 
 

Average Position With Ball: 

 

 Avg position without ball: 

 

 

I'm looking for suggestions as to how I can improve this team's shape and chance creation. 

[ozilthegunner]

A few other threads (including my own) have popped up just recently all with a focus on a 4-3-3 and largely the same preferred playing style. So, there is some good stuff in the other threads you may find valuable.

As far as your specific CM/Winger problem: Does your winger have the PPM to cut inside from the right? (or either flank) Are you giving him PIs to do so? Perhaps your CWB on the right is encouraging it a bit (so he has space). But, regardless, something is causing your winger to not keep his width.

As an alternative, especially if the player does have a PPM to cut in, or you do actually desire that, is to switch the CM(a) to a MEZ(a) and the W(s) to an IW(s). I had already been playing with an IW(s) on my right side, and was encouraged to swap my CMs so that the Mez was on the same side (and on attack rather than support). I haven't got a full chance to test it out yet, but with the MEZ being told to 'stay wide' and the IW coming inside, there should be less issue of them being on each other

I also think you could do with an attack duty in your front 3... should help with penetration which is probably part of your problem. If you leave the right sided CM on attack, I'd put either the center striker on attack (I have found a CF(a) works quite well in this general setup) or the left-sided inverted winger (or both). I realize you have the CWB on attack on the left, which you may need to change, but I think you definitely want more oomph somewhere in the front 3.

[Snootch]

1 minute ago, ozilthegunner said:

A few other threads (including my own) have popped up just recently all with a focus on a 4-3-3 and largely the same preferred playing style. So, there is some good stuff in the other threads you may find valuable.

As far as your specific CM/Winger problem: Does your winger have the PPM to cut inside from the right? (or either flank) Are you giving him PIs to do so? Perhaps your CWB on the right is encouraging it a bit (so he has space). But, regardless, something is causing your winger to not keep his width.

As an alternative, especially if the player does have a PPM to cut in, or you do actually desire that, is to switch the CM(a) to a MEZ(a) and the W(s) to an IW(s). I had already been playing with an IW(s) on my right side, and was encouraged to swap my CMs so that the Mez was on the same side (and on attack rather than support). I haven't got a full chance to test it out yet, but with the MEZ being told to 'stay wide' and the IW coming inside, there should be less issue of them being on each other

I also think you could do with an attack duty in your front 3... should help with penetration which is probably part of your problem. If you leave the right sided CM on attack, I'd put either the center striker on attack (I have found a CF(a) works quite well in this general setup) or the left-sided inverted winger (or both). I realize you have the CWB on attack on the left, which you may need to change, but I think you definitely want more oomph somewhere in the front 3.

Must have missed those threads, I'll try to take a look. If you think there's any particularly valuable nugget of info in them, feel free to send my way!

As for the PPMs, I should have mentioned: Bellarabi only has a PPM to place finishes. Maybe if I change it to CM(s) + add PI of Get Further Forward? Or would that still be too conservative given my attacking problems? Will definitely change the CF to an attack duty. 

 

[AbdelBarrada]

Some suggestion: 

1) you’re playing extremely wide with positive mentality so this mainly effects your focus of attacks. You can see a lot of attacks/cross from wide areas but despite bellarabi and bailey are pacey they’re not good finishers (they have very bad attributes on decision, finishing, anticipation, composure etc) also your striker can drop off because of his role so may be you can try to play with wide or standart with

2) none of your attackers are a regular goal thread inside the box, alario drops deep, Bellarabi will cross from wide, bailey will dribble and make a shot or try to pass, your only player to attack to box is palacios and he is not very pacey so he can arrive the box late, so may be u can consider making one of the attackers to attack duty (preferably bailey because of his speed)

 

3) dont foget kerem demirbay has a “plays to wide areas” ppm so may be u can create overload at the right side of the  and kerem send a diagonal pass to Bailey (inside forward attack), while your striker  pulls one of the defender

 

the best way to analyze the chance creation is checking the shooting map at analytical data so u can see where are your shots from 

btw your tactic seems a lot of vulnerable defensively while your left full back has a bad positioning (i suppose 8 or 9) and a very aggresive role and also bailey has a bad defensive skills (workrate etc) so u can give a lot of space down your flanks especially teams that attack from wide areas

 

 

 

[DarJ]

20 hours ago, Snootch said:

Key (intended) Philosophies: 

- Keep plenty of possession 

As part of you philosophy you want to keep the ball, yet you are playing extremely wide; those two things are opposite

 

20 hours ago, Snootch said:

CM(a) intended to add a deep runner to support attacks, is too often getting into the way of the RW as seen here:

As others have mention that shouldn't happen. your winger must have a trait that makes him cut inside

20 hours ago, Snootch said:

Poor chance creation

You don't have anyone attacking the box. The CF on support would drop deep, roam around etc. same with the IF and your CM is starting from a much deeper position.

If you want your striker to be the primary goal threat change him to a CF on attack and if your want the the IW to score goals, change him to an IF on attack.

20 hours ago, Snootch said:

Stretch defensive opposition as wide as possible 

You can leave the width on default then change the W to attack then you can either leave the CM on attack and change the CWB to FB-d/IWB-d or you can change the CM to a B2B and change the CWB to FB-s/IWB-s

 

Personally I'd play like the screenshot below but that might not be too possession orientated and the left flank could be exposed but you have a HB so it should be fine

[sporadicsmiles]

Your winger is behaving strangely there though, something is making him cut inside like that. I use a CM(A) and W(S) and this is never an issue for me. So either it is a player issue or an instruction issue. Does the winger have any PIs like sits narrower? And why is he cutting inside when you do not have the ball? That seems to be the major issue. Where is he going? 

[denen123]

On 09/12/2020 at 20:43, Snootch said:

It's pre-season in my first season with Bayer Leverkusen. Below is my base tactic: 

 

Key (intended) Philosophies: 

- Keep plenty of possession 
- Win the ball back quickly when we lose it 
- Stretch defensive opposition as wide as possible 

 

Tweaks When Playing Weaker opposition: 

- Lower the line of engagement to Standard/Low/Lowest LOE + switch on Counter (in an attempt to invite the parked bus forward) 

Tweaks When Playing Stronger Opposition: 

- Place greater emphasis on possession: Work ball into box, lower tempo

 

Problems: 

- Practically no goals scored from open play in pre-season 

- Poor chance creation 

- CM(a) intended to add a deep runner to support attacks, is too often getting into the way of the RW as seen here: 
 

Average Position With Ball: 

 

 Avg position without ball: 

 

 

I'm looking for suggestions as to how I can improve this team's shape and chance creation. 

You strayed too much from what I thought was a very good 4-3-3, in terms of shape. When it comes to creating "consistency " in attack, your build-up play is most important (how you bring the ball out and how it ends up in the final third). Might come off as vague, as it can change, depending on a lot of factors, but if you notice patterns of play right from build up, you know how you play.

My issue with the tactic(shape wise) would first have been your left CM. He will occasionally be close to your CDM/DM, in build up phases, but often be higher up. This forces your team to look for too many alternatives in build up phases. In real life, managers often change according to games. If teams press you out, then go long. If they don't, then going short. Some managers(i.e I know we are bored of it, now, but yeah PEP.. lmao... he builds it up consistently with the CB's and a DM that drops deep to create a 3rd option. The fullbacks are wide enough if the keeper wishes to kick it wide and safe) go for something with more variety. However, players have to be positioned in the right spaces in order to be available, at all times.

I will also take out all your "out of possesion instructions" and keep "offside trap", higher LOE and Higher Defensive line. Distribute to fullbacks + play out of defence brings your team closer and helps create multiple options in build up phases. Leave the width on default.

All this long talk was to convince you that a HBde and a Dlpsu would have been very ideal. Then your ST as CFsu is a good role. Problem is it is a very demanding role. It is deep, but unlike a DLF, it demands a dribbler that carries it from deep to front. I, personally, have found roles like these to be more effective with Wingers/Attacking Midfielders that have decent technique & finishing. Essentially Leon Bailey would execute this role to the fullest(bar heading. But that is the sacrifice). If it is too much, then just use the ST for a more deeper hold up role(DLFatt or PFatt).

So I only changed a role. LCM. I also, changed players. 

Lastly, the out of possesion instructions are just a lot. You can tell ST, RW, LW, LCM & RCM to "close down more"(split block). ST to mark specific position = CD & RCM to mark specific position = DM(to reduce some level of passivity in the press).

Then Mentality changes for Home and Away matches. Home games I start on the front foot. "ATTACKING MENTALITY". Away games I use the "BALANCED" one. All of it is risk taking, essentially. I want to force the breakdowns on teams in Home games , but in away games I am aware of the fact that they will come to play so I reduce the risk by merely toggling the mentality bar to  "balanced". Passing and tempo reduces, so we are more Conservative with the ball, inviting our "impatient" yet "eager" opponents and then we open them up.

You can also dismiss all I wrote(which is boring and not my best English) and just study on how to create build-ups in 4-3-3 by virtue of player proximity. 

[Justified]

For some reason I see a lot of managers playing HB's this year. Have I missed why this is?  is it "just" because graphically he drops into defence and it looks "cool"?

Also, surely if you play a halfback it's to get the wide backs to be more adventurous. So why have a FBsu?

[denen123]

1 hour ago, Justified said:

For some reason I see a lot of managers playing HB's this year. Have I missed why this is?  is it "just" because graphically he drops into defence and it looks "cool"?

Also, surely if you play a halfback it's to get the wide backs to be more adventurous. So why have a FBsu?

I understand you. But the FBsu gets forward, once you're in transition. Especially when paired with a W-su on the same flank. 

[Snootch]

17 hours ago, denen123 said:

You strayed too much from what I thought was a very good 4-3-3, in terms of shape. When it comes to creating "consistency " in attack, your build-up play is most important (how you bring the ball out and how it ends up in the final third). Might come off as vague, as it can change, depending on a lot of factors, but if you notice patterns of play right from build up, you know how you play.

My issue with the tactic(shape wise) would first have been your left CM. He will occasionally be close to your CDM/DM, in build up phases, but often be higher up. This forces your team to look for too many alternatives in build up phases. In real life, managers often change according to games. If teams press you out, then go long. If they don't, then going short. Some managers(i.e I know we are bored of it, now, but yeah PEP.. lmao... he builds it up consistently with the CB's and a DM that drops deep to create a 3rd option. The fullbacks are wide enough if the keeper wishes to kick it wide and safe) go for something with more variety. However, players have to be positioned in the right spaces in order to be available, at all times.

I will also take out all your "out of possesion instructions" and keep "offside trap", higher LOE and Higher Defensive line. Distribute to fullbacks + play out of defence brings your team closer and helps create multiple options in build up phases. Leave the width on default.

All this long talk was to convince you that a HBde and a Dlpsu would have been very ideal. Then your ST as CFsu is a good role. Problem is it is a very demanding role. It is deep, but unlike a DLF, it demands a dribbler that carries it from deep to front. I, personally, have found roles like these to be more effective with Wingers/Attacking Midfielders that have decent technique & finishing. Essentially Leon Bailey would execute this role to the fullest(bar heading. But that is the sacrifice). If it is too much, then just use the ST for a more deeper hold up role(DLFatt or PFatt).

So I only changed a role. LCM. I also, changed players. 

Lastly, the out of possesion instructions are just a lot. You can tell ST, RW, LW, LCM & RCM to "close down more"(split block). ST to mark specific position = CD & RCM to mark specific position = DM(to reduce some level of passivity in the press).

Then Mentality changes for Home and Away matches. Home games I start on the front foot. "ATTACKING MENTALITY". Away games I use the "BALANCED" one. All of it is risk taking, essentially. I want to force the breakdowns on teams in Home games , but in away games I am aware of the fact that they will come to play so I reduce the risk by merely toggling the mentality bar to  "balanced". Passing and tempo reduces, so we are more Conservative with the ball, inviting our "impatient" yet "eager" opponents and then we open them up.

You can also dismiss all I wrote(which is boring and not my best English) and just study on how to create build-ups in 4-3-3 by virtue of player proximity. 

Just wanted to follow up and say wow - this was an incredibly eye opening post. The beauty is in its the simplicity of the approach. Here's a half of football I was particularly pleased with following your logic: 

 

 

 

The flexibility and variability of mentality is what particularly opened my eyes. Rather than stubbornly imposing a rigid play style with multiple out of and in possession instructions, I can encourage the play I want with balanced duties, a handful of instructions, and otherwise control it with mentality. Currently my only in possession instruction is to play it out back, transition is to distribute to CBs and FBs and counter press, and higher DL+LOE w/ offside trap. 

 

Ticking it down to cautious and you notice the shorter passing, slower tempo, generally calculated approach to the game. Attacking lets them express themselves and go full throttle. A couple of playmaker roles w/ the high line and playing out defence and it can be a possession tactic (71% !!!) without much shorter passing + work ball into box + low crosses. Wow. I feel like I've been playing FM wrong for the past 10 years. 

Edited December 13, 2020 by Snootch

[denen123]

6 hours ago, Snootch said:

Just wanted to follow up and say wow - this was an incredibly eye opening post. The beauty is in its the simplicity of the approach. Here's a half of football I was particularly pleased with following your logic: 

 

 

 

The flexibility and variability of mentality is what particularly opened my eyes. Rather than stubbornly imposing a rigid play style with multiple out of and in possession instructions, I can encourage the play I want with balanced duties, a handful of instructions, and otherwise control it with mentality. Currently my only in possession instruction is to play it out back, transition is to distribute to CBs and FBs and counter press, and higher DL+LOE w/ offside trap. 

 

Ticking it down to cautious and you notice the shorter passing, slower tempo, generally calculated approach to the game. Attacking lets them express themselves and go full throttle. A couple of playmaker roles w/ the high line and playing out defence and it can be a possession tactic (71% !!!) without much shorter passing + work ball into box + low crosses. Wow. I feel like I've been playing FM wrong for the past 10 years. 

Thank you.

To be fair, your setup was already good and really looked like something I would use(although I hate 4-3-3's. But that is another story for another day). Just keep touching small tweaks and learning how it affects the whole thing. You'll enjoy it. Cheers.