Fine tuning a tactic

[ReadingFan82]

Hello everyone, hope you had a nice Christmas.

Just wondered if you had any advice for this tactic that I've came up with and if there were any glaring issues with instructions and player roles that you might have noticed?

The general idea is that the right back is basically a slightly more advanced center back, meaning that we always have 3 back at least so the left back can just wander as far up the pitch as they want, exploiting space that could be left by the IW(s) drifting inward. The CWB(a) could then try an out the ball into the box for the ST and IF(a) who can try and score goals. Very simplistic, I know.

The A(de) is essentially just so if a team tries to break on a counter there is a player who can try and cut off any passes and so they don't just have a free run at my 2 center halves. A lot of the other roles and instructions are just things I kind of know I need to have in some variant, you always need a playmaker of some sort, etc etc...

In terms of instructions I want something that works as a counter attacking tactic, that seems to sit a bit deeper, not pressing too much, waiting for the oppposition to give the ball away to then spring a counter on them. I'd like to try and know i what I have so far is anyway near this sort of thing?

I think I really need 2 variants of this, a tactic that could be used in the counter attacking sense and another that I could use to try and control possession 

Does anyone think that this would be an effective game plan, just in a very general sense, for a team of my level? I think I have a decent squad and in the first 4 seasons I came 5th in the first and 4th in the second third and fourth, obviously using a variety of weird and wonderful tactics along the way. If not, is there anything you might suggest?

Open to any ideas to be honest, I'm not too good at the tactical aspect of this game (which is a bit of problem obviously) so any help would be really appreciated.

 

[DarJ]

The roles and instructions make sense to me and you could try it out to see how it works, however, there are a few things I would change and these are just personal preference

• I'll change the CF to AF because the CF does it all so he will drop deep sometimes etc while the AF will be right in the defenders face putting pressure on them

 

• I'll change the BBM to CM on attack. If the player you're using as a BBM has traits like "gets forward when ever possible" and "gets into opposition area" then the role would be fine but personally I'll go for the CM because I want to throw bodies forward and I have a DM so I still have 4 players to defend (The DM, 2 CBS and the FB n support)

 

• Because I have changed to a CM on attack I'll change the CWB to FB on attack because with the CM going forward I don't want players trying risky things like dribbling etc. since if we loose the ball there we could be in trouble and I think the FB on attack is the most "intelligent" out of the rest. He will go forward when he has to and he will drop deep as soon as he looses the ball

 

• Instruction wise I'll add "get stuck in" because as we are defending deep I want my players to win the ball and not shy away from tackles. I know some people have reported that their players tend to get yellow cards with it but that hasn't been the case for me

 

• I'll take off extremely high tempo and go for more direct passing with standard tempo. Extremely high tempo means your players will try to get the ball forward as fast as they can and although it sounds as a good Idea but you'll probably end up giving the ball away because your team have not got into position to support play

 

• Finally, I'm not sure about "fairly narrow" and that doesn't mean it won't work just that I'll like to think that when a team is attacking me space opens up out wide especially if they commit their fullbacks and "fairly narrow" tells your players to look for passes inside first. Maybe just leaving it on standard might be a better option 

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2020 by DarJ

[DarJ]

7 hours ago, ReadingFan82 said:

I think I really need 2 variants of this, a tactic that could be used in the counter attacking sense and another that I could use to try and control possession 

Does anyone think that this would be an effective game plan

Of course it's an effective plan and it's something I've started doing in my save where sometimes I might even have 3 different formations. The standard one, a defensive one for when we are like 2 goals up or we are playing for a draw and a more attacking formation for when I absolutely need to score. That's why I like the 4231; I can drop the 2 CM to DMS and play on the counter, I can use it to play a more controlled style of game and I can also use it to push for goals and I don't have to waste subs

[Experienced Defender]

Personally, I would not:

- use a fullback on support duty behind an IF or IW, because I feel the role is a bit too conservative to offer sufficient support to the inside-oriented wide forward, especially in advanced areas of the pitch. Instead, my preference would be WB support (or automatic, for a bit more "security").

- use a CWB in a non-narrow formation, because CWB as a role is most effective when he has no "competition" on his flank

Of course, these are just my personal views and I am by no means going to claim that it can never work. Different approaches can work (or fail) and different people have different experiences with different types of tactics. 

When it comes to instructions, the lower LOE suggests you want to play a defensive brand of football. The extremely high tempo then suggests it's a counter-attacking version of defensive football (especially under a high team mentality like yours). The same goes for pass into space.

However, even for a counter-attacking style, the extreme tempo can be a bit too much, especially when coupled with a high team mentality. Simply because you are likely to needlessly give the ball away too cheaply and too often. For that reason, I would rather opt for just higher tempo instead of extremely high. The Counter TI in transition will encourage your players to attempt counter-attacks whenever possible anyway, so extreme tempo is really unnecessary IMHO. 

Another problem is your midfield setup relative to the style of play. While you do have optimal compactness thanks to the combo of standard DL and lower LOE, a defensive style of football - whether counter-attacking or passive - also requires a defensively stable configuration of roles and duties. With the combo of AP and BBM - neither of which is either holding or covering role - your midfield does not seem to be solid enough for such playing style.

Hopefully you'll find these observations helpful 

[ReadingFan82]

On 31/12/2020 at 12:23, Experienced Defender said:

Personally, I would not:

- use a fullback on support duty behind an IF or IW, because I feel the role is a bit too conservative to offer sufficient support to the inside-oriented wide forward, especially in advanced areas of the pitch. Instead, my preference would be WB support (or automatic, for a bit more "security").

- use a CWB in a non-narrow formation, because CWB as a role is most effective when he has no "competition" on his flank

Of course, these are just my personal views and I am by no means going to claim that it can never work. Different approaches can work (or fail) and different people have different experiences with different types of tactics. 

When it comes to instructions, the lower LOE suggests you want to play a defensive brand of football. The extremely high tempo then suggests it's a counter-attacking version of defensive football (especially under a high team mentality like yours). The same goes for pass into space.

However, even for a counter-attacking style, the extreme tempo can be a bit too much, especially when coupled with a high team mentality. Simply because you are likely to needlessly give the ball away too cheaply and too often. For that reason, I would rather opt for just higher tempo instead of extremely high. The Counter TI in transition will encourage your players to attempt counter-attacks whenever possible anyway, so extreme tempo is really unnecessary IMHO. 

Another problem is your midfield setup relative to the style of play. While you do have optimal compactness thanks to the combo of standard DL and lower LOE, a defensive style of football - whether counter-attacking or passive - also requires a defensively stable configuration of roles and duties. With the combo of AP and BBM - neither of which is either holding or covering role - your midfield does not seem to be solid enough for such playing style.

Hopefully you'll find these observations helpful 

Thanks for the suggestions on the full backs, I'll definitely give them a go, as well as lowering the tempo slightly, which makes sense given your explanations.

Do you maybe making the AP a DLP on defend could perhaps, or maybe too another role like a BWM on defend or support?

I've found your observations very helpful, than you very much  

 

[Experienced Defender]

20 minutes ago, ReadingFan82 said:

Do you maybe making the AP a DLP on defend could perhaps, or maybe too another role like a BWM on defend or support?

Post the whole tactic as you envision it, because only then I'll be able to share any thoughts properly 

[ReadingFan82]

16 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Post the whole tactic as you envision it, because only then I'll be able to share any thoughts properly 

Here it is, just so you can have a bit more of an in depth look at it to see what you think. I'll try and explain my logic to it as best as I can.

I've changed some of the roles around like you said and tried to play around a little bit with the midfield. I swapped the AP for the DLP on defend to make it so I have another player who holds their position like you suggested I should have, as I thought I needed to still have a play maker of some sort in the team. I don't know if having the box to box instead being a ball winning midfielder or something like that would be beneficial but I'm of course open to suggestions.

To be quite honest I'm not sure what the mentality of a team really does, so I've just whacked it on cautious, but I'd be more than happy to hear suggestions on what you think it should be.

I've put the tempo down to just slightly higher as you suggested before. I've put play for set pieces on mainly because I have a few pretty handy set piece takers and it seemed a sensible thing to do but I don't know if the instruction does anything else that could screw things up. I put the width on narrow as that would match the defensive width I have my team on but don't know if I needed to do that. I'm also not sure if play out of defense is really helpful for the way I'm trying to get my team to play but I have it on just in case.

I have distribute quickly and counter on for obvious reasons. I obviously don't want to have counter press on as that would open up my shape a little bit too much, but am unsure whether I should have it on regroup or just leave it on neutral. I also don't know if I need to have distribute to center backs and full backs on either. 

I'm trying to force the opposition wide, as I think I have enough through the middle to try and cut off any attacks through the middle but don't know if I could just leave this on standard. I've lessened the press to less urgent as well, so my players don't break the structure of the team. I've also turned get stuck in on but don't know if that's really needed, could give away a lot of free kicks, penalties, etc...

The lower line of engagement with the standard defensive line is the same as it was originally which you said you thought was quite good.

I'm still in preseason, now having only played a few games with this so far, a few against some teams on a Hong Kong tour, which I beat easily, and 2 away games against Barcelona and Real Madrid, losing 2-0 to Barcelona and beating Real Madrid 1-0, the latter I was pretty happy with, even if it is just a friendly against a rotated Real Madrid. I also still have nearly 100 million quid as well to spend if I need, so if there's any positions that you think need significantly strengthened I could definitely afford to give that a go as well. I myself was thinking of getting a better anchorman than Godfrey, a better right back than Dest or just going mental and spending all my money on a top top class ST to replace DCL.

[Experienced Defender]

Absolutely no reason for the defend duty of your DLP. Because you already have another holding midfielder on defend duty behind him (the anchor), so the DLP can comfortably be played on support. 

The attacking WB would make a lot more sense on the same side as the DLP than BBM (assuming you want to have at least one fullback on attack duty, which is not necessary btw). That would also mean switching the AMR's duty to support.

On the left flank, a number of different role/duty combos are possible, depending on what specifically you want. 

But then when I look at your instructions, including the cautious team mentality, I am struggling even more to figure out what exactly your idea is in terms of the intended style of play. 

[ReadingFan82]

23 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Absolutely no reason for the defend duty of your DLP. Because you already have another holding midfielder on defend duty behind him (the anchor), so the DLP can comfortably be played on support. 

The attacking WB would make a lot more sense on the same side as the DLP than BBM (assuming you want to have at least one fullback on attack duty, which is not necessary btw). That would also mean switching the AMR's duty to support.

On the left flank, a number of different role/duty combos are possible, depending on what specifically you want. 

But then when I look at your instructions, including the cautious team mentality, I am struggling even more to figure out what exactly your idea is in terms of the intended style of play. 

I was trying to make a tactic that was compact and would sit back and try and soak up pressure of the opponent and then break quickly and try to score on the counter, but from your confusion, I'm guessing I'm a far way off.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, ReadingFan82 said:

was trying to make a tactic that was compact and would sit back and try and soak up pressure of the opponent and then break quickly and try to score on the counter

So you want a typical counter-attacking tactic, right? Well, you already have some good elements for such tactical style:

- enough forward players on attack duties (striker and AMR)

- higher tempo (although under a "wrong" team mentality)

- low block with optimal compactness (standard DL & lower LOE) + narrow defensive width

So you just need to remove/fix/adjust the wrong ones:

- the cautious mentality (and lower mentalities in general) are more suited to passive defensive styles, as opposed to the counter, which relies on fast(er) transitions and a bit more aggressive defending

- no need for less urgent pressing within your low block, because in a counter style you want the players to be more aggressive/assertive within the defensive block (get stuck in makes sense, but lower pressing urgency does not, especially in tandem with harder tacking, because it looks as though you want to allow the opposition to come into your penalty area and only then go hard on them)

- defensive styles of football, which the counter belongs to, require as much defensive solidity as possible, both in terms of compactness and balance of roles and duties, but your left flank looks very shaky and poorly protected with a BBM and attacking wing-back paired up

- Play for set pieces could also be problematic, because sometimes it can encourage your players to try and win a set piece in a situation where they could actually create a chance via open play (during a promising counter-attack, for example)

- Play out of defense can be used in a counter-oriented tactic, but is much more suited for possession-oriented styles (plus can be risky if your defenders and keeper are not good and comfortable enough with the ball at their feet)

- If you want to use the Play out of defence anyway, then specific distribution to CBs and FBs as well as the manner of distribution (short kicks) is really unnecessary and only (over)complicates things with no good reason

- I already explained the problem with the defend duty for your DLP, so there is no need to repeat myself