Jump to content

Duties - Trying to understand what is best


Recommended Posts

Hello! I've been using this tactic for a while and getting good results overall. Some disappointments here and there, but that's OK. What I usually struggle is to understand how to distribute my duties.

In terms of PIs, I ask my AMR to Stay Wider and Cross More Often. I'm thinking in convert that role to a Winger, but I don't have the right players yet. 

840850685_CapturadeTela2021-01-02as14_58_39.thumb.png.d152e9d9f2bd73a245158ac0eefacfa7.png

I often ask myself if I should put my IF on support. And, if by doing so, would be better to change my FB to WB (I don't want to get too exposed).

What you would change in this tactic? Any role and duty changes? I want to learn from your opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Experienced Defender has a thread somewhere about balancing a 4231 (albeit the focus is on the pivot being in the MC strata, but that should not change much)

As for what you have... generally an IF(a) and AF(a) will get in each others' way. Usually, if you have an IF then he should be on support if your striker is on attack or vice versa. There are ways to acceptably violate that guideline, but it is an useful rule of thumb.

I think a FB(s) could be ok with an IF on support. On attack, though, you probably need the FB further up for support, so WB(s) is preferable. Could do WB(s) either way, though, given the pivot in the DM strata, although the DM on the left is reasonably adventurous

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ozilthegunner said:

@Experienced Defender has a thread somewhere about balancing a 4231 (albeit the focus is on the pivot being in the MC strata, but that should not change much)

As for what you have... generally an IF(a) and AF(a) will get in each others' way. Usually, if you have an IF then he should be on support if your striker is on attack or vice versa. There are ways to acceptably violate that guideline, but it is an useful rule of thumb.

I think a FB(s) could be ok with an IF on support. On attack, though, you probably need the FB further up for support, so WB(s) is preferable. Could do WB(s) either way, though, given the pivot in the DM strata, although the DM on the left is reasonably adventurous

Tks! This is the thread? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, interferemadly said:

Hello! I've been using this tactic for a while and getting good results overall. Some disappointments here and there, but that's OK. What I usually struggle is to understand how to distribute my duties.

In terms of PIs, I ask my AMR to Stay Wider and Cross More Often. I'm thinking in convert that role to a Winger, but I don't have the right players yet. 

840850685_CapturadeTela2021-01-02as14_58_39.thumb.png.d152e9d9f2bd73a245158ac0eefacfa7.png

I often ask myself if I should put my IF on support. And, if by doing so, would be better to change my FB to WB (I don't want to get too exposed).

What you would change in this tactic? Any role and duty changes? I want to learn from your opinions.

Attack duty means he will be up early in the build-up and going to play riskier than the team mentality except for TA and APA. They are going to come deep to get the ball but deep in the final third, they are going to be in the box. When defending, they will be the last when tracking back.

Support duty means they will go forward later than attack duties and play with the risk the team mentality allows except for inside forwards.(it's going to be one notch higher than the rest of the support duties.) When defending, they will track back later than defend duty players.

Defend duty means they only think of joining the attack if they think there is little to no risk going forward and they are going to be more cautious than the rest of the team and they will track back first in defensive transitions.

Anyway, your role and duty distribution allows for quick transitions but you slow down play and kill space your attack duty players need by pressing high in the final third. In other words, role/duty distribution and playing style isn't parallel to each other.

Who do you need up in the build-up? Who is going to offer close support to your attack duties while linking defence to the midfield to ease attacking transitions? They are going to be your support duty players. Who do you need to protect space? Give them defend duty, etc.

 

Edited by frukox
Link to post
Share on other sites

in terms of roles and duties, I would only change the AML from IF on attack into winger on support. That would give the entire left side an optimal balance and also add the necessary attacking width. The rest of setup looks good.

When it comes to instructions, I would like to hear the reasons for very narrow width (primarily) and higher tempo. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

in terms of roles and duties, I would only change the AML from IF on attack into winger on support. That would give the entire left side an optimal balance and also add the necessary attacking width. The rest of setup looks good.

When it comes to instructions, I would like to hear the reasons for very narrow width (primarily) and higher tempo. 

I was applying a more urgent pressing intensity, so my thinking was to get players closer when losing the ball high up the pitch, then I decided to go very narrow. For higher tempo, I was aiming to go faster to attack after recovering possession.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, interferemadly said:

I was applying a more urgent pressing intensity, so my thinking was to get players closer when losing the ball high up the pitch, then I decided to go very narrow. For higher tempo, I was aiming to go faster to attack after recovering possession.  

think that you could drop the 'higher tempo' and still achieve your goal... the Treq in the AMC slot is a playmaker, and so will attract the ball, meaning you will be moving the ball reasonably quickly up to the front 4. From there, though, you may find you need the lower tempo (not a low tempo, but lower than what you have) to break down a team. 

With shorter passing, play out of defense, and very narrow (not to mention your distribution TIs) you seem to be going for a possession game. But then higher tempo conflicts with all that.

On the other hand, if you did want to play quicker attacking play overall then you should (at least) increase your width... if you are going to tell players to make quicker decisions/passes then you want to make sure there is space for them to pass into. A very narrow formation reduces this possibility - while it may mean players are closer together providing short options, that isn't what your players (being ordered to play a higher tempo) will be looking for. You want them to use the full width of the field to allow for long passes that are more likely to be successful

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, interferemadly said:

I was applying a more urgent pressing intensity, so my thinking was to get players closer when losing the ball high up the pitch, then I decided to go very narrow

That makes sense, although I don't see more urgent pressing in your tactic. But even if the narrowing of attacking width makes sense from the perspective of aggressive pressing, you need to take into account its other implications, such as limiting your attacking options, especially against defensive opposition playing in a deep and compact block. 

 

2 hours ago, interferemadly said:

For higher tempo, I was aiming to go faster to attack after recovering possession

Okay, but you can start with the default tempo and then adjust it during a match as you see fit .Because in some situations and against certain types of opposition, high(er) tempo can play into the hands of the opponent (as can a lower one in a different situation). 

Plus, if you want your players to attempt a fast attacking transition (counter-attack essentially) as soon as they win the ball back, you can achieve that simply by the Counter TI in transition, especially if coupled with a higher team mentality, both of which are already parts of your tactic anyway. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

 

Okay, but you can start with the default tempo and then adjust it during a match as you see fit .Because in some situations and against certain types of opposition, high(er) tempo can play into the hands of the opponent (as can a lower one in a different situation). 

 

Could you please expand on when different tempos could be required? Against what type of formation / opposition 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, benhoward12 said:

Could you please expand on when different tempos could be required? Against what type of formation / opposition 

Tempo is one of those instructions that I personally prefer to start with on its default setting and only tweak/adjust it during a given match based on what I observe watching it. Unless I want to implement a specific tactical style that requires a certain kind of tempo - either faster or slower - as an integral part of that particular style of play, I simply just leave it on default and then may tweak it slightly from there as I see fit.

Here is one more thing you may find useful: tempo, like all other instructions, is affected by the team mentality. This means that  X tempo under Y mentality won't be the same as X tempo under Y+1 (or Y-1) mentality. Instead, it will be proportionally higher or lower.

Last but not least, besides the team mentality, tempo is also slightly affected by the passing team instruction. For example, short passing + standard tempo + balanced mentality will be slightly different in terms of tempo than standard (or more direct) passing + standard tempo + balanced mentality. In the latter case, tempo will become a bit higher even if it remains labelled as "standard" in your tactical creator screen. 

So you can effectively tweak the tempo even without touching the tempo instruction. Of course, the effect is lesser compared to tweaking the tempo instruction itself, but still exists. Which can be a useful tool to fine-tune a tactic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Tempo is one of those instructions that I personally prefer to start with on its default setting and only tweak/adjust it during a given match based on what I observe watching it. Unless I want to implement a specific tactical style that requires a certain kind of tempo - either faster or slower - as an integral part of that particular style of play, I simply just leave it on default and then may tweak it slightly from there as I see fit.

Here is one more thing you may find useful: tempo, like all other instructions, is affected by the team mentality. This means that  X tempo under Y mentality won't be the same as X tempo under Y+1 (or Y-1) mentality. Instead, it will be proportionally higher or lower.

Last but not least, besides the team mentality, tempo is also slightly affected by the passing team instruction. For example, short passing + standard tempo + balanced mentality will be slightly different in terms of tempo than standard (or more direct) passing + standard tempo + balanced mentality. In the latter case, tempo will become a bit higher even if it remains labelled as "standard" in your tactical creator screen. 

So you can effectively tweak the tempo even without touching the tempo instruction. Of course, the effect is lesser compared to tweaking the tempo instruction itself, but still exists. Which can be a useful tool to fine-tune a tactic. 

That's is useful. But against what type of opposition do you go with a higher or lower tempo? Usually I think if I have problems breaking down a defensive side, I choose a lower tempo, to create chances with more patience – do you agree with this approach?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, interferemadly said:

That's is useful. But against what type of opposition do you go with a higher or lower tempo? Usually I think if I have problems breaking down a defensive side, I choose a lower tempo, to create chances with more patience – do you agree with this approach?

It won't depend on the opposition, but on how things are going on the pitch. If you play against a defensive side that sets up shop, a low tempo possession game may help you in recycling possession and waiting for the right opening. On the other hand, it could also make you play too slow to create openings, and a faster tempo may be required to unlock them. 

My rule of thumb is usually that if I have a lot (60+%) of possession without creating chances, I'll try to up the tempo to see if that helps. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, interferemadly said:

That's is useful. But against what type of opposition do you go with a higher or lower tempo? Usually I think if I have problems breaking down a defensive side, I choose a lower tempo, to create chances with more patience – do you agree with this approach?

I don't base tempo on whether the opposition is weak or strong. And even when I make an in-match tweak, it does not necessarily involve tempo. Instead, I usually opt to just slightly adjust my attacking patterns and that in most cases proves enough. I may occasionally allow players to be more expressive for example, but tempo is one of instructions I very rarely tweak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@04texag (I believe) has suggested altering tempo as a response to opposition pressing. 

Following one of Guardiola's methods, you want to use individual possession as a means of attracting opposition to open space elsewhere. The best way to do that is to invite the opposition to you so that they arrive just before the pass is made. Too early, less space; too late, tackle. 

So, anyway, the idea is to watch to see if you are hitting that pressing sweet spot and, if not, alter tempo to get there.

Now, importantly, given the fact that tempo is also affected by other TI changes (as mentioned above), strictly speaking altering those other things as a means of achieving the same goal could also work... and may be required since they can produce different 'increments' of change from just changing tempo directly 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ozilthegunner said:

@04texag (I believe) has suggested altering tempo as a response to opposition pressing. 

Following one of Guardiola's methods, you want to use individual possession as a means of attracting opposition to open space elsewhere. The best way to do that is to invite the opposition to you so that they arrive just before the pass is made. Too early, less space; too late, tackle. 

So, anyway, the idea is to watch to see if you are hitting that pressing sweet spot and, if not, alter tempo to get there.

Now, importantly, given the fact that tempo is also affected by other TI changes (as mentioned above), strictly speaking altering those other things as a means of achieving the same goal could also work... and may be required since they can produce different 'increments' of change from just changing tempo directly 

By this logic, if a team is sitting back or playing a lower block, you are more likely to slow the tempo, to give them time (invite) the opposition towards the player on the ball? And/Or run at defence maybe?

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Riziger said:

By this logic, if a team is sitting back or playing a lower block, you are more likely to slow the tempo, to give them time (invite) the opposition towards the player on the ball? And/Or run at defence maybe?

Right, that is the perhaps counterintuitive implication. But yeah, assuming they are letting you regularly get to the attacking third and you are largely camped there, then go wide and lower the tempo. 

If you have a lot of possession but in the middle third, that could be a different issue and lowering the tempo could be a poor response (just depends on why you aren't able to progress further)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...