Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1941849226_Screenshot(38).thumb.png.6b3b6d9052a64ecca5a9e66fde7a92bb.png

When City came to Stamford Bridge last month, i grew fascinated by the way he set the team especially the De Bruyne role that game, Although you can say the role was a F9, he ended up dropping deeper then a F9 can do in the game which is why I've used him as a SS

Since this game, I've watched more of their games and have found roles i believe are accurate to the team however for some reason i cant consistently get 55+% 

If possible can you provide feedback

Peps City 21.fmf

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my book, FB on defend duty won't be able to provide the proper attacking support to his partner(s) on the left, especially considering the tactic as a whole. Actually, the IWB would make a lot more sense on the left flank than on the right. So I would change the FB defend into IWB support (or automatic) and the (R)IWB into WB on support (or automatic). 

If possession is a high priority, then playing both CBs in the BPD role is not a good idea, because BPD loves to play adventurous long(ish) passes and thus skip the midfield build-up a bit too often. Which makes even less sense when you have a playmaker (DLP) immediately in front of them.

The same goes for the SK on attack duty. Even SK on support may not be a good idea for a possession-minded tactic, let alone on attack.

Wide attacking width - which under the attacking mentality is even wider - does not really go hand in hand with (much) shorter passing and a possession-minded tactical style in general. Because what's the point of moving players further away from one another when you want them to keep and control possession by playing a short-passing game?

Telling the keeper to slow pace down (in transition) in an attack-minded tactic is another thing that looks pretty contradictory.

Aggressive defensive instructions such as tight marking and get stuck in (hard tackling) are much more suited to defensive styles of play that use bottom-heavy formations and employ a compact low block. Your tactic is the exact opposite. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This post might have some interesting stuff- I can't play test your tactic atm but my personal thoughts are that your set up is broadly right. If you want to try and mimic it using a 433 as the base formation then I'd be inclined to have Bernardo as a potentially more offfensive role. It's difficult to truly mimic as the midfield 3 are very flexible. For example against Liverpool they settled into a 442/4222 block in midfield at times, and it'd usually be Gundo-Rodri as the pivot with Silva joining Foden up top to press. But sometimes Gundogan would be the presser and Silva would be in the pivot. But just thought I'd plug that post as there was some decent discussion of the Pep tactic.

As I'm writing this @Experienced Defender has just replied and I don't disagree with his points from an FM game play perspective necessarily. But in terms of recreation the LB should be the FBd/s and the RB (Cancelo) is definitely the IWB (however when Cancelo has not been playing then sometimes Zinchenko will take up the role and the tactic will 'flip'). I would be inclined to play with 2 winger roles to keep the width and then just play inverted footers on that side so that you get cutting inside behaviour. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

In my book, FB on defend duty won't be able to provide the proper attacking support to his partner(s) on the left, especially considering the tactic as a whole. Actually, the IWB would make a lot more sense on the left flank than on the right. So I would change the FB defend into IWB support (or automatic) and the (R)IWB into WB on support (or automatic). 

In regards to this, i wanted to keep the back 4 as close to citys as possible as usually zinchenko or Laporte would act as a 3rd CB while Cancelo would move into the midfield to make either a double pivot with Rodri or at times make a 3 with Gundogan and Bernado in front of Rodri 

If possession is a high priority, then playing both CBs in the BPD role is not a good idea, because BPD loves to play adventurous long(ish) passes and thus skip the midfield build-up a bit too often. Which makes even less sense when you have a playmaker (DLP) immediately in front of them.

In hindsight this makes sense so it was due to my prior reservations about the roles which i thought BPD would be more willing to play to feet out from the back so i think ill change this

Wide attacking width - which under the attacking mentality is even wider - does not really go hand in hand with (much) shorter passing and a possession-minded tactical style in general. Because what's the point of moving players further away from one another when you want them to keep and control possession by playing a short-passing game?

My thought process was that you want to stretch the oppositions defence to at the very least create space for one of my world class players to make the difference themselves aswell as create space for team mates to run into 

Aggressive defensive instructions such as tight marking and get stuck in (hard tackling) are much more suited to defensive styles of play that use bottom-heavy formations and employ a compact low block. Your tactic is the exact opposite. 

This idea was inspired by how Bayern press and how city press against big team, get the wingers to mark the each CB (knowing that realistically they wont do an excellent job but they will be close to the space between the CB and fullbacks) and the striker to mark the DM. Thus far this has worked both with my previous Bayern tactic and even this season with this tactic as we have only conceded 5 goals in 23 games. I noticed that by doing this i win possession a lot through tackles and score

Previously with my Bayern i was able to employ this kind of press and still retain atleast 55% possession 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Flußkrebs said:
Quote

 I'd be inclined to have Bernardo as a potentially more offfensive role

Ive been switching between AP(S) and Mezzala support to get a role where he goes essentially into a wingback area sometimes to get the ball but i feel like his role is the one im struggling most to recreate. Inregards to defensive shape im happy with how we have been as ive seen the 4-4-2 shape in defence at by making the mezzala close down more.

Quote

I would be inclined to play with 2 winger roles to keep the width and then just play inverted footers on that side so that you get cutting inside behaviour.

 i thought of this but i thought it would isolate the SS too much but i may try again

And also for the IW(s), ive noticed when hes paired with and IWB, he has a wide start position so ive just decided that my more techincal fullback will be a IWB while my faster and better crossing fb will be WB(s)

 

Edited by Miragepredator
Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem im having is how to fully utilise the SS or is this as good as i can get with that role 

Id have thought that by dropping the striker and having him start deeper in a AM slot, it would help us in possession but it somehow has seemed detrimental or perhaps its something in my tactic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Attacking team mentality makes (A) duties very attacking; very short passing while wide, contradictory; Run at defence encourages those with hard coded PI 'dribble more' to dribble loads.

Possession may be hampered by these. Try removing one or two and keeping it very simple. The roles and duties look okay and they are what dictate the majority of the tactic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Aggressive defensive instructions such as tight marking and get stuck in (hard tackling) are much more suited to defensive styles of play that use bottom-heavy formations and employ a compact low block. Your tactic is the exact opposite. 

I would argue that both (tight marking and/or hard tackling) could be as suited to a high pressing style of play as a defensive style?

These are both (if i’ve understood correctly) instructions that seek to reduce the opponents time on the ball, which is kind of imperative in a high pressing style.

Especially when managing a good side with players that have generally high mental attributes, i’d argue that tight marking can be ideal when pressing high.

Edited by Dougiefresh
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dougiefresh said:

I would argue that both (tight marking and/or hard tackling) could be as suited to a high pressing style of play as a defensive style?

These are both (if i’ve understood correctly) instructions that seek to reduce the opponents time on the ball, which is kind of imperative in a high pressing style

For that particular purpose, higher pressing urgency would make more sense (as an also aggressive instruction) than both tight marking and hard tackling, considering the context of the tactic and tactical style as a whole. Which still does not mean that I personally would recommend it, not least because the attacking team mentality already entails proportionally more aggressive style of defending, even on default settings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have spent a lot of hours this year trying to replicate how city plays under pep. From what i have seen lower mentality + aggressive roles is a much better replication than attacking + conservative roles

pep235.png.231e07573b087b3e803f2bb336c54f8e.png

In the above image i tried to replicate the team when walker plays in and his role is something like a 3rd centerback, if the winger has opposite foot i will use him as inverted winger with stay wider(this year works a lot better)

i will write later with more info but in general i was very happy with how we looked

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Dougiefresh said:

I would argue that both (tight marking and/or hard tackling) could be as suited to a high pressing style of play as a defensive style?

These are both (if i’ve understood correctly) instructions that seek to reduce the opponents time on the ball, which is kind of imperative in a high pressing style.

Especially when managing a good side with players that have generally high mental attributes, i’d argue that tight marking can be ideal when pressing high.

I agree that on facue value, it makes snse as you describe it, but consider this:

When considering pressing, every player has an imaginary area/zone around them. When you increase pressing urgency, it does two things;
1) They will press more intensely
2) The area/zone expands

Basically, this means the player will move further away from their intended position to press a player. That's why you'll often see a left winger press a DM or a CM on the opposite side in systems with high pressing (in FM). Contrary to what many think, pressing urgency isn't what dictates when a player press - that's decided mainly by Line of Engagement.

So, how does this tie into Marking and Tackling? Well, Tight Marking inherently means to stay as close to a player as possible. If you tell your players to mark tightly, but also increase the area of pressing per player, you get a contradiction - your players will have opponents come into 'their' areas more often and that'll trigger a press, resulting in them moving away from the player that was around their starting position (that you wanted to them to tight mark). Tackler Harder means your players will go to ground more often. If you're pressing more urgently, that means they're willing to move further away from their starting position to press and tackle - and if they miss that tackle, it'll take longer before they get back into position as they're on the ground as opposed to on their feet. That'll in turn lead to your system falling apart defensively as your players can end up quite literally running around like headless chickens. 

You see how this contradicts with pressing hard? Personally, I think there's a world where Tackle Harder works with more urgent pressing, but I would argue that it requires very good tacklers with good positioning, decisionmaking, concentration and anticipation to ensure they don't get overzeleaous and to minimize the amount of times they miss their tackles. I also imagine the scenario where it works well is in a more direct/counter based system, where you congest space between your box and the middle of the pitch and press urgently in that area.

Conversely, tight marking fares well with less urgent pressing. Tight marking inherently requires your players to stay with their closest opponent until another player clearly becomes a bigger threat. It's also a defensive strategy that tends to work better in congested space, as the players you want to tight mark have less effective space to move into - and congestion is generally more reliable in your own half as there is far less space behind your defenders. Similarly, tackle harder is more reliable in the same conditions - if you miss the tackle, you're less likely to give up space and less likely to break the structure of your team defensively. 

None of this is meant to say that you can't do this or must do that, but hopefully it clears up some of the logic behind it. :)

Also, as always, if I've misunderstood something or am plain wrong, I expect @Experienced Defender will correct me! ;)

 

Edited by Christopher S
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, mss100 said:

Attacking team mentality makes (A) duties very attacking;

Im not fully sure what this exactly means in terms of the game but ive now understood from this and elsewhere that im better off having either a positive or balanced mentality for Peps

very short passing while wide, contradictory;

 I still dont understand this point either, surely by having players more spaced out from each other, more players will be found in space and with the roles of my players there should be support from team mates especially down the right. At the very least if they have no one to pass it to, with the calibre of player they should be able to get past atleast one player

Run at defence encourages those with hard coded PI 'dribble more' to dribble loads.

I was using this while tinkering to see whether any changes would occur but this was only temporary

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well of you play on attacking, the default width is already wider than usual. Increasing this to be even wider species your players out more. Asking them to pass short means they look for players close and brings players closer to the ball. Since you are wide + a bit extra from attacking mentality, your players are looking for short passes that might not be there.

 

Possession is a natural by product of good players. If you are playing as city, you won't need a host of TI's to influence their ability to keep the ball. Keep it simple.

 

And on the first point. If a player has an attacking duty, the attacking team mentality makes them incredibly attacking: not particularly effective for possession based football. It also makes your supporting players take more risks and look to force passes and dribbles rather than picking their moments. You're right, I think positive is your best bet. 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/02/2021 at 16:39, Miragepredator said:

The main problem im having is how to fully utilise the SS or is this as good as i can get with that role 

Id have thought that by dropping the striker and having him start deeper in a AM slot, it would help us in possession but it somehow has seemed detrimental or perhaps its something in my tactic

I'm playing a save right now where I'm mainly playing possession playstyle and mostly use 4-3-3. Occasionally I'll drop my striker into the AMC position and use him as an AM on attack with Roam from position and Move into channels and sometimes Hold up ball if it calls for it. 

 

But yeah, playing on attacking with a possession system can be counter-intuitive but it's possible. I usually play on positive or balanced andI'm finding a lot of success using narrow or fairly narrow width with sorter passing and dribble, then I'll have at least couple of wide players staying wide, like an IW(s) on "Stay Wider". 

What seems to work for me, especially when playing with an AM instead of ST, is using my 4 midfielders to try and overload the midfield, keep the ball between themselves then they will more often than find the space for an unmarked winger/wingback/fullback/inside forward. Using focus play in FM 21 is especially useful to really overload certain areas and then have a creative player with "likes to switch ball to the other side" to find an unmarked player. 

Just to add, I'm not really sure with Dribble more or less, sometimes dribbling does work really well other times it's just one run after another to the corner flag killing the offense. 

Edited by expiredyogurt
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/02/2021 at 17:28, Miragepredator said:

1941849226_Screenshot(38).thumb.png.6b3b6d9052a64ecca5a9e66fde7a92bb.png

When City came to Stamford Bridge last month, i grew fascinated by the way he set the team especially the De Bruyne role that game, Although you can say the role was a F9, he ended up dropping deeper then a F9 can do in the game which is why I've used him as a SS

Since this game, I've watched more of their games and have found roles i believe are accurate to the team however for some reason i cant consistently get 55+% 

If possible can you provide feedback

Peps City 21.fmf 50.24 kB · 7 downloads

After watching a video about the last match, my setup would be like this in FM terms(disregard the defensive phase),it's impossible to replicate both as to real life tactics.

 

              SSA   APA             IWA

IWS                        MEZS

                       DMD

FBD      CDD        CDD       IWBS

                       SKD

Sterling is the highest player isolated against TAA on the left flank like Mahrez stayed high up as a counterattacking threat. So he is a IWA to me, too but to get compact on the left flank I chose IWS. He already  has the trait of Get Into Opp Area. Guendogan stays high on the left flank and attacks the box while roaming around. SS could represent this well. Foden as a false nine dropped deep to the area when Bernardo moves up to the right half space so Foden is a modified APA while Bernardo played typically like a MEZS. Cancelo moved into the midfield and behaved like a part of the double pivot and sent passes down the left flank so he is a typical IWBS. Rodri was in front of the defence so a DMD is suitable.

Their defensive line is really hard to recreate with the ME in hand. To simulate the 3 at the back I'd choose a FBD to keep him in the back as much as possible with two typical CDDs.

Balanced

Play out of Defence, Work Ball Into Box, Be More Expressive, Dribble Less

Counterpress, Distribute to CBs

Higher DL, Higher LOE, Use Offside Trap, Prevent Short GK distribution

As the system has three attack duties, I chose Balanced not to lose much in terms of possession. They typically played their short passing game with switches of play to Sterling for 1vs1 duel against TAA, who is known for his defensive weakness, after they built up the game on the right flank. They relentless pressed Liverpool's back line which led to three more goals for the away side so it's a high block for me.

                        

 

Edited by frukox
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Pep's 4-4-2

Things I Noticed:

1.) During the UCL games and some league games, I noticed that City more commonly used a 4-4-2 system then the usually associated 4-3-3 which would then in turn press with a 4-4-2 shape due to either Bernado or KDB pressing higher up. Now at times, depending on Gundogans movements, you can see the double false 9's staying wide to help the winger overload the sides(Sometimes the full backs would join in with either their overlaps or underlaps) and then when City wanted to further their torture Gundogan would sometimes join the attack to add another option with Cancelo then covering him in a double pivot with Rodri.

2.) During the Burnley game a while ago, I had noticed that on the ball they shifted into a shape similar to Cruyffs total football team with the 3-4-3 diamond sometimes, which i reckon was Peps attempt to succeed with his predecessors system. This point doesnt offer much, but felt like saying it as i used this point to help build this system initially.

3.) (This point may be pure waffle, as this is my assumption from watching videos off youtube of this side) In terms of Champions League performances, I drew comparisons with Fergies 07/08 side and the way Fergie managed his side in the UCL. Some of these comparisons include the fact that Pep would willingly concede possession sometimes and drop into a 4-4-2 ( PSG game being the prime example of this) and as said in *point 1*, rather then Peps use of free 8's, he would use a solid base in midfield with Rodri and Gundogan staying back. Theres also the fact that both sides had essentially no pure strikers and both front two's dropping deep to get balls sometimes. Obviously Pep has his own tricks added in to the system but these are things i found similar nonetheless.

Edited by Miragepredator
Link to post
Share on other sites

With that being said,here is my new and updated take on this system

I applied all of the points and understanding and used it to make this tactic. The only difference is that the system is flipped to match my team as, my team is better down the left.

Also, the Rodri role is supposed to be on DLP(D), but you can switch it around

The Gundogan role is instructed to move further forwards and move into channels, if i need a goal, i tend to change from support to attack.

The striker on the opposite side to the gundogan role has been told to play wider so that it can mimic that 5 at the top with gundogan in the half space.

In game, depending on opposition,I tinker with the fullbacks, either creating as close to a 3-3-4 , 2-3-5 , or even 3-2-5 as possible

I usually switch between this and a watered down version of the system which was heavily inspired by the videos i watched of  fergie 07/08 side that is more counter attacking based

Screenshot (39).png

Edited by Miragepredator
Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres the 4-3-3 varient

Just beat City 5-0 in the cup with this variant (which I only use when I have used the 4-4-2 version for long periods of times and feel like switching it up a bit) 

Screenshot (40).png

Edited by Miragepredator
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/05/2021 at 04:26, addiction-od said:

Hey, mate. Would you mind sharing the above 2 tactics? I love the fact that everyone's ratings are good apart from Haaland. Would you recommend him as a false 9?

In terms of using Haaland, I wouldnt, I only signed him cuz i managed him with my previous side for like a decade and then he was available on a free

Im fairly sure his average rating is high cuz i only use him as a sub or against small teams

And heres the 2 tactics, they may have been tweaked around since then

(Also these are on fm20)

PEPS 4-4-2.fmf Peps City 21.fmf

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...