Jump to content

[FM21] The concept of building around key players


Recommended Posts

Hello, it's me again. Again.

Still fumbling in the dark with my AFC Fylde side, now in 2033. All my previous escapades in here have ended the same way; I get 60% on the way to getting a tactic to work, I identify an issue, try to correct it and break my entire system. So, time to try something different!
I've identified 4 key players in my squad that I'd like to build a system around. Problem is, this is an approach I've basically never taken before. I tried tinkering with it, but couldn't really find my groove - therefore, I'm here asking for help. 

To start things off, here are the players - we are playing in the Championship:

Jim Cresswell

190fb6b5a64c31ff49fccc9b40dd3139.png

Robbe Van Den Bergh

95b11991b463ac595fe88a1d4063bb60.png

Dean Moyle

ef292afb2491fdba24e247307ff605fa.png

Adrian Williams

c46c336f702c880420deff52c97128d6.png

Worth mentioning about my squad as a whole:

1) My squad is average to below average physically, above average technically and well above average mentally. 
2) My defenders below average in the air, and barely average pace wise. 
3) I personally like using possession defensively, as my experience with FM21 is that the ME on the whole doesn't defend very well against heavy possession. On top of that, my defenders aren't good enough to resist constant attacking and need relief. 
4) I have 4 players that can play left midfield/left winger, and all of them are right footed. 

Idea phase:

I'll share some of my immediate thoughts as a starting point. I was hoping to get ideas and suggestions on how to do this from you guys, but I realize that it'd be lazy and unfair to expect having it handed to me. 

1) I really like Van Den Bergh. Despite being a tad underwhelming defensively, the rest of his attributes are great. I'm a sucker for central midfield stars, and this is one in the making for me. I suspect he'd need to be in a 3 man midfield to play a CM role due to the lack of said defensives, no? Alternately, he should be golden as an AMC, right? 

2a) Cresswell seems like the better goal scorer than Moyle to me. From my experience, players without a certain amount of pace and agility struggle to get goals on FM. Moyle isn't slow by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not quick enough to get away and stay away. Therefore, if I want my Striker to be the primary goal scorer, the first choice there would be Cresswell - sounds reasonable?

2b) Alternately, Moyle is the superior creative striker. His passing, first touch, vision, teamwork and balance attributes are stellar for the level we're at. However, that'd leave me needing to set up the primary goal scorer elsewhere. The obvious place would be AML, as we have 4 players that can play that role that are all right footed. It would add more license for Van Den Bergh in an AMC role to go forward?

So, formation wise, how do we make this add up? Based on those ideas, I'm leaning towards this so far: 

- Lone striker, creative type and secondary goal threat (Moyle)
- AML as primary goal threat (Cresswell), IFa 
- AMC as secondary goal threat and creative contributions (Van Den Bergh)

With Cresswell taking up the AML spot primarily, Williams needs to go somewhere else. The obvious answer is AMR, as asymmetrical formations rarely work in my experience. Like so: 

c52a845e7282079524cc728aec6b3192.png

Questions & brainstorming:

From my understanding, the roles I've chosen here should fit all 4 players well individually, and go well togheter. Moyle is available for linkup with Cresswell and Van Den Bergh, and he'll leave space behind for Van Den Bergh to move into. It should also leave 2-3 players in the box for Williams to cross onto. It all seems reasonable to me. However, here's where I get stuck: 

1) What kind of playstyle do these roles set up? From what I've gathered, role selection inherently dictates what playstyle to go along with it, ie. passing style, tempo, LoE and so on. 
2) The remaining positions in relation to what I mentioned about my squad as a whole, will it work? 

How would you guys go about this? Am I on the right track? 

Show me your suggestions & ideas! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Christopher S said:

c52a845e7282079524cc728aec6b3192.png

Nothing wrong with the setup of these 4 roles and duties when considered alone. The question is what the rest of the setup - as well as the tactic as a whole - looks like. 

 

2 hours ago, Christopher S said:

What kind of playstyle do these roles set up?

Given that the striker is on support duty, the style of play should be geared more toward possession-oriented than fast-attack or counter-attack. At the same time, the presence of a winger (role) points to a more progressive than patient possession style. But of course, such impression can vary depending on the rest of the setup/tactic. 

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

Nothing wrong with the setup of these 4 roles and duties when considered alone. The question is what the rest of the setup - as well as the tactic as a whole - looks like. 

Given that the striker is on support duty, the style of play should be geared more toward possession-oriented than fast-attack or counter-attack. At the same time, the presence of a winger (role) points to a more progressive than patient possession style. But of course, such impression can vary depending on the rest of the setup/tactic.

I've initially opted for a Winger (support) because I wanted someone to stretch the pitch and provide width. My right side fullbacks aren't very proficient at attacking, hence using a Winger instead. That does create a weird paradox, though. Based on previous advice from other threads, I now have this;

- My AML is on an attacking duty, meaning that a supportive fullback role is more appropriate. 
- My AMR is on a supporting duty, meaning that an attacking fullback role is more appropriate. 

Problem is, my left side fullback is far superior going forward to the right side fullbacks. Conversely, my right side fullback is better defensively. Maybe I'm overblowing this, but I'm struggling to resolve it. 

Regarding possession oriented, I'm inclined to believe that in order to have an Inside Forward as my primary goal scorer, I'll need to play in a way that leaves enough space behind their defence. Am I wrong regarding that? And if I'm right, doesn't that mean I'll have to find a way to combine fast transitions with a possession oriented game plan? Additionally, I'm inclined to use a CFs instead of a DLFs to create more space for my IFa and AMa. Do you see that changing the overall playstyle much?

Sorry for rambling, just trying to... wrap my head around this. I'd love to hear your thoughts on how you'd distributed PRDs for the rest of the team based on that front 4. 

Edited by Christopher S
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

I've initially opted for a Winger (support) because I wanted someone to stretch the pitch and provide width

Okay, nothing wrong with the winger on support in this particular setup. If I opted for the winger role in AMR, I would also play him on support duty, given the rest of the roles and duties up front :thup: 

 

1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

- My AML is on an attacking duty, meaning that a supportive fullback role is more appropriate

What exactly do you mean by "supportive fullback role"? FB on support or WB on support? Or perhaps WB on automatic duty, who is somewhere between the previous 2 roles? 

 

1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

My AMR is on a supporting duty, meaning that an attacking fullback role is more appropriate.

Not necessarily. First, you need to consider the system as a whole (including the formation). Secondly, it's not just about duties but also roles. 

 

1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

Problem is, my left side fullback is far superior going forward to the right side fullbacks. Conversely, my right side fullback is better defensively. Maybe I'm overblowing this, but I'm struggling to resolve it

I already have an idea based on that particular information, but would like to hear from you first ;) 

 

1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

Regarding possession oriented, I'm inclined to believe that in order to have an Inside Forward as my primary goal scorer, I'll need to play in a way that leaves enough space behind their defence. Am I wrong regarding that? And if I'm right, doesn't that mean I'll have to find a way to combine fast transitions with a possession oriented game plan? Additionally, I'm inclined to use a CFs instead of a DLFs to create more space for my IFa and AMa. Do you see that changing the overall playstyle much?

I really have to see the whole tactic before I could answer such question. I never look at tactical elements in isolation, only the system as a whole. 

 

1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

I'd love to hear your thoughts on how you'd distributed PRDs for the rest of the team based on that front 4

Again, without a clear perspective as to what you want to achieve in terms of playing style, I cannot offer any definite answer. Based on the specific info you provided on your fullbacks, I would probably avoid a pure possession tactic and rather opt for some hybrid style. However, I still don't know anything about your central midfielders, who are vital for any 4231 system. Are they suited to play in a formation such as 4231 in the first place?

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

What exactly do you mean by "supportive fullback role"? FB on support or WB on support? Or perhaps WB on automatic duty, who is somewhere between the previous 2 roles? 

Was referring to duty, yeah. Ie. AML on attack + LB on support, AMR on support, RB on attack. 

23 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Not necessarily. First, you need to consider the system as a whole (including the formation). Secondly, it's not just about duties but also roles. 

 

23 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I really have to see the whole tactic before I could answer such question. I never look at tactical elements in isolation, only the system as a whole. 

I do want to mention that I made this thread to get help building a system around those 4 players. In other words, I was hoping that the 4 players (with the roles I showed + their attributes) would 'push' the rest of the system in a specific direction. As such, showing you the rest of the system is hard, because I don't know what the rest of the system should/will look like - that's what I'm trying to get help with. In other words; 

How would I complete the system to enable the 4 key players based on their attributes and selected roles/duties? :)

If I were to fill out the roles, I would do this: 

259d6d9d76f1260a721da5c28a2799e5.png

But then again, as mentioned, my RB options aren't suited to play an attacking role, which leaves me a bit stunted. 

23 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Based on the specific info you provided on your fullbacks, I would probably avoid a pure possession tactic and rather opt for some hybrid style. However, I still don't know anything about your central midfielders, who are vital for any 4231 system. Are they suited to play in a formation such as 4231 in the first place?

Based on my understanding of the 4-2-3-1, and most systems with to CMs and no DM, you need CMs that are both technically and defensively proficient, with good mentals and ideally the acceleration and stamina to cover the necessary space. Here's a couple of my CMs: 

Dean Campbell

6c333747ff29221c21d455c91852a8a4.png

His tackling and marking could've been better, but I would argue he should be good enough for the more advanced of the two holding midfielders. 

Iago Mancebo 

eec76af06073ae0bbdffc2ec0a56b3a6.png

I'm aware he's not optimal, but he is 18 years old and will improve rapidly. He has the makings of a great defensively minded CM. 

Jean Onana

e3e0ae240717add01980b9fbc508a1b7.png

Getting old and is about to lose his legs, but is still defensively really good. 

I know my CMs aren't superstars for the most part, but it's sort of a caveat of playing a mid table Championship club - all players will have gaps/flaws, if not, they wouldn't be at this level. Also, keep in mind that Robbe Van Den Bergh from the OP can also play CM. 

Edited by Christopher S
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

259d6d9d76f1260a721da5c28a2799e5.png

This setup has a decent overall balance. However, you previously said that your right back is not good attacking-wise, so playing him on attack duty seems to run counter to it. 

Anyway, with 2 crossing-heavy roles on the same (right) flank, the setup is definitely not suited to possession football. Therefore, swapping around the duties between the striker and AMC could be worth considering (AM on support and CF on attack). Or - if you are willing to take greater risk - even both on attack duties. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're on the right track, with some nice players to get the best out of. Here's my suggestions for a couple of tweaks based on what you're already thinking.

Van Den Bergh looks like a great playmaker, but he's not really a goalscorer. He already has 'Gets Forward Whenever Possible', and I think playing him as an AM on Attack isn't making the most of his skillset. I'd lean towards playing him on a Support duty.

As a side note, I also think you could use him as your most advanced player on the right of a midfield three, with Campbell/Mancebo at MCL and Mancebo/Onana in a holding role at DM.

If you did play Van Den Bergh as an AM on Support, I would probably tweak Moyle to an Attack duty. He'll still play a supporting role to create for Cresswell as a DLF, but would also give you more of a goal threat, which he's more suited to than Van Den Bergh.

Based on what you said about your right back being more of a defensive player, my suggestion would be to change him to a Support duty. To make up for this, I would just swap your CM roles around. Mancebo can use his energy to support attacks on the right, making up for the more reserved full back. Campbell is a naturally left-footed player who can dictate from deep, as well as sharing the defensive work in the double pivot with Mancebo, who I would want to give plenty of gametime to develop.

To summarise, I would suggest something like this if you want to play a 4231:

SKd

FBs - CDd - CDd - WBs

BWMs (Mancebo) - DLPd (McGregor) 

Ws (Williams) - AMs (Van Den Bergh) - IFa Cresswell

DLFa (Moyle)

EDIT - As another subtle variation for the tougher games, you could also use a BWMd or CMd at MCL (possibly bringing in Onana), with a DLPs at MCR, so you would have two midfielders who 'Hold Position' for a bit more solidity.

Edited by Mike_Cardinal
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

This setup has a decent overall balance. However, you previously said that your right back is not good attacking-wise, so playing him on attack duty seems to run counter to it. 

Like I mentioned below the screenshot, I am aware of that. The roles/duties in the screenshot is what I would use in an idea scenario based on my understanding of how to build a system. The whole issue is that my full backs aren't suited for that setup. :)

10 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Anyway, with 2 crossing-heavy roles on the same (right) flank, the setup is definitely not suited to possession football. Therefore, swapping around the duties between the striker and AMC could be worth considering (AM on support and CF on attack). Or - if you are willing to take greater risk - even both on attack duties. 

So, if I'm understanding this right, I can go two ways with this: 

1) Pivot towards a transition/counter based playstyle, more direct, and keep the flank roles, but swap my AMC to a supportive role and my ST to an attacking role. Attacking space with more direct movement and passing kind of style
or
2) Move my full backs to support duties and try to use possession as a the primary platform, keep the front 4 roles/duties. 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 hours ago, Mike_Cardinal said:

Van Den Bergh looks like a great playmaker, but he's not really a goalscorer. He already has 'Gets Forward Whenever Possible', and I think playing him as an AM on Attack isn't making the most of his skillset. I'd lean towards playing him on a Support duty.

As a side note, I also think you could use him as your most advanced player on the right of a midfield three, with Campbell/Mancebo at MCL and Mancebo/Onana in a holding role at DM.

That's fair. He's not exactly Lampard level in terms of finishing. I'm not opposed to having him on Support and the striker on Attack - I'm just worried Moyle won't cut it due to his lack of particular physicality. He's just above average pace wise and in the air, and I've always struggled to get players like that to consistently score goals. 

And I'm open to a 3-man midfield like that - it's what I've been using for most of the season. Reason for trying a new approach is that it wasn't really working. No matter what I do, I always end up with a team that isn't creating chances. Generally speaking, whenever I try to use logic to build a system, I end up with a system that leads to games with 5-8 shots total between both teams - without trying to, no matter the shape or instructions. So I thought I'd try and build around these 4 players, and just 'do' whatever their strengths and positions/duties dictate, if that makes sense. 

2 hours ago, Mike_Cardinal said:

SKd

FBs - CDd - CDd - WBs

BWMs (Mancebo) - DLPd (McGregor) 

Ws (Williams) - AMs (Van Den Bergh) - IFa Cresswell

DLFa (Moyle)

This seems like a reasonable setup to me. I am somewhat worried we'll have next to no penetetration on the right hand side, though - should I be worried? If that is an issue, could I maybe address it by adding Roaming and/or Move Into Channels to Van Den Bergh (AMs)?
Also, I'm inclined to maybe use Play Down Right Flank in a setup like that, to force an overload and create space for my IFa - or is that overkill/unecessary?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olegmelnikov said:

As an idea, but maybe I'm totally wrong...

As for me you do not have good pair of CM for 4231, so I could think about 433 Wide?

1617287172_1.png.84f4439707bc7e4c4e0db479a4350962.png

 

 

That's a valid suggestion, however, considering the tempo Mancebo is developing at since joining the club, I think playing a double pivot is justifiable. Look at this: 

0cb9dc8b9f9ae22e557ae81b12d4ad6f.png

93182135a5a9ab30e572059737b49983.png

That's from a period of 3 weeks in game, and he's increased his passing, concentration, composure, acceleration and strength by a full 1 point already. He's also sitting on a respectable 7.22 avg. rat. in 14 games, providing 2 goals and 5 assists. I agree that his attributes aren't ideal just yet, but his performances + the development tempo seems like a fair tradeoff for the time being. If he keeps up this development, he'll likely be a perfect fit in a couple of months. 

What do you think? :)

Edited by Christopher S
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, yep. it's great progress. He has rather average Positioning and Concentration, but it can be compensated by anticipation and acceleration.

19 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

What do you think? :)

You know, on paper it looks pretty well. And only you can see how your team plays matches, especially with stronger teams.

And of course it is very interesting to look on your tactics wholly (mentality, TI).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, olegmelnikov said:

Wow, yep. it's great progress. He has rather average Positioning and Concentration, but it can be compensated by anticipation and acceleration.

While Conc 11 and Pos 12 is 'techincally' average, it's not really that bad considering it's the Championship. I've set his training up to cover all the necessary attributes as you can see here; 

56fa91e63ba523b007f36f8b1a05e890.png

The only thing not covered as of right now through training is Concentration and Marking. However, they will improve organically as he's still very young - and if I want to target those later I can.

Edited by Christopher S
Link to post
Share on other sites

Van Der Bergh is a great option for you in central midfield; his PPM's really support a playmaker ole that gives some cojones to a possession based system. 

I'd play him on the right side of a midfield three. Not only will he support the winger who stretches play, but advance deep into the opposition half aiming to play killer passes. A more aggressive supporting player inside the winger means you can utilise the RB in a defensive capacity (IWB - D).1889611622_Test433forsi.PNG.83549d26b92f5e92dd0207f59ed111be.PNG

The remaining roles could look something like this. Ignore players of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mss100 said:

Van Der Bergh is a great option for you in central midfield; his PPM's really support a playmaker ole that gives some cojones to a possession based system. 

I'd play him on the right side of a midfield three. Not only will he support the winger who stretches play, but advance deep into the opposition half aiming to play killer passes. A more aggressive supporting player inside the winger means you can utilise the RB in a defensive capacity (IWB - D).1889611622_Test433forsi.PNG.83549d26b92f5e92dd0207f59ed111be.PNG

The remaining roles could look something like this. Ignore players of course.

Huh, that's an interesting approach. I've never really gotten a 4-3-3 to work properly without having an attacking role centrally, but that doesn't mean it can't work - plus, I've never really used the RPM role, so it could be cool to try. I'm wondering wether IWBs would be a better fit for that setup, though? On Defend they're supposed to tuck in to function as a DM, but I seem to recall they won't do that if there is already a DM in that strata. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Christopher S said:

So, if I'm understanding this right, I can go two ways with this: 

1) Pivot towards a transition/counter based playstyle, more direct, and keep the flank roles, but swap my AMC to a supportive role and my ST to an attacking role. Attacking space with more direct movement and passing kind of style

Yes. 

 

6 hours ago, Christopher S said:

2) Move my full backs to support duties and try to use possession as a the primary platform, keep the front 4 roles/duties

Here I would have to see the whole setup first in order to be able to give you proper feedback. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:
6 hours ago, Christopher S said:

So, if I'm understanding this right, I can go two ways with this: 

1) Pivot towards a transition/counter based playstyle, more direct, and keep the flank roles, but swap my AMC to a supportive role and my ST to an attacking role. Attacking space with more direct movement and passing kind of style

Yes. 

How would you go about that, really? I've never been able to get direct/fast attacking 4-2-3-1's to work at all - only possession based. 

6 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:
6 hours ago, Christopher S said:

2) Move my full backs to support duties and try to use possession as a the primary platform, keep the front 4 roles/duties

Here I would have to see the whole setup first in order to be able to give you proper feedback. 

Here's the system I've been using for since starting this thread: 

c3687cac39bcf7349d942178cc976efb.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

Huh, that's an interesting approach. I've never really gotten a 4-3-3 to work properly without having an attacking role centrally, but that doesn't mean it can't work - plus, I've never really used the RPM role, so it could be cool to try. I'm wondering wether IWBs would be a better fit for that setup, though? On Defend they're supposed to tuck in to function as a DM, but I seem to recall they won't do that if there is already a DM in that strata. 

He should still move inside the pitch. They fail to come inside if there is a DM in the DMCR slot, I believe.

What this system affords you is more control of the midfield than a 4-2-3-1 with an attacking AM. Often that system would resemble a 4-4-2 and I think you would be relying on the quality of your press for possession numbers. And on the attacking role, the RPM would be 'Balanced' in regard to his individual mentality, but his PPM's would make him an aggressive playmaker from a deeper role.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

I've never been able to get direct/fast attacking 4-2-3-1's to work at all - only possession based. 

Yep, that's true. My last try of 4231 was with Borussia Dortmund.

I wanted to play 4231, but I didn't want to play possession based football. My solution was "Fast possession"  attacking football =)

So, I used positive mentality, shorter passing, higher tempo.

4231.png.06d6ff0ff99206ca8ad7cbf587b4dd15.png

As the result for 3 seasons: 

- 3 times champion, 2 domestics cups, 3 supercups, but every  year I was knocked from Champion League - first knockout round, all 3 times from English teams from London - Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Christopher S said:

c3687cac39bcf7349d942178cc976efb.png

 

6 hours ago, Christopher S said:

Here's the system I've been using for since starting this thread

This setup looks good and makes sense in and of itself :thup:

But what about instructions? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Christopher S said:

How would you go about that, really? I've never been able to get direct/fast attacking 4-2-3-1's to work at all

I would first make sure that I have the right players for such style of play, which is more risky overall than a possession-based one. In case I do, then it could look something like this:

PFat

IFsu             APat         Wat

CMde   BWMsu

FBat   CDde  BPDde  FBsu

SKsu

Positive - run at defence & early crosses - counter, counter-press & distribute quickly to CBs and FBs - higher D-line + split block

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

 

This setup looks good and makes sense in and of itself :thup:

But what about instructions? 

Like so: 

6e2b521e43c92dcdf7ab3a4b7b51cad9.png

Nothing fancy. General issues I had were these; 

- Struggling to create proper chances
- I'd dominate play and generally take the lead by 1-0 or 2-0. Then be completely powerless to defend said lead, and get overrun for the rest of the game. 

8 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:
15 hours ago, Christopher S said:

How would you go about that, really? I've never been able to get direct/fast attacking 4-2-3-1's to work at all

I would first make sure that I have the right players for such style of play, which is more risky overall than a possession-based one. In case I do, then it could look something like this:

PFat

IFsu             APat         Wat

CMde   BWMsu

FBat   CDde  BPDde  FBsu

SKsu

Positive - run at defence & early crosses - counter, counter-press & distribute quickly to CBs and FBs - higher D-line + split block

My team should be capable of playing like that, imo - at least my first XI. I suspected an APa was the attacking pivot in a version like this, so at least my instincts aren't completely off. What do you think of using an IWBd instead of FBs on the right side? That could give me more license to move the MCr forward on counters/in attack - could even try to put the BMW in MCl slot as a BMWd with a BBM in MCr - like this: 

                    PFat

IFsu             APat         Wat

          BWMd  BBMs

FBat   CDde  BPDde  FBsu

                   SKsu

Obviously a BBMs will roam and that could be risky, just brainstorming here. Maybe a CMs instead. Or would the BWMs support quick attacks/counters just fine anyways? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

Like so: 

What average possession do you have? 

36 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

I'd dominate play and generally take the lead by 1-0 or 2-0. Then be completely powerless to defend said lead, and get overrun for the rest of the game.

Do you use  Counter Press as a constant TI? May be your players are not ready for counter pressing for the whole match? For me, split block is much safer)

And what your idea to for Play Out the of Defense? You have DPde and seems that you want fast transitions?

 

53 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

                     PFat

IFsu             APat         Wat

          BWMd  BBMs

FBat   CDde  BPDde  FBsu

                   SKsu

For me, no holding role for CM in 4231 = a lot of problems) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, olegmelnikov said:
1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

Like so: 

What average possession do you have? 

1 hour ago, Christopher S said:

I'd dominate play and generally take the lead by 1-0 or 2-0. Then be completely powerless to defend said lead, and get overrun for the rest of the game.

Do you use  Counter Press as a constant TI? May be your players are not ready for counter pressing for the whole match? For me, split block is much safer)

And what your idea to for Play Out the of Defense? You have DPde and seems that you want fast transitions?

Average possession is 60%+. I'd generally have between 60-70% possession until I'm up 1-0 or 2-0. Then the opposition decides to start attacking, and I'll go down to about 58-62%. 

It's the default setting. I took it off for a couple of games to see if it was simply my players not being fit to counter press throughout a full game, but the end result was still being run ragged for 30+ minutes. As for split block, it's definitely safer, but I have mixed results. Sometimes, it has no discernable effect from not using a split block, other times it works really well. I'm down to try it, of course. 

POOD is used to create space by luring the enemy team up the pitch into mine, but I suppose it counter acts my role setup since I have an attack role ST and support role AMC. I just really dislike giving away possession for no reason, so I tend to use POOD instinctively. Maybe remove POOD at let and instead just play through the DLPd to get the ball out of defence? I can ask my keeper to distribute to him or full backs + distribute quickly? 

It's worth mentioning that for the most part, the system I posted in response to @Experienced Defender played in a way I really liked. It just had two crucial issues really hurting results (the ones I mentioned). I intermittently used other TI's as well: 

- Narrower
- Lower Tempo
- Work into Box
- Lower Crosses
- Positive Mentality

not all at the same time, but various combinations based on the game. 

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

Like so: 

6e2b521e43c92dcdf7ab3a4b7b51cad9.png

Okay, the tactic looks fine and there are no glaring issues, which means you are on the right track :thup: 

 

8 hours ago, Christopher S said:

General issues I had were these; 

- Struggling to create proper chances
- I'd dominate play and generally take the lead by 1-0 or 2-0. Then be completely powerless to defend said lead, and get overrun for the rest of the game

I don't know your players and quality/strength of your team in general, so cannot tell you where exactly the source of your issues can be. But given that the tactic - as I already said - is well-designed overall, it basically means that you need to experiment with a couple of small tweaks while retaining the good overall balance of the tactic until you find the system that fits your players in an optimal way. 

For example, you can try to tweak the roles on the left - IF on support and FB on attack is a combo that would not disrupt the balance but can give you a different dynamic when attacking. That particular tweak would then call for giving the attack duty to your AMC in order to encourage him to get more forward and attack the space behind the striker while at the same time allowing the IF more space to move inside. That's the first tweak I personally would try before seeing if more tweaking is needed.

So the setup would look like this:

IFsu       AMat

FBat

The rest remains unchanged.

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...