Help analysing a match

[Rugrat123]

Hi guys

so i have made a tactic and its going fairly well, or celtic is just really good, any way in a recent game against rangers i dominated the game in terms of possession but most of the shots were blocked, i do think parked the bus but would like to see if there was a way i could have overcome this.

anyway here's the tactic and the match:

 

thanks

Celtic v Rangers.pkm

[Experienced Defender]

Unfortunately, I am not in a position to watch the match you posted, so I can only say that I honestly don't like the look of your tactic. However, given that you said you are doing well - and the 1st place in the league confirms that - I think you should stick with the tactic nevertheless (at least for as long as it works). 

[dactz]

They defended narrow and compact but their defensive line wasn't that deep. That being said line of engagement appeared deep and the FBs where on defensive instructions.

You moved the ball mainly through short passes only 1 dribble was attempted the entire game so they never really had to move out of that shape. This meant all you created was really low quality chances (only one shot hit a 0.1 xG)

It feels like there was a chance to use the speed in your squad certainly I know Watkins and Idah are fast a few more direct passes and early crosses and I think they could have got in behind but this wasn't really tried.

Side note #1 Outside of set plays you didn't win a single header in the box might be worth looking at someone with some height to give you that option

#2 in 120 minutes you made 2 interceptions in the final 3rd all game long despite urgent pressing and high line of engagement might be worth tracking long term

#3 Despite what the game tells you Kent wasn't really a winger he actually played in a much more AMC esque role based on the average positions didn't effect anything but bizzare none the less 

 

[Rugrat123]

16 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Unfortunately, I am not in a position to watch the match you posted, so I can only say that I honestly don't like the look of your tactic. However, given that you said you are doing well - and the 1st place in the league confirms that - I think you should stick with the tactic nevertheless (at least for as long as it works). 

out of curiosity what do you not like and what would you change? i am 1st at the moment but that's currently under threat as I often struggle against Aberdeen and rangers and all 3 of us manage to steamroll the rest of the league

[Rugrat123]

13 hours ago, dactz said:

They defended narrow and compact but their defensive line wasn't that deep. That being said line of engagement appeared deep and the FBs where on defensive instructions.

You moved the ball mainly through short passes only 1 dribble was attempted the entire game so they never really had to move out of that shape. This meant all you created was really low quality chances (only one shot hit a 0.1 xG)

It feels like there was a chance to use the speed in your squad certainly I know Watkins and Idah are fast a few more direct passes and early crosses and I think they could have got in behind but this wasn't really tried.

Side note #1 Outside of set plays you didn't win a single header in the box might be worth looking at someone with some height to give you that option

#2 in 120 minutes you made 2 interceptions in the final 3rd all game long despite urgent pressing and high line of engagement might be worth tracking long term

#3 Despite what the game tells you Kent wasn't really a winger he actually played in a much more AMC esque role based on the average positions didn't effect anything but bizzare none the less 

 

Amazing. that's a lot to think about and i will keep and eye on these over the next couple of games, especially the passing and dribbling, as in some games all my chances come from set peices.

in regards to the interceptions do you reckon that is to do with the roles of the players or possibly the players themselves?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Rugrat123 said:

out of curiosity what do you not like and what would you change?

The setup of roles and duties is completely disjointed as though the team is literally divided into 2 separate groups - one that is responsible only for defending and the other that is only attacking. In short, a huge lack of tactical balance. 

I would change a lot, but at the same time I am always reluctant to suggest any changes to tactics that work well in terms of results, no matter how flawed they may look. 

[dactz]

5 hours ago, Rugrat123 said:

Amazing. that's a lot to think about and i will keep and eye on these over the next couple of games, especially the passing and dribbling, as in some games all my chances come from set peices.

in regards to the interceptions do you reckon that is to do with the roles of the players or possibly the players themselves?

Not sure it's a role thing although others can feel free to correct me

I imagine it would be an Aggression, Bravery, Work Rate of the strikers VS Composure, Decisions and Awareness if the defenders with a few other attributes thrown in

[Experienced Defender]

Things such as interceptions and tackles - both successfully and unsuccessfully executed - are a function of both players (i.e. their relevant attributes) and your tactical settings (roles, duties and instructions).

For example, in a well-balanced and sensibly/logically designed tactic, you can see a player with poor tackling making a perfect tackle, which you should read as a reward from the game/ME for a well-designed tactic. Conversely, if a tactic is flawed (poor balance of roles and duties, poor defensive compactness, tactical contradictions etc.), even players with great attributes can make unbelievable mistakes, which is a sort of punishment by the ME.