Feedback on this positive & possession 433

[Vega09]

Hey, I'm looking for some feedback on this 433  with Milan as it includes a number of roles that I don't tend to use - AP-A and IWB-S - and I'm not sure now of this setup of roles makes sense or there could be a better combination. Defensively I think it could be better but maybe this is down to the familiarity still increasing

[CARRERA]

How did your tactic play out? Do you manage to score constantly? 

One thing you could think about, is that noone is actually attacking the right half space (4). The AP is rather looking to sit between the other teams midfield and defensive line instead of attacking the box. Even with an attack duty. The B2B isnt really attacking the space, but looking for late runs into that area, thats why i put him in brackets.

Edited June 19, 2021 by CARRERA

[Experienced Defender]

Your setup of roles and duties is more suited to fast attacking or counter-attacking football than a possession style. For example, AP on attack duty is not a possession-friendly role, because it looks for fast transitions (among other things).

Regardless of your intended tactical style, a role such as CWB is more suited to narrow formations, in which he is the only player on the flank. Therefore, I would switch him to standard WB on support duty in a system like yours. 

[Vega09]

Thanks for the feedback, in terms of changing the roles in midfield I was thinking of changing to a DLP-D sitting above the defence, then a CM-S and maybe a Mez-S, would they still suit possession focused football?

I was considering change the W to a IW, but all the players I will play there are right footed so seem to be a better match for playing as wingers. 

Something like this: 

Edited June 20, 2021 by Vega09

[Experienced Defender]

6 minutes ago, Vega09 said:

in terms of changing the roles in midfield I was thinking of changing to a DLP-D sitting above the defence, then a CM-S and maybe a Mez-S, would they still suit possession focused football?

Such setup would be more possession-friendly than your current one. However, the positions/sides in which you put the CMsu and mezzala also matter a lot. And you could also experience a lack of central penetration.  

 

15 minutes ago, Vega09 said:

I was considering change the W to a IW, but all the players I will play there are right footed so seem to be a better match for playing as wingers

Footedness is not a problem. You can play a right-footed player as an IW or IF in AMR (and vice versa). Likewise, you can play a left-footed player as a winger in AMR. Interaction between roles is the most important. Therefore, play the role that fits better into the setup as a whole, taking also into account your intended style of play.

[Vega09]

15 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Such setup would be more possession-friendly than your current one. However, the positions/sides in which you put the CMsu and mezzala also matter a lot. And you could also experience a lack of central penetration.  

Which of the available midfield roles help with the central penetration? I assume CM-A and Mez-A, but are any others worth looking at? or it depends on the rest of the tactic..

[Experienced Defender]

3 minutes ago, Vega09 said:

Which of the available midfield roles help with the central penetration? I assume CM-A and Mez-A, but are any others worth looking at? or it depends on the rest of the tactic

It always depends on the rest of the tactic (i.e. the tactic as a whole). 

[Vega09]

I've made some further adjustments based on the feedback, hopefully nothing glaringly unbalanced stands out. The one issue I've picked up is some of the PPMs of Bennacer contradict the behaviour of a Mezzala so will probably look to untrain them 

 

[Experienced Defender]

The setup of roles and duties looks decent (generally speaking). However, if you want to play a short-passing style with good consistency, I personally would swap the duties of the striker and AML. Like this:

DLFsu

IFat                            

That would also help prevent the AML and BBM from obstructing each other on occasion.    

In terms of defensive solidity, your central midfield could potentially prove problematic, because both CM roles are not just runners but also roaming roles. If you notice problems. you can change the BBM into carrilero or BWM on support duty. 

Given that you use both short passing and play out of defence, there is no need to instruct the keeper to distribute specifically to CBs and FBs. Instead, let him pick the best/safest option available. 

Not sure why have you opted for the "Slow pace down" transitional instruction? It is a defense-minded instruction that obviously does not go hand in hand with your overall tactical style.

Instructions such as "Be more expressive", attacking width (either wide or narrow) etc. should basically be used situationally (as occasional in-match tweaks), rather than on a regular basis. Because effectiveness of these instructions tends to vary depending on the situation or opposition. 

                            

[Vega09]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

The setup of roles and duties looks decent (generally speaking). However, if you want to play a short-passing style with good consistency, I personally would swap the duties of the striker and AML. Like this:

DLFsu

IFat                            

That would also help prevent the AML and BBM from obstructing each other on occasion.    

In terms of defensive solidity, your central midfield could potentially prove problematic, because both CM roles are not just runners but also roaming roles. If you notice problems. you can change the BBM into carrilero or BWM on support duty. 

Given that you use both short passing and play out of defence, there is no need to instruct the keeper to distribute specifically to CBs and FBs. Instead, let him pick the best/safest option available. 

Not sure why have you opted for the "Slow pace down" transitional instruction? It is a defense-minded instruction that obviously does not go hand in hand with your overall tactical style.

Instructions such as "Be more expressive", attacking width (either wide or narrow) etc. should basically be used situationally (as occasional in-match tweaks), rather than on a regular basis. Because effectiveness of these instructions tends to vary depending on the situation or opposition. 

                            

Thank you, I made that change and in the last few games the team has been playing very well. I'm not sure why I had selected slow pace down either. Keeping an eye on the CM spots and if the BBM role should change