In Transition

[Steve1977beyond]

Been playing Football Manager 2018 for a very long time but finally brought FM21 and I've gone from being a decent tactician to totally clueless because of the In Transition instructions. I've read the official blog on it but still nonethewiser

Is there a guide anywhere on In Transition? I'm upto speed on player roles and general playing style but it seems that In Transition simply does what the other instructions are meant to do?

i.e.

'When Possession has been lost'

Counter Press - Isn't this just closing down?

Regroup - Closing down less?

 

'In Possession'

Counter - Isn't this just the temp being increased? Except it isn't because in the other screen my tempo is still being dictated by my general mentality, i.e. positive etc.

 

Is the In Transition screen generally giving you more control if you pay more defensive and kinda redundant if you play standard, positive, attacking etc. 

Just seems like more things to tick in my eyes but if there's a guide anywhere or any advice people can give I'd love to read it.

[Johnny Ace]

I'm no expert on this but Counter is more than just increased tempo on the break. It's an in game mechanic, tempo will be increased but so will player mentalities, you'll see it when it kicks in

Not sure on the others as I don't use them but I think Counter Press will trigger a press from a few players & Regroup will have players getting back into position before they press  

[CARRERA]

When possession is lost, your team will fall back into its defensive shape. The time inbetween doing so is called the transition phase, and that’s where Counterpress or Regroup kick in as a instruction. 

Counterpress = immediately try to win back the ball, at the Risk of giving up your defensive shape for a longer period

Regroup = fall back into the defensive shape immediately

when possession is won your team will start to move forward and build up their play depending to their roles / duties and your overall instructions to reach the final third. The time while doing so is the transition phase.

Counter = players are moving forward immediately after winning the ball and build up play will be very fast and vertical to reach the final third as fast as possible. At the risk of loosing the ball and players may be caught out of position when loosing the ball quickly after it’s won back. 

Hold shape = Players will remain in their Position and play will be slowed down to remain in possession and build up safely until you reach the final third. 

Edited August 29, 2021 by CARRERA

[Steve1977beyond]

cheers for the explanation guys, really don't see the point in it I must say because 'hold shape' is essentially 'work ball into box'. I remain unconvinced tbh

[CARRERA]

14 minutes ago, Steve1977beyond said:

cheers for the explanation guys, really don't see the point in it I must say because 'hold shape' is essentially 'work ball into box'. I remain unconvinced tbh

no, work ball into box is a instruction for the final third (and asks your players to refrain from shots and crosses), hold shape applys while transitioning into the final third. (and asks your players to remain in their position while doing so). Both instructions not only apply in different phases of the play, they also do different things

[Steve1977beyond]

never realised that about Work Ball Into Box, is this In Transition thing kinda similar to the Philosophy from previous games where you could play 'Rigid', Fluid etc

 

Also one big question on all this, what if none of them are ticked?

Edited August 29, 2021 by Steve1977beyond

[CARRERA]

10 minutes ago, Steve1977beyond said:

is this In Transition thing kinda similar to the Philosophy from previous games where you could play 'Rigid', Fluid etc

i guess thats a question?! no its not, the "fluidity instruction" from FM18 and earlier was about creative freemdom and how the individual players mentality is dristributed from front to back.

10 minutes ago, Steve1977beyond said:

Also one big question on all this, what if none of them are ticked?

Im not 100% sure on that, but i think there is a default setting for transitions under the hood for every mentality or a default setting in general. Its properbly a balnced mix. But you can defenitly play withou ticking any of them.

Edited August 29, 2021 by CARRERA

[Steve1977beyond]

Really appreciate your time in replying to these - thank you

Using 4-2-3-1 as an example, would the effect be as follows for In Possession

Counter - Every one piles forward to attack - potentially leaving large gaps behind given players are in very attacking positions anyway

Hold Shape - As the name says, players are more rigid in sticking to the shape for attacking

Nothing Ticked - More attacking than Hold Shape and more defensive than Counter

 

By the same token, I'd imaging that lets say I was playing a really defensive formation then Counter Press would be great to providing an extra edge in closing players down, but with a formation where players are already in high positions, then regroup would give that little bit of defensive positioning

Edited August 29, 2021 by Steve1977beyond

[Johnny Ace]

45 minutes ago, Steve1977beyond said:

By the same token, I'd imaging that lets say I was playing a really defensive formation then Counter Press would be great to providing an extra edge in closing players down, but with a formation where players are already in high positions, then regroup would give that little bit of defensive positioning

That sounds backwards, Counter Pressing with a top heavy formation would make sense, Counter Pressing with a bottom heavy formation would have players rushing out of position closer to your own goal. Regroup when on the backfoot to keep the formation stable & difficult to play through 

[CARRERA]

1 hour ago, Steve1977beyond said:

Using 4-2-3-1 as an example, would the effect be as follows for In Possession

Counter - Every one piles forward to attack - potentially leaving large gaps behind given players are in very attacking positions anyway

Hold Shape - As the name says, players are more rigid in sticking to the shape for attacking

Nothing Ticked - More attacking than Hold Shape and more defensive than Counter

It is really important to understand, that transitional phases are usually a very short period. Its a fluid process that applys immediately after possession is turned over in any direction. Maybe you can learn more about it from that article / picture. That said, the formation does not really affect how your team approaches the transitional phases. However, a certain formation can help your team to be more effective in their transitional approach.

e.g. Top heavy formations can help your team to counterpress and can transition more quickly in possession from back to front. Bottom heavy formations usually want to settle quickly as their defensive balance is at the bottom.

http://coachingbadges.blogspot.com/2012/07/phases-of-play.html

 

[Steve1977beyond]

59 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

That sounds backwards, Counter Pressing with a top heavy formation would make sense, Counter Pressing with a bottom heavy formation would have players rushing out of position closer to your own goal. Regroup when on the backfoot to keep the formation stable & difficult to play through 

I considered it the opposite because ultimately, the arrows point forwards when you select it and so with a top heavy formation, players will try to intercept the ball more and thus leaving more space.

With regards to this screen, is the fact it also includes Goalkeeper instructions a clue as to it's intent too. i.e. when the keeper has it, it's arguably a transitional phase and so ultimately, these instructions are mostly dictated by the keeper to a certain extent?

[Johnny Ace]

19 minutes ago, Steve1977beyond said:

I considered it the opposite because ultimately, the arrows point forwards when you select it and so with a top heavy formation, players will try to intercept the ball more and thus leaving more space.

With regards to this screen, is the fact it also includes Goalkeeper instructions a clue as to it's intent too. i.e. when the keeper has it, it's arguably a transitional phase and so ultimately, these instructions are mostly dictated by the keeper to a certain extent?

Nah, they're all headed up, WHEN POSSESSION IS LOST ie you've lost the ball & the other team are in transition WHEN POSSESSION IS WON ie you're on the transition GOALKEEPER IS IN POSSESSION so the other team have lost the ball & your keeper's starting the transition 

You don't have to use any of these options, but play about with them 

[Zemahh]

14 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

That sounds backwards, Counter Pressing with a top heavy formation would make sense, Counter Pressing with a bottom heavy formation would have players rushing out of position closer to your own goal.

I can see where you're coming from, but I'd say Counter-Press is riskier in top-heavy formations.

For example, let's look at Counter-Press in a 4-2-3-1:

For the duration of the opposition's transition from defence to attack, your players will be allowed to leave their positions to apply pressure. That includes your holding CMs, which means they can leave you completely exposed if the press fails. For this reason, I'd say Regroup is safer in this situation, as it asks your players to fall back into their defensive structure and defend from there.

But if you take a bottom-heavy formation, now you may have some room for error, because even if the Counter-Press fails (transitional phase), your players will still be able to track back to their original positions for the defensive phase. There may also be more cover with a DM.

For example, I almost always use Counter-Press in my 4-4-2s or similar formations and often with great success. That is because I don't always want to be on the back foot and want my teams to try winning the ball back high up the pitch before retreating into their deep defensive shape. Because Counter-Press will never be successful 100% of the time, you will still defend from your natural shape most of the time, but certainly less so than if you were asking your team to always be passive and fall back. I think that can invite a lot of unnecessary pressure onto bottom-heavy formations that are already inherently quite defensive.

Anyway, that's just my personal interpretation of it, I could be totally wrong. Just thought I'd offer a different point of view.

[Tsuru]

16 minutos atrás, Zemahh disse:

I can see where you're coming from, but I'd say Counter-Press is riskier in top-heavy formations.

For example, let's look at Counter-Press in a 4-2-3-1:

For the duration of the opposition's transition from defence to attack, your players will be allowed to leave their positions to apply pressure. That includes your holding CMs, which means they can leave you completely exposed if the press fails. For this reason, I'd say Regroup is safer in this situation, as it asks your players to fall back into their defensive structure and defend from there.

But if you take a bottom-heavy formation, now you may have some room for error, because even if the Counter-Press fails (transitional phase), your players will still be able to track back to their original positions for the defensive phase. There may also be more cover with a DM.

For example, I almost always use Counter-Press in my 4-4-2s or similar formations and often with great success. That is because I don't always want to be on the back foot and want my teams to try winning the ball back high up the pitch before retreating into their deep defensive shape. Because Counter-Press will never be successful 100% of the time, you will still defend from your natural shape most of the time, but certainly less so than if you were asking your team to always be passive and fall back. I think that can invite a lot of unnecessary pressure onto bottom-heavy formations that are already inherently quite defensive.

Anyway, that's just my personal interpretation of it, I could be totally wrong. Just thought I'd offer a different point of view.

This is a very interesting point of view. It can explain why my 4-2-3-1s with CP had lots of big gaps in midfield.

I have been playing with "blank formations" and not using any specific TIs, but I will consider your insight when using Counter-Press as a situational weapon. You see, I play on a 4-4-1-1 and maybe on some games I can use CP for specific moments to give opponents less time on the ball. As I am playing with a bottom heavy formation it can be less riskier.

[zabyl]

Others explained plainly; therefore i will add some nuances to transition TIs.

• transition: phase between defensive shape to attacking shape or attacking shape to defensive shape
• counter-press: skipping transition from attacking shape to defensive shape for a short time to close down opponents immediately after losing the ball.
• regroup: transition from attacking shape to defensive shape immediately after losing the ball.
• counter: transition from defensive shape to attacking shape immediately after winning the ball.
• hold shape: transition from defensive shape to attacking shape after winning the ball in a more patient approach.

Counter-press suits formations with more numbers on attacking phase and regroup suits formations with more numbers on defensive shape.

There is no exigence to activate one or more of them. Activating one will increase their impact on game phases.

 

Not using a TI does not destroy it from the game. It is always there. TIs are there for increasing/decreasing them.

[alerosso]

24 minuti fa, Tsuru ha scritto:

This is a very interesting point of view. It can explain why my 4-2-3-1s with CP had lots of big gaps in midfield.

I have been playing with "blank formations" and not using any specific TIs, but I will consider your insight when using Counter-Press as a situational weapon. You see, I play on a 4-4-1-1 and maybe on some games I can use CP for specific moments to give opponents less time on the ball. As I am playing with a bottom heavy formation it can be less riskier.

I noticed the same lately on my 4-2-3-1.

I'm in season 4 or 5 in my current save and besides always being pretty solid defensively, since ticking it off I immediately went on a clean sheet record-streak!

 

I think it'd be better being able to select exactly which players should apply counter-press

[zabyl]

57 dakika önce, Zemahh said:

I can see where you're coming from, but I'd say Counter-Press is riskier in top-heavy formations.

For example, let's look at Counter-Press in a 4-2-3-1:

For the duration of the opposition's transition from defence to attack, your players will be allowed to leave their positions to apply pressure. That includes your holding CMs, which means they can leave you completely exposed if the press fails. For this reason, I'd say Regroup is safer in this situation, as it asks your players to fall back into their defensive structure and defend from there.

But if you take a bottom-heavy formation, now you may have some room for error, because even if the Counter-Press fails (transitional phase), your players will still be able to track back to their original positions for the defensive phase. There may also be more cover with a DM.

For example, I almost always use Counter-Press in my 4-4-2s or similar formations and often with great success. That is because I don't always want to be on the back foot and want my teams to try winning the ball back high up the pitch before retreating into their deep defensive shape. Because Counter-Press will never be successful 100% of the time, you will still defend from your natural shape most of the time, but certainly less so than if you were asking your team to always be passive and fall back. I think that can invite a lot of unnecessary pressure onto bottom-heavy formations that are already inherently quite defensive.

Anyway, that's just my personal interpretation of it, I could be totally wrong. Just thought I'd offer a different point of view.

4-2-3-1 has no DM so that space must be minimized with DL & LOE for better counter-pressing. 

Yes counter-press is a risky choice with many advantages. But counter-press is more risky with bottom heavy formations because it disrupts defensive shape for a short time. Your approach is good theoretically but not good in practically. Try counter-press with top and bottom heavy formations against different sides. You will decide which is riskier then.

 

As i mentioned before, there is no exigence to use a TI. If it performs well without it, then don't fix it.

Edited August 30, 2021 by zabyl

[Tsuru]

8 minutos atrás, zabyl disse:

As i mentioned before, there is no exigence to use a TI. If it performs well without it, then don't fix it.

That is my new motto. I prefer to play without any TIs and add them during the match if it is really necessary. This addition can be permanent or temporary depending on the situation.

I think some Tis overcomplicate things depending on the team you have, specially the "In Transition", "Tight Marking" and "Get Stuck In". I prefer to play in the simplest possible way.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Tsuru

[Steve1977beyond]

1 hour ago, Zemahh said:

I can see where you're coming from, but I'd say Counter-Press is riskier in top-heavy formations.

For example, let's look at Counter-Press in a 4-2-3-1:

For the duration of the opposition's transition from defence to attack, your players will be allowed to leave their positions to apply pressure. That includes your holding CMs, which means they can leave you completely exposed if the press fails. For this reason, I'd say Regroup is safer in this situation, as it asks your players to fall back into their defensive structure and defend from there.

But if you take a bottom-heavy formation, now you may have some room for error, because even if the Counter-Press fails (transitional phase), your players will still be able to track back to their original positions for the defensive phase. There may also be more cover with a DM.

For example, I almost always use Counter-Press in my 4-4-2s or similar formations and often with great success. That is because I don't always want to be on the back foot and want my teams to try winning the ball back high up the pitch before retreating into their deep defensive shape. Because Counter-Press will never be successful 100% of the time, you will still defend from your natural shape most of the time, but certainly less so than if you were asking your team to always be passive and fall back. I think that can invite a lot of unnecessary pressure onto bottom-heavy formations that are already inherently quite defensive.

Anyway, that's just my personal interpretation of it, I could be totally wrong. Just thought I'd offer a different point of view.

This is what I have started doing with my 4-2-3-1 tactic along with leaving the 'when out of possession' blank. Now, my players are not running around like a swarm of sheep trying to get the ball and I've started getting credible draws in games where I was on odds to lose

[Zemahh]

13 minutes ago, zabyl said:

But counter-press is more risky with bottom heavy formations because it disrupts defensive shape for a short time.

It disrupts defensive shape regardless of the formation, no? And that is kinda my point, disrupting defensive shape in an already inherently defensively vulnerable 4-2-3-1 might be more risky than disrupting it in a bottom-heavy formation with a DM.

13 minutes ago, zabyl said:

Your approach is good theoretically but not good in practically. Try counter-press with top and bottom heavy formations against different sides. You will decide which is riskier then.

I have tried both approaches before, which is where my opinion comes from. I've just started a new save recently and am currently running a 4-4-2 w/ Counter-Press with great success.

Likewise, I've also experimented with 4-2-4 and found it way more defensively stable w/ Regroup, than Counter-Press. It sounded counter-intuitive to me too at first, but having your CMs rush out of positions and miss an interception can be extremely punishing when there's no cover behind them.

[zabyl]

34 dakika önce, Zemahh said:

I have tried both approaches before, which is where my opinion comes from. I've just started a new save recently and am currently running a 4-4-2 w/ Counter-Press with great success.

Likewise, I've also experimented with 4-2-4 and found it way more defensively stable w/ Regroup, than Counter-Press. It sounded counter-intuitive to me too at first, but having your CMs rush out of positions and miss an interception can be extremely punishing when there's no cover behind them.

Ok, then counter-pressing is not suited for your team. As i said, don't use it if it creates issues.

 

A 4-4-2 has no DM like 4-2-3-1. Both formations have space for opponents to exploit between defence and midfield.

Edited August 30, 2021 by zabyl

[CARRERA]

 

 

 

I dont think its possible to make a general statement about what and when its better to use what. Its always a question of wether you want to play to your strenght at the risk of some unbalance or wether you want to balance out your weaknesses at the risk of effectiveness.

However, Counterpress is always a high risk - high reward instruction. 

[Zemahh]

3 hours ago, zabyl said:

But counter-press is more risky with bottom heavy formations because it disrupts defensive shape for a short time.

Also, one more thing to mention on this. Counter-Press is always applied immediately after possession is lost, meaning defensive shape is already disrupted anyway. When you use Counter-Press in a bottom-heavy formation, you shouldn't visualize it with your original formation in mind, because that's not the shape your team will be in during the transitional phase, when Counter-Press is applied. That's why I don't think it's an instruction that's only effective with top-heavy formations; in most cases, even the most defensive tactics will have at least a few bodies in advanced areas during attacking phase.

For example, this is the goal we just scored earlier (4-4-2 w/ Counter-Press + Counter):

Would be interesting to see just how different the behaviour would be in the same situation with a 4-2-3-1/4-2-4 though. My guess is the right Winger on Attack duty (#18) wouldn't be quite as willing to track back and put in a tackle, or he might have already been in the box himself when the possession was lost (wide midfielder vs. wide forward).

Edited August 30, 2021 by Zemahh

[zabyl]

29 dakika önce, Zemahh said:

Also, one more thing to mention on this. Counter-Press is always applied immediately after possession is lost, meaning defensive shape is already disrupted anyway. When you use Counter-Press in a bottom-heavy formation, you shouldn't visualize it with your original formation in mind, because that's not the shape your team will be in during the transitional phase, when Counter-Press is applied. That's why I don't think it's an instruction that's only effective with top-heavy formations; in most cases, even the most defensive tactics will have at least a few bodies in advanced areas during attacking phase.

For example, this is the goal we just scored earlier (4-4-2 w/ Counter-Press + Counter):

Would be interesting to see just how different the behaviour would be in the same situation with a 4-2-3-1/4-2-4 though. My guess is the right Winger on Attack duty (#18) wouldn't be quite as willing to track back and put in a tackle, or he might have already been in the box himself when the possession was lost (wide midfielder vs. wide forward).

Christophe Galtier had used similar transition method last season with a 4-4-2 on Lille which earned him ligue 1 trophy. He continues to use same method with his new side OGC Nice. A related topic to yours.

Edited August 30, 2021 by zabyl

[Steve1977beyond]

Gave up on FM21  because I just couldn't get my head around it but there's some cracking advice in here. So took the plunge with FM22 and see if I can more sense of it. 

Struggling badly lol and create zero chances but then I remembered this thread and decided to try and re-evaluate.

So based on the evidence I figured:

When Possession has been lost: Influenced by type of formation. i.e. if Top Heavy such as 4-2-3-1 then never select re-group. As the players may leave holes and that split second of losing the ball may be upfront and so if the players are naturally there anyway, they may win it back.

When Possession has been won: Influenced by mentality. Could never get my head around why if i selected 'Attacking' with a high line, then i'd also be selecting 'Counter'. An oxymoron if ever there was one.

 

Based on these assumptions I took charge of a game and whilst I did lose, I had 15 more shots that i'd been getting in my previous 10 games and my xG was greater than the opponents too. I lost I reckon cause morale is low, I've been on a poor streak and I'm about to get fired. 

Playing 4-4-2 I was on When Possession has been lost: Regroup. To get back into a solid shape

When Possession has been won: Playing a deep line and on standard. I selected Counter. As the game wore on I went attacking and selected 'hold shape'

 

I still think it's flakey and similar to clashing tactic options which are automatically in red and unclickable, I think SI should do the same here. As if i was playing very attacking, i wouldn't also play counter surely. Counter by it's definition is playing deep, defensive but then quickly hitting on the break. Playing a high line, very attacking is the complete opposite of this.

Going to start a new game now with a better team and see if these theories are right.

[Robson 07]

16 hours ago, Steve1977beyond said:

As if i was playing very attacking, i wouldn't also play counter surely. Counter by it's definition is playing deep, defensive but then quickly hitting on the break. Playing a high line, very attacking is the complete opposite of this.

The effect of a counter being triggered is to briefly change your Team Mentality to Very Attacking.  I believe that is what this mechanism does.  Therefore its affect (i,e, choosing counter) is completely negated if your team already plays on Very Attacking as its default/starting mentality.

Btw, this is how I think (could be completely wrong) all these labels may affect the players indicated in the Transition screens if triggered.

Counter - briefly the indicated players take risks playing fast and become Very Attacking at the start of an attack

Hold Shape - initial risk taking is minimised, safe passes and your attacks slows at Very Defensive mentality when you win the ball

Counter Press - again briefly the players indicated press with the max intensity of the Very Attacking mentality.

Regroup - an immediate retreat with those influenced by this instruction dropping off (not engaging in the press) as if playing Very Defensively

If none are ticked you continue with your starting mentality unaffected by the turnover.

[Mst82]

So how does counter press work with your pressing mentality? For example, what if I choose CP with a standard or low pressing mentality?

Edited February 13, 2022 by Mst82

[Robson 07]

@Mst82(based only on my hypothesis) if the pressing intensity bar stays in the middle your team presses in line with team mentality.  In your example this would be a standard level.  If you have Counter Press active I believe your initial press, upon turnover, would change to Very Attacking intensity level before reverting to standard.

Edited February 13, 2022 by Robson 07

[Johnny Ace]

You really don't have to use all of the tactical options available @Steve1977beyond, you can use neither of the transition options 

[Mst82]

6 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

@Mst82(based only on my hypothesis) if the pressing intensity bar stays in the middle your team presses in line with team mentality.  In your example this would be a standard level.  If you have Counter Press active I believe your initial press, upon turnover, would change to Very Attacking intensity level before reverting to standard.

Makes sense man thanks. Been playing since 2011 and still learning!

[Steve1977beyond]

On 13/02/2022 at 08:09, Robson 07 said:

The effect of a counter being triggered is to briefly change your Team Mentality to Very Attacking.  I believe that is what this mechanism does.  Therefore its affect (i,e, choosing counter) is completely negated if your team already plays on Very Attacking as its default/starting mentality.

Btw, this is how I think (could be completely wrong) all these labels may affect the players indicated in the Transition screens if triggered.

Counter - briefly the indicated players take risks playing fast and become Very Attacking at the start of an attack

Hold Shape - initial risk taking is minimised, safe passes and your attacks slows at Very Defensive mentality when you win the ball

Counter Press - again briefly the players indicated press with the max intensity of the Very Attacking mentality.

Regroup - an immediate retreat with those influenced by this instruction dropping off (not engaging in the press) as if playing Very Defensively

If none are ticked you continue with your starting mentality unaffected by the turnover.

Absolutely brilliant post, this is fantastic and done a lot to clear up the confusion