Jump to content

top half side can't win


Recommended Posts

games are very boring, both teams barely reach 1 xG, not a lot of chances being created. striker suits target forward but has good passing and drop deep PPM, very good LW with drop deep PPM, LB and RB both have stays back PPM, LCM and RCM both have get further forward. 

LW: 1.JPG.011b0e7e083c0d38353cdf8fd653652f.JPG

2.JPG.8dddc01a4a38805e251e4106ff129b7c.JPG

3.JPG.4e723c7acb5197416e2c783b7270d68e.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

hace 18 minutos, thebreadlady dijo:

can't create chances, just very boring style of football. pass around in midfield, loss possession, repeat. 

There are a lot of things you can test, ideally not all at the same time. We cant know your problem because we cant see your stats or your games. 

You can try "Run at defense" or "Be more creative" TIs.

Or maybe test with just a notch more direct passes TI to encourage more risk taking, or deactivating work ball into box TI with take less shots PI to the midfield players. 

You could also change some player roles, i hate carrilero, i'd rather take a mezzala on support. DLF it's a hit or miss, maybe try a false nine if you see him isolated too much, but encourage runs from the wings and midfielders.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No nonsense defender isn't going to help build up from the back, nor is the Anchor.  The Anchor will help you though against the counter and for that reason you may not need the inverted full back holding his hand.  On the right wing you have a crossing machine.  It's another role that isn't going to build play, but he'll deliver crosses, so who do have arriving to win those?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to say but your most recent tactic has 2 playmakers, shorter passing and play out of defense, which might slow down your attack.

My focus would be on your LW.  He has really good Pass/Vis/Fl/Dec/Ant/Team.  He could be a creative master.  Might be wasting him as IF, plus 'drop deep' conflicts with IF, especially IF(a).  You could play him as an AP(a) or T(a).  With his ability to read the game, great physical ability and 'drops deep' (which compliments AP and T), he would find space between your opponents' midfield and defense.   Then he could make great passes to your midfield runners and maybe make a creative tandem with your striker.

I'd play him on AP(a) because support duty looks more to stay in the space and spray passes and with your LW's good drib/flair/acc/tech/agi, he should be looking to attack and disrupt, then pass to open teammates.  T(a) is like AP but does much less defensively.  If you can risk it -- and your defense looks solid -- T(a) might be worth the risk, but if your CMs both have 'gets further forwards', and your RW is also further forwards, you might be exposing yourself too much. But maybe not because your fullbacks stay back and you have a DM.

Because your D is solid and your RB/LB stay back, can you get a bit more aggressive with your DM?  If he has the Stam/WR/Pace, SV can really energize and offense.  If not, even DM(s).  

You could also try a formation change.  4-2-3-1 is more attacking.  

 

Edited by glengarry224
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, glengarry224 said:

Hard to say but your most recent tactic has 2 playmakers, shorter passing and play out of defense, which might slow down your attack.

My focus would be on your LW.  He has really good Pass/Vis/Fl/Dec/Ant/Team.  He could be a creative master.  Might be wasting him as IF, plus 'drop deep' conflicts with IF, especially IF(a).  You could play him as an AP(a) or T(a).  With his ability to read the game, great physical ability and 'drops deep' (which compliments AP and T), he would find space between your opponents' midfield and defense.   Then he could make great passes to your midfield runners and maybe make a creative tandem with your striker.

I'd play him on AP(a) because support duty looks more to stay in the space and spray passes and with your LW's good drib/flair/acc/tech/agi, he should be looking to attack and disrupt, then pass to open teammates.  T(a) is like AP but does much less defensively.  If you can risk it -- and your defense looks solid -- T(a) might be worth the risk, but if your CMs both have 'gets further forwards', and your RW is also further forwards, you might be exposing yourself too much. But maybe not because your fullbacks stay back and you have a DM.

Because your D is solid and your RB/LB stay back, can you get a bit more aggressive with your DM?  If he has the Stam/WR/Pace, SV can really energize and offense.  If not, even DM(s).  

You could also try a formation change.  4-2-3-1 is more attacking.  

 

i had to switch my LW and CM around since my CM was getting into scoring chances and missing too frequently. ive made some further tweaks to get back into winning ways but also conceding more goals and chances. 2-1, 4-1, 3-1, 4-2 last four games. don't let the scorelines foul you, they were narrow wins. 

1.JPG.1c468cd9b6cbb2e330ff927f963105bf.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that's a lot of goals scored!

Is Stamos the player who has the trait 'drops deep'?  if so, that doesn't mix well with Mez(a).  Midfield would work great for him but maybe better as an AP(a) or DLP(s), though DLP won't make as much use of his physical and dribbling ability.  Does he have the trait runs with ball frequently?  That'd be good for him.

Yeah, with Attacking, Higher Lines, WB(a), BBM, Mez, you are more exposed.  Or maybe it was just a bad run or lucky for opposition?  

Edited by glengarry224
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, glengarry224 said:

Wow, that's a lot of goals scored!

Is Stamos the player who has the trait 'drops deep'?  if so, that doesn't mix well with Mez(a).  Midfield would work great for him but maybe better as an AP(a) or DLP(s), though DLP won't make as much use of his physical and dribbling ability.  Does he have the trait runs with ball frequently?  That'd be good for him.

Yeah, with Attacking, Higher Lines, WB(a), BBM, Mez, you are more exposed.  Or maybe it was just a bad run or lucky for opposition?  

1.JPG.81cbb7c188d5428c86127f0e82e57642.JPG 

results since switching to attacking. no more than 1.5 xg in all but 1 game with the opponent creating more decent chances and having a higher xg. combination of getting lucky and being more clinical. for example, im currently in a game and we have 2 shots with .05 xg at half time and scored from a long shot while the opposition have 6 shots with a 1.01xg and should've scored one. 

yea but i had to switch stamos with my CM who couldn't put away chances. 

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.