5312 short/quick vertical tiki-taka build-up issues

[kjarus1]

Hello guys,

I have build a quite successful tactic that is based around short/quick vertical tiki-taka. The idea behind is two attack with intensity through the middle where we have numbers while also trying to preserve possession and pick our moments for through balls.

 

 

The reason for extremely wide pitch here is to make opposition's channels bigger, move into them, and then penetrate with a killer ball. Those CM(A) boys are getting loads of highlights and I really like how we attack. However, the issue I am facing is in a build-up phase where I cannot connect well my defense to midfield and our build-up play is not as good.

 

 

This is average position with ball and you can see that no-one from CM's drops to link up with defense. Of course the solution would be to change CM(A) to something like box-to-box but then I am loosing one deep runner and they are key in penetrating those channels. Any ideas in how I could improve my build-up play here? I want to have at least 2 deep aggressive runners and 3 people pressing at the top. Some of my ideas:

- Add 'come deep to get the ball' as player trait to CMs

- Change CWB to WB or IWB. I would imagine that IWB would tend to tuck in more and offer more passing options for my defenders, but the downside is that I will be loosing width.

- Change AM to AP, maybe he would come a bit deeper to get the ball?

- Change one of CMs to a box-to-box and add 'Get Further forward'/'move into channels' PIs.

- Change one of CMs to a box-to-box and then AM to a Shadow Striker, but then we would become too predictable for opposition as we attack with all 3 our most forward players?

Any ideas are welcomed.

[Tsuru]

1 hora atrás, kjarus1 disse:

However, the issue I am facing is in a build-up phase where I cannot connect well my defense to midfield and our build-up play is not as good.

 

1 hora atrás, kjarus1 disse:

no-one from CM's drops to link up with defense

I think you addressed the problem very well: you need a CM which helps the defence a little bit more.

I would consider some options:

• You can turn one of the CM-At into a DLP-Su, for example, and see what happens. If you feel you need more power upfront due to the use of the DLP (which I don´t think you will do), you can try a MO-At, or even a CWB on Attack on the same side of the DLP-Su.
• You can turn one the CM-At into a BWM-Su. I played like this on 5-3-2 systems before and the BWM-Su does this "dropping job" into midfield fairly well.
• Instead of a CM-At, you can try a simple CM-S and move the Libero into an Attacking role, for example.

I think you should try to focus on the buildup from defence to the midfield and try to balance any changes with other changes on the players upfront.

I would also select a different striking pair, as I think two AFs will give you less variability and also can isolate your attack from your midfield. But if it is working don´t touch it! 

 

[kjarus1]

@Tsuruthanks for the advices. The thing is that apart from strikers I want to keep at least 2 aggressive runners from deep centrally which means if I put DLP(SU) or BWM(su) it won't happen :/ What is MO-At? I think Libero on attack could be very interesting to experiment - I will see how much further up the field he is willing to go. You are right also on striker partners, but AM(su) being behind helps a lot and provides nice link up, otherwise I would have one striker dropping deeper.

[kjarus1]

I think I found a solution thought, tried to experiment different combinations, simulate match and produce average with ball plots. Here is the one which seems to work nicely:

 

Added player traits for both CMs to 'drop deeper to get ball' and changed from CWB(SU) to WB(SU) since this role doesn't have permanent 'stay wider' instruction I think they are more involved in possession while still maintaining that width.

[Tsuru]

13 minutos atrás, kjarus1 disse:

@Tsuruthanks for the advices. The thing is that apart from strikers I want to keep at least 2 aggressive runners from deep centrally which means if I put DLP(SU) or BWM(su) it won't happen :/ What is MO-At? I think Libero on attack could be very interesting to experiment - I will see how much further up the field he is willing to go. You are right also on striker partners, but AM(su) being behind helps a lot and provides nice link up, otherwise I would have one striker dropping deeper.

Sorry, AM-At...I thought in my mother tongue 

It looks like you found a solution for the CMs. For the striker pair I was thinking on something like AF/DLF-At, or maybe AF and Treq. You would keep the two playing more upfront but you would gain more variety as they would behave differently,