What changes can add more defensive balance to this tactic?

[trueblue9877]

[trueblue9877]

I've been having great difficulty against top half teams especially away from home, against big 6 teams away it's almost impossible to win but I've tried going to a  balanced mentality and somehow the defence has got worse so just looking for hints.

[Cloud9]

2 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

Height on your DM will help shore things up against counter attacks.

Other changes:

• Have one of your wingbacks sit as a FB(s) and move ur DLP(s) to a non holding role. If you want to keep the DLP, switch to a 4-2-3-1. With this high quality player, a BPD could be a nice addition to the backline. 
• Caicedo is a bit wasted on a CM(a) imo, SV could be a decent alternative. You could always try a flat 3 DMs, which would give you the platform to keep both wingbacks going forward.

[trueblue9877]

8 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

Height on your DM will help shore things up against counter attacks.

Other changes:

• Have one of your wingbacks sit as a FB(s) and move ur DLP(s) to a non holding role. If you want to keep the DLP, switch to a 4-2-3-1. With this high quality player, a BPD could be a nice addition to the backline. 
• Caicedo is a bit wasted on a CM(a) imo, SV could be a decent alternative. You could always try a flat 3 DMs, which would give you the platform to keep both wingbacks going forward.

So I tried that but pretty much the same thing kept happening.

[poma]

I've had/has massive problems with Chelsea.

Don't get anything out of this squad, it's so unbalanced so no matter what tactic/training I've used I end up either sacked or I resign.

But good luck mate 

[NineCloudNine]

Having a GK-D, two CD-D and a DM-D might look like it should be defensively sound but in practice this is a very passive defence. They will also take low risk options which might well mean punting it long and giving possession away. As RL Chelsea discovered this weekend, top teams will find a way past a deep, passive defence eventually. Rolling ball out also means you are giving the ball to defenders who are being told not to take any risks. Either remove that instruction or make at least one CD a BPD, IMO.

On the other hand you have a very attacking front 4-5, but no playmaker, and you’re telling the team to run at defence. They are likely to be giving the ball away a lot and then getting counter-attacked through an empty midfield. I would remove that instruction.

Having a W-A and a CM-A on the same side is likely leaving a large gap down your left side. I personally don’t like W-A because it is very one-dimensional (run to byline and cross). Also seems a bit of a waste of Cole Palmer’s all-round game. I’d swap him and Sterling and make them both IW-S.

[trueblue9877]

1 minute ago, NineCloudNine said:

Having a GK-D, two CD-D and a DM-D might look like it should be defensively sound but in practice this is a very passive defence. They will also take low risk options which might well mean punting it long and giving possession away. As RL Chelsea discovered this weekend, top teams will find a way past a deep, passive defence eventually. Rolling ball out also means you are giving the ball to defenders who are being told not to take any risks. Either remove that instruction or make at least one CD a BPD, IMO.

On the other hand you have a very attacking front 4-5, but no playmaker, and you’re telling the team to run at defence. They are likely to be giving the ball away a lot and then getting counter-attacked through an empty midfield. I would remove that instruction.

Having a W-A and a CM-A on the same side is likely leaving a large gap down your left side. I personally don’t like W-A because it is very one-dimensional (run to byline and cross). Also seems a bit of a waste of Cole Palmer’s all-round game. I’d swap him and Sterling and make them both IW-S.

Thanks, I can see how run at defence would lead to more turnovers but there are two midfielders holding and there's a dlp so I kind of thought that would be a source of playmaking.

[NineCloudNine]

21 minutes ago, trueblue9877 said:

Thanks, I can see how run at defence would lead to more turnovers but there are two midfielders holding and there's a dlp so I kind of thought that would be a source of playmaking.

I was looking at the tactic in the post a couple above mine, which has a DM-D, BWM and CM-A.

Overall I think that to defend better you need to be more proactive, not add more D duties, and to look to be more compact, leaving less space and being harder to play through. You have a high and aggressive press, including pressing the GK, plus counter. All this pulls your team out of shape and makes you vulnerable to quick, press-resistant teams like the better ones you are struggling against.

You may still lose to top teams anyway. Chelsea are a long way off the best teams in the PL at the moment and your experience reflects that.

[poma]

14 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

move ur DLP(s) to a non holding role. If you want to keep the DLP, switch to a 4-2-3-1.

What do you mean?

[trueblue9877]

2 hours ago, NineCloudNine said:

I was looking at the tactic in the post a couple above mine, which has a DM-D, BWM and CM-A.

Overall I think that to defend better you need to be more proactive, not add more D duties, and to look to be more compact, leaving less space and being harder to play through. You have a high and aggressive press, including pressing the GK, plus counter. All this pulls your team out of shape and makes you vulnerable to quick, press-resistant teams like the better ones you are struggling against.

You may still lose to top teams anyway. Chelsea are a long way off the best teams in the PL at the moment and your experience reflects that.

Well the thing is that even with a mid block as can be seen here you get the exact same results.

[poma]

4 minutes ago, trueblue9877 said:

Well the thing is that even with a mid block as can be seen here you get the exact same results.

I can feel your pain, Chelsea were **** in last version of FM and EVEN worse in this years FM.

[NineCloudNine]

3 minutes ago, trueblue9877 said:

Well the thing is that even with a mid block as can be seen here you get the exact same results.

 

I didn't suggest you play a mid-block or or use that radically different formation. You've had a few suggestions here. You haven't said thanks and you don't seem to like what's been suggested, so bye and good luck!

[trueblue9877]

48 minutes ago, NineCloudNine said:

I didn't suggest you play a mid-block or or use that radically different formation. You've had a few suggestions here. You haven't said thanks and you don't seem to like what's been suggested, so bye and good luck!

I said thanks after your first comment, plus the only reason I showed the other tactics is because like the other ones what you suggested didn't work.

[Cloud9]

11 hours ago, poma said:

What do you mean?

Usually you want your 8's to be a bit more mobile and a DLP(s) comes with hold position. This will create a lopsided pivot when the other 8 goes forward and can disjoint the connection between the midfielders to the frontline.

In a 4-2-3-1 you could then utilize two 6's with hold position and end up with an symmetrical pivot instead, which is a much more defensively stable platform for the 10 to perform in front of. 

Edited February 20 by Cloud9