Relationship between Closing Down and Defensive Line

[TwoShedsJackson]

Looking for peoples opinions on what you do with Closing Down if you raise/lower the defensive line. Seems to me that raising the defensive line means you should have to reduce Closing Down as your players will be higher up the pitch and so could get caught out by through balls if they are chasing all over the pitch as well.

If reducing it, closing down can increase as you should be less at risk of being caught out in this manner - has anyone done much experimenting with this or do you generally leave closing down at the same setting irrespective of whether you alter the defensive line during a game?

[sillymonkey666]

I would have thought it would be the other way around. If you play a high defensive line and dont close down high then wouldnt that allow the opposition defense time to make a hollywood pass over the top of your advanced line? And when using a low defensive line with high closing down I would expect this to stretch your team and leave big gaps between defense and midfield.

[teejay73]

I would have thought it would be the other way around. If you play a high defensive line and dont close down high then wouldnt that allow the opposition defense time to make a hollywood pass over the top of your advanced line? And when using a low defensive line with high closing down I would expect this to stretch your team and leave big gaps between defense and midfield.

This is how i play it, though must admit i have never set a high def line and low closing down so dont know for sure, i always went with the assumption that if i am dropping deep on my def line and playing a def game then low closing down for most of my team and quite the opposite if i were playing a high def line and attacking game.

[RT--]

I'd go with the two above posters and say that I normally match a high defensive line with higher closing down settings for the defence.

The advantage of a high defensive line, to me, is to press the opponents higher up the pitch and attempt to squeeze the space available to them in order to make it hard for them to retain possession. If you have low closing down, you're effectively positioning your players further up the pitch, but when the oppostion get the ball, they'll keep backing off and dropping away until they're near your own penalty area, at which point they'll try and challenge for the ball.

To me, that's incurring all the risk of a high defensive line without getting any of the benefit

[JD nawrat]

Looking for peoples opinions on what you do with Closing Down if you raise/lower the defensive line. Seems to me that raising the defensive line means you should have to reduce Closing Down as your players will be higher up the pitch and so could get caught out by through balls if they are chasing all over the pitch as well.

If reducing it, closing down can increase as you should be less at risk of being caught out in this manner - has anyone done much experimenting with this or do you generally leave closing down at the same setting irrespective of whether you alter the defensive line during a game?

So, with a Deep Line, you think you should Close Down Often?

I disagree with all of the posts in the thread so far. I think that there is no 'relationship'. At least it won't be highly damaging if you don't.

If you defend deep, and close down, it might give them a small window of opportunity. If you defend deep, but don't close down, the opponents might hit a wonder strike from a distance.

And if you defend high, but don't close down, it'll allow the opponent to run to you. But defending high and close down could allow a large window of opportunity, unless your two defenders are very quick.

Both have pros and cons. There isn't a 'relationship', so to speak.

For the record, I defend with a High Line, Close Down Often, and have a pretty quick defence, not the quickest, but not slow. I also have one of the best defensive records in the league.

Which is why I don't agree with either points of view.

It depends on your team, how this 'relationship' will vary.

[teejay73]

I would have thought it would be the other way around. If you play a high defensive line and dont close down high then wouldnt that allow the opposition defense time to make a hollywood pass over the top of your advanced line? And when using a low defensive line with high closing down I would expect this to stretch your team and leave big gaps between defense and midfield.

So, with a Deep Line, you think you should Close Down Often?

I disagree with all of the posts in the thread so far. I think that there is no 'relationship'. At least it won't be highly damaging if you don't.

If you defend deep, and close down, it might give them a small window of opportunity. If you defend deep, but don't close down, the opponents might hit a wonder strike from a distance.

And if you defend high, but don't close down, it'll allow the opponent to run to you. But defending high and close down could allow a large window of opportunity, unless your two defenders are very quick.

Both have pros and cons. There isn't a 'relationship', so to speak.

For the record, I defend with a High Line, Close Down Often, and have a pretty quick defence, not the quickest, but not slow. I also have one of the best defensive records in the league.

Which is why I don't agree with either points of view.

It depends on your team, how this 'relationship' will vary.

Sorry to say this but i think there is a relationship between def line and closing down, they do go hand in hand, one of the big cons you will find with a high def line regardless of closing down is always going to be the fact that your back four if slow enough can be exposed easily by a fast forward line but on the other hand, if you have players in your defence with the right mentality attributes then they dont really need high pace essentially. so it is as much a players specific attributes that determine if a high def line is a success or not, so yes you should play high def line with high closing down instructions, imo.

The same could be said regarding low def-line and closing down, as an example if you are playing a tough away match and needed to defend, you would not want high closing down as this would leave players out of position and the opponent could exploit the space left by you rushing to close them down, this would be really bad if you were playing a low def-line and was playing quite deep.

[JD nawrat]

I think you've misunderstood me a little.

What I mean is, if you go with a High Line, and Close Down often, then it will leave your defence running out of positions, with huge gaps through the middle, and will effectively allow the opponents to pass it through that space and allow you to be torn to shreds.

Whereas, if you don't close down often, you don't leave gaps, and don't present such good opportunities for the opponents.

I understand that it's simple to just play the long ball over the top, and your pacey striker will get onto it and score no bother, but I was meaning in terms of allowing players too much space, and them exploiting you too easily.

[teejay73]

I think you've misunderstood me a little.

What I mean is, if you go with a High Line, and Close Down often, then it will leave your defence running out of positions, with huge gaps through the middle, and will effectively allow the opponents to pass it through that space and allow you to be torn to shreds.

Whereas, if you don't close down often, you don't leave gaps, and don't present such good opportunities for the opponents.

I understand that it's simple to just play the long ball over the top, and your pacey striker will get onto it and score no bother, but I was meaning in terms of allowing players too much space, and them exploiting you too easily.

I get what you are saying and yes you are right about high closing down, but when you run a high def line you are as some-one has said squeezing the play and coupled this to a high closing down (not extreme closing down) you are giving your opponent very little time on the ball to make those killer passes, unlike if you sat back on a high def line then you would be caught out more often as the opposition has time to play those killer balls, but once again you cant just set a high def line and high closing down and expect the players to adapt, there are other things to consider as well, like how the opposition want to play against you, so rule number 1 know your enemy, is he going to sit back and let you play against him with a high def-line or will he look to soak up and then counter, that is the danger for me!!

[teejay73]

So, with a Deep Line, you think you should Close Down Often?

I disagree with all of the posts in the thread so far. I think that there is no 'relationship'. At least it won't be highly damaging if you don't.

If you defend deep, and close down, it might give them a small window of opportunity. If you defend deep, but don't close down, the opponents might hit a wonder strike from a distance.

And if you defend high, but don't close down, it'll allow the opponent to run to you. But defending high and close down could allow a large window of opportunity, unless your two defenders are very quick.

Both have pros and cons. There isn't a 'relationship', so to speak.

For the record, I defend with a High Line, Close Down Often, and have a pretty quick defence, not the quickest, but not slow. I also have one of the best defensive records in the league.

Which is why I don't agree with either points of view.

It depends on your team, how this 'relationship' will vary.

My apologies jdownie i missed the first line of your original post..doh, though i do feel there is a relationship between the two though.

[kolobok]

There is a relationship and it's pretty straight forward. Closing down slider position for attacking players should be higher than defensive line slider position. If it's not, then you allow opposition time to launch a quick attack. On the other hand, deep DL complemented by high cllosing down for attacking players will lead to gaps in the middle. Basically, the distance between DL slider position and CD slider position for the attacking players should be more or less constant. In fact, at least in 9.2.0, all AI managers' tactics had that distanse equal 5 (e.g. DL = 10 CD =15) IIRC (check out this thread http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=90566 ). I believe it's slightly different in 9.3.0 but the idea stays.

[teejay73]

There is a relationship and it's pretty straight forward. Closing down slider position for attacking players should be higher than defensive line slider position. If it's not, then you allow opposition time to launch a quick attack. On the other hand, deep DL complemented by high cllosing down for attacking players will lead to gaps in the middle. Basically, the distance between DL slider position and CD slider position for the attacking players should be more or less constant. In fact, at least in 9.2.0, all AI managers' tactics had that distanse equal 5 (e.g. DL = 10 CD =15) IIRC (check out this thread http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=90566 ). I believe it's slightly different in 9.3.0 but the idea stays.

Just as i thought kolobok, and yes it is pretty straight forward. I normally play a high closing down game with my attacking players above the def-line which is high but if you are adjusting closing down individually where do you place your defensive players in relation to the def-line? and to clarify what if you use a global setting? by setting this higher than the def-line would pull the back four out of position more.

[kolobok]

Just as i thought kolobok, and yes it is pretty straight forward. I normally play a high closing down game with my attacking players above the def-line which is high but if you are adjusting closing down individually where do you place your defensive players in relation to the def-line? and to clarify what if you use a global setting? by setting this higher than the def-line would pull the back four out of position more.

My regular team settings are DL = 15, CD = 17. Individual CD is applied to DCs (both at 8), MCd (10) and one MC (13), though if I play 442 only DCs and MCd are on individual. If I want to play deeper, I put DL to 10 and CD around 13. As you see, there is no particular need to adjust any individual instructions. I never go below 10 for DL as I have pretty good team. But if I had to, I would make some adjustments to individual instructions as well. Keep in mind, that I use mentality between 8 and 12 so even with high CD my FBs, wingers, and MCs still track back.

[teejay73]

My regular team settings are DL = 15, CD = 17. Individual CD is applied to DCs (both at 8), MCd (10) and one MC (13), though if I play 442 only DCs and MCd are on individual. If I want to play deeper, I put DL to 10 and CD around 13. As you see, there is no particular need to adjust any individual instructions. I never go below 10 for DL as I have pretty good team. But if I had to, I would make some adjustments to individual instructions as well. Keep in mind, that I use mentality between 8 and 12 so even with high CD my FBs, wingers, and MCs still track back.

So you cant play a fully global CD as you would still have to have an individual instruction for the defensive units of the team? is this right?

[kolobok]

So you cant play a fully global CD as you would still have to have an individual instruction for the defensive units of the team? is this right?

You probably can, but I have never tried it in FM09. I guess if you put DL somwhere near 5 or below, then global CD around 7-8 should be ok. I would not try it with high DL though as I believe keeping position for DCs is more important than trying to retrieve ball ealier.

[teejay73]

You probably can, but I have never tried it in FM09. I guess if you put DL somwhere near 5 or below, then global CD around 7-8 should be ok. I would not try it with high DL though as I believe keeping position for DCs is more important than trying to retrieve ball ealier.

Exactly my thoughts on it, though it is good to have some clarification on this so thanks for clearing that up.