Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

lam

Members+
  • Content Count

    3,298
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About lam

  • Rank
    Semi Pro

About Me

  • About Me
    London

Interests

  • Interests
    Use to love the gym, but love my computer more now

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Spurs of course

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Raynes Park United (edited from Walsall)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In answer to your question....with that tactic I'd play normal width and then review in game if it's working. Your WB's, which in my opinion are really attacking, should provide all the width you need. But spreading the rest of the team out you make your passing style harder to achieve as there are fewer players that can receive a short pass as they are simply not close enough but you also lessen the space your WB's can work in. If you want your WB's really wide then use the PI's to achieve this...... Stay wider + run wide with the ball. On a related note.... and entirely subject to player ability my RB would be FB(S) or IWB(D/S). Don't underestimate how far forward a FB(S) will go when there is space..... for him to move into..... hmm..... space for Wingbacks..... I think I may have mentioned that above.
  2. A couple of things stand out for me here. You're attacking in terms of mentality but also your instructions. Essentially you have a lot of players forward and this is even assuming some (S) roles rather than (A) roles. With this many forwards, with mixed passing and attacking mentality you are really forcing attacking play. This is somewhat reflected in your shot numbers. If your players are all forwards and your taking a lot of shots then expecting possession is probably unrealistic. I mean it can be done but your setup is very attacking. With your current instructions, and assuming you didn't want to change them, I think you'd need many (S) roles. I'm using the 'Liquid' tactic designed by Rashidi at the moment and it's really interesting to watch. It's setup is not to dissimilar to to yours in respects that it is very attacking. My shots on goal are at phenomenal numbers but my long shots are too and this is a signal of no passing options. I imagine you are seeing the same. If you want more possession based stats then you need to balance a bit. Stick with your current TI's but lower the roles to (S) and see what happens. Or pull some of the TI's out, push mentality back a little and find a nice balance between (S) and (A) roles. One thing that many people forget.... the quickest way to lose possession is to take crappy shots at goal. If your shots not on target are high this will be a problem for possession. I'm somewhat surprised that you're unable to close down players with a 442 formation. Personally I think it's one of the best formations for closing down as you have players in almost all positions. Just ensure your roles are not countering your instructions. On a related note. If they are playing really deep and your whole team is pressing you'll be caught on the counter a lot. Thus try some high/low block closing down. Rashidi wrote about this somewhere but essentially high block is your front players pressing really hard and your mid/back players having medium press. A low block is the reverse.
  3. I'd be more worried about the role of #21. Look at all that space for him to drive into....... As the others have said. If he has move into channels as a PI or PPM then that is what he is doing. I think you'll see this more if you do not have other players driving into that space like a W(A) or WB(A). But seriously..... think about getting #21 to use that space.... theres tons of it. ps... as a side note.... how'd you post that little movie?
  4. Still with a training question rather than starting a new thread. Whats going on here: Why, in some cases, do I have 'none' workload? I can only assume that my team are on physical training but I'm sure in that there is an element of all the other categories for training. I also have a lot of roles being trained most of which would require one of the 'none' categories. Thoughts?
  5. Hey, Just getting into a 'deep' save (where I go huge details on training and youth) and am wondering how best to set the coaches up. I have some simple questions along these lines but if there is additional information that would be great. Who is better for training under 18's. Attack 18 and Youth 14 or Attack 14 and Youth 18. Is discipline still favourable for U18's and motivation for U23's Should I put a really good 17yo into th U23 (and some 1st team appearances) or leave him in U18's (noting the training good for U18 and game time for over rule_) Thanks
  6. Your tactic may be surprisingly working for you (and this is the point) because teams are underestimating you. Despite your balanced approach your team is really attacking. Two x BBM's, IF(S), AF(A), AP(A), W(A). If you gain promotion this may continue to work for you in the high league as again teams will underestimate you. However once you start to be considered a threat I think you may find that teams will be a little more cautious and do two things: Sit deeper and that means they will have lots of players in the box and you are also flooding it which means no space. Hit you on the counter and with two BBM's there is a risk there. If their team work is decent they should support each other a little but I'd be a little worried. Your defence looks decent in terms of roles. So often you'll see two WB's on attack or something. However as Denen said, I imagine you have quite a gap between defence and midfield that could be exploited..... Here..... think counter attacking team with a DLF(S) or something like that.... tons of space for him to sit in. Short answer..... I think you're just surprising the opposition.
  7. Your tactic is incredibly similar to mine (very). These players are always interesting as you tend to look at the key skills and they are great.,.... passing, tackling, physical etc. However when you look under the hood they are missing the primary supporting skills to excel in any role and for me it more often becomes about what you can train rather than where he fits. He is missing some key stats that would make some stand out roles/positions perfect. In the BBM role he is lacking in finishing, flair and creativity. Thats a lot of skills to work on. In the DM role he is missing positioning and aggression. Aggression is hard to train. I don't know your players but I know that tactic as it is very similar to mine. He would be great in the DM(D) role. An enforcer with great physicallity who can just continually recycle the ball over and over. Many would be tempted to switch to DLP due to his decent passing but he doesn't have the vision for it and it would mess with the tactic. If he is the strongest of your players then the BBM will be fine but for me he is not rounded enough for that.
  8. A few bullets from me to consider: No real defensice support in MC's. If you're using a BBM then try a CM(D) on the MCR WB(S) can go forward but ideally you might want a more defensive role in the MCR position (see above). Don't be afraid to use FB(S/A) as they still really do get forwards when there is space in front of them. You'd be surprised but they are just more fussy about those opportunities With 4 players in the top third so you really need a 'much higher defence line'? Are the DC's fast? Playing a high line and offside if they are not is suicide
  9. You might have a danger of your DLP bypassing your two MC's. Couple that with a Target man...... I think your team looks a little like this.. Goal keep to Whelan.... Whelan to Abraham.... Abraham looses possession as he is the only upfield player. A few bullets from me: A straight forward DM(D) will recycle possession over and and over. If you want an MC scoring goals then go for a Mez(A). A DLF(A/S) I think would work better in a possession tactic. It can still do the TM stuff but will not draw the play overly and you can switch it around depending on their supply and involvement in the game. You're playing through the middle when you have 4 wide players. Turn it off and let the team decide where to pass as the game unfolds You need some roaming to ensure players are always in position to receive the ball without a marker. I'd turn it off. Watch the WB roles. I playing a very very similar tactic to this but with the AML/R positions. I recently swtich my WB's to FB'(S/A) and the defensive transformation was amazing. A FB(S/A) can still be Really attacking.... they just choose their moment more careful. Using FB's will also mean that you'll have deeper support more often to recycle play Turn off most of those TI's. It's impossible to work out why your tactic is not working with so many active. (keep short passing - fundamental to possession). Once you understand the tactic and see something in game to exploit then turn some back on again (injured opposition FB - overload the flank etc) Looking for some combining duties on three front players. Something like a Mez(A), DLF(S) and Winger(A). If it's to much then pull the winger back to (S) Below are the two I'm playing with at the moment. Look to the left side to see main changes. LAM
  10. This is me and I'll tell you why I think this is working for me. Naturally different team and different players. Defence: In terms of defending narrow I moved away from this when reading something that Rashidi wrote. If you're playing against a wide 442 and their wingers are bombing down the flanks then why would you defend narrow? You're allowing them lots of space where the want it. So i tend to defend normal or wide. On the flip side if they are playing with a narrow formation or with inside forwards I'll go standard or narrow. They'll want to cut in and when doing so will run into a FB, DC and DM. If playing against a winger and IF (like I do) then I'd set normal and tell the FB on the IF side to sit narrower. This is an instruction whilst YOU have possession but I think it helps position them better when the ball is turned over. The roles that I have mean that my players will tend to follow the team instructions around closing down. Attack: Fullbacks: Above is the description of a Wingback and it brought me to a realisation that in a formation where I have three men forwards with two other midfielders supporting I really really didn't need anymore players around the box. A fullback provides me with the support and defence i need to balance the tactic. On the left the FB(A) will make late runs into an attacking position or stay a little deeper supporting. The beauty of this is that he is very rarely marked as he is often quite deep in build up play and not considered a threat. This means that by the time he gets forwards he is generally unmarked and in a fantastic position to support play. My FB(S) has only recently been changed to (S) from(D) as we are becoming so dominant that few teams are countering down this flank. In a (D) role he provides incredible support play and recycling ability as well as a man back for counters or defence. In an (S) he will make late runs like the (A) but later still and not as far forwards as often. In the FB role I find the contrast between the duties to be significant in certain aspects but negligible in others. Below you'll see what I mean. Look at the number of crosses from the (A) vs the (D/S) however also look at the number of passes. The passes are very similar in quantity between the two but the (D) lacks the key passes but clearly is providing a real support. If you look at your first game picture you are so incredibly attacking ... who is supporting?? Be under no illusions to just how supportive an FB can be to a formation yet provide great defensive structure Again..... looking at your game picture - how narrow are your front three? Where is the movement? When I started with this formation I had two IF's. I then switched to two Wingers and loved the width that provide. I also loved how they would attack the goal when the ball is on the opposite flank. I then bough Hulme and what an incredible lower league player he is!!. He is tailor made for an IF(S) in my opinion and wreaks havoc there however when i switched back to an IF(S) I lost my width. So now I set up him with 'stay wider' so he pulls defences out wide then kills them with his dribbling, agility and pace when he cuts inside early from a really wide position. You can imagine the damage this causes when my late arriving FB(A) not only isnt marked but has noone near him to pick up. One last thing. In my opinion you have waaayyyy to many team instructions. Another thing I took from Rashidi or Herne is to apply these during the game when you see something you can exploit. Is your GK distribution being wasted getting the ball forwards.....then turn on short passes/distribute. If it's finding your men then leave it alone. Are they weak down a certain flank.... then exploit it I hope some of that helps.
  11. I play pretty much as you described. I'll post more later and my tactic however two settings to look at. Use FB's rather than WB's. I use (A) on the left as I overlap an IF and (D) on the right. I'll switch out the right to (S) if we are dominating and I feel no threat down the flank. Both offer better support play and you can tell them to cross left. This year I have noticed just how overused the WB role is. Since switching my defence is considerably better and the number of cross are far lower and the support play is better. What for the massive difference between teh (A) and (D). Also you can use 'work ball into box'. though this affects a lot more.,
  12. It's an intersting transition you have made to two wingers. Despite my last post stating I am likely to stick with this tactic I have moved away due to a poor run of injuries. I was tempted to 'magically heal them' but decided to stick with the game proper and just switched tactics. I make the comment as I have been playing around with other formations that are a little more traditional and I have tried to bring with me what I learnt about this formation (WM). I opted for a simple 4141DM and was getting a little frustrated with it but then I played around with the front three and set myself up with two wingers. One (S) and one (A) and the game play was great. Defense was really stretched, there was space for incoming midfield to attach and I massively dominated the last 14 minutes and grabbed the winner goal from a cross from the far winger to the other winger that had cut in. I found with the WM and my team the passing around the box was amazing but the box was just packed with players so it often took an amazing worldie to win a game. It early days for me with two wingers but it really does seem to deliver the space. Now it's just about how best to exploit it. I'm running a auto 100 year game in the background so can't post a picture but am running with this AF(A) Winger (S) Winger (A) CM(S) MEZ(A) WB(A/S) DC(C) DC(S) WB(S)/IWB(S) The DC combo is interesting as they do not have 'hold position' like the normal DC(D) do. Thus they move around a little more offering better support. I also find that they mark a solo striker a little better,
  13. Agreed. Yes it can. I'm playing the WM formation which, whilst having wingers, does play fairly narrow. The overload of 4 DM/MC's creates an incredible support structure generally having a passing option at all times. Which roles do you have on your strikers? If they are both attacking type roles AND you have an attacking mentality (guess you do as PSG) then do not expect them to drop deep. Maybe trya DLF(S) or False9.
  14. I would hazard a guess that you are getting buggered down the wings. I think any opposition deep midfielder is going to have a ton of time on their hands to make a great pass down the flanks bypassing your midfield. Check the assists against your team. Are they from the flanks? Think about it.... how many advanced players do you have on (A) and with a positive mentality they will be well up the field. If you lose the closing down game your midfield and flanks are exposed.
  15. I have no one in my team that can take a decent direct free kick however everyone that has an opportunity always shoots.# The only option I am offered is 'mixed' but it is never mixed it's always direct and I score perhaps 1 in 40 shots. I've taken to keeping all my players back simply because I know I will lose possession. Is there a way to change this? My current match has a player with freekicks 6, longhots 4 taking my direct free kicks and shooting. Anuy ideas?
×
×
  • Create New...