Sneaky Pete
-
Posts
94 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by Sneaky Pete
-
-
2 hours ago, Flohrinho said:
Interesting, I feel like the majority of dribbles I see go straight into the defender, lose the ball and you get countered. That even seems to happen regularly to players with 18+ dribbling skills. But I totally agree that you rarely ever see a player beat another with a dribbling in a narrow space.
It depends on where the dribble happens. I agree that attempted dribbles tend to result in a loss of the ball in the first 2/3rds of the pitch, but once you get to the attacking 3rd it's pretty clear that taking a man on is lava.
Wide players on attacking duties are particularly bad about it. Receive ball -> get shown outside and make a dash for the byline -> stand on the ball and lollygag until you get tackled happens 20+ times per game against underdogs that pack the box. The IFs/IWs is actually more willing to take a man on directly than their attack duty counterparts, presumably because they tend to receive the ball deeper on the pitch.
Once wide players are level with the top of the box it's like they can smell that bloody byline and neither man nor beast is going to keep them from it.
1 -
21 hours ago, Andrew Marines said:
While i agree with you on most of the things you said, a WB-auto with get further forward and cross less often will play quite close to a wb-a but without all those crossing. With those PIs it becomed my favourite role.
For the right WM maybe he could use an inverted wingback in the spot right just over the wingback. But anyway, with a wm-d with stay narrow you should be able to create something like that, at least in the final third
I've never really used any of the "Auto" roles as I really dislike the idea of mentality so fundamentally changing how a player behaves, but I'll take your word for it.
0 -
I like what you're aiming for here, but it's not going to work out in the FM22 ME. Neither the WPs nor WMs roles will sit that deep and narrow, so you'll tend to get a wonky 3-1-6 shape (with the CMa and the MR competing for the right half-space) instead of the 3-2-5 you're looking for.
I also tend to really dislike the WBa/CWBa roles. While you will get the kind of positioning from them that you're looking for here, they have a really bad habit of behaving like mindless crossing bots regardless of player, TIs, and PIs. It feels like there's a zone near the byline where those two roles become physically incapable of considering any other action than a speculative cross; typically straight into the shins of a defender.
5 -
At the risk of sounding glib, have you considered that the inevitable result of playing on Attacking mentality and asking your players to play with "Much Higher Tempo" is lots of awful-quality shots against teams that sit back? All of your TIs scream "high-octane Klopp-style football", not "break down a parked bus".
Furthermore, your lineup has no vertical structure to it whatsoever. I guarantee if you look at average positions during established possession, your wingbacks are practically at the byline, Xhaka is probably sitting right on the edge of the box, and everyone else excluding your CBs and GK are in the box proper. You have no good options to recycle possession, and particularly your WBa on the right is going to mindlessly spam crosses into the box as a result. You are giving teams exactly what they want and compressing play needlessly with your role choices.
0 -
3 hours ago, Neil Brock said:
We say it's being investigated as the hope is that all raised issues will be fixed - it just comes down to time, resource and the complexity of the specific issue.
The intent behind communicating in this way is clearly sound, but speaking from experience I think you guys need to be a little bit careful about how you do this.
For example, one of my bugbears with regards to the ME has, for a long time, been the behaviour of wide players in the AM strata. The issue has been raised with developers in the bug forum across several consecutive editions by a wide swathe of different users. Every year it's been met by some one-line variation on "we're investigating/hope to fix this". The first time, this is fine. The fourth time, it starts feeling like you're politely being told to **** off and find something else to moan about.
The longer an issue goes unfixed, IMO, the greater the need for very clear communication. Even something along the lines of "this simply isn't a priority for us to fix" or "this would require more work than is reasonable relative to the scale of the issue" would do, but "we're investigating" year-on-year-on-year does not come off well even when the intent is pure as snow.1 -
1 hour ago, kandersson said:
if I remember correctly in the last three or four editions of the game the winter updates had minimal ME changes. Just saying...
In this case SI themselves have expressly stated that they're working on fixing IF/IW behaviour, which they acknowledge is not as intended.
Anything remotely resembling a fix would certainly be a "major change" - and frankly the ME really doesn't need much else to be very, very good indeed.2 -
I don't think there's a whole lot wrong with this tactic per se, so much as I think your issues likely stem from bad player fits.
You're trying to run a high-pressing tactic, but your players almost all have Work Rate < 15 and outside of Ndongala and Bellingham uniformly have quite low Aggression. Your players aren't really interested in doing what your tactic asks of them. Beyond that I think "Play Out of Defence" is a dodgy proposition when you're a top Bundesliga side and one of your CBs has a Composure and First Touch of 10. He's going to get flustered and give the ball away or hoof it long if he gets pressed.
I think the players you have a much better suited to a fairly direct style of play and a mid block - and I would try to get rid of that Comes Deep to Get Ball PPM on Moukoko yesterday. He just doesn't have the Teamwork and Vision for DLFs to bring the best out out in him.
0 -
8 hours ago, MrPompey said:
This is an existing issue and a problem for a number of releases.
Pending SI resolving it where possible dont let these get built into contracts - this is the pre contract conversation where you confirm squad role etc before final contract negotiations. This then allows flexibility of position and then avoids player discussions and promises.
Seconding this. Remove and exclude from negotiation is your friend here.
1 -
37 minutes ago, Bradz FM said:
I've quickly watched highlights of 4 Man City games and haven't seen a single example of both wide players hugging the line in final third. My sample size is tiny though
To clarify, I don't think anyone is asking for both wide players to hug the touchline simultaneously when the ball is in the attacking third. The far-side winger should obviously be coming infield and potentially making a run at the back post. Anything else would be nonsense.
Your second picture is a good example of what things should look like, although if my gut is correct Chiesa probably received the ball somewhere within the width of the penalty area and then ran wide with it, rather than receiving the ball while already wide.
The first picture is a good example of what people in this thread are complaining about. Bernardeschi is ball-side and not being overlapped by a fullback, yet rather than hugging the touchline to stretch play, he's almost sitting flush with the edge of the penalty area. This is exactly the opposite of what you see the player to the left of KdB doing in your first Man City screenshot/Bernardo Silva doing in the second Man City screenshot - both of them are far wider than the penalty area and stretching play horizontally.
It's more or less impossible to get the ball-side winger to consistently stretch play like that in FM. They will consistently come inside and sit no wider than the width of the box.
2 -
It's hard to say without knowing exactly what your players look like in terms of attributes and PPMs, but in a vacuum there are a couple of glaring issues with this setup:
1. All three of your forward duties are primarily selfish players that will look to score goals first and create for others as a distant second. IFs may be a support duty, but the role is essentially a striker in all but name.
2. Your midfield is hard-working and hard-tackling, but has exactly zero creativity. None of those three roles are inherently looking to provide creative, progressive passes..
Furthermore, your striker is likely quite disconnected from the rest of the team during build-up, and with "Counter" enabled your team may just be lumping the ball in his general direction. This may work if you're the underdog, but if you're the favoured team they are likely doing so to little avail.
0 -
5 hours ago, cristhianlinhatti said:
This isn't what's hard to recreate - it's when your team is actually camped around the opposition box that ME limitations make every wide role in the AM strata come too narrow.
Getting width in the early buildup is fairly trivial. Keeping your wide players from coming inside the width of the penalty area when the ball is near the box is not.
3 -
If your IW has the stats to make it viable, your best bet here is probably reworking your tactical setup somewhat and making them a primary goalscorer. You can do this by using "Focus Play Right", as you already have a lot of support roles on that side of the pitch, and your DLP will naturally move towards the ball. This will congest play on the right side of the pitch and open up space for your IWa to run into so that your other players can find him with a pass.
Unfortunately as @DarJ says you are simply not going to get the behaviour you want from your IW in the current ME - there is a fundamental deficiency in terms of how wide players behave on the ball that you cannot fix.
0 -
As you mention, I tend to be quite a bit more direct in buildup. When this starts being a problem consistently I also tend to look at bringing in a Plan B in the form of an extremely physically dominant target forward - Lorenzo Lucca is a good, cheap shout in this year's edition. You can also consider 3ATB as this generally means you outnumber the gegenpressing team during buildup. My most convincing victories against teams like Liverpool have been in 3ATB systems with an absolute ogre of a forward up top, typically on the side of the aerially weakest CB.
Interestingly, you can use this exact same type of system against teams that stubbornly sit very deep - 3ATB allows every other role on the pitch to take a lot of risk, and if you use counterpressing + counter you can effectively use the target forward as a human battering ram by playing the ball onto him and being extremely aggressive off the 2nd ball.
1 -
4 hours ago, De Nile said:
4141
x2 IWB on defend
x2 Mezzala on support/attack
x1 DLP/Regista
x2 Inverted Winger attack
this is how i would do it just a suggestion on forming the 235 out of a 4141 also because every one from wide is cutting inside you can afford to play wider if you want. IWB on defend are really good for curtaining opposition counters you may also want to play something else than a double mezzala.
This is an excellent suggestion, although I would maybe consider wingers instead of IWa to ensure width. If you go with WBIB and underlap left/right they won't really cross all that much, and if you play them with their strong foot goal-side they'll still cut inside, particularly with the right PPMs.
0 -
2 hours ago, luckydutch said:
I'm still not 100% confident in my role selection for the wide forwards. Just watched a few games in comprehensive and on IF(A), they seem to sometimes go on these long dribbles but get pushed out wide by the defender and just keep going till they run out of space and either whip a cross into the box off their weaker foot or turn 180 and double-back on themselves. Considering going back to IW(S) now that the overlap command is gone and they're no longer stopping to wait for the full-back all the time.
I want them coming inside as often as possible, either with the ball at their feet and looking to shot/play a through ball or to get on the receiving end of a low cross.
Bolding mine: this is unfortunately just a known and built-in weakness of the current ME, but one that they are expressly trying to fix in the next patch. Any wide role will do this, although IF-a is probably slightly more prone to it than a less aggressive role. However, IF-a will make diagonal runs behind the defense off the ball when the space is there, so you will still get them coming inside to get on the end of crosses/through balls. You can try Raumdeuter or APs as those roles dribble much less than the IF/IW/winger roles. I don't think APs really suits any of your players bar Bobby so you're probably stuck with at least one dribble-prone role.
But hey - at least they cut the ball back instead of hammering it into the fullback's shins like last year!
2 hours ago, luckydutch said:I'm just not convinced my squad has many ultra creative playmakers.
Then you should buy or develop some. Goals don't create themselves, and somebody has to release your wingbacks and forwards into space.
0 -
2 hours ago, luckydutch said:
I kept both wide forwards on attack but as IFs and they were way more direct without the overlap instruction. Jota had a stormer and Origi played alright. Firmino still played like a donkey as a F9 and got subbed-off for Adeyemi as an AF who scored almost immediately. Thiago had his first decent game in months.
Bolding mine: I find this sometimes happens if the opposition has a lot of players crowding the DM strata defensively, or are sitting very deep so your F9 ends up dribbling into cul-de-sacs and trying creative passes that just aren't on. The F9 is a very aggressive role in that sense despite coming with a support duty.
I find DLFs usually gets better performances out of players in this situation as it's a less ambitious role, and particularly a role that's less prone to dribbling itself into trouble. A speedy AF can also work if it's mostly an issue of the DM strata being extremely crowded, although in that situation I will also sometimes switch a 4-3-3 to a 4-2-3-1 and try to overload that area myself instead of bypassing it.
I'm unsurprised to hear that Thiago did much better as an AP than a Mez - the latter just inherently tries to do too many things that Thiago is too slow to pull off.
0 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
13 minutes ago, Kingstontom88 said:It was purely on the ME. I just think FM21 is more realistic and varied in its representation of football matches.
If you only look at scoring sequences, sure, I can see an argument there.
If you watch FM21 on comprehensive there is a veritably absurd amount of "run towards byline, bang cross against shins of a defender for corner". The FM22 ME has its issues, but the fact that wide players will actually turn and recycle the ball when a cross isn't on is an unfathomably large improvement over the maddening idiocy seen in FM21.
I can watch FM22 on comprehensive for hours if need be - FM21 makes me outright angry within 10-20 minutes at most.
9 -
1 hour ago, luckydutch said:
I’m looking to sell Firmino and Thiago and bring in Mbappe to lead my frontline. I’m guessing he’s going to want to be more of poacher. Can I make that work? I'll also look to replace Thiago with someone who can play more of a Steven Gerrard role. I guess he was kind of a Mezzala or Attacking Midfielder? Charging runs from deep to shoot or play through-balls.
Mbappé is going to be a little bit difficult to fit in - it leaves you with 3 forwards none of whom are particularly creative, although Mbappé could be played as a DLFa or CFa since none of his PPMs really interact with playing a striker, but he's lazy and pretty selfish. Mané will create to some extent in the IWa role, but his PPMs make him quite scoring-oriented. I would probably use some of the funds saved by bringing in Mbappé on a free transfer to find a creative winger, or just keep Firmino and rotate between Mbappé/Salah/Mané at AMR/AML.
Gerrard is a prototypical BBM with some very aggressive PPMs to me. You could definitely bring in that type of player and replace the DLP with an AP - Thiago will still work in that role as he has decent positioning and good anticipation, although you will want to replace him eventually as his lack of athleticism is very limiting in a gegenpressing side.
0 -
Your tactic has a really bad case of square peg in round hole on top of generally not being set up to create goals from your wingers. Your tactic fundamentally does not make sense with the players you have available.
- Your WBs are bombing up the pitch and hitting crosses to... Bobby Firmino, who has the "Comes Deep to Get Ball", "Looks for Pass" and "Likes Ball Played Into Feet" PPMs and is a mediocre finisher. If I had to design the least possibly suitable player for the AF-a role, I would have designed Bobby Firmino. Playing him in this role makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. He is getting low ratings because you're constantly crossing to him and he's getting bullied by Prem-level CBs.
- Your MEZ-a is Thiago. What is a MEZ-a supposed to do? Make aggressive runs with and off the ball, threaten space, provide goals. Is Thiago suitable to this role in any way? No. He has the "Comes Deep to Get Ball" and "Likes Ball Played Into Feet" PPMs and the athleticism of a moderately overweight 45-year-old.
- Salah has the "Looks to Break Offside Trap" PPM to go with elite athleticism and goalscoring ability... but you're playing him in an unselfish role that is not focused on scoring goals. Mané likewise.
This tactic would make sense if you had a monstrous, physically dominant forward (i.e. Haaland or Vlahovic) and an athletic, goalscoring midfielder (think SMS) as well as creative, unselfish wingers. But you have the exact opposite of that. Your tactic is asking your players to do things that run counter to their natural instincts and abilities. No wonder they perform terribly!
Now here's how you un**** it:
Now you have:
- Firmino dropping deep in a creative role to open up space for your two aggressive, goal-scoring wingers.
- Fabinho playing a defensive, buildup-orchestrating role that allows your wingbacks to bomb forwards.
- Thiago in a role that maximises his creative talents and masks the fact that he is short, slow, and weak.
- Play focused on attacking the middle of the pitch rather than hitting crosses to your front 3 who are all poor in the air.
0 -
This guy has way too much physical potential to play him far from goal. He's 195 tall with absolutely amazing physicals and mentals. He's not a great finisher, but definitely a decent one.
This guy screams TQ-A to me. You want this guy in the box at the end of moves. I can easily see him capable of 20G/20A seasons.
0 -
On 12/01/2022 at 12:12, Brian said:
How does your team look in transition?
The IF's and MEZ are on Very Attacking player mentality, with your backs on Positive. Doesn't this create gaps on the wings?
You would think so, but "short passing" and "play out of defence" tends to keep the team quite patient and compact in build-up.
I will occasionally turn the team mentality down to Balanced if I feel like we're being wasteful, though.
Edit: And for what it's worth the issue you're pointing out is kind of unavoidable regardless of mentality. An IWBs will always be two mentality notches below an IWs, regardless of which mentality your team is on. You can prevent your forwards from being too wasteful with the ball, but you don't want the vertical gap you have to somehow counteract it.
0 -
On 10/01/2022 at 15:12, Prolix said:
...well don't stop there!
It's not horribly wrong, but there's an unfortunate mix of square pegs in round holes (players with roles that don't suit their stats + PPMs) and incoherent tactical instructions:
1. Pressing high, hard, and trying to prevent short GK distribution, but "pass into space" and "counter" both ticked. Against 90% of teams this is just a recipe for giving the ball away, as OP will already have them pinned deep in their own half.
2. Two IFs, but a midfield that frankly has poor creativity and counterproductive PPMs. Barella is an elite player and can to some extent create, but his PPMs don't encourage it. McKennie is a runner through-and-through. Rice is very much a holding player and generally not someone that will provide assists. Both McKennie and Barella are going to end up in the box more often than not at the end of moves, leaving nobody other than Rice to recycle possession and attempt through balls.
3. The Mez-IF combo on the right could work - I like the combination of outside-in and inside-out movement - but it's ignoring the player PPMs. Ideally what you want to see here is the IF moving inside and the Mez moving outside... but Barella has "Gets Forward Whenever Possible" and so is going to end up fighting Zaniolo for space in the channel more often than not. When he doesn't end up fighting him for space in the channel, he's occupying the same space as the WBs.
Ultimately the only thing that I really don't like about OPs setup is the Mez + WB combination and some of the superfluous/actively self-sabotaging TIs. The rest is down to building a squad that doesn't suit the setup OP is trying to run. For reference, this is my own setup with Juventus:
You'll see that OP and I run fairly similar systems in a lot of ways, with a few key differences:
- A runner from deep in Szoboszlai that actively underlaps Kulusevski, who is primarily a creative player, but will also drift outside when Kulusevski drifts into the channel.
- An IWBs rather than a WBs. He occupies the space vacated by the Mez, and drifts wide if nobody else is providing width.
- A BBM in Locatelli that can drift into the area late, but primarily hangs around the top of the box, and comes deep to receive the ball in build-up.
- A DLPd in Guimaraes who despite his role has a very creative set of attributes and PPMs, meaning he will occasionally ping a long ball to my forwards.
- Actual space for forwards to run into because I'm not trying to strangle the opposition in their own area.
The only real misfit in this setup is Chiesa, whose "Hugs Line" PPM is both a blessing and a curse. I'd like him to make more diagonal runs at goal, but he does stretch play and is fast enough that his runs are quite dangerous regardless.
3 -
18 minutes ago, Poison said:
I think maybe you should use a winger because no one is "feeding" them , two ifs isn't something that will work, only Rice has this role currently and it's risky to serve them from that deep, though he should in general. Also maybe the opponents have a very deep defensive line and there is no space? I also use a deep line and very rarely I see players behind my defence. Do you counter or keep shape?
Two IFs can absolutely work if the rest of the team is set up correctly. The problem is that OP's team is not set up correctly.
0 -
1 hour ago, Johnny Ace said:
The "golden rule" with a 4-4-2 always seemed to be, you had to have one of the CMs on Defend
I think this is perhaps on over-interpretation of the "golden rule" of a 4-4-2 midfield partnership.
You need a holding role. That doesn't necessarily mean a Defend duty. If anything, you want to avoid defend duties in the midfield partnership of a 4-4-2 if you want to recreate the IRL banks-of-four defensive structure.
As for OP's issue, there are some great suggestions in terms of defending narrower and trying to disrupt build-up/mark out the AM, but the reality is that the 4-1-4-1 diamond is one of the harder counters to your formation. The only matchup I can think of that is arguably worse is the 5-3-2.
1
Squaring the ball when through on goal
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted
This is an on-and-off problem in FM, with some versions being worse than others. FM23 isn't great but nowhere near as bad as say, FM16, where wide players would run parallel to the byline and cannon it at the near post from a zero-degree angle.
Generally, though, it's a sequence of play that's very hard to recreate consistently.