Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Dickie Greenleaf

Emulating Diego Simeone's Atletico Madrid

Recommended Posts

It's doable to a degree. I've been using this: http://football-manager.forumcommunity.net/?t=58765385

I changed the CM-D to a BWM-S w/hold position and one of the CB to CB-C w/hold position and it's worked out pretty solid so far. Need to make adjustments to defend crosses, because that seems to be the biggest issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I'm working with now, and it's going really well (I'm killed with injuries at the moment, as you can see from my XI):

blw9PjN.png

gEHV6X4.png

Most of what I concede are second chance shots from not clearing the ball or set pieces. 4231 or 4312 can sometimes be a bogey, but I'm going to try dropping the DLF to an anchorman to see if that can help out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

what skin are you using?

I'd like to have this tactics screen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is what I'm working with now, and it's going really well (I'm killed with injuries at the moment, as you can see from my XI):

blw9PjN.png

gEHV6X4.png

Most of what I concede are second chance shots from not clearing the ball or set pieces. 4231 or 4312 can sometimes be a bogey, but I'm going to try dropping the DLF to an anchorman to see if that can help out.

What effect would going to structured and removing the the exploit the flanks and be more disciplined TI? I saw video by rashidi on his tactical bootroom and someone had similar shouts and he used that fix.

The logic behind it being that by instructing to the flanks you are restricting your play there, and that by removing it you would add more variety to your play going forward. Perhaps you are doing this on purpose to ensure that if you lose the ball on the wings you can press in those zones and win it back out wide. Maybe thats what you're going for but from the little I have seen of Atletico they seem to be able to penetrate through the centre of the pitch as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I have my OI set up is to press and funnel everything inside, and then my play is dictated from the wings and the WP. I don't have much issues scoring, to be honest.

I'll give those TI changes a try, though.

Edit: I had to tick back exploit the flanks, wasn't getting enough going forward but I've kept structured and removing be more disciplined.

And the skin I'm using is a Korean one. Called Gunzo I think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought as much regarding the funnelling as I was typing. What changes if any have you seen when switching to structured and removing be more disciplined?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The way I have my OI set up is to press and funnel everything inside, and then my play is dictated from the wings and the WP. I don't have much issues scoring, to be honest.

I'll give those TI changes a try, though.

Edit: I had to tick back exploit the flanks, wasn't getting enough going forward but I've kept structured and removing be more disciplined.

And the skin I'm using is a Korean one. Called Gunzo I think?

what OIs are you using? The ones from that FM Base thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what OIs are you using? The ones from that FM Base thread?

A different FM Base thread. I took some of Artisan's Simeone tactic in FM15 and made tweaks to roles etc.

784396d1425296504-diego-simeone-inspired-l-4-4-2-l-counter-attacking-pressing-artisan-15-3-0-screen-shot-2015-03-02-11.41.13.png

And it seemed the back four kept their shape more often with structured, IE less the CB breaking the line to make a tackle or close down.

Here's the tactic if anyone wants to it. https://www.dropbox.com/s/gudlwvvyyqnztsz/Atletico%20Counter_16A50B20-1918-4E7D-870A-A43F4C131E3A.fmf?dl=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is what I'm working with now, and it's going really well (I'm killed with injuries at the moment, as you can see from my XI):

blw9PjN.png

gEHV6X4.png

Most of what I concede are second chance shots from not clearing the ball or set pieces. 4231 or 4312 can sometimes be a bogey, but I'm going to try dropping the DLF to an anchorman to see if that can help out.

looks good, nice post - I've started using a variant;

9404430359.png,

changed some of the player roles too and seems pretty solid so far

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice. Which roles did you change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Ghents,

do you make any adjustments, or this setup is used in every match?

E.G. do you remove pass into space against teams sitting deep, do you change from counter to another mentality, etc.?

What's with cards, there's get stuck in and some hard tackling in OI's?

I'm asking bcs I can't try the tactic right now, tnx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I try to use it all the time. It's my first season using it so I'm more trying to learn the ins and outs of it. But those ideas would work, I'd think. I haven't had AI completely adjusting to me yet, I.E. Sitting deep etc. I haven't had an issue with cards.

I probably won't ever change from counter, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made a few adjustments.

Flexible -> Fluid

Higher Line -> Normal line

More direct passing -> mixed passing

LFB-A to LFB-S, RFB-A to WB-S

Against something with an AMC and 2 strikers, I drop the CF-S to a DLP-D at DM and change the BWM-S to a BBM-S (same PI) and the DLP-D to a CM-S (same PI)

Still the vast majority I concede are the damn rebound shots from set pieces, which to be blunt is.... INFURIATING.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this version is pretty different from the one you posted pics of

Must have been an old version. What's different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Must have been an old version. What's different?

middle two are a BBM and a CM(d), few different TIs, different front two etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I finally got a chance to test the tactic, I have a few questions.

I like the idea of forcing opposition play in the middle, playing narrower and using those OI's do that? Have I missed any instructions?

What do you do if opposition have pacy wingers, do you experience issues closing them down and hard tackling?

I see that now you have DR/L on support, I really liked how they made runs in space created by WM & WP.

I'm interested in creating width, except for exploit flanks you declared indispensable above, what are key instructions for achieving it?

What are your thoughts on AF(a) + F9 combo? I might try having always 1 striker in the box?

Could you explain going fluid? I've read many times that 442, a non multistrata formation, should use it to reduce gaps between lines, but I recently read Herne79's thread where he advocates using structured (to ensure players follow your instructions) shape with or without be more creative, depending on opposition.. I also remember reading somewhere that you can add creativity to a single player by using "get creative" shout so that's another option adjusting your tactic..

What are your thoughts on this? TNX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
middle two are a BBM and a CM(d), few different TIs, different front two etc.

Ahh, yeah. Must have been during me messing with stuff. middle two should now be BBM and CM-D. strikes should be CF-S and DLF-A.

Here's TI I'm using now.

yBXXnkT.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I finally got a chance to test the tactic, I have a few questions.

I like the idea of forcing opposition play in the middle, playing narrower and using those OI's do that? Have I missed any instructions?

What do you do if opposition have pacy wingers, do you experience issues closing them down and hard tackling?

I see that now you have DR/L on support, I really liked how they made runs in space created by WM & WP.

I'm interested in creating width, except for exploit flanks you declared indispensable above, what are key instructions for achieving it?

What are your thoughts on AF(a) + F9 combo? I might try having always 1 striker in the box?

Could you explain going fluid? I've read many times that 442, a non multistrata formation, should use it to reduce gaps between lines, but I recently read Herne79's thread where he advocates using structured (to ensure players follow your instructions) shape with or without be more creative, depending on opposition.. I also remember reading somewhere that you can add creativity to a single player by using "get creative" shout so that's another option adjusting your tactic..

What are your thoughts on this? TNX

I'll try to answer these best I can.

1. From watching the matches, the OI I use forces them to come inside, typically. You'll get overlap at times with them kicking it out to a full back, but by then usually the middle is so packed the crosses get cleared. If they have pacy wingers I'll take of mark tighter and drop the closing down on them to not get caught out.

2. As long as you keep "gets further forward", you'll still get that overlap, at least from what I've seen since moving to fluid from structured. I swapped to support because I felt too often I was getting my counter, countered and they were too far up the pitch too quickly. Exploit flanks I've found is necessary for this, because the play often works through the WP/WM and with look for overlap, those fullbacks will keep the width when those cut inside.

3. It may work, I haven't fiddled with my strikers too much. CFS/DLFA seem to be pretty effective so if it's not broke, I don't fix it.

4. I moved to fluid because when I swapped the fullbacks to support, I didn't feel like they ventured up enough and wanted them to be more involved. Also, since I exploit the flank and run at defense, it leans more towards using fluid (someone correct me if I'm thinking about that the wrong way?). I wasn't aware about the structured and more creative shout, though so mayhaps I'll try that out in some matches. There were times on structured, even with attacking movement training, where I just couldn't get shots off.

Honestly, most of this was I recreated a tactic I used in FM15 a ton and tried to convert it. Then just a lot of trial and error changing things around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologize Ghents, but I'm Italian, I find it really hard to translate from English to Italian the player roles, could you put in download your last tactic with your latest change? I'd like to test it with my Reggiana (3rd leven of italian league)but I do not know how to change roles. the OI that you use, it's from the 111 post? the pre match training it's to defensive movement's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same OI. Match training I use set piece defending now. I'll upload the current version when I get back home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ghent thanks for the answer,i await for the download link of tactics so i can run the test with the Reggiana. if you want, in mid-season, I can send you my save, so you can realize what works and what does not, I would do it too but,as you can see, I do my best with English language, but with not very well results ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried it out in pre-season, which isn't long enough to give a worthwhile opinion, but there were some troubling aspects in my midfield.

The theory seems to suggest condensing the middle of the park, allowing opposing ST's and AMC's little time on the ball, but I rarely found that to be true.

I shipped 6 goals in pre-season, all shots from the centre of the pitch with little urgency from my MC's to close down or tackle. Gap between the Defensive and Midfield lines were too big.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tried it out in pre-season, which isn't long enough to give a worthwhile opinion, but there were some troubling aspects in my midfield.

The theory seems to suggest condensing the middle of the park, allowing opposing ST's and AMC's little time on the ball, but I rarely found that to be true.

I shipped 6 goals in pre-season, all shots from the centre of the pitch with little urgency from my MC's to close down or tackle. Gap between the Defensive and Midfield lines were too big.

The steam one, or mine?

Steam one looks like it uses a much higher line, which could get your CBs killed on the offside trap if they're not super pacy. The BWM will expose the middle quite a bit too, along with the AF getting isolated, I would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used this tactic as a base in my first season with Panathinaikos. Only made a couple of signings (Zivkovic + Michel on loan). Well guess what? We WON THE EUROPA LEAGUE. We beat Club Brugge in CL Qualifying but lost in the Playoff to Bayer Leverkusen (I tried a different tactic). In the groups we beat Rapid Weid, Besiktas, and CSKA Moscow (top of the group), then we beat Schalke, FC Midtjylland, Lazio, Steaua Bucharesti, and Liverpool in the Final. Superb tactic. Can struggle domestically when teams park the bus against me, but it's still an amazing tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The steam one, or mine?

Steam one looks like it uses a much higher line, which could get your CBs killed on the offside trap if they're not super pacy. The BWM will expose the middle quite a bit too, along with the AF getting isolated, I would think.

It has a much lower line and a BBM, not a BWM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've used this tactic as a base in my first season with Panathinaikos. Only made a couple of signings (Zivkovic + Michel on loan). Well guess what? We WON THE EUROPA LEAGUE. We beat Club Brugge in CL Qualifying but lost in the Playoff to Bayer Leverkusen (I tried a different tactic). In the groups we beat Rapid Weid, Besiktas, and CSKA Moscow (top of the group), then we beat Schalke, FC Midtjylland, Lazio, Steaua Bucharesti, and Liverpool in the Final. Superb tactic. Can struggle domestically when teams park the bus against me, but it's still an amazing tactic.

If they park the bus, try removing pass into space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been playing around with a Atletico / Leicester hybrid tactic recently and I was becoming increasingly frustrated at how much pressure we kept coming under and that we were struggling to make those transitions count. Having watched Atletico play Bayern recently, I realised that, especially in the big games, Atletico don't play with strikers. They are essentially playing a strikerless formation of 4-4-2-0, with their 'strikers' basically as attacking midfielders as you'd imagine them in the game. The gaps between the midfield and the attack while in the defensive phase wasn't that great and they would pull themselves almost behind the ball.

With that in mind my version of a Simeone 442 would be:

Defence / Counter mentality / Fluid - Close down much more , pass into space.

GK

FB - Attack

FB - Support

CD

CD

WM - Support ( come inside, sit narrower)

WM - Attack (come inside , sit narrower, dribble more)

CM - Defend (close down less)

CM - Support (Hold position)

AMC - Attack (Close down much more, Hold up ball)

Second Striker - Attack

The idea being that in defensive transition the 'strikers' are harrassing the opposition but also moving back into a much deeper position when required, but also pounce on any attacking transitions with pace. The central midfield is there to hold its shape and create a barrier in front of the defence, one full back is more attacking than the other and goes on the same side as the support mid.

I think Strikerless is the way to go tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree with the strikerless approach in theory. although this is one of the reasons why im hoping for a bit more differentiation and complexity in how you can set up your defensive shape in future versions of the game. seems a bit counterproductive to set your strikers as AMCs when they could just give you more flexibility in how your strikers defend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i agree with the strikerless approach in theory. although this is one of the reasons why im hoping for a bit more differentiation and complexity in how you can set up your defensive shape in future versions of the game. seems a bit counterproductive to set your strikers as AMCs when they could just give you more flexibility in how your strikers defend

Possibly, but again I think its the difference between using the role names as a way of understanding what the player is doing as opposed to what the game is actually doing. Yeah we'd all think Atletico play with 2 strikers, but if you watch them against the big sides, the defensive positioning of the strikers is much deeper than that.

I have tried it with 2 defensive forwards instead, but I found that they just weren't defending in the correct manner, but running around like headless chickens a little bit. With AMCs there is much greater support to the central mids. I might consider switching to strikers depending on the situation however

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been playing around with a Atletico / Leicester hybrid tactic recently and I was becoming increasingly frustrated at how much pressure we kept coming under and that we were struggling to make those transitions count. Having watched Atletico play Bayern recently, I realised that, especially in the big games, Atletico don't play with strikers. They are essentially playing a strikerless formation of 4-4-2-0, with their 'strikers' basically as attacking midfielders as you'd imagine them in the game. The gaps between the midfield and the attack while in the defensive phase wasn't that great and they would pull themselves almost behind the ball.

With that in mind my version of a Simeone 442 would be:

Defence / Counter mentality / Fluid - Close down much more , pass into space.

GK

FB - Attack

FB - Support

CD

CD

WM - Support ( come inside, sit narrower)

WM - Attack (come inside , sit narrower, dribble more)

CM - Defend (close down less)

CM - Support (Hold position)

AMC - Attack (Close down much more, Hold up ball)

Second Striker - Attack

The idea being that in defensive transition the 'strikers' are harrassing the opposition but also moving back into a much deeper position when required, but also pounce on any attacking transitions with pace. The central midfield is there to hold its shape and create a barrier in front of the defence, one full back is more attacking than the other and goes on the same side as the support mid.

I think Strikerless is the way to go tbh.

This is something I've been thinking of trying out in tougher matches. I play with a CF-S and DLF-A, so was thinking of dropping them in the same fashion to am AM-A and an SS. I used the DLF-A as kind of a mobile targetman, so I imagine the AM-A could fill the same role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a lot of validity to this discussion, as one of the biggest issues on the tactics forum are people coming on and asking for help (or just ranting) as they're trying to create a particular system, but the complexity of the tactics creator is confusing them and they can't understand why it's not working. Even for myself, as someone who has played every version of FM since the CM days, each for over 500 hours, I often find it hard to know how shape, mentality and the ti's all link together and what the outcome will be. Generally I get there but I have to put the time into it, and I'm sure there could be a more simple approach that will allow both casual and experienced players alike, an easier interface to help them achieve their tactical goal.

I would think there would be some merit to adjusting the tactics creator to something like the following:

Page 1 - Defensive. This covers your formation, and how your team defends with a selection of options in a top menu, with a pitch shape below it, showing how the shape would change if a certain option is selected. Options could include pressing style and block positioning and compactness, the latter which would cover width, shape and defensive line.

Page 2 - Attacking. This covers how your team attacks when regaining the ball (e.g. transition speed/tempo, passing directness, personal creativity). A graphical representation could show likely player positions and their likely range of movement using arrows (e.g. a striker role with moves into channels could show where he would move to, or a AM (A) would have an arrow showing he will move into the forward line etc, similar to old FMs).

Basically it would be a bit of an overhaul, but it would allow the user to more easily see how the shape, mentality and TI's will effect the team in both the defensive and attacking phases through a graphical representation of each. All of the same options are there, just split up differently to make it more user friendly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "with possession" "without possession" split would be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

523018bab4.png

8aa691889c.png

having some success with this - wide mids have close down more - tackle harder and sit narrower, same with strikers (bar sit narrower), and fullbacks have mark tighter, run wide with ball and tackle harder. dm support has dribble less, close down more and hold position

edit: i should swap rpm position with dm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm considering trying an approach similar to Atleti's, funnelling the ball to tightly marked or heavily closed down players, and I've been thinking that surely opposition instructions are going to have a lot to do with it? Starting with the ball with their centre halves you want to cut the pitch in two and force play to the flanks, so show DLC onto his left and DRC onto his right. Then you want to deny the fullback the opportunity to pass it back inside so it's close down always and show onto his favoured foot. He should have no option but to pass down the line by now so the winger I suppose would be marked tightly and always closed down. That's Atletico on the front foot anyway.

You'd then need another tactic to be used against stronger teams or when in front in tight games, sitting deeper and narrower and showing wingers inside, then attacking with a furious tempo and mixed passing.

The whole idea of using opposition instructions as the basis for a tactic interests me quite a lot really...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm considering trying an approach similar to Atleti's, funnelling the ball to tightly marked or heavily closed down players, and I've been thinking that surely opposition instructions are going to have a lot to do with it? Starting with the ball with their centre halves you want to cut the pitch in two and force play to the flanks, so show DLC onto his left and DRC onto his right. Then you want to deny the fullback the opportunity to pass it back inside so it's close down always and show onto his favoured foot. He should have no option but to pass down the line by now so the winger I suppose would be marked tightly and always closed down. That's Atletico on the front foot anyway.

You'd then need another tactic to be used against stronger teams or when in front in tight games, sitting deeper and narrower and showing wingers inside, then attacking with a furious tempo and mixed passing.

The whole idea of using opposition instructions as the basis for a tactic interests me quite a lot really...

I agree this seems a very interesting way of trying it/approach, not sure anyone has tried it with smart opposition instructions yet, interested to see how this would turn out in-match once applied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
523018bab4.png

8aa691889c.png

having some success with this - wide mids have close down more - tackle harder and sit narrower, same with strikers (bar sit narrower), and fullbacks have mark tighter, run wide with ball and tackle harder. dm support has dribble less, close down more and hold position

edit: i should swap rpm position with dm

Maybe im overreacting based on a couple of matches but I gave this a punt with my nascent west ham save and it was just incredibly ruthless. Hands down the most vicious counter attacks I've ever seen a side of mine muster. Mullered Spurs 5-0 right off the bat. Insane, really. Also tried out some opposition instructions similar to what was suggested above and again, they seemed to work (as 5-0 would indicate lol) but hard to tell at this stage how much effect they had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just to reaffirm after playing a lot more matches: absolute ****ing wrecking ball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree this seems a very interesting way of trying it/approach, not sure anyone has tried it with smart opposition instructions yet, interested to see how this would turn out in-match once applied

I have used this OI apporach, albeit with a different tactic to this Simeone approach, and i can confirm that, although subtle, this idea will/does work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once I get home, I'm gonna post my "new" interpretation of Simeone. I moved the CMs back to DMs as I didn't think they were deep enough for a defensive tactic like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just to reaffirm after playing a lot more matches: absolute ****ing wrecking ball

excellent

Once I get home, I'm gonna post my "new" interpretation of Simeone. I moved the CMs back to DMs as I didn't think they were deep enough for a defensive tactic like this

look forward to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
523018bab4.png

8aa691889c.png

having some success with this - wide mids have close down more - tackle harder and sit narrower, same with strikers (bar sit narrower), and fullbacks have mark tighter, run wide with ball and tackle harder. dm support has dribble less, close down more and hold position

edit: i should swap rpm position with dm

Could you clarify exactly the last sentence please??

Is it the RPM on the right sided DM and left sided the DM? Or both positions and DM (S) ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you clarify exactly the last sentence please??

Is it the RPM on the right sided DM and left sided the DM? Or both positions and DM (S) ??

I saw I made a mistake, the RPM should be on the right side and the DM on the left side, since I have hold position on him it makes more sense to put him on the left side with the fb-a

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...