Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Sign in to follow this  
thejay

Can the tactic masters please explain this to me?

Recommended Posts

Okay, I'm by no means a tactical genius but I may be able to offer some advice if I fully understood how you want to play, so if you'd like to explain that, it'd be greatly appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems like OP has no clue in how he wants to play. Unfortunately, the mods can do so much but it is YOU that have to decide the way you want to play...

How exactly do I have no clue what I want? I have described it numerous times in this thread.

Instead of skimming through the thread and providing your opinion, just read what I have written in my posts

I think the issue with the ifs is related to the retain possession instruction, When I don't use this instruction , they get passed to earlier so they receive the ball before I have possession firmly inside the opponent's half .

With retain possession they move in very narrow after the ball is in possession at a certain height in the opposition half and don't involve themselves again in order to construct moves.

There are then numerous occasions where the full back or the central midfielders have the ball but the ifs don't move in the right position to receive the ball, rather they stay narrow around the box

No instructions or cm role changes has altered this behavior significantly .

Not using retain possession somewhat works around this issue because the ifs just get passed to earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've had a look at that latest pkm you uploaded.

In my opinion your issue has got nothing to do with poor movement from IFs, F9s or dodgey pass choices by your midfielders.

Your issue is tempo.

You have reduced the tempo in your team by so much your players are dwelling overly long on the ball - so whilst your IFs (for example) are looking to make the run in behind, your player with the ball dwells on it for so long the opportunity is lost.

Your 2 examples you posted above in post #145 are prime examples.

Your first:- Minute 20:03; Samper has passed to Bentancur who has his back to goal. Rather than making an instant pass to the "free" Eggestein (that you say should happen), Bentancur controls the ball and dwells on it. In the time that takes, Eggestein has run back towards his own goal slightly and so is close to an opponent. The pass opportunity is lost and Bentancur passes out wide. Tempo killed that move.

Your second:- Minute 22:21; Coric has received the ball in acres of space. Zivkovic has started a great looking run inside and behind the defence. But Coric just dwells on the ball. He dwells for so long that Zivkovic is practically run offside (lets be generous and call him "in line"). Because it's now a dodgey looking pass due to a possible offside, Coric passes out wide. Tempo killed that move as well.

Whilst a Control mentality comes with a pretty high tempo set by default, you have removed just about all of it with your TIs and player duty selection. You have no urgency in attack, so the opportunity for the potentially great passes you seem to want is lost.

Now all of that is while you are in possession. Unfortunately you also have defensive issues, which are caused almost entirely by your incredibly high defensive line. You scored first in that match you uploaded, but quite frankly you should have been 2 or 3 nil down by that stage.

Why? Because you are getting hammered by balls over the top and in behind your defence. Just in the first 10 minutes this happened several times. Playing the offside trap will rarely save you.

This match wasn't about winning, just trying out stuff, I know that a high line brings a lot of risk and I would never complain if I had lost this game due to counter attacks.

That's also the reason why i lowered the tempo to not lose the ball too often which is risky with a high line like that.

But if its not possible to play patient lesser risk build up while still being able to play incisive passes, i do have to change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't really do what was advised though did you? You still prevent GK distribution, you still retain possession, you still use shorter passing, you still play low tempo. On top of this we spoke in great depth about how you wanted a player to go beyond the F9 when attacking to keep the IF's free and to give them actual space to play in. Yet you've not done that, you've used a CM support who again plays in the same kind of space as the F9 and doesn't really go past him. This means the same issues still exist because you still don't occupy the oppositions defence so the IF's are always marked by 2 opposition players. Then we have the issue of your TI's still slowing play down far too much.

You've not altered anything at all really. And you seem surprised that you still get the same results. Apart from the CM change you didn't do anything else based on the PKM and the instruction you posted. I also categorically stated about 10 times you need a constant threat going beyond the F9 if you wanted to free up the IF's and explained several times why and how it would work. But again you did the opposite and did the role and duty that I said would play like the F9......

You also don't seem to grasp what your players are actually doing. In the examples you posted a few of them are retreating and moving towards your own goal yet you think these are viable passing options even though the player is either marked or facing the wrong way.

That's also the reason why i lowered the tempo to not lose the ball too often which is risky with a high line like that.

But that isn't whats happening and you're still losing the ball because players are taking so long to release the ball now. So players make movements and the ball still isn't played to them and eventually you turn possession over anyway.

But if its not possible to play patient lesser risk build up while still being able to play incisive passes, i do have to change that.

You can play like that. It's just you've gone extreme and told the players to keep possession longer than they have to and you've not done anything to fix the IF issue despite me giving you the answers yesterday and listing which roles would work and why.

Until you actually listen and take the advise onboard that was give you'll still have the same issues regardless because you're not grasping why people are telling you to change stuff and just going with what you think. The thread is just going around in circles and you're no further forward than when you first posted yet at least 4 people have gave you advise to fix your issues. Yet in your last example you posted you did none of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You didn't really do what was advised though did you? You still prevent GK distribution, you still retain possession, you still use shorter passing, you still play low tempo. On top of this we spoke in great depth about how you wanted a player to go beyond the F9 when attacking to keep the IF's free and to give them actual space to play in. Yet you've not done that, you've used a CM support who again plays in the same kind of space as the F9 and doesn't really go past him. This means the same issues still exist because you still don't occupy the oppositions defence so the IF's are always marked by 2 opposition players. Then we have the issue of your TI's still slowing play down far too much.

No, in this match I have used various alterations of exactly that, like I have written, retain possession off and on, higher tempo and variations of passing directness and I have used various roles for the second cm. On support with forward runs, on attack, bbm, roaming playmaker.

You've not altered anything at all really. And you seem surprised that you still get the same results. Apart from the CM change you didn't do anything else based on the PKM and the instruction you posted. I also categorically stated about 10 times you need a constant threat going beyond the F9 if you wanted to free up the IF's and explained several times why and how it would work. But again you did the opposite and did the role and duty that I said would play like the F9......

I did in fact not do the same , but used various instruction variations during the full time watched match.

I don't get this constant accusatory tone from you, why do I have to constantly defend myself?

I spend a good chunk of yesterday trying out various solutions and suggestions from this thread.

You can play like that. It's just you've gone extreme and told the players to keep possession longer than they have to and you've not done anything to fix the IF issue despite me giving you the answers yesterday and listing which roles would work and why.

Until you actually listen and take the advise onboard that was give you'll still have the same issues regardless because you're not grasping why people are telling you to change stuff and just going with what you think. The thread is just going around in circles and you're no further forward than when you first posted yet at least 4 people have gave you advise to fix your issues. Yet in your last example you posted you did none of them.

I have actually described various things, before accusing me of something, why not read what I have written ?

WIthout retain possession the ifs get passed to earlier so they receive the ball before I have possession firmly inside the opponent's half .

With retain possession they move in very narrow after the ball is in possession at a certain height in the opposition half and don't involve themselves again in order to construct moves.

There are then numerous occasions where the full back or the central midfielders have the ball but the ifs don't move in the right position to receive the ball, rather they stay narrow around the box

No instructions or cm role changes has altered this behavior significantly .

Not using retain possession somewhat works around this issue because the ifs just get passed to earlier.

If I play a faster tempo and am generally less concerned with keeping the ball, the ifs just get involved earlier before they go extremely narrow.

Examples such as this is what I have an issue with:

eDIIXpU.jpg?1

There is basically no space to do anything except pass to the fullback, extremely easy to defend for the opposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are barely testing our suggestions if you think that using them in 5/10 minute spells is going to produce significant results.

Try testing them over a significant period of games, 3 might suffice, and then get back to us with what progress has been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The skin I'm using shows what settings you used and you didn't change things like you said you did. It was still the same as in the screenshot below in the PKM you uploaded. These were the settings you used in that game;

sgBhz7H.jpg?1

The only change was the CM. You made slightly changes throughout the game but they lasted minutes, you jumped from one thing to the next constantly without doing what I told you at the very start, learn how and why things work.

Anyways I'm out, I don't have the time for another day of the same issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Removing retain possession does make the players try for forward passes, it does not really solve the issues with the ifs coming narrow so soon.

The second movement is correct, in the pass could be solved by increasing directness ,removing retain possession, the problem is these are the only 2 instances where their movement was correct during the game, most of the time they tend to move narrow immediately, leaving only the fullback open.

The IFs come "narrow too soon" because they're going into the space that is provided to them by your F9. They're doing exactly what should be expected of them given your set up. Have you tried playing a striker with a different role that occupies the centre backs to see if that gives your IFs the movement you're looking for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The skin I'm using shows what settings you used and you didn't change things like you said you did. It was still the same as in the screenshot above in the PKM you uploaded. These were the settings you used in that game;

The only change was the CM. You made slightly changes throughout the game but they lasted minutes, you jumped from one thing to the next constantly without doing what I told you at the very start, learn how and why things work.

Anyways I'm out, I don't have the time for another day of the same issue.

I have started with this yes and made various tweaks throughout the match, like I said in initial post.

Maybe, the changes did not last long, but It was enough for me to see that if behaviour was not significantly altered in the way I wanted.

And instances like the last screenshot were happening often, ifs get sucked in narrow, compressing the space incredible leaving only the fullback open.

This could explain why the fullbacks constantly receive such a high rating, not only for me but for the ai as well when he uses a formation with wide forwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something, or shouldn't people use "exploit the middle" if they want players' passing to be biased towards passing to the false 9 or advancing midfielders rather than spreading the play, especially if they're using a wide formation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I now played a full game implementing suggestions from this thread:

In the first half my setup was like this:

No retain possession, work ball into box, one cm on attack, width wide.

P8iOLFQ.jpg

Now there were various instances where I was dissatisfied with the movement of the ifs and decision making of the midfielders or false 9

Here Coric is in space and instead of making a through ball to the well positioned if between center back and fullback he chooses to pass to the fullback on the other side of the field.

1ibF4cN.jpg?1

Pass to fullback Jedvaj

2yYsSly.jpg

Here the Ifs get sucked inside prematurely while opposition defends extremely narrow leaving only the fullbacks open

qCS3tgT.jpg

Here false nine is in space and if could make an obvious diagonal run between center back and fullback for a pass from the false 9

sE8DGCI.jpg

Instead no run is made by the if and the pass to the fullback option is again chosen by the false 9

J6AxyNL.jpg

Now in the second half I tried a slightly altered setup.

No ball work in the box, higher tempo, less width, slightly lower defensive line, different role for dm.

4VbF9p3.jpg

False nine has ball in space and if is positioned for an obvious diagonal run in behind the defense:

RInTSK1.jpg

Instead of doing that, left if retreats actually and leaves false nine alone running against 4 defenders in the center.

5B3637E.jpg

Here the dlp has various options for short passes in the center to the feet .

5P67FsU.jpg

Rather passes to the fullback instead, ok you could argue that he hasn't turned but he had space and time to make a decision.

yiKNGd9.jpg

Here false nine receives the ball high up the field with little support

BuIgAjk.jpg

But instead of providing support the ifs actual retreat again and leave the false nine alone to run at the whole defense.

dnbRYPO.jpg

gg4U4TB.jpg

Here if receives the ball in a promising position with space to turn and dribble

9WSagHi.jpg

But decides on a lobbed pass into the feet of the false 9 instead.

LZ4DhLZ.jpg

I hope this post does dispel the notion that I am not trying the things suggested in this thread, I am doing it constantly, but behavior from ifs , false 9 and midfielders is odd and I am struggling to get it right.

pkm from the full match is here:

http://www113.zippyshare.com/v/xcnNCdxS/file.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna have to come out and say that many of the passes you've given as examples are actually examples of good passes - just not what you want obviously.

Here Coric is in space and instead of making a through ball to the well positioned if between center back and fullback he chooses to pass to the fullback on the other side of the field.

>>

Pass to fullback Jedvaj

Here the IF you talk about isn't making a run and is static, and Jedvaj is making a fantastic run into the box unmarked (as you continue to use attacking full-backs with narrow forwards, this shouldn't be a surprise) and is actually in a good position.

In the rest of your first half examples your IFs are still being marked - they could make the run, but then they could still be easily intercepted or tackled should the ball be received. Your full-backs however are unmarked because they're moving into the space that the IFs are creating. I find it strange that this is something you don't want to see, as it's actually very good play. I also don't understand why you persist with using fullbacks that attack when it's against what you want to see.

Your IFs aren't making the right runs and that certainly is a problem. I don't think your players are very suited to the role. Grbic especially only has 1 star in his role ability (not forgetting Coric has only 1 star as a CM-A) and this will obviously affect the players' performances of what you're instructing them. You're trying to fit square pegs into round holes, I think.

Pardon my eyes but I think you want to re-examine the posts about the "IFs retreating". Sure they don't make up a lot of ground aren't supporting the attacks very well at all, but they aren't "retreating" like you say. I think it's probably more likely that your F9 is advancing faster than the IFs are. Definitely poor play there though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fullbacks are almost always open for passes like that, because the opposition chooses to defend extremely narrow and the ifs don't make runs or get sucked inside narrow.

The only advantage I would have from constant passes to fullbacks that are open would be to instruct them to cross constantly, what I do not really want.

Pass combinations with the fullback and the IF that comes out do not happen really effectivly.

I do of course want to have fullbacks who push up , that doesn't mean they should be passed to in situations where its is clearly not the most advantageous thing to do.

I could also try the same thing with Barcelona if you want.

In the first instance they are definitely retreating, in the second you are right its more stopping than retreating but the result is the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they are the most advantageous passes in my opinion. Your IFs are tightly marked by the opposition and leave a lot of space for your full-backs to fill. This is always going to happen because that's how you've set the team to be.

Also you say you don't want your full-backs to cross yet use a role where one of the default settings is to Cross More Often.

I think you need to seriously re-consider what exactly it is you want from the tactic, whether what you want is both realistic and can be successful and then look over the roles and make sure you have a better idea of how those roles: a) Contribute to your philosophy and b) work with each other.

If that sounds too mean or anything, I'm sorry and I'm not trying to attack you. Just trying to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fullbacks are almost always open for passes like that, because the opposition chooses to defend extremely narrow and the ifs don't make runs or get sucked inside narrow.

The only advantage I would have from constant passes to fullbacks that are open would be to instruct them to cross constantly, what I do not really want.

Pass combinations with the fullback and the IF that comes out do not happen really effectivly.

I do of course want to have fullbacks who push up , that doesn't mean they should be passed to in situations where its is clearly not the most advantageous thing to do.

I could also try the same thing with Barcelona if you want.

In the first instance they are definitely retreating, in the second you are right its more stopping than retreating but the result is the same.

My suggestion: teach specific PPM's to your attackers. Namely 'Try killer ball', 'Play one-twos', 'Beat offside trap', 'Move into channels'. PPM's do make a difference and should help you achieve the style of football you're trying to implement. I do agree that ME tends to favor wide play and especially overlapping fullbacks; PPM's will help you more than you can imagine though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the observations about the poor play by the inside forwards are far more valid than the questions about fullbacks. In my experience they're a lot better at running behind the defence on attack duty, but on support you'd at least hope they'd try to get into a position where they could exchange passes with the F9..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But they are the most advantageous passes in my opinion. Your IFs are tightly marked by the opposition and leave a lot of space for your full-backs to fill. This is always going to happen because that's how you've set the team to be.

Also you say you don't want your full-backs to cross yet use a role where one of the default settings is to Cross More Often.

I think you need to seriously re-consider what exactly it is you want from the tactic, whether what you want is both realistic and can be successful and then look over the roles and make sure you have a better idea of how those roles: a) Contribute to your philosophy and b) work with each other.

If that sounds too mean or anything, I'm sorry and I'm not trying to attack you. Just trying to help.

Those are the best passes? You cannot seriously say that, especially with the instructions the players have and the mentality.

And using retain possession or work ball into box reduces crosses at the first opportunity while still having fullbacks that push up to stretch the field.

Using ifs without fullbacks that overlap to provide width would not be good, or not?

Using the width of the field does not mean cross at the earliest opportunity and using ifs does not mean to they should play as central strikers, rather make the runs I suggested or receive the ball wide and cut inside.

This it not really happening.

My problem is not with the fullbacks or their movement but with the midfield, movement of ifs and false nine decision making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the observations about the poor play by the inside forwards are far more valid than the questions about fullbacks. In my experience they're a lot better at running behind the defence on attack duty, but on support you'd at least hope they'd try to get into a position where they could exchange passes with the F9..

Thank you, yes attack duty improves their bahviour somewhat but not ideal, at the cost of not tracking the opposition fullbacks often or pushing too far up during buildup bad if you want to work the ball forward patiently.

It's one attack also does not solve their narrow positioning when the ball is at a certain level when in possesion in the opponents half.

Wide forwards are really a problem for me in terms of movement and behaviour, if have tried a lot of combinations, in support or attack with pi forward runs or roaming or stay wider.

The closest in terms of positioning I managed to archive was using wide target men on attack with cut inside pi and cross less often.

Of course the problem then is the hardcoded dribble less that comes with the role and makes it unsuitable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another example.

79E6A1001DD310EC0785C3C41852BC1596FAF3FB

BFB912F2066CCF8E6BA133C455FB4ACE2956AF38

9F81C6D4A493387DF3B8C4F0C307D0C8E840FA5B

CC86850CCF13412F9E79A01E4E6CDFCC31778EA2

D19DF292B55E69B23E52A662016A2E1C7F4D6609

Every time we have an opportunity to build-up play nicely through the middle with short, simple passes; one of the midfielders always decides to kick it out-wide to either winger/or fullback, resulting in a stupid loss of control in the game. I have every instruction possible which should avoid these kind of things happening but it doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's another example.

Another example of what?

Goretzka can either pass the ball backwards to a central defender; sideways past the ref to a midfielder; or forward to the winger. He chose the positive option and passed to the winger.

Edit - I see you have edited in another example. But again, who do you think Geis is going to pass to? Everybody is marked, so he tries a bit of a hail mary ball hoping the winger will somehow latch onto it. If everyone is marked, where is the "opportunity to build-up play nicely through the middle with short, simple passes" as you say?

But again, this is all largely meaningless without any context. We have no idea of your tactical settings, or the crucial few seconds around these two (five) pictures. We can't see player movement or the build up. Perhaps you do have a point, but when all we have to go on is 2 (5) still pictures that shows the pass chosen is potentially a valid one, that's all that can be commented on - and is why pkms have been constantly asked for and supplied (which resulted in the issue being identified as tactical rather than ME related).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, yes attack duty improves their bahviour somewhat but not ideal, at the cost of not tracking the opposition fullbacks often or pushing too far up during buildup bad if you want to work the ball forward patiently.

It's one attack also does not solve their narrow positioning when the ball is at a certain level when in possesion in the opponents half.

Wide forwards are really a problem for me in terms of movement and behaviour, if have tried a lot of combinations, in support or attack with pi forward runs or roaming or stay wider.

The closest in terms of positioning I managed to archive was using wide target men on attack with cut inside pi and cross less often.

Of course the problem then is the hardcoded dribble less that comes with the role and makes it unsuitable.

The problem is that you insist in isolate the issues.

The problem in your tactic is not the IF's, or the Fullbacks, or the midfield.... it's everything working as a unit.

If the IF's need space to cut inside, to be open to receive the ball, they aren't gonna find it on their own!! You need that the the as a whole built that space.

And this is what Cleon and others are trying to explain to you since the first post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is that you insist in isolate the issues.

The problem in your tactic is not the IF's, or the Fullbacks, or the midfield.... it's everything working as a unit.

If the IF's need space to cut inside, to be open to receive the ball, they aren't gonna find it on their own!! You need that the the as a whole built that space.

And this is what Cleon and others are trying to explain to you since the first post.

I am aware of that and I also provided clear examples of were this space was available but not used by the ifs, or where they even compressed space needlessly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another example of what?

Goretzka can either pass the ball backwards to a central defender; sideways past the ref to a midfielder; or forward to the winger. He chose the positive option and passed to the winger.

Edit - I see you have edited in another example. But again, who do you think Geis is going to pass to? Everybody is marked, so he tries a bit of a hail mary ball hoping the winger will somehow latch onto it. If everyone is marked, where is the "opportunity to build-up play nicely through the middle with short, simple passes" as you say?

But again, this is all largely meaningless without any context. We have no idea of your tactical settings, or the crucial few seconds around these two (five) pictures. We can't see player movement or the build up. Perhaps you do have a point, but when all we have to go on is 2 (5) still pictures that shows the pass chosen is potentially a valid one, that's all that can be commented on - and is why pkms have been constantly asked for and supplied (which resulted in the issue being identified as tactical rather than ME related).

Yes his examples are not the same, in his pictures the ball was correctly passed to the only player actually free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another example of what?

Goretzka can either pass the ball backwards to a central defender; sideways past the ref to a midfielder; or forward to the winger. He chose the positive option and passed to the winger.

Edit - I see you have edited in another example. But again, who do you think Geis is going to pass to? Everybody is marked, so he tries a bit of a hail mary ball hoping the winger will somehow latch onto it. If everyone is marked, where is the "opportunity to build-up play nicely through the middle with short, simple passes" as you say?

But again, this is all largely meaningless without any context. We have no idea of your tactical settings, or the crucial few seconds around these two (five) pictures. We can't see player movement or the build up. Perhaps you do have a point, but when all we have to go on is 2 (5) still pictures that shows the pass chosen is potentially a valid one, that's all that can be commented on - and is why pkms have been constantly asked for and supplied (which resulted in the issue being identified as tactical rather than ME related).

He didn't choose the positive option, he chose the option which resulted in a throw-in to the opponent. My instructions for both team & individual players should be to do exactly the opposite, to play a short pass. Not everyone is marked, there is a clear pass inside to the other CM who has clear space ahead of him to progress the play forward. There are enough passes for him which would have kept control of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He didn't choose the positive option, he chose the option which resulted in a throw-in to the opponent. My instructions for both team & individual players should be to do exactly the opposite, to play a short pass. Not everyone is marked, there is a clear pass inside to the other CM who has clear space ahead of him to progress the play forward. There are enough passes for him which would have kept control of the game.

I haven't read all of this in great detail, but aren't Vision, Anticipation, Decisions, etc. supposed to come into play at some point? There might be an option for a pass, but players don't always make the right choice. I understand we're also talking about ME tendencies, but I thought it might be worth mentioning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He didn't choose the positive option, he chose the option which resulted in a throw-in to the opponent. My instructions for both team & individual players should be to do exactly the opposite, to play a short pass. Not everyone is marked, there is a clear pass inside to the other CM who has clear space ahead of him to progress the play forward. There are enough passes for him which would have kept control of the game.

The fact is that your players ARE marked, so they're not options for straight passes. If you can provide more info about the entire tactic in use, the discussion can move forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He didn't choose the positive option, he chose the option which resulted in a throw-in to the opponent. My instructions for both team & individual players should be to do exactly the opposite, to play a short pass. Not everyone is marked, there is a clear pass inside to the other CM who has clear space ahead of him to progress the play forward. There are enough passes for him which would have kept control of the game.

Sorry, you're missing the point.

It's insufficient to put up a couple of screenshots to try to demonstrate examples, as screenshots are just a snap shot in time with nothing contextual about them. Because of that, they are open to different interpretations and we don't advance the discussion.

This is the main part of my response to focus on: :).

But again, this is all largely meaningless without any context. We have no idea of your tactical settings, or the crucial few seconds around these two (five) pictures. We can't see player movement or the build up. Perhaps you do have a point, but when all we have to go on is 2 (5) still pictures that shows the pass chosen is potentially a valid one, that's all that can be commented on - and is why pkms have been constantly asked for and supplied (which resulted in the issue being identified as tactical rather than ME related).

Give us the context of these "issues" that you imply are ME rather than tactical related and we can delve into it. If it is ME related then there is something to post in the bugs forum with valid examples to help SI improve things. If it's tactical related, we can help you improve your system. Doing nothing on the other hand simply means you have provided a couple of screenshots that are open to interpretation which helps nobody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always tricky to make such a system work in my opinion.

With an extremely high line and high press, you're effectively boxing an opposition team in and making them sit narrow and compact. If you're playing with a stronger team it will only exaggerate this as the opposition is more likely to be more conservative.

When you combine the high press with slower tempo, retain possession and shorter passing shouts (especially if used in conjunction), with two central playmakers, and none of the front 3 making runs beyond the defenders, you'll logically end up with the following scenario:

1) win ball back high up the pitch, opposition already has men behind the ball so can keep a strong shape and mark out the front 3

2) ball is distributed to central play makers.

3) F9 and IF (S) turn to look to get involved in the build up play

4) playmaker has no one making a forward run, and doesn't want to play a more risky pass to one of the front 3

5) playmaker dwells on the ball looking for an option

6) fullback has the most space, playmaker passes wide

7) fullback either crosses, or, with the TI's considered, more likely goes back to the playmakers to start again

I'm not going to harp on with advice as you've got some very smart folks here trying to help already, but that's the general situation in my opinion. You need to think about how to break teams down with a more aggressive transition, or, create more movement beyond the defenders both centrally and through the wide players in a more patient system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Always tricky to make such a system work in my opinion.

With an extremely high line and high press, you're effectively boxing an opposition team in and making them sit narrow and compact. If you're playing with a stronger team it will only exaggerate this as the opposition is more likely to be more conservative.

When you combine the high press with slower tempo, retain possession and shorter passing shouts (especially if used in conjunction), with two central playmakers, and none of the front 3 making runs beyond the defenders, you'll logically end up with the following scenario:

1) win ball back high up the pitch, opposition already has men behind the ball so can keep a strong shape and mark out the front 3

2) ball is distributed to central play makers.

3) F9 and IF (S) turn to look to get involved in the build up play

4) playmaker has no one making a forward run, and doesn't want to play a more risky pass to one of the front 3

5) playmaker dwells on the ball looking for an option

6) fullback has the most space, playmaker passes wide

7) fullback either crosses, or, with the TI's considered, more likely goes back to the playmakers to start again

I'm not going to harp on with advice as you've got some very smart folks here trying to help already, but that's the general situation in my opinion. You need to think about how to break teams down with a more aggressive transition, or, create more movement beyond the defenders both centrally and through the wide players in a more patient system.

The ifs have problems with making them availble for passing option when the ball is in control in advanced positions on the field.

Look at one of my screenshots for example:

qCS3tgT.jpg

This situation is almost exactly like this real life example:

https://streamable.com/xmxm

But here If Suarez comes out and provides passing options for the fullback and in turn opens space in the middle.

This kind of movement does not happen in the game and the ifs just get sucked in incredible narrow without any movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thejay, can you actually provide the PKMS for these, as indvidual screenshots do not show the build up. You've had so much info provided, but you seem insistent on not taking any of it on. At a loss to where this thread goes now tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thejay, can you actually provide the PKMS for these, as indvidual screenshots do not show the build up. You've had so much info provided, but you seem insistent on not taking any of it on. At a loss to where this thread goes now tbh.

I provided the pkm in the post with the screenshots at the end.

pkm from the full match is here:

http://www113.zippyshare.com/v/xcnNCdxS/file.html

I also described clearly in the post what kind of things I implemented based on suggestions in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The ifs have problems with making them availble for passing option when the ball is in control in advanced positions on the field.

Look at one of my screenshots for example:

qCS3tgT.jpg

This situation is almost exactly like this real life example:

https://streamable.com/xmxm

But here If Suarez comes out and provides passing options for the fullback and in turn opens space in the middle.

This kind of movement does not happen in the game and the ifs just get sucked in incredible narrow without any movement.

If the striker has a poacher or advanced forward role, do the IF's still sit up against the defenders? That front 3 will offer no penetration. Do you want the IFs scoring or creating? At the moment the front 3 are in more creatively orientated roles so they're suffering from trying to do similar things. It's very one dimensional (worsened by the tempo instructions previously discussed). If the front 3 all need to be in the build up, who is going to be scoring?

I honestly feel like you're so dead set on having two IFs and a false 9, that you're blinding yourself from better options to achieve the same aims. Have you tried a raumdeuter on one side and an AP (A) on the other? Then perhaps switch the F9 for a CF(s), and then only have one playmaker in the CM roles to compensate. I don't think Barcelona set up with 2 IFs and a F9 so if that's what you're trying to do I think you're really limiting youself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you guys are telling thejay that this doesn't work because of too many creative players but what about wwfan's old Barcelona system, that has a DLP (s) and an AP (a) together in the middle with a Treq up front?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know you guys are telling thejay that this doesn't work because of too many creative players but what about wwfan's old Barcelona system, that has a DLP (s) and an AP (a) together in the middle with a Treq up front?

It's not about creativity, but movement and passing penetration. He doesn't have too much of either when combined with his TIs, and when he plays high up the pitch and gives the opposition no room to move, it becomes sterile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not about creativity, but movement and passing penetration. He doesn't have too much of either when combined with his TIs, and when he plays high up the pitch and gives the opposition no room to move, it becomes sterile

Yeah sorry that was what I meant, too many playmakers in the middle with not enough movement. My point was that wwfan's Barca system doesn't seem to have much movement from the centre mids either?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah sorry that was what I meant, too many playmakers in the middle with not enough movement. My point was that wwfan's Barca system doesn't seem to have much movement from the centre mids either?

But you havent removed the capabilty for both playmakers to launch split passes, and the APA can carry the ball through

in 158, he's actually removed the penetration to go with any movement generated by the front 3 with his TIs, as they combine to remove lots of forward passes from midfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ceefax, i deleted your post for a reason. Suggest you stop reposting it.

I think my post contained some pretty good points and I don't think deleting it twice, deleting a further post about it with no explanation and then totally ignoring the subsequent PM was very nice :(

Anyway, on with the thread and I hope OP sorts his issues out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the striker has a poacher or advanced forward role, do the IF's still sit up against the defenders? That front 3 will offer no penetration. Do you want the IFs scoring or creating? At the moment the front 3 are in more creatively orientated roles so they're suffering from trying to do similar things. It's very one dimensional (worsened by the tempo instructions previously discussed). If the front 3 all need to be in the build up, who is going to be scoring?

I honestly feel like you're so dead set on having two IFs and a false 9, that you're blinding yourself from better options to achieve the same aims. Have you tried a raumdeuter on one side and an AP (A) on the other? Then perhaps switch the F9 for a CF(s), and then only have one playmaker in the CM roles to compensate. I don't think Barcelona set up with 2 IFs and a F9 so if that's what you're trying to do I think you're really limiting youself.

I want the outside players to make diagonal runs into the space the false 9 vacates, which other role than if is doing that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you havent removed the capabilty for both playmakers to launch split passes, and the APA can carry the ball through

in 158, he's actually removed the penetration to go with any movement generated by the front 3 with his TIs, as they combine to remove lots of forward passes from midfield.

My problem is actually primarily with if movement , not midfield.

I tried various Tis which I have demonstrated in my post, the movement of the if did not improve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My problem is actually primarily with if movement , not midfield.

I tried various Tis which I have demonstrated in my post, the movement of the if did not improve.

Having watched the pkm of the game, you have issues with the setup. Cleon and others have pointed this out several times in a lot more detail. You've got all the advice you need in this thread. You've become so focused on the inside forwards you're missing the issues somewhat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I think is there is some problem in the logic of passing from ME. The first priority of logic is trying to find out an open space to pass, instead of thinking a valid of pass or useful pass. It is also the reason of so many offside. In the past FM series, may be FM13,FM14, it was lack of switch to the flank logic even your get the relevant PPM. But in FM16, it looks like every player also gets this PPM because of the logic of passing.

Just imagine that if you setup a tactics with a half back which push forward your wing backs, you will have thousand of offside from your wing back. Yeah, this must be our tactics :applause:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I think is there is some problem in the logic of passing from ME. The first priority of logic is trying to find out an open space to pass, instead of thinking a valid of pass or useful pass. It is also the reason of so many offside. In the past FM series, may be FM13,FM14, it was lack of switch to the flank logic even your get the relevant PPM. But in FM16, it looks like every player also gets this PPM because of the logic of passing.

Just imagine that if you setup a tactics with a half back which push forward your wing backs, you will have thousand of offside from your wing back. Yeah, this must be our tactics :applause:

Please don't post rubbish when that's not how the game works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I think is there is some problem in the logic of passing from ME. The first priority of logic is trying to find out an open space to pass, instead of thinking a valid of pass or useful pass. It is also the reason of so many offside. In the past FM series, may be FM13,FM14, it was lack of switch to the flank logic even your get the relevant PPM. But in FM16, it looks like every player also gets this PPM because of the logic of passing.

Just imagine that if you setup a tactics with a half back which push forward your wing backs, you will have thousand of offside from your wing back. Yeah, this must be our tactics :applause:

Cut the sarcastic tone out for a start.

Having watched his pkm, he actually has issues with his setup

Its also got nothing to do with the offsides.

Now let's get back to the topic at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Having watched the pkm of the game, you have issues with the setup. Cleon and others have pointed this out several times in a lot more detail. You've got all the advice you need in this thread. You've become so focused on the inside forwards you're missing the issues somewhat

I know it has issues, but none of the things suggested here the I tried to implement really improved the midfield decision making and if movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know it has issues, but none of the things suggested here the I tried to implement really improved the midfield decision making and if movement.

I feel that any changes you're trying to make aren't really straying very far from where you started and it's just not doing enough. You seem insistent on having certain things in your set up even though they clearly don't work in the way that you want them too.

You asked previously which other roles would allow the wide players to exploit the space vacated by the false 9....well an IF(s) is not going to be the best role to do that as they will cut inside, but in supporting roles they will be more likely to drop towards the midfield, or look for a pass once on the ball, rather than breaking through the defensive line (especially when combined with your TIs). A RMD would work well for that, as their mentality is quite attacking so that would help override your possession orientated TIs.

To give you an example of how roles and TI's interact, I have W(s) on both sides of my 4-2-3-1 and they score loads of goals by getting in around the back of the full back or between the FB and CB to convert crosses or through balls. They function because the system fits for them to do that. My goal is to have the wide players be doing one of two things when we go forwards - they either 1) have the ball at feet and are putting in a cross from wide, or 2) if the the ball is on the other side, they are coming in around the back of the full back to convert at the back post. I have a structured, attacking mentality with just 1 or 2 TI's. I have a, BBM, P(a) and an AM(a) in the centre, so the central defenders and full backs get put under a lot of pressure by their runs, meaning the wingers get more space. The other midfielder then holds position in front of the back 4, with the full backs not being very adventurous either so I have 5 players sweeping up clearances and protecting against the counter.

If you had these two W(s) roles in a possession orientated set up, they wouldn't be able to do the same things they do right now, as the opposition wouldn't allow them the space to do it - they would end up staying wider, my system functions because the team gets the ball forward quickly, with the central players making long, cross field passes to shift the opposition around as much as possible as well. The TI's and roles interact well and it creates the end result I'm looking for.

I'm certainly not saying this is what you want to do of course as this is nothing like what you want to do, all I'm trying to point out is that you need to look at the roles in conjunction with the system. If you're playing a possession system using multiple 'safe passing' related shouts, with 3 forward players in support, it's not reasonable to expect the forward players to be constantly breaking through the defensive line to search for the through balls. The central players passing has been severely limited to make sure possession is retained, so they just won't try it often enough and the attacking 3 won't be looking for it often enough. What's represented on the ME may look slightly different, but that's still the issue.

If you put the wide players in more aggressive roles and tailor the Ti's/Pi's to make sure the the central players are given the freedom to try as many through balls as possible, you might just get what you want. However at the moment it feels like you're insistent on not straying far from your starting point in terms of both roles and TI's, when in reality both probably need adjustments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No offense guys but I am amazed of those who still defend Match Engine claiming "it's your tactics bro". I am nowhere near to say that ME is broken, absolutely no, but there are things that doesn't work as intended and problem described by OP is one of them. For some reason players choose to pass to fullbacks despite having better option (striker sitting on shoulder of last defender waiting for through ball - it's one of those screenshots). Building play through middle, more risky passes has very little impact on it, you will still see a lot of hoof balls to fullbacks, this is FM2016 and I'm sure one not the only one that thinks this is unrealistic. Once again- I am not complaining because I - like many of us - used to deal with it, my tactics is all about attacking from the wings :) Regards!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No offense guys but I am amazed of those who still defend Match Engine claiming "it's your tactics bro". I am nowhere near to say that ME is broken, absolutely no, but there are things that doesn't work as intended and problem described by OP is one of them. For some reason players choose to pass to fullbacks despite having better option (striker sitting on shoulder of last defender waiting for through ball - it's one of those screenshots). Building play through middle, more risky passes has very little impact on it, you will still see a lot of hoof balls to fullbacks, this is FM2016 and I'm sure one not the only one that thinks this is unrealistic. Once again- I am not complaining because I - like many of us - used to deal with it, my tactics is all about attacking from the wings :) Regards!

We're not defending the ME as you put it.

We've simply looked at the pkms of matches that have been uploaded and from the examples given seen that the issue in this particular case lies with the tactics used, not the ME.

We can only look at individual examples, as without it there are no facts - just guesswork, assumptions and generalisations which would answer nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No offense guys but I am amazed of those who still defend Match Engine claiming "it's your tactics bro". I am nowhere near to say that ME is broken, absolutely no, but there are things that doesn't work as intended and problem described by OP is one of them. For some reason players choose to pass to fullbacks despite having better option (striker sitting on shoulder of last defender waiting for through ball - it's one of those screenshots). Building play through middle, more risky passes has very little impact on it, you will still see a lot of hoof balls to fullbacks, this is FM2016 and I'm sure one not the only one that thinks this is unrealistic. Once again- I am not complaining because I - like many of us - used to deal with it, my tactics is all about attacking from the wings :) Regards!

You've missed the entire point of the last 199 posts. And unless you have actually watched the PKMs, then you really cant comment on his situation.

So unless you have something constructive to add to the OP's predicament, please do not derail the thread with inaccuracies. His own TIs actually instruct his players not to make the risky passes to players on the shoulder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...