Question Regarding Team Shape.

[WHUBen]

I understand that team shape determines how compact you are and obviously transitions. After reading Cleon Thread about Maintaining a tactic long term, I came up with my own 442 in my Leicester Save.

Mentality: Standard

Shape: Flexible.

However due to me doing very well in the league, sitting about 5th right now with 10 games left. A lot of teams sit back, me than changing to counter or just adjusting my defensive line to slightly deeper does help.

But if I changed from flexible to fluid, obviously watching out for the counter attack of course, will all my players contribute in counter attacking play rather than staying at flexible and being like should I help attack, should I not. Also would a structured approach be suitable for teams against Man City Away?

When I played West Brom at Home, I changed to a fluid shape after altering with my defensive line and I did a massive difference, obviously there is more risk to this because more players were supporting play. I have kept 12-13 clean sheets so far this season, but I won the game 6-2. If I was on flexible I feel the score would of been pretty close so was wondering if Team Shape going from Flexible to Fluid against teams who sit back and Flexible to structured against teams who attack me?

Thanks guys!

[Rashidi]

Yay. You are reaching the promised land of Eureka. What you are doing is absolutely correct. And so are your assumptions. When we created the tactical creator it was for people like you. Those managers who want to throttle games, so when you adjust team mentality and shape, you are doing exactly that. Mentality=Risk, and Shape=Creativity. When you think about it, the two are inter-related.

Good luck and well done.

[James9]

Yay. You are reaching the promised land of Eureka. What you are doing is absolutely correct. And so are your assumptions. When we created the tactical creator it was for people like you. Those managers who want to throttle games, so when you adjust team mentality and shape, you are doing exactly that. Mentality=Risk, and Shape=Creativity. When you think about it, the two are inter-related.

Good luck and well done.

Rashidi could just get your input on team shape mentality. Could you explain the difference when teams plays Control + Fluid compared to Control + Structured when playing a 4231 or 4411 formation.

Also when playing with a Standard Mentality does mean the team will take their time and not make rash decisions with the ball which will eventually lead to more possession and better control of the ball

I am just trying to get my head around the team shape and mentality at the moment. I think when I understand how the two are inter-related I will know what to look for when I am watching games.

[ianscousemac]

Rashidi could just get your input on team shape mentality. Could you explain the difference when teams plays Control + Fluid compared to Control + Structured when playing a 4231 or 4411 formation.

Also when playing with a Standard Mentality does mean the team will take their time and not make rash decisions with the ball which will eventually lead to more possession and better control of the ball

I am just trying to get my head around the team shape and mentality at the moment. I think when I understand how the two are inter-related I will know what to look for when I am watching games.

James9. The way I try and look at is and I am no expert so I'd be interested to hear what Rashid thinks, playing on Standard mentality I view as a 50/50 balance of risk. with a Flexible team shape I look at that as 50% of my players being more defensive and 50 % being more attacking.

If I went to Standard Fluid I'd still be on 50/50 risk factor but maybe 65% of my players being more attacking and 35% on a more defensive or Control Structured would be more risk say 65%-35% but 65% of my players being more defensive and 35% more attacking.

Now if I try and translate that to how the team plays. Using a control mentality with a structured setup would mean my forwards / attacking players would be taking more risks and defensive players more cautious. Wheras using Defensive/Very fluid all my players would be taking an equal level of risk.

Hope that kinds of makes sense and like I say its my interpretation so by no means is it fully correct.

[Rashidi]

James9. The way I try and look at is and I am no expert so I'd be interested to hear what Rashid thinks, playing on Standard mentality I view as a 50/50 balance of risk. with a Flexible team shape I look at that as 50% of my players being more defensive and 50 % being more attacking.

If I went to Standard Fluid I'd still be on 50/50 risk factor but maybe 65% of my players being more attacking and 35% on a more defensive or Control Structured would be more risk say 65%-35% but 65% of my players being more defensive and 35% more attacking.

Now if I try and translate that to how the team plays. Using a control mentality with a structured setup would mean my forwards / attacking players would be taking more risks and defensive players more cautious. Wheras using Defensive/Very fluid all my players would be taking an equal level of risk.

Hope that kinds of makes sense and like I say its my interpretation so by no means is it fully correct.

You have got the general flow, however, how many players get up and attack also depends on your duties. So while you have identified what generally happens, the specific players involved in transitions will be those that are "support" duties. So a defensive/structured system with say 5 players on support and 1 on attack, would see 5 drop back to defend leaving one forward, whilst one with 2 on support and 5 on attack, would have a different result..

There are so many things at play here...but all you need to understand is what does mentality affect and what does shape affect, for instance.

In an attacking mentality - a defender will look to play more direct passes occasionally, and support players may play more direct passes because of their risk appetite

On defensive mentality - a defender may look to play safer passes or punt the ball, and support players may look to play safer passes and won't be looking to generate an attack every moment.

On structured shapes the distinction is clear, however on fluid shapes, because players are likely to share the same mentality and have have higher creative freedom, you would see a more disorganised mass heading back to defend on transitions. The same would not be true for Structured shapes. The compactness of shapes plays a big part here.

Not all roles and duties have high risk, some roles are hardcoded to approach a game with low risk. To check this look at a Player Instructions, if the Play Less Risky Passes option is locked out, hovering over it will let you know what kind of passes he will make. On a fluid system everyone on the team will have one creative setting, however those whose roles have more risky passing, are more likely to have higher creative freedom hardcoded too.

Defensive/Very Fluid will always struggle to work, because your team is already playing a deep defensive line, taking less chances, but you are opting to get them to play very fluid, which doesn't give the time much spatial options.

Defensive/Structured makes more sense, since there is more distinction, a team will have players who depending on the duty split will approach things in varied ways. More support duties will encourage camping, forward roles with attack duties would place high demands on good players to find space and others to play the ball to them. And this would help set up nice counter systems.

When looking at mentality you are addressing a team's passing, width and general risk appetite. Shape commands a team to create distinctions in duties. Every problem I have noticed on the forums with respect to tactics that don't work, have a problem with either duty selection or shout choices.

And its Rashidi....not Rashid :-)

@James9 you are generally right, and my explanation should cover your question too. Control/Structured vs Control/Fluid influences depend on your duty allocation first. Look for support players and then you will see who goes up and down in transitions.

[ianscousemac]

You have got the general flow, however, how many players get up and attack also depends on your duties. So while you have identified what generally happens, the specific players involved in transitions will be those that are "support" duties. So a defensive/structured system with say 5 players on support and 1 on attack, would see 5 drop back to defend leaving one forward, whilst one with 2 on support and 5 on attack, would have a different result..

There are so many things at play here...but all you need to understand is what does mentality affect and what does shape affect, for instance.

In an attacking mentality - a defender will look to play more direct passes occasionally, and support players may play more direct passes because of their risk appetite

On defensive mentality - a defender may look to play safer passes or punt the ball, and support players may look to play safer passes and won't be looking to generate an attack every moment.

On structured shapes the distinction is clear, however on fluid shapes, because players are likely to share the same mentality and have have higher creative freedom, you would see a more disorganised mass heading back to defend on transitions. The same would not be true for Structured shapes. The compactness of shapes plays a big part here.

Not all roles and duties have high risk, some roles are hardcoded to approach a game with low risk. To check this look at a Player Instructions, if the Play Less Risky Passes option is locked out, hovering over it will let you know what kind of passes he will make. On a fluid system everyone on the team will have one creative setting, however those whose roles have more risky passing, are more likely to have higher creative freedom hardcoded too.

Defensive/Very Fluid will always struggle to work, because your team is already playing a deep defensive line, taking less chances, but you are opting to get them to play very fluid, which doesn't give the time much spatial options.

Defensive/Structured makes more sense, since there is more distinction, a team will have players who depending on the duty split will approach things in varied ways. More support duties will encourage camping, forward roles with attack duties would place high demands on good players to find space and others to play the ball to them. And this would help set up nice counter systems.

When looking at mentality you are addressing a team's passing, width and general risk appetite. Shape commands a team to create distinctions in duties. Every problem I have noticed on the forums with respect to tactics that don't work, have a problem with either duty selection or shout choices.

And its Rashidi....not Rashid :-)

@James9 you are generally right, and my explanation should cover your question too. Control/Structured vs Control/Fluid influences depend on your duty allocation first. Look for support players and then you will see who goes up and down in transitions.

Rashidi , brilliant explanation as always. Many thanks.

[James9]

Rashidi what TI would you recommend if I wanted to add some urgency back into a defensive/structured set up. I was thinking of higher D Line close down more and higer tempo. So that they do not dwell on the ball. I am thinking of also adding retain possession so the defended do not just hoof the ball away all the time.

I am playing with Arsenal so I know you are going to say why am I playing Defensive/Structured football with Ozil, Cazorla and Sanchez in my side. But I tried them on Control/Fluid and it does not seem to be working too many players with creative freedom. And on Control too many players making high risk decisions and giving the ball away. So I decided to try Defensive/Structured.

I do not know if it is a role on duty set up issue. I have 3 players on attack duty in the final third. 1 player on support duty and 1 defensive duty in midfield. Normally the midfield two will be CMS and DLP D. 1 attack duty full back and 1 support duty full back. This is my role on duty set up when I am playing 4231 on Control/Fluid

I hope you can help

[Rashidi]

Rashidi what TI would you recommend if I wanted to add some urgency back into a defensive/structured set up. I was thinking of higher D Line close down more and higer tempo. So that they do not dwell on the ball. I am thinking of also adding retain possession so the defended do not just hoof the ball away all the time.

Why are you thinking about using the Retain Possession shout? When you consider a shout, you need to know how it impacts EVERYTHING- that shout affects 3 broad areas of a team. And if you are only hoping to see your fullbacks keep possession...then use the Play out of Defence shout. If they are hoofing all the time, its a symptom that your players may be isolated. My backline can play quite a few passes along the defensive line before launching an attack.

I am playing with Arsenal so I know you are going to say why am I playing Defensive/Structured football with Ozil, Cazorla and Sanchez in my side. But I tried them on Control/Fluid and it does not seem to be working too many players with creative freedom. And on Control too many players making high risk decisions and giving the ball away. So I decided to try Defensive/Structured.

Again you are thinking about big fixes, switching between shapes does not mean that your players will use the ball better. For example, how is it possible for me using the same team to go from Defensive/Structured to Control/Structured and Attacking/Very fluid, without any problems? The only shout I may change is offside trap or defensive line changes, but never have I used Shape as a reason to stop high risk decision making. You do that with other things. For example, you could use an axe and tell them to be more disciplined. Or you can use a scalpel and choose the right roles and PIs to make players take less risks. I never use a Shape change unless I want to affect the whole team.

I do not know if it is a role on duty set up issue. I have 3 players on attack duty in the final third. 1 player on support duty and 1 defensive duty in midfield. Normally the midfield two will be CMS and DLP D. 1 attack duty full back and 1 support duty full back. This is my role on duty set up when I am playing 4231 on Control/Fluid

I hope you can help

You obviously still don't understand the distinction between an attack and support duty. An attack duty sets players to Get Forward Early, you are using a 4231, ask yourself this question: Aren't your players forward ALREADY?, then look at the rest of your team, how are they going to get passes to players? The reason why you are seeing hoof balls has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Shape.

[James9]

Why are you thinking about using the Retain Possession shout? When you consider a shout, you need to know how it impacts EVERYTHING- that shout affects 3 broad areas of a team. And if you are only hoping to see your fullbacks keep possession...then use the Play out of Defence shout. If they are hoofing all the time, its a symptom that your players may be isolated. My backline can play quite a few passes along the defensive line before launching an attack.

Again you are thinking about big fixes, switching between shapes does not mean that your players will use the ball better. For example, how is it possible for me using the same team to go from Defensive/Structured to Control/Structured and Attacking/Very fluid, without any problems? The only shout I may change is offside trap or defensive line changes, but never have I used Shape as a reason to stop high risk decision making. You do that with other things. For example, you could use an axe and tell them to be more disciplined. Or you can use a scalpel and choose the right roles and PIs to make players take less risks. I never use a Shape change unless I want to affect the whole tea

You obviously still don't understand the distinction between an attack and support duty. An attack duty sets players to Get Forward Early, you are using a 4231, ask yourself this question: Aren't your players forward ALREADY?, then look at the rest of your team, how are they going to get passes to players? The reason why you are seeing hoof balls has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Shape.

Well with the 4231 I have 4 players already in the final third so by understanding your theory these players will not need attack duties because they are ready forward. So switching these players to support will be better. Then the rest I need some penetration coming from deep so my full backs on attack duty. I will keep my central midfield pairing the same. How am doing with understanding. Am I beat a Eureka moment yet or am I stone ccld

[EuanDewar]

editeddddd

[Vizzini]

Just to add to what rashidi was saying. I'm currently using a 4-2-3-1 system, and all my players in the attacking strata (am and fw positions) are on support duty, which for me means that they contribute more in the defensive and transition phase. The DF-S occupies the cb's making space for my if, Winger and am-s, plenty of dribbling, penetrative passing and ofb movement and links up well with my cm-d's and fullbacks.

[EuanDewar]

so would this work for counter/structured then? the WPs attracting the ball and getting up in transition, the CAM sitting there for people to work off of and the DLP moving up a wee bit but mostly sitting back and orchestrating things?

[cfkllasdfaslkdfj]

So, if we simplify things, if the players in general have high values in Decision, Anticipation, Team Work, Concentration, Vision, Composure attributes, we choose a more Fluid Shape, focusing more on player decisions and if our players are strong in technical/physical abilities, it is reasonable to increase the risk to Control/Attacking mentality? On this basis, the majority of players who have high mental skills, also have high rates in technics, so, almost every tactic that has a Fluid shape should go with an increased risk (>= Standard). Whereas for the counter-attacking or defensive might be best fit Defensive/Counter - Structured combination. Am I right?

[herne79]

No, that's really not simplifying things.

Mentality = risk, team shape = creative freedom. That's pretty much it.

Re-read the opening post and Rashidi's reply .

[goalash]

How about looking at the shape setting in terms of a 'mental battle'?

For instance: I look at both teams attributes, decisions and anticipation mostly, and I compare them line to line: my d-line vs enemy forwards, midfield vs midfield, my attack line vs enemy d-line. Then I get the idea. My d-line is way better mentally than their fw's, midfield formations are tightly matched, as well as my fw's against their defenders. At the end of the day, I seem to have a very slight upper hand - so i go to fluid/flexible.