The art of conceding

[enigmatic]

I think the main problem is you're simply expecting too much of your team and too much of the "defensive" setting in an attacking league where your players are only a bit better than average. In real life, there were two teams outside the top four that conceded fewer than 47 goals in La Liga last season (One of them conceded 45 and the other one ironically was Malaga, but they really struggled to score). Needless to say, the top four achieved better defensive records through having opponents that feared to attack them, better midfields to keep the ball and better defenders rather than from playing more defensive strategies.

And nobody outside the top three got goal difference anywhere near as good as yours, so I'd be more inclined to be pleased with the attack overperforming than anything else.

Even if your overall approach to the game is notionally conservative, two strikers and no holding midfielders really isn't that defensive a formation, and defenders with 15s in most of the right places and 12s for pace and acceleration really aren't particularly special by La Liga standards, so you've got no reason to expect your defence to miraculously overperform relative to other sides at your level, which is really what you're asking for here. 

Sure, it's probably worth having an option with a holding midfielder or both midfielders sitting deep and sacrificing the extra striker for those games where you're worried about hanging onto your lead. But it actually sounds like your tactics are pretty well balanced and you need better players to keep the ball more and track opponents better and the opposition to start fearing you a bit more before your defensive record is excellent rather than reasonably good by the standards of the league.

[looping]

28 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

I think the main problem is you're simply expecting too much of your team and too much of the "defensive" setting in an attacking league where your players are only a bit better than average. In real life, there were two teams outside the top four that conceded fewer than 47 goals in La Liga last season (One of them conceded 45 and the other one ironically was Malaga, but they really struggled to score). Needless to say, the top four achieved better defensive records through having opponents that feared to attack them, better midfields to keep the ball and better defenders rather than from playing more defensive strategies.

And nobody outside the top three got goal difference anywhere near as good as yours, so I'd be more inclined to be pleased with the attack overperforming than anything else.

Even if your overall approach to the game is notionally conservative, two strikers and no holding midfielders really isn't that defensive a formation, and defenders with 15s in most of the right places and 12s for pace and acceleration really aren't particularly special by La Liga standards, so you've got no reason to expect your defence to miraculously overperform relative to other sides at your level, which is really what you're asking for here. 

Sure, it's probably worth having an option with a holding midfielder or both midfielders sitting deep and sacrificing the extra striker for those games where you're worried about hanging onto your lead. But it actually sounds like your tactics are pretty well balanced and you need better players to keep the ball more and track opponents better and the opposition to start fearing you a bit more before your defensive record is excellent rather than reasonably good by the standards of the league.

I completely agree with you. Just one thing, I do have a holding midfielder cm-d.

However, I dropped my cm to dm strata and told my cb to close down less. I'm conceding much less (less than 1 goal per game) and scoring few less 1,5 goals per game. Overall results are more or less the same, in terms of points and position.

This is exactly what I was trying and I really think it's almost imposible to achieve better results with this team.

[looping]

Ok guys. Any explanation for that?

No, it is not the sitting deep opponent thing.

My players are motivated.

During matches, my players pass the ball to the opponent all the time.

When defending are dummies, they just watch the opponent.

This is my second complete season. Last season ended 2 and won the cup. Conceded 22 goals in all the league.

What can I do? 

 

[looping]

After one year playing and finally doing it succesfully,my conclusion is that Fm is totally wrong oriented. It is scripted in the game that you have to conceed. Nobody can deny it. The game think it is "easier" to win 2-1 3-2 or whatever than 1-0. I'll change my opinion if anybody shows me how he/she won the league scoring less than 50 goals.

Yes, yes, you will say that is unrealistic. It is not. It's simply that doesn't suit the style of football played nowadays, but it's not unrealistic. Fm thinks it is, so doesn't allow you to do that. At some point you start conceding (and scoring) like crazy. Impossible to keep consistent clean sheets and 1-0 wins but quite easy to keep unbeliavable scoring numbers (3-2, 2-1, etc..). That's it. I found why I was struggling with fm. Simply, what I want to do is impossible in fm.

I'm done .

[warlock]

11 minutes ago, looping said:

Nobody can deny it.

I deny it. Well, me and loads of other players on the forum over the years.

I get your frustration, I really do. But it seems like your view of FM (and real football) is the one that's unrealistic.

You say it's realistic to win the league with 1-0 wins, but do the maths. Over 38 games a season, how you could put together a winning campaign based on 1-0 results if every other team is doing the same? Here's the first thing Google threw up on the subject:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/european-big-four-leagues-goals-3513388

Note that over four years, in four leading European leagues, the average result was something close to 2-1 or 3-0 or 1.5-1.5. To generate that average, every 1-0 has to be matched by a higher-scoring game. I'd say that's pretty much bang on my own experience in FM across a season.

[looping]

11 minutes ago, warlock said:

I deny it. Well, me and loads of other players on the forum over the years.

I get your frustration, I really do. But it seems like your view of FM (and real football) is the one that's unrealistic.

You say it's realistic to win the league with 1-0 wins, but do the maths. Over 38 games a season, how you could put together a winning campaign based on 1-0 results if every other team is doing the same? Here's the first thing Google threw up on the subject:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/european-big-four-leagues-goals-3513388

Note that over four years, in four leading European leagues, the average result was something close to 2-1 or 3-0 or 1.5-1.5. To generate that average, every 1-0 has to be matched by a higher-scoring game. I'd say that's pretty much bang on my own experience in FM across a season.

If you deny it I want to see it. Show me how anybody has won any league scoring less than 50 goals (38 games). If you show me, I'll change my opinion.

Your answer demonstrates I'm 100% right. Fm doesn't allow you to walk out of the standards, whatever happens on the pitch. Nowadays, I know results are like 1,5-1.5, This is exactly what I want to change, because my football style is 99% focused on defending. 

I don't care if I don't score. I don't want to conced. I would be happy drawing all games 0-0 (going into a extrem scale). If I win 6-3, for me it's a nightmare. I prefer 0-0 than winning 6-3. Even 3-2. The result I hate the most is 2-1.

That's my point. I can't do what I want to do. Go for the 0-0 and if we score defend and keep the 0. Of course it is not going to happen in every match.

I was happy in my first season. I conceded 22 goals (19 clean sheets) and scored 58. Ended 2 and won the cup. Perfect. Not asking for more. With my players, it's almost imposible to do it better.

In my second season I'm scoring an unbelievable amount of goals and conceeding an outrageous amount. Outrageuous in my terms. I'm conceeding 1 goal per game which is a total disaster, not because the average but because I conceed in almost every game, against any team.

Question: is it realistic that 2 stupid and terribly bad strikers scored more than 20 goals with Malaga? Is this more realistic than keeping clean sheets consistently? Why my strikers can overperform insanely and not my defenders? Because it is scripted in the game. 

Show me I'm wrong. I'd be happy to know it is posible to do and it' just me that I'm stupid.

Thanks for your answer. 

[herne79]

7 minutes ago, looping said:

I was happy in my first season. I conceded 22 goals (19 clean sheets) and scored 58. Ended 2 and won the cup. Perfect. Not asking for more

You answered your own question.

I appreciate you are frustrated, but repeatedly calling the game scripted won't get you anywhere.  It isn't.  If it were, everyone would have the problems you do.

If all you want to do is focus 99% on defending, perhaps you should experiment more using the Contain mentality in a Highly Structured system and perhaps even a deep formation with a first line of defence across the DM strata.

[warlock]

1 hour ago, looping said:

I was happy in my first season. I conceded 22 goals (19 clean sheets) and scored 58. Ended 2 and won the cup. Perfect. Not asking for more. With my players, it's almost imposible to do it better.

As herne says, you demonstrated that what you want is possible, and you achieved it. FM is a simulator, and what it is trying to simulate is real world football. I've already shown you that real world football produces an average of nearly 3 goals per game - that fits every possible definition of the word "realistic". You are trying to exploit the simulator to create a situation in which the average is 1 goal per game - that's a reasonable definition of "unrealistic".

Even if you look at Arsenal's Invincibles season, they managed only four 0-0 results over 38 games, and the average across the season was nearly 3 goals per match (exactly in line with European standards), and included 4-0 and 4-1 results against Middlesboro, and 4-0 and 5-1 results against Leeds. To repeat, if what you're trying to achieve is impossible in real-world football, why do you think it should be possible season after season in FM?

[AndySummers]

2 hours ago, looping said:

If you deny it I want to see it. Show me how anybody has won any league scoring less than 50 goals (38 games). If you show me, I'll change my opinion.

 

You have answered your own question.

Such a thing barely exists in 'reality'. You are expecting a league winner to score at a rate of less than around 1.3gpg. There hasn't been a Premier League winner in 25 years that has scored less than 67 (and that was Man Utd in the inaugural season). La Liga over the last twenty years is similar, with the shortest number of goals being in the mid-60s - barring Valencia's freak season in 2000-01 where they scored only 51 and won the league with a paltry 75pts. It is the same story in Serie A; 1996-97 where Juventus scored 51 (in a season where only one team scored more than 54) and you are having to stretch back twenty years for that. The lowest scoring Bundesliga winners in the last twenty years were Stuttgart; 61.

What you are expecting does not happen at the highest level of modern European football; the occasions are so few and far between.

Therefore, is it really FM that is unrealistic? Particularly when you are actively chasing possession, pushing up the pitch to an extent and playing with two aggressive widemen! If you want to 'work' the game and experiment with this ultra-defensive ideology, I'd say you'd need to rethink how you are setting up. As an Arsenal fan, when teams have come to the Emirates over the years trying to steal a 0-0, they aren't often setting up with a defensive line much outside their 18 yard box, hounding the ball and playing with a duo upfront. Generally, they sit with a flat back 4, fullbacks tucked in, five packed across the middle with a dedicated screen and some poor sod running around up the pitch about 40 yards from his nearest team-mate.

[Svenc]

5 hours ago, herne79 said:

You answered your own question.

I appreciate you are frustrated, but repeatedly calling the game scripted won't get you anywhere.  It isn't.  If it were, everyone would have the problems you do.

If all you want to do is focus 99% on defending, perhaps you should experiment more using the Contain mentality in a Highly Structured system and perhaps even a deep formation with a first line of defence across the DM strata.

 

This. You won't get any more defensively solid than with either two DMs or two CMs on a defend duty, players that make that central of the pitch completely their own in the match play, preferably with really great defensive stats so that they don't miss additionally key tackles etc. and naturally you can also play matches dynamically after going 1-0 up. Having deep players also allows you to easier recycle the ball, and if they don't have it, they can't attack. If they can't attack, they can't take a shot. That's true in football and it's the same in the game. Sadly FM doesn't sport such average stats which means you have to do stuff manually, but with a good side in a league you can bring the shots you concede, overall shots mind, down to something like 4, 5, 6  on average... and having win records of 80% with 12 own shots taken average. And naturally the better the players, the easier it is to keep those clean sheets. Your fans might complain about the boring football on display via the confidence tabs, but it's possible. A  4-4-2 is always prone to be vulnerable, in particular on FM where the forwards just don't engage much in defending and help out centrally until you engage them to (I often have the deeper one of them man marking the deepest opposition midfielder). Compare that to how Atletico played against Bayern, both forwards tracking back deep into their halves -- not happening on FM unless you manually make them engage in such (no AI does this ever). None of the setups posted are that cautious to begin with, the 4-4-1-1 posted with both WMs in possession that's basically the same as going with 4-2-3-1 top heavy Denmark, four players completely pushing ahead of things and flooding the final third, plus one of the cms on support pushing alongside to it too. Best visible from elevated cams.

On previous iterations I ran fun saves where I tried to go without conceding a goal with say Bayern, but somewhere around the 10th game of the season or if you're unlucky right in the first right after kick-off there's always a goal in there, and be it off a set piece (attacking throw, free kicks, corners) or error, heck even a bug. It's not scripted, it's just that the second to second match play, you can't get it to something where you have 100% possession or zero shots conceded or anything, and even the long shot conversion seems to be something approaching football numbers (ca. 1 in 20-30 attempts purely average = goal).  You just can't keep everything away from goal (no team in football can), unless you would sport a massively superior team, which you can replicate also and is oft seen in wildly unbalanced Cup ties where opponents don't get a damn going -- in league matches, not so much. Just saw this tonight too, so it's possible in FM 2016 all the same. No surprises the DM strata is packed, if he switched it to something more conservative with less attack duty guys upon taking leads, he'd up his 1-0 tallys or spam 0-0s (which isn't the goal, just to keep clean sheets). http://www.meistertrainerforum.de/index.php/topic,22917.msg835671.html#new 

If there ever was AI managers brought to such levels, and this is hardly rocket science, the game will be really fun. As anyone can witness by comparing,  it plain isn't. To add another 2c you are unlikely to ever fully contain the attacking talent teams such as Barca and Real tend to sport, you've got to upgrade your own defense a tad too... which isn't that unrealistic. You'd be much better off with Atletico probably if you want to grind out nice and dirty 1-0s from the go as they are packed with some quality defenders right there.  Playing with top teams, often AI opponents simply try to avoid heavy beatings, so tend to not at all play that aggressively, which makes it massively easier to keep clean sheets right there and to an extent is true for them in football just as well. Speaking of which, AI does win the league on occasion scoring little more than 50 goals.... all the while being much less solid still at the back (see above, sigh).

 

http://www.meistertrainerforum.de/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=21468.0;attach=6564;image

[Feddo]

I cant show you winning a league with so few goals because for me that wouldn't be fun and there for I haven't tried it. However in my current save I do have lots of games without conceding any, sometimes something like 6 in a row. But it would be something like 2-0 3-0  or 4-0

[looping]

Guys,

you all are right. I was on tilt.

The only problem is that I achieved this kind of results in almost every previous version of fm. I can show you if you want. I think it was in 2009 or 2010, I won Serie A with Catania conceding only 12 goals in my second season and didn't have great players (my best defender was Bellusci). I don't know how I managed because in that days I didn't pay any attention to tactics. 4231 2 fb 2 cb 2 central midfielders (midfield strata) 2 wingers 1 amc and a striker. No other instructions. I never watched a game until this version.

If I try this now I'm sacked in 2 months. Fm has changed a lot...

[looping]

I lost 7 of 8 last games. I conceded 18 goals and scored 11. I resigned and deleted the save, it was going nowhere. I don't know how you can play this game. Why if one tactic is good, suddenly, turns so terrible? I'm not overcomiting players forward, it was solid defensively, I'm still scoring more or less the same than in the previous season. Why? Why it happens in every save? Why suddenly everything goes wrong? Why this difference? Why I lose against any opponent? Why whatever I do goes wrong? I've tried everything, absolutely everything. When I thought I had something, this happens. What I'm doing wrong? Does this happen to anybody else? 

There is no explanation. I watch games and there is nothing wrong. Just my players don't defend. They watch, miss tackles and pass the ball to the opponent. They are motivated no complacency. What is wrong? Why, at some random point, everything goes wrong? It can happen after 20 games or, like in this save, after 80 games. What can I do?

I've been trying to explain you this during 1 year. At some point, I start conceding like crazy and losing every game. Whatever the team, whatever the tactic, whatever everything I do it happens. 

[looping]

It happened again. New save, new team, new players, new tactic, new everything and the same happens. After being unbeaten 22 games with Villarreal (18-4) 31 scored 8 conceded I lost 2-5 against Granada and from that moment the average of goals conceded is almost 2 per game. I can't beat anybody, simply that. I stopped playing because I already know how this ends. I won't be able to win a single match until they sack me. It happens again and again.

The last idea that comes to my mind is to post a game before and a game after, so if anybody is so extremely kind can watch both matches and play the difference game.

Can anybody do that for me? In this case, I can post the differences I see and compare with your opinion. I don't know what else to do. I've followed every advice you've given me. I've tried my best and all I get is frustration. I don't expect to keep unbeaten all the season. I just want to have rational results and play the game with rational success. I just don't want to win the first 20 games and then lose every single one until I'm sacked.

[looping]

Ok, obviously nobody will help me wit that.

I've asked the same hundreds of times and I've received many different answers. The question is: why, after X games, I start conceding an outrageous amount of goals and my results drop until I'm sacked? The answers I received are, more or less:

1. Your tactic relies on having space that the opponent leaves behind and, as long as you are having so much success, teams start playing deeper. Then you don't have space and start losing.
This doesn't explain my constant failing. Probably my initial tactics were relying on space. Not now. Until the drama starts, my team is able to beat teams sitting deep. Sometimes I have to adjust something, but i can beat them. For instance, I had a tactic with fluid shape+Be more disciplined TI. Against defensive sides unticking be more disciplined was enough. I had another tactic with structured shape. Changing it to fluid was also enough.
So, this is not reason. in addition, the fact that the opponent is sitting deep so I don't have space to exploit would explain scoring problems, not conceding problems. So, definitively, this is not the explanation.

2. Your tactic is unbalanced and you are overcommitting men forward, so defensive sides hit you on the counter.
No, no and 1000 times no. This is not what's happening. Again, in my initial tactics probably this was happening. Not now. My last tactic was 442 defensive+structured. 3 attack duties (wm both sides an one striker). It's imposible to overcommit players with this tactic. In fact, I think I wasn't committing enough players upfront, but that potential issue would explain, again, scoring problems, not conceding. In addition, I've watched carefully matches and I'm not conceding from counters, I'm conceding in positional defense.
So, no, this is not the reason.

3. Complacency/pressure
This is something I started to pay attention to in the last 2 months and I-m 100% sure my players are not complacent. I talk to them assertive/aggressive I there is no sign of complacency. I go to reports of my assman and they say my players are motivated.
When the drama starts, I try to recover moral with team meetings and changing my team talks. They are not stressed. At least, this is what my ass man says.
This is not the reason.

4. Players tired.
No. I regularly use 18/20 players and no my players are not tired. I'm not playing with only 11 players so on february they are exhausted. This is not the case

5. My players are not good enough and you can keep overachieving constantly.
Ok, that would explain a rational drop of results. For instance, if my team is, let's say, expected to end 8, at some point I will start getting results inherent to the quality of my players. That would be fine and understandable, but this is not what happens. What happens is that I start losing almost every game until I'm sacked. I don't get typical results of a mid table team. I get results of the worst team of the league until I'm sacked.

6. Bad luck.
Well, this would be a reasonable explanation if happened once or twice, but no, it is happening in every save, consistently, no matter the team, no matter the players, no matter the tactic. Whatever I do, at some point, I start conceding like crazy until I'm sacked.

So, a part of this reasons, do you have any other idea?

[warlock]

1 hour ago, looping said:

no matter the team, no matter the players, no matter the tactic. Whatever I do, at some point, I start conceding like crazy

What do you do then? When results start going against you what do you do? If this is happening 20-plus games in to a season, you must have a Plan B tactic that isn't hitting your tactical familiarity. What is it?

[looping]

8 hours ago, warlock said:

What do you do then? When results start going against you what do you do? If this is happening 20-plus games in to a season, you must have a Plan B tactic that isn't hitting your tactical familiarity. What is it?

I watch full matches to find out what's happening. I make adjustments based on what I see. Basically, the same I was doing before. Against defensive sides I give my players more creative freedom (if needed). If  I see a dangerous overlapping fullback I manmark him. This kind of stuff.

[Svenc]

14 hours ago, looping said:

 

5. My players are not good enough and you can keep overachieving constantly.
Ok, that would explain a rational drop of results. For instance, if my team is, let's say, expected to end 8, at some point I will start getting results inherent to the quality of my players. That would be fine and understandable, but this is not what happens. What happens is that I start losing almost every game until I'm sacked. I don't get typical results of a mid table team. I get results of the worst team of the league until I'm sacked.

 

 

Why doesn't that show on the screenshots you posted? Those look like close results against competitive teams.  In fact it doesn't even show conceding like crazy one bit, safe for one or two individually matches. Overall you seem to concede about 1 goal per game, whilst that it isn't at the standard that Atletico tend to have in La Liga, it isn't that hugely far off of the other top teams either. You should either upload the save or matches or anything because nobody is going to guess what's going on. You have a pretty warped perception judging by what you've uploaded so far either way. Don't delete the saves, upload those crazy 2-5 results as pkms against weaker teams. Maybe somebody could have a look then, rather than wondering. It doesn't all need to be tactical, who knows what you're doing when you start to lose some matches (randomly chopping things around), going by what you've posted it could be anything as the shots you provide so far don't match much you describe. A further hint for that is the totally frustration, the double posts, the tilting and the deleting of the saves. That doesn't make things sound very reliable. Still remember a big thread from the Summer, maybe the reason that nobody does provide any help anymore is because you flat out denied it -- such as stopping the constant reloading against a rather "specialty" AI formation where you were clearly getting overloaded in key areas. You seem to massively overcomplicate and tilt all over the shop. I honestly know a lot of totally newbies who don't have any such frustrations, maybe because they keep it clean and simple (and take the occasional loss on the chin and carry on). That way the focus on their squads, and with better players come more consistently results either way.

About older versions... I could turn both of my centre backs into goal scoring machines on FM 2011. It's fun if you don't care about realism (or buggy set pieces). But things have moved on either way. At the core it's still as simple a game for the most part as you let it be, in fact the AI tactical decision making for instance is in need of plenty upgrades. If you're still playing or switching to that 4-4-1-1 with both WMs on A and one of the centre mids on support.. it's not some kind of horrid thing but when in possession it's pretty much the same as going 4-2-3-1 outright which is like one of the most aggressive formations in the game bar none, for a start because it is 4 players by default pushing up deep into the final third. Same as your 4-4-2 would immediately turn into a 4-2-4. The attacking wide guys are going to push up from their position immediately, you'd have the attacking centre mid plus the forward plus one of the centre mids pushing along too.  So if your main concern is conceding, putting both of the centre mids in that 4-4-1-1 on a defend duty can do wonders. That's two guys who will intercept balls and are deeper outlets for retention, typically unchecked by opposition players as they're a bit deeper, visibly. It will also make it tons easier to keep the ball for your side, which further influences naturally your defense, as the longer your side has the ball in the ops half, that's time they basically can't attack. Neither of anything tactical you posted is meant to prioritize clean sheets either way.

 

[looping]

3 hours ago, Svenc said:

 

Why doesn't that show on the screenshots you posted? Those look like close results against competitive teams.  In fact it doesn't even show conceding like crazy one bit, safe for one or two individually matches. Overall you seem to concede about 1 goal per game, whilst that it isn't at the standard that Atletico tend to have in La Liga, it isn't that hugely far off of the other top teams either. You should either upload the save or matches or anything because nobody is going to guess what's going on. You have a pretty warped perception judging by what you've uploaded so far either way. Don't delete the saves, upload those crazy 2-5 results as pkms against weaker teams. Maybe somebody could have a look then, rather than wondering. It doesn't all need to be tactical, who knows what you're doing when you start to lose some matches (randomly chopping things around), going by what you've posted it could be anything as the shots you provide so far don't match much you describe. A further hint for that is the totally frustration, the double posts, the tilting and the deleting of the saves. That doesn't make things sound very reliable. Still remember a big thread from the Summer, maybe the reason that nobody does provide any help anymore is because you flat out denied it -- such as stopping the constant reloading against a rather "specialty" AI formation where you were clearly getting overloaded in key areas. You seem to massively overcomplicate and tilt all over the shop. I honestly know a lot of totally newbies who don't have any such frustrations, maybe because they keep it clean and simple (and take the occasional loss on the chin and carry on). That way the focus on their squads, and with better players come more consistently results either way.

About older versions... I could turn both of my centre backs into goal scoring machines on FM 2011. It's fun if you don't care about realism (or buggy set pieces). But things have moved on either way. At the core it's still as simple a game for the most part as you let it be, in fact the AI tactical decision making for instance is in need of plenty upgrades. If you're still playing or switching to that 4-4-1-1 with both WMs on A and one of the centre mids on support.. it's not some kind of horrid thing but when in possession it's pretty much the same as going 4-2-3-1 outright which is like one of the most aggressive formations in the game bar none, for a start because it is 4 players by default pushing up deep into the final third. Same as your 4-4-2 would immediately turn into a 4-2-4. The attacking wide guys are going to push up from their position immediately, you'd have the attacking centre mid plus the forward plus one of the centre mids pushing along too.  So if your main concern is conceding, putting both of the centre mids in that 4-4-1-1 on a defend duty can do wonders. That's two guys who will intercept balls and are deeper outlets for retention, typically unchecked by opposition players as they're a bit deeper, visibly. It will also make it tons easier to keep the ball for your side, which further influences naturally your defense, as the longer your side has the ball in the ops half, that's time they basically can't attack. Neither of anything tactical you posted is meant to prioritize clean sheets either way.

 

I'm not allowed to post it here but there are other reasons why some people don't want to help me any more and it is not related to any summer post. Some private conversations may help to understand....

Anyway, I'll do what you say. I'll start a new save and will play until I'm sacked. I'll post some games and you will see. in fact, this is what I said.

On 15/10/2016 at 02:04, looping said:

It happened again. New save, new team, new players, new tactic, new everything and the same happens. After being unbeaten 22 games with Villarreal (18-4) 31 scored 8 conceded I lost 2-5 against Granada and from that moment the average of goals conceded is almost 2 per game. I can't beat anybody, simply that. I stopped playing because I already know how this ends. I won't be able to win a single match until they sack me. It happens again and again.

The last idea that comes to my mind is to post a game before and a game after, so if anybody is so extremely kind can watch both matches and play the difference game.

Can anybody do that for me? In this case, I can post the differences I see and compare with your opinion. I don't know what else to do. I've followed every advice you've given me. I've tried my best and all I get is frustration. I don't expect to keep unbeaten all the season. I just want to have rational results and play the game with rational success. I just don't want to win the first 20 games and then lose every single one until I'm sacked.

 

[Ceching You Out]

If you want to honestly tackle the issues you're having, let's start with this: it is undoubtedly something you are doing. No more dissembling or blaming it on "fixed" matches, no more tilting, none of the nonsense. You're having a problem that is very uniquely yours; you're never going to get anywhere (here or in life) if you continue to blame outside factors that very few others, if any, are experiencing.

Having commented on several of your threads, your struggle to accept the above is a very likely contributor to why many of the frequent T&T posters have stopped trying to help. Either step back and think about the problem you're having calmly and rationally or accept that people aren't going to invest their time to help you. I feel a bit silly having to point this out, but hopefully it strikes a chord with you.

To the heart of the matter -- the wobbles are not unusual given the team you're playing with and their place in the La Liga. The issue seems to be that you're not able to pull out of the nosedive; your team slams the throttle and hits the ground full bore. What does morale look like after a couple of losses? Are your team talks appropriate for your team given your opponents? What's the personality of your squad? How many youngsters are you playing? How consistent are your players rated? What types of goals are you conceding -- flukes, wondergoals, set pieces, through balls, crosses, etc.?

Echoing a few other comments, why is your expectation that the formation you're playing will give you exceptional defensive results? I don't think you're thinking through how all the components come together. WM(a) will still be aggressive in a Stuctured tactic even if you're on Counter. You're not playing any DMs. Your defenders are solid but not spectacular. Sevilla isn't such a big club that teams will sacrifice their attack to park the bus. Why do you expect such a defensive overachievement?

[looping]

40 minutes ago, Ceching You Out said:

If you want to honestly tackle the issues you're having, let's start with this: it is undoubtedly something you are doing. No more dissembling or blaming it on "fixed" matches, no more tilting, none of the nonsense. You're having a problem that is very uniquely yours; you're never going to get anywhere (here or in life) if you continue to blame outside factors that very few others, if any, are experiencing.

Having commented on several of your threads, your struggle to accept the above is a very likely contributor to why many of the frequent T&T posters have stopped trying to help. Either step back and think about the problem you're having calmly and rationally or accept that people aren't going to invest their time to help you. I feel a bit silly having to point this out, but hopefully it strikes a chord with you.

To the heart of the matter -- the wobbles are not unusual given the team you're playing with and their place in the La Liga. The issue seems to be that you're not able to pull out of the nosedive; your team slams the throttle and hits the ground full bore. What does morale look like after a couple of losses? Are your team talks appropriate for your team given your opponents? What's the personality of your squad? How many youngsters are you playing? How consistent are your players rated? What types of goals are you conceding -- flukes, wondergoals, set pieces, through balls, crosses, etc.?

Echoing a few other comments, why is your expectation that the formation you're playing will give you exceptional defensive results? I don't think you're thinking through how all the components come together. WM(a) will still be aggressive in a Stuctured tactic even if you're on Counter. You're not playing any DMs. Your defenders are solid but not spectacular. Sevilla isn't such a big club that teams will sacrifice their attack to park the bus. Why do you expect such a defensive overachievement?

 

FIRST AND FOREMOST,  Better not to talk about our lives out of fm. I have no idea who you are and you have no idea who I am. I have no idea about your life and you neither about mine. If you want to help me, I will be very thankful but stop talking about what you have no idea.

With that said and forgotten already because we all know it's not going to happen again,

it is undoubtedly something you are doing.
I've repeated constantly, what am I doing wrong? I know it's me myself and I. When I say it seems it is scripted (for instance) I'm not saying it is. I'm saying it seems to me. Can anybody understand that? Many times many of you said I was complaining about the game but I wasn't. I was only exposing my feeling, which I totally know is wrong.

 What does morale look like after a couple of losses? Are your team talks appropriate for your team given your opponents?
3. Complacency/pressure
This is something I started to pay attention to in the last 2 months and I-m 100% sure my players are not complacent. I talk to them assertive/aggressive I there is no sign of complacency. I go to reports of my assman and they say my players are motivated.
When the drama starts, I try to recover moral with team meetings and changing my team talks. They are not stressed. At least, this is what my ass man says.
This is not the reason, at least in my opinion and according to what you guys suggested.

What's the personality of your squad? How many youngsters are you playing? How many youngsters are you playing?
It doesn't matter. Yes, it doesn't matter keep reading please. It doesn't matter because it happens with absolutely any team.

why is your expectation that the formation you're playing will give you exceptional defensive results? WM(a) will still be aggressive in a Stuctured tactic even if you're on Counter. You're not playing any DMs. Your defenders are solid but not spectacular. Sevilla isn't such a big club that teams will sacrifice their attack to park the bus. Why do you expect such a defensive overachievement?
My team is not Sevilla. I play with WM-at because I want wingers, but wm are more responsible defensively so I use wm with some PI to attack like wingers. Mentality is Defensive. I play with 2 dm, one on defend one on support. 

I also posted how my goals are. Mainly, what the game calls through balls despite they aren't exactly (herne explained it better than I can do).

I'll post, as always, whatever other info you need, if I'm able to provide it.

I said I would play a new save (last post) until sacked to show you what exactly happens. I'm doing exactly this despite I don't have much time available.

Thanks for your answer.

[Ceching You Out]

I'm getting the feeling that I should steer clear here, although against my better judgment I'll try one more time. Feel free to ignore my advice above, but I am pointing out exactly why others are frustrated with your repeated requests for help. Nobody cares that you "feel" the game is scripted. Is it helpful to share that sentiment if you're legitimately looking for help? And then why claim a reasonable thing is impossible and challenge people to do it? Point blank -- that is dishonest nonsense that drives helpful people away. If you truly want help, make it easy for people to help you. Continue however you like, but no surprises how you've burned bridges here.

This may be a translation issue, but complacency/pressure does not equal morale nor motivation. Your team's personality and age do matter because they impact the type of talks you should be giving. For example, if you're a casual, young, inconsistent side that loses a couple of games after an overachieving win streak, aggressively yelling at them may simply encourage the downward spiral of results. Similarly, professional veterans tend to need a more pointed approach. Plus talks depend on whether you were unlucky in the match and what the pre-game odds were. Your Assistant Manager is a decent resource but he won't catch everything.

Apologies on mistaking Sevilla for Malaga; La Liga club badges have never been my forte. That only reinforces that other sides are going to approach you like a midtable side though. How do you expect people to provide advice when you're no longer even playing the formation you last posted? Minimize the number of variables you're changing at one time. Stick with one club and share each step of your tactic changes.

The stats you showed @herne79 are useful, but I'm looking for your analysis. What do you see when you replay each of the goals scored against you in the losing streak? Analyze how each of them happened and look for patterns. Bad giveaways, counter attacks, a forward sneaking behind your defensive line, patient build up, second balls, long shots, or...? The rough frequency of each gives you an idea why you're conceding.

[looping]

I wrote a huge post and deleted itself or I don't know what happened...

You don't understand what I mean when I talk about feeling. I don't know if it is language, culture or what, but for me it is very clear. When you know that the apparent cause of something  is not, but you feel it is because, after thinking a lot, you don't find another explanation. It's not complaining. It's not crying. It is not about sentiments. Never experiencied this? You clearly know you are wrong, but you don't find any other explanation for anything? 

I don't understand what you mean with morale, motivation, complacency and pressure. I simply don't get it. I mean, I understand what you say about youngsters and veterans, but I don't know where to look at when playing to discover if my players are motivaded/pressured or whatever.

My basic tactic was posted. THen I made some adjustments based on suggestions received. I'm not going to quote everything because it would results on a huge post, but you can see it.

Now, I'm with my basic 442 defensive structured but I dropped one of my strikers to amc strata to reduce the gap between the midfield and attack. Note that I'm playing with 2 dm, one on defend and other on support + Pi get further forward. I never managed to pair succesfully an amc with a lone strike, speciallly if I want my striker to be the scorer and my amc the creator, but I'm trying.

The only pattern I see with my defensive problems is the opponent moving in front of my box, my cb and dm acting like dummies and suddenly the opponent is in front of my gk. This kind of things don't happen before the drama starts.

I don't have problems with counters and fast transitions.  Positional defense is the problem.

 

[looping]

I'm trying an adjustment in my initial 442, dropping one striker to amc position, and I have some problems pairing amc with a striker. Can you help me with that?

I have a 4411 defensive structured 

TI Play out the defence, close down more, push higher

gk-de

fb-su cd-de cd-de fb-su

wm-at cm-de dlp-su wm-at

----------------AM-su

----------------P-at

PI: cd-de close down less, cm-de less risky passes, wm-at run wide cross from byline, am-su more risky passes.

So, basically the same, only changed

Now dlp-su before cm-su

Am-su, dlf-su

PAt, Af-at

The idea is to have more bodies in midfield with my am-su and a more conservative role (dlp-su), because, when attacking, I'm playing 4-2-3-1 so I need 2 holding midfielders. 

The reason of the poacher is that he is more static so more a target for crosses than an AF.

Some principles which are not optional:

- I don't want attacking fb

- My main scorer must be my striker.

- I don't want my striker to be a creator-supportive player, I want him to focus on scoring.

- As usual i prefer winning 1-0 than 4-2.

Basically, the idea is to feed my Poacher.

 

I think I'm starting to understand what's happening. My tactic is a complete disaster but, at first, opponents overattack me so give me space behind which my players, who are better than opponent expects, can exploit. My defense is solid, at first, because they overcommit players.

Once I have good results they sit back and my tactic can't unlock them. My adjustments and tweaks don't work at this moment, but the true is that they weren't working before, despite I was winning. In fact, my team was winning in spite of me.

With that said, I have literally no idea what's wrong, why my tactic is so terrible and what can i do to fix it. And I say this after watching and watching games during 1 year. It is a waste of time. I don't think nobody can help me. Well, there is one way: I need somebody by my side explaining me what's happening exactly and how to fix it.

It's important to understand that he case is not that my ideas to fix my tactics are wrong. The fact is that I have literally no idea. I just follow exactly what I read in the forums, without understanding why. I mean, I understand the reasoning, but I don't identify anything in the pitch. 

For instance, I conceded a goal from a ball over the top. I thought, in the forums say if you have problems with balls over the top, drop your defense line. I did that and I conceded 2 goals from crosses. Now what? Literally, no idea.

I'm losing and I have to score a goal. Ok, I go to fluid shape. Do you think I see any difference? No. I don't see a single difference. We may score 1, 2 or 6 goals, but I don't see my players behaving different. I go to fluid just because I've read it here.

[HUNT3R]

7 hours ago, looping said:

I think I'm starting to understand what's happening. My tactic is a complete disaster but, at first, opponents overattack me so give me space behind which my players, who are better than opponent expects, can exploit. My defense is solid, at first, because they overcommit players.

Exactly. It's good that you're starting to see this yourself now too.

 

7 hours ago, looping said:

For instance, I conceded a goal from a ball over the top. I thought, in the forums say if you have problems with balls over the top, drop your defense line. I did that and I conceded 2 goals from crosses. Now what? Literally, no idea.read it here.

No, that's not quite right. There should be a relationship between your D-line and closing down. In your 442, dropping the D-line will increase the gap between your midfield and defence. That potentially opens MORE space for opposition midfielders to measure balls over the top.

In other words  -  look at who is playing the balls in the first place and stop that. It might be that you're constantly leaving that player open. Then again, it was 1 goal, so you also may have been unlucky.

[looping]

9 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Exactly. It's good that you're starting to see this yourself now too.

 

Yes, but that's going on circles. 

My tactic is wrong----> I create a new tactic----> I post it here-----> You say my basic tactic is good, watch games and adjust----> I do that, start winning until I start losing miserably--->why I'm losing?-----> I'm losing because my tactic is a complete disaster but, at first, opponents overattack me so give me space behind which my players, who are better than opponent expects, can exploit.---->I create a new tactic----> I post it here-----> You say my basic tactic is good, watch games and adjust----> I do that, start winning until I start losing miserably--->why I'm losing?

And again.

 

[jazzyboy]

32 minutes ago, looping said:

Yes, but that's going on circles. 

My tactic is wrong----> I create a new tactic----> I post it here-----> You say my basic tactic is good, watch games and adjust----> I do that, start winning until I start losing miserably--->why I'm losing?-----> I'm losing because my tactic is a complete disaster but, at first, opponents overattack me so give me space behind which my players, who are better than opponent expects, can exploit.---->I create a new tactic----> I post it here-----> You say my basic tactic is good, watch games and adjust----> I do that, start winning until I start losing miserably--->why I'm losing?

And again.

 

Maybe you're overcomplicating a bit here. I don't think there is right or wrong tactic, it's just how you want your team to play, your players are still the most important factors that affect the result of a game.

Personally, when evaluating my own tactic I pay attention to where my players are passing the ball, the type of passes, does player have option around him, and where they start engaging the oppositions without the ball. I dont worry/ change tactics after bad results coz there are too many variables to consider, mainly player attributes, ppm etc.. you wanna have some kind of a base before changing, or else it would be like starting from scratch all over again.

I have been there, endless losing streaks, my tweaks seemed to have no impact at all. I had to relearn the TIs (I rarely use player instructions), mentality etc as I misunderstood their effects on the pitch. I think having a style of play in mind helps as it gives you something to benchmark against.

Oh and I dont like defensive mentality, I hate giving up so much space in front of your defenders and your players are more focused on running back to form that deep dline, sometimes even running away from opp. w/ball to get back to position. But that's just me, not saying it's bad to play defensive. You give away some and you gain some, for me I don't fancy the trade-off.

[Ceching You Out]

Like @HUNT3R points out, it's good that you're seeing that for yourself. That's the first couple of steps -- understanding why you were succeeding and why you start to fail. Let's break that cycle though. Stick with a consistent formation or its variations so that you can start to see the difference. Don't overreact by making drastic changes because then you're not able to see the effects as clearly.

In the 4-4-1-1 you posted above, you're playing Structured so that means players will basically stick to their roles. Your team will be a little more static, playing to their roles; your defenders aren't going to play like forwards and vice versa. On Defensive, you will be direct out of the back and low risk on the offensive end of the pitch. So looking at the roles you have chosen, you've got 3.5 attacking players (counting the AM(s) as the .5). As long as the other team comes at you, there will be space for those 3.5 players to create chances.

Now once the other team sits deeper and plays a little less risky, where are your chances going to come from? You have 3.5 attacking roles going against 5+ defenders, with your poacher being fairly static. How are you going to break that defense down? Don't change the formation, but hypothesize the other changes you could make. Take a few guesses, explain your rationale, and I'm happy to tell you whether you're on the right track.

 

3 hours ago, jazzyboy said:

Maybe you're overcomplicating a bit here. I don't think there is right or wrong tactic, it's just how you want your team to play, your players are still the most important factors that affect the result of a game.

There's a lot of truth to this. Tactics have to fit your players. Most tactics, here and in the real world, are designed around optimizing the talents of your best players. An important question for @looping to answer is what do your players do well compared to the rest of the league? What do they do poorly?

[looping]

Ok. Concrete problem that I can identify and consistently happens in every save. Idiot cm not tracking back. Look my highlighted player Recio. He is a cm-su. Why on earth he is not tracking back? Which are the posible causes?

I

 

I Posted this before I saw yours Ceching You Out.

[jazzyboy]

1 hour ago, looping said:

Ok. Concrete problem that I can identify and consistently happens in every save. Idiot cm not tracking back. Look my highlighted player Recio. He is a cm-su. Why on earth he is not tracking back? Which are the posible causes?

I

 

I Posted this before I saw yours Ceching You Out.

He has 2 other players in front of the ball covering. I can see why he chose to play the passing lane instead.

Did you use specific man marking btw? Your wide players got sucked into the IFs. Is this 4-4-1-1?

Did I see correctly, 14 sec in and 6 shots already? 

[looping]

7 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

He has 2 other players in front of the ball covering. I can see why he chose to play the passing lane instead.

Could you please use other words? I don't understand it. I'm defending in this screenshot and my player did not track back.

8 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

Did you use specific man marking btw?

No.

8 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

Your wide players got sucked into the IFs. Is this 4-4-1-1?

Yes.

9 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

Did I see correctly, 14 sec in and 6 shots already? 

No. I was reviewing the match during half time.

[looping]

2 hours ago, Ceching You Out said:

In the 4-4-1-1 you posted above, you're playing Structured so that means players will basically stick to their roles. Your team will be a little more static, playing to their roles; your defenders aren't going to play like forwards and vice versa. On Defensive, you will be direct out of the back and low risk on the offensive end of the pitch. So looking at the roles you have chosen, you've got 3.5 attacking players (counting the AM(s) as the .5). As long as the other team comes at you, there will be space for those 3.5 players to create chances.

I've made some changes.

AM(s)----T-at in the AMCR position.

P(a)---AF in the stcl position

dlp(s)---cm (s)

So I have this now:

PI: cb close down less and cm-de fewer risky passes.

2 hours ago, Ceching You Out said:

Now once the other team sits deeper and plays a little less risky, where are your chances going to come from? You have 3.5 attacking roles going against 5+ defenders, with your poacher being fairly static. How are you going to break that defense down? Don't change the formation, but hypothesize the other changes you could make. Take a few guesses, explain your rationale, and I'm happy to tell you whether you're on the right track.

Now I have 4.5 players attacking (wm, wm, t, af +.5 cm)

 

2 hours ago, Ceching You Out said:

here's a lot of truth to this. Tactics have to fit your players. Most tactics, here and in the real world, are designed around optimizing the talents of your best players. An important question for @looping to answer is what do your players do well compared to the rest of the league? What do they do poorly?

I've made some transfers (best players from relegated teams, transfer list players, and best players from lower leagues) and a couple of database tweaks (not relevant, just adjusting some attributes and ppm which I think don't match with real life).

I think I have a complete team. A decent gk, two fb who decently attack and defend (around 12-14 attributes), two good but not paced cb (good marking, tackling, heading, positioning...), two hard working cm, one more defensive oriented (Camacho) and other more creative (Recio, despite he is not a creative force), two fast wings, a creative talented trequartista and a good striker, if we ask him to focus on what he can do: of the ball, finishing and running without the ball (that's why I used a poacher role, now changed to AF).

I think (and I expect) my team to defend well. We have the players to do that. Even my wings are decent defenders. When attacking, I should exploit the passing and creativiy of my t-at, the pace of my wings and feed my striker who is good at goal scoring.

I played 3 competitive matches and results are very good. My defense is still weak, because I'm conceding to many chances but I'm creating many many chances.

I know this doesn't mean much because I use to have good results in the first games and I can't identify what exactly I'm doing good or wrong.

 

[jazzyboy]

I meant as the opponent has 2 of your players in front of him already that could challenge him if he advances, so Recio chose to guard the passing options so he could intercept the pass incase the opponent passed back.

Did this incident happen 14 sec into the game, i knowyou were reviewing it after it happened. If this was after a kickoff, it would make sense that players were still scrambling to pick up their man.

If you wanna make sure they track back why not give them def duties? Support imo is 50-50, player's decision making and your fluidity will affect if they track back or not. 

[looping]

1 minute ago, jazzyboy said:

I meant as the opponent has 2 of your players in front of him already that could challenge him if he advances, so Recio chose to guard the passing options so he could intercept the pass incase the opponent passed back.

Did this incident happen 14 sec into the game, i knowyou were reviewing it after it happened. If this was after a kickoff, it would make sense that players were still scrambling to pick up their man.

If you wanna make sure they track back why not give them def duties? Support imo is 50-50, player's decision making and your fluidity will affect if they track back or not. 

I can't give him a def duty because I want him to make some forward runs.

It happens quite usually during the games: My cm-su, for any reason, gets out of position (which can happen, it is understandable) but, instead tracking back to recover shape he stays out of position, doing absolutely nothing. After 10-20-30 seconds, he realizes he is out of position a runs like there was no tomorrow, but it is too late. The defense was unbalanced because he didn't track back/recover position as soon as posible.

Is this caused by decision making? Recio's decisions attribute is 14, which is not bad and I can't believe any player in the world would take this decision, which is absolutely against any rational principle. He is going directly against my orders, playing out of his defensive position just because he decided not to track back without any rational explanation. I can't believe that is caused by decisions attribute.

I'm not saying it is not caused by a bad decision. I'm saying if this is the case, the ME is wrong because it makes no sense (please keep reading). And, assuming that as a bug, I'm not complaining because this is what we have (and is quite good). I just want to know if I can fix it without giving my cm a defend duty. I tried with bbm and it seems he follows better my instructions when defending,  but he gets further forward when attacking and I have some problems in transition (he is too high up the pitch and has to cover a lot of space).

[jazzyboy]

20 minutes ago, looping said:

I can't give him a def duty because I want him to make some forward runs.

It happens quite usually during the games: My cm-su, for any reason, gets out of position (which can happen, it is understandable) but, instead tracking back to recover shape he stays out of position, doing absolutely nothing. After 10-20-30 seconds, he realizes he is out of position a runs like there was no tomorrow, but it is too late. The defense was unbalanced because he didn't track back/recover position as soon as posible.

Is this caused by decision making? Recio's decisions attribute is 14, which is not bad and I can't believe any player in the world would take this decision, which is absolutely against any rational principle. He is going directly against my orders, playing out of his defensive position just because he decided not to track back without any rational explanation. I can't believe that is caused by decisions attribute.

I'm not saying it is not caused by a bad decision. I'm saying if this is the case, the ME is wrong because it makes no sense (please keep reading). And, assuming that as a bug, I'm not complaining because this is what we have (and is quite good). I just want to know if I can fix it without giving my cm a defend duty. I tried with bbm and it seems he follows better my instructions when defending,  but he gets further forward when attacking and I have some problems in transition (he is too high up the pitch and has to cover a lot of space).

The problem with having another runners is your defense will be exposed when they are making runs forward. If that happens then it will be a domino effect, players trying to cover for each other and in turns getting dragged out of position.

Keep in mind when using more structured fluidity, players will try to maintain distance between each line as a result of more pronounced difference in mentality.

There are lots of attributes that affect tracking back, workrate, stamina, teamwork, decision, aggression, anticipating opponent's movement, etc, but mainly workrate and teamwork. Did you see the same thing happening when you use different player instead?

Also, I looked at your tactic posted above, is there a reason why you went with defensive/structured with TIs that contradict the mentality (close down more, push higher)? 

 

[looping]

9 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

The problem with having another runners is your defense will be exposed when they are making runs forward. If that happens then it will be a domino effect, players trying to cover for each other and in turns getting dragged out of position.

Keep in mind when using more structured fluidity, players will try to maintain distance between each line as a result of more pronounced difference in mentality.

There are lots of attributes that affect tracking back, workrate, stamina, teamwork, decision, aggression, anticipating opponent's movement, etc, but mainly workrate and teamwork. Did you see the same thing happening when you use different player instead?

Also, I looked at your tactic posted above, is there a reason why you went with defensive/structured with TIs that contradict the mentality (close down more, push higher)? 

 

I don't find an explanation for my player out of position. The situation is: we are positioned, two solid banks of four. My cm-s decides to close down an opponent and leaves his position. Nothing against it, it's fine and understandable. Once he stops closing down, he should immediately recover his position (track back to his original position,  his defensive position), but, instead of doing that, he stays out of position doing nothing, just watching, until he realizes he is out of position. He stays bad positioned even 30 seconds, which totally destroys my defensive order.

Any player I use as cm-su does the same. 

About TI. This comes from my initial tactic. Push higher is just to reduce the space between defense and midfield. With Defensive mentality, I don't expect my def line too high.

Close down more is just because, developing my initial tactic, I noticed about a lack of pressing (specially down the flanks) so I tried with close down more. The PI close down less to my cb is a suggestion by herne which I think is totally right to counteract a bit the more closing down effect.

Play out Def is just because defensive mentality has direct passing at back and I wanted to counteract this (not specially interested in short passing, but with direct passing from the back I have nobody upfront to receive that long balls).

[jazzyboy]

15 minutes ago, looping said:

I don't find an explanation for my player out of position. The situation is: we are positioned, two solid banks of four. My cm-s decides to close down an opponent and leaves his position. Nothing against it, it's fine and understandable. Once he stops closing down, he should immediately recover his position (track back to his original position,  his defensive position), but, instead of doing that, he stays out of position doing nothing, just watching, until he realizes he is out of position. He stays bad positioned even 30 seconds, which totally destroys my defensive order.

Any player I use as cm-su does the same. 

About TI. This comes from my initial tactic. Push higher is just to reduce the space between defense and midfield. With Defensive mentality, I don't expect my def line too high.

Close down more is just because, developing my initial tactic, I noticed about a lack of pressing (specially down the flanks) so I tried with close down more. The PI close down less to my cb is a suggestion by herne which I think is totally right to counteract a bit the more closing down effect.

Play out Def is just because defensive mentality has direct passing at back and I wanted to counteract this (not specially interested in short passing, but with direct passing from the back I have nobody upfront to receive that long balls).

Have you ever considered using different mentality or different team shape? With structured,  the cms will always likely be more advanced than cmd with or w/o ball. Defensive mentality is really conservative, it seems like they wait till it's close to your penalty box before they tackle the ball which I found to put too much pressure on the defense and combined with high line, it makes your players like yo-yo sometimes, going up and back down again.

Also cb with close down less and high line doesnt quite make sense to me as the goal of high line is to compress space and give less time on ball to the other team.  Closing down less does the opposite of that. With high line you'd often have this scenario where the opposition's striker receiving ball near the kickoff circle and your defenders are close to the halfway line. If you give them close down less, your defenders will retreat back while the striker advances, pretty much just waiting till your other players pick up the striker, conceding space to him. Unless this is what you are trying to achieve with your tactic, I prefer not to give them space and possibility of shot on goal.

So maybe try standard/fluid, leave your ti as is, remove the close down less. Might want to consider other role for the am, if he helps with closing down, it might help your cm-s too as he doesn't have to be in 2 places as often.

[looping]

9 hours ago, jazzyboy said:

Have you ever considered using different mentality or different team shape? With structured,  the cms will always likely be more advanced than cmd with or w/o ball. Defensive mentality is really conservative, it seems like they wait till it's close to your penalty box before they tackle the ball which I found to put too much pressure on the defense and combined with high line, it makes your players like yo-yo sometimes, going up and back down again.

Also cb with close down less and high line doesnt quite make sense to me as the goal of high line is to compress space and give less time on ball to the other team.  Closing down less does the opposite of that. With high line you'd often have this scenario where the opposition's striker receiving ball near the kickoff circle and your defenders are close to the halfway line. If you give them close down less, your defenders will retreat back while the striker advances, pretty much just waiting till your other players pick up the striker, conceding space to him. Unless this is what you are trying to achieve with your tactic, I prefer not to give them space and possibility of shot on goal.

So maybe try standard/fluid, leave your ti as is, remove the close down less. Might want to consider other role for the am, if he helps with closing down, it might help your cm-s too as he doesn't have to be in 2 places as often.

Buff.. Standard +fluid sounds almost suicidal to me.

I've created other tactics with fluid shape+counter mentality and the TI be more disciplined. This clearly indicates the style of play I want to implement.  

As I said, push higher has the only purpose to reduce the space between defense and midfield. If I had a dlp instead my cm, I would untick push higher, because the dlp is deeper than cm, so space is reduced without the TI.

My idea is that deep lying strikers are a problem of my cm, not my cb (close down less PI). Cb are the last wall, I hope you understand. I want my cm to track back, hassle the opponent, offer a good screening.

Again, the problem with my cm is not that he is doing something different of I want him. The problem is that he "disconnects" from reality and stays quiet, away from the ball during a few seconds, until, at some moment, he realizes he is doing absolutely nothing, reacts, and tracks back to his expected position extremely fast. This means he "knows" he is out of place, but during a few seconds he is out of the game, his brain is thinking in how much fun he had yesterday with his girlfriend (or whatever), until he remembers "hey I'm a cm, support duty, defensive mentality, structured shape. I should be in front of my box defending instead of here doing nothing". Look at this screenshot:

What the hell is he doing? He is doing nothing there. There is no reason why to be there. He lost his position, I can understand that, but why he is not recovering his original and expected position? Why he stays there, quiet, not moving, until something clicks and tells him "my friend, track back". 

Don't you see his positioning is totally out of place? Absolutely irrational?  I'm almost defending diamond!

If this player had low decisions, work rate, teamwork, positioning... attributes, I could understand it. But whoever plays in this position behaves this way, even players with +15 of this and other crucial attributes. 

The only solution that comes to my mind is drop my cm to dm and tell one of them to get further forward to provide some forward runs, but I'm afraid this will create big gaps between dm and attacking players.

 

[herne79]

12 minutes ago, looping said:

The only solution that comes to my mind is drop my cm to dm and tell one of them to get further forward to provide some forward runs, but I'm afraid this will create big gaps between dm and attacking players.

If it is just the cm-s you are having defensive issues with, have you tried dropping just this one position back to the DM line rather than both central midfielders?  Perhaps as a DM-s with the PI to get further forward (if needed)?

[looping]

I tried dropping one or both cm to dm but I'm not happy with the results. Yes, now both track back, but there is a big space between midfielders and striker (s).

I also tried a different approach. I changed my t-at to mp-at and gave him PI to make him play like a t-at when attacking (I didn't tick close down less and tackle and ease off tackles). I also told him to man mark the cmr of the opponent, who is the one sitting in front my cm-su (cml). The idea is, if my cm-su leaves his positions (which I can accept) but he doesn't recover it (which I can't accept), I'll give him a screen so he doesn't need to leave his position closing down an opponent.

At this moment, I'm happy with that but I'll keep an eye on it.

Moving on to other issues, there is a big difference between first half and second half. IN the first, I dominate, create chances, have posession, deny the opponent... Everything is fine. In second half, I don't know what happens but we play worse. For instance, in two different matches, half time winning 2-0 the opponent 0 shots. Ended winning 2-1, suffering a lot, the opponent had 10 or more shots.

[jazzyboy]

If you want the dlf be picked up by cm, perhaps the push higher up kinda counters that, don't you think?

[looping]

Ok. It started to happen again. Not because I had 3 bad results but because I already know what's going to happen: I will start conceding like crazy, losing almost every match until I'm sacked. I will asume as written on stone that my problem is 

On 21/10/2016 at 00:11, looping said:

I think I'm starting to understand what's happening. My tactic is a complete disaster but, at first, opponents overattack me so give me space behind which my players, who are better than opponent expects, can exploit. My defense is solid, at first, because they overcommit players.

Once I have good results they sit back and my tactic can't unlock them. My adjustments and tweaks don't work at this moment, but the true is that they weren't working before, despite I was winning. In fact, my team was winning in spite of me.

If you want to help me you must know that I don't see it on the pitch. I don't see it. I'm not saying it is not happening. I'm saying I don't see it. It means I'm assuming that I'm not watching properly. As a consequence, the info I can give you is limited, but I'll do my very best.

What I see is the opponent moving in front of my box with short passes, my players acting like dummies and suddenly the opponent is in front of my gk. In possession, my players used confusion attack against themselves and now are passing the ball to the ones who are not wearing the same shirt than them. 

Note that I against Getafe and Eibar I scored first, so, when I conceded the goals, I suppose, they were not exactly sitting deep and defending because they scored in the second half when I was 1-0 up.

I won't play any more games until some feedback is given and I can give a try.

My tactic is what I attach. PI: gk--->pass it shorter, short kicks, fewer risky passes cb--> close down less cm-de---> fewer risky passes  am-at--> more risky passes, move into channels roam from position.

I will provide any info you need, if I can. Just tell me.

Thanks in advance.

 

[looping]

6 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

If you want the dlf be picked up by cm, perhaps the push higher up kinda counters that, don't you think?

I'm not sure... If I reduce the space between defense and midfield, my midfielder will be closer to the striker deep lying (he will start deep lying from a deeper position, so when he has deep lied he is almost in my midfield strata). If there is a big gap, he will deep lie to my dm strata where there is nobody so he will receive the ball with space and time.

This is my opinion, but I may be mistaken...

[looping]

20 hours ago, looping said:

Ok. It started to happen again. Not because I had 3 bad results but because I already know what's going to happen: I will start conceding like crazy, losing almost every match until I'm sacked. I will asume as written on stone that my problem is 

If you want to help me you must know that I don't see it on the pitch. I don't see it. I'm not saying it is not happening. I'm saying I don't see it. It means I'm assuming that I'm not watching properly. As a consequence, the info I can give you is limited, but I'll do my very best.

What I see is the opponent moving in front of my box with short passes, my players acting like dummies and suddenly the opponent is in front of my gk. In possession, my players used confusion attack against themselves and now are passing the ball to the ones who are not wearing the same shirt than them. 

Note that I against Getafe and Eibar I scored first, so, when I conceded the goals, I suppose, they were not exactly sitting deep and defending because they scored in the second half when I was 1-0 up.

I won't play any more games until some feedback is given and I can give a try.

My tactic is what I attach. PI: gk--->pass it shorter, short kicks, fewer risky passes cb--> close down less cm-de---> fewer risky passes  am-at--> more risky passes, move into channels roam from position.

I will provide any info you need, if I can. Just tell me.

Thanks in advance.

 

 

This is just to show you what I say is true. I knew the disaster was coming. This is what happened.

Last 14 games: 4 wins, 5 draw 5 lost. This means 17 points in 14 games, 1,21 points/per game, in 38 games 46 points. Totally unacceptable.

I've changed nothing. My tactic is the same. I just tried (like I was doing during the first 9 games) to adapt to the opponent (slight changes during matches), so there is no chopping.

If anybody wants to help me, please, asume this as true. Don't say "expect dips" and this kind of thing. Affter some matches, everything turns horrible. I will asume as true that the cause is

On 21/10/2016 at 00:11, looping said:

I think I'm starting to understand what's happening. My tactic is a complete disaster but, at first, opponents overattack me so give me space behind which my players, who are better than opponent expects, can exploit. My defense is solid, at first, because they overcommit players.

Once I have good results they sit back and my tactic can't unlock them. My adjustments and tweaks don't work at this moment, but the true is that they weren't working before, despite I was winning. In fact, my team was winning in spite of me.

With that said, I have literally no idea what's wrong, why my tactic is so terrible and what can i do to fix it. And I say this after watching and watching games during 1 year. It is a waste of time. I don't think nobody can help me. Well, there is one way: I need somebody by my side explaining me what's happening exactly and how to fix it.

It's important to understand that he case is not that my ideas to fix my tactics are wrong. The fact is that I have literally

But if you want to help me, please asume as true that this is not a few bad games. This will stay like this until I'm sacked. There is no reason why to keep playing matches, because whatever I do I will lose.

I'm still waiting for advice. I will provide any info, if I can.

[HUNT3R]

2 minutes ago, looping said:

I'm still waiting for advice. I will provide any info, if I can.

Looping, you wait for advice, but you don't provide anything. Logically, you need to realise that no one can see your matches. I'm sure there's a way to make that possible. 

Instead of waiting for someone to try and pull information out of you, again, why not just provide it in the first place?

You've played 14 matches without changing anything. Why? Did you not spot a single issue?

Do you compare one of the matches where things went well to one of the matches where they don't, to see what the difference is? There obviously are differences, so it's a matter of seeing what they are.

[looping]

21 hours ago, looping said:

What I see is the opponent moving in front of my box with short passes, my players acting like dummies and suddenly the opponent is in front of my gk. In possession, my players used confusion attack against themselves and now are passing the ball to the ones who are not wearing the same shirt than them. 

 I add that my players seem unable to clear a cross.

I attach what I think are my best and worst matches.

Athletic - Málaga.pkm

Zaragoza - Málaga.pkm

[loklokno123]

 

The best way to defend is to sit deep, play very narrow 

for fm17 , i dont press high because AI's counter attack is very effective. 

I concede lots of goal becoz my silly players lose possession(such as dribbling but he is a BMW-D lol)  then a long pass lead to goal . 

 

 

 

[looping]

I don't know if this kind of answer was what you were expecting. You must understand that my problem is not fixing issues. My problem is identifying issues.

I can't tell you what is wrong because I don't know. I don't see any concrete issue, a part of what I've said (crosses, passing to the opponent...).

If my problem was, for instance, getting caught on the counter, it would be fine. I would ask for solutions to that issue. This is not the case. I can't tell you what's wrong, not because I don't want, but because I don't know.

I've watched hundreds of full games and I don't know what is wrong. This is not lazy, it's simply I don't know.

That's why I say there is no rational explanation. This is why I say it seems to me is scripted. Not because I'm saying it is, but because, as long as I can't identify what is good or wrong, I don't find an explanation. Please understand this sentence: I know it is not scripted.

I don't understand when you say, good is playing the style you want, bad is not playing the style you want. Yes, my players are doing what I want (with exceptions I already exposed), the problem is that they are doing it wrong. They don't clear crosses, miss tackles. That's why I can't give you more info than this.

An example. My wm. I want them, to be an attacking threat, run, dribble, cross and go to the far post to finish crosses. When defending, I want them to be part of a solid bank of 4. Are they doing that? Yes, they are. But they are doing it wrong (cross to the opponent, miss dribbles, miss tackles...)

 

[jazzyboy]

10 minutes ago, looping said:

I don't know if this kind of answer was what you were expecting. You must understand that my problem is not fixing issues. My problem is identifying issues.

I can't tell you what is wrong because I don't know. I don't see any concrete issue, a part of what I've said (crosses, passing to the opponent...).

If my problem was, for instance, getting caught on the counter, it would be fine. I would ask for solutions to that issue. This is not the case. I can't tell you what's wrong, not because I don't want, but because I don't know.

I've watched hundreds of full games and I don't know what is wrong. This is not lazy, it's simply I don't know.

That's why I say there is no rational explanation. This is why I say it seems to me is scripted. Not because I'm saying it is, but because, as long as I can't identify what is good or wrong, I don't find an explanation. Please understand this sentence: I know it is not scripted.

I don't understand when you say, good is playing the style you want, bad is not playing the style you want. Yes, my players are doing what I want (with exceptions I already exposed), the problem is that they are doing it wrong. They don't clear crosses, miss tackles. That's why I can't give you more info than this.

An example. My wm. I want them, to be an attacking threat, run, dribble, cross and go to the far post to finish crosses. When defending, I want them to be part of a solid bank of 4. Are they doing that? Yes, they are. But they are doing it wrong (cross to the opponent, miss dribbles, miss tackles...)

 

There, you seem to be going somewhere. You could always post a pkm of a match where you're not happy with and see what other people think about it

[looping]

14 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

There, you seem to be going somewhere. You could always post a pkm of a match where you're not happy with and see what other people think about it

 

3 hours ago, looping said:

 I add that my players seem unable to clear a cross.

I attach what I think are my best and worst matches.

Athletic - Málaga.pkm

Zaragoza - Málaga.pkm