Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

Marcelo Bielsa's Tactical Philosophy in Football Manager 2017

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

A Supporting duty balanced with an Attacking mentality gives us a 70-30 preference towards attack. I

There is no fixed proportional relationship between mentaltity and duty, you should stop suggesting that this could be a relational truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. I thought I knew what to do in FM18 but now the plans may have changed :D

Love El Loco and hope this can lead to many success.

btw, are the PI only for the striker and the keeper?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ozil - are you sure the striker moves into channels. Originally it was roams?

Great thread. I just had a glance as I will read it later - but the striker thing I noticed straight away.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rashidi said:

There is no fixed proportional relationship between mentaltity and duty, you should suggesting that this could be a relational truth.


Would you mind re-phrasing that? "Proportional relationships" and "relational truths" got me :lol: there's also possibly a typo in there somewhere as the last part of the sentence does not make sense, to me anyway.

Above the line your quoting is:

Quote

Individual mentality is determined by 3 primary factors:

  1. Team Mentality determines a base Mentality level, according to the collective team strategy.
  2. Player Duty determines whether an individual is responsible for attacking, defending or supporting in relation to the collective mentality.
  3. Team Shape determines to what extent the individual focuses on the Team Mentality vs. their individual Duty.

The word 'primary' there is to keep things simple avoiding over-complicating the subject with the minor modifications you get from Exploiting the Flanks / Centre, Overlapping fullbacks and the team boost you get not playing a Attack duty attacker - to list the few I am aware of.

Not sure if that's what you're getting at?

The line you quoted comes from this context:

Quote

Given that we have already chosen an Attacking team mentality, we can see that a Flexible -  instructs individual players to balance Team Mentality and individual Duty equally - team shape gives us the following Mentality distribution:

I am saying that a Midfielder with Support duty in Attack team mentality and Flexible team shape has this mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kingjericho said:

Wow. I thought I knew what to do in FM18 but now the plans may have changed :D

Love El Loco and hope this can lead to many success.

btw, are the PI only for the striker and the keeper?

 

16 minutes ago, Anaconda Vice said:

Ozil - are you sure the striker moves into channels. Originally it was roams?

Great thread. I just had a glance as I will read it later - but the striker thing I noticed straight away.

 

 

Apologies if this is not clear. Some PIs are listed where I am talking about the Player Duties as well.

Eg. if it's a Support role and doesn't naturally get forward more but I say it does then that's a PI.

Very difficult to write up the minor details clearly when trying to tackle the bigger issues. The objective is that these threads should enable people to make their own decisions rather than looking to be given a set of instructions. Keep on asking questions if that is not happening yet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Support:

A8bs8PC.png

A Supporting duty balanced with an Attacking mentality gives us a 70-30 preference towards attack. In a Standard mentality system, this level of individual mentality would be considered attacking.

There is no proportional relationship between mentality and duty in the game like you infer, and suggesting one to be a "truth" ( i.e. 70-30 preference) like you have can be misleading. And apologies, typos happen when I have a baby in one arm and am trying to type with a handphone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

There is no proportional relationship between mentality and duty in the game, and suggesting one to be a "truth" like you have can be misleading.


Ok, now the sentence makes sense but I am still not sure I get what you're saying. :lol:

Re-iterating my response above:

Quote

Above the line you're quoting is:

Quote

Individual mentality is determined by 3 primary factors:

  1. Team Mentality determines a base Mentality level, according to the collective team strategy.
  2. Player Duty determines whether an individual is responsible for attacking, defending or supporting in relation to the collective mentality.
  3. Team Shape determines to what extent the individual focuses on the Team Mentality vs. their individual Duty.

The word 'primary' there is to keep things simple avoiding over-complicating the subject with the minor modifications you get from Exploiting the Flanks / Centre, Overlapping fullbacks and the team boost you get not playing a Attack duty attacker - to list the few I am aware of.

Not sure if that's what you're getting at?

The line you quoted comes from this context:

Quote

Given that we have already chosen an Attacking team mentality, we can see that a Flexible -  instructs individual players to balance Team Mentality and individual Duty equally - team shape gives us the following Mentality distribution:

I am saying that a Midfielder with Support duty in Attack team mentality and Flexible team shape has this mentality.

Interested to hear your thoughts if that isn't accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

gives us a 70-30 preference towards attack

You said it gives a player a 70-30 preference in attack when on an attacking mentality, why 70-30 and not 50-50? Why pick such a specific proportional relationship? That is why I am saying there is no such proportional relationship in the game. And some people might start quoting that and go why is not he attacking 7 times out of 10. I only see him attacking 2 times out of 10. As this is your conclusion, based on everything you've said before, I felt it was inaccurate to give such a proportion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to following this one, how do you plan to achieve Bielsa-like possession figures (~55%) on Attacking mentality? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, argenmik said:

Great thread ozil. If we could get more of you and less of rashidi spouting grammatical nonsense that would be great 

 

No need for that at all. @Rashidi is a great community member as is @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we have established that "Preference" is your  personal term, which you have introduced to explain how you interpret decision making in the game.  

And I am well aware of the sliders and their values and I can say this much : There is a lot more to this, and while I can appreciate your attempts to dumb it down and try it simplify it I would be careful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, blondin57 said:

Looking forward to following this one, how do you plan to achieve Bielsa-like possession figures (~55%) on Attacking mentality? 


Funny you should say that! :lol:


MSvn2Ee.png


Our on-the-ball strategy is possession neutral in that the objective is not to keep the ball or control possession, it is to get the ball forward.

The high possession % is more of a by-product of effective pressing.

Travelling at the moment so cannot do this question justice but do intend to respond when I have the time. In the mean time, you can see a few examples of different matches in the Bilbao thread where I've been enjoying writing updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

So we have established that "Preference" is your  personal term, which you have introduced to explain how you interpret decision making in the game.  

And I am well aware of the sliders and their values and I can say this much : There is a lot more to this, and while I can appreciate your attempts to dumb it down and try it simplify it I would be careful.


:thup:

That's exactly the objective. "Dumb it down" is a harsh term, but the objective is always to give a simple, logical explanation of the Tactics Creator concepts. These threads always aim to demonstrate different tactical concepts, how you can implement them in the Tactics Creator and how you can see these characteristics played out in the match engine.

Always interested to hear other's view points so if you'd care to elaborate on the 'a lot more to this', I am all ears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you put play out of defence? I spotted cb's are tended to play it out long. Or should i give shorter passing to cbs. Which one would be better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Egecann said:

Can you put play out of defence? I spotted cb's are tended to play it out long. Or should i give shorter passing to cbs. Which one would be better?

In an Attacking mentality, defenders will tend to pass it short. Not too sure if you even need the Play Out of Defense TI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

How do you fare against the weaker times ? I often find myself in a lot of trouble, playing a highly aggressive style with ultra-pressing + a high mentality against the weaker teams in the leagues, since they are waiting for my attacks and than going for the counter. How do you or did you solve this issue ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant thread and I've just read threw the rest of the threads. Like biesla's style also like the wales thread but would love to see you do an old school Italian defence tactic you've covered nearly every aspect of attacking football would love to see you use a defensive style geared purely for shutting out an opponent and sneaking a goal 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard work ball into box lessens crossing so I put shoot less on all players and deleted work ball into box. This way is better imo cause crossing is always dangerous if you have good crossers. And i dont my fbs or wingers to pass it back from byline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting piece O-zil thanks for sharing. It's taken a couple of reads to digest but that's fine. Bielsa's football is something that I'm very interested in (did the name give it away?) but not something that I've ever tried to fully replicate. Bits definitely, taking principles and adapting but not a full tactic.

 

What I find most interesting in articles like this is the question and answer sections - the bits that get you thinking about the style of football that you want to achieve. Like this:

 

On 25/08/2017 at 19:59, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Football can be broken down into 4-phases:

  • Defence
  • Transition from Defence to Attack (aka. Build-up)
  • Attack
  • Transition from Attack to Defence

Now, let's think about Marcelo Bielsa's approach to each of these phases:

 

You can apply this to any style that you want to create by answering those four bullet points. Want to replicate Mourinho? No problem. Want to take your own ideas and translate that into FM? No problem. You delve into this deeper by giving examples based on Bielsa but you can't go far wrong if you are asking yourself key questions like the above.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

All your threads for FM17 were outsranding... but we need to start thinking about the new game! :D

Can you think about doing an analysis on Tony Pulis' style? This would be a very different approach to your past threads - I'm unsure that will fall in the 'very fluid' category. It's a style that many users have tried to emulate. There are some threads about it and maybe you could give us a hand!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread indeed. @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! I have enjoyed all of your threads and have learned a lot or have been inspired a lot. You have an excellent way of explaining your ideas, choices and what & why something works. My favorite part here is the balance between Attacking Team Mentality and Defensive/Supporting Individual Duties.

I'll be interested in your take on Jurgen Klopp's system but that could be a project for FM18.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone struggling in FM17 to create a highpressing system such as this? I have tried some of these formations and others combining a high back line and heavy pressing and I tend to always get exposed. I must caveat this that I am using it with teams like Bayern or Real madrid, who should have sufficient quality to ensure that they can carry these systems out but they just don't seem to be providing the desired results. Usually the pressing just seems to bring certain players out of postion, so when they press they do not cover the passing options behind them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, poobington said:

Is anyone struggling in FM17 to create a highpressing system such as this? I have tried some of these formations and others combining a high back line and heavy pressing and I tend to always get exposed. I must caveat this that I am using it with teams like Bayern or Real madrid, who should have sufficient quality to ensure that they can carry these systems out but they just don't seem to be providing the desired results. Usually the pressing just seems to bring certain players out of postion, so when they press they do not cover the passing options behind them. 

If you watch full match you can see some sucessful pressing. When you watch on extended highlights, game shows you the ccc's of opponents which is more likely to be happen if you fail to win the ball.Besides that i agree that it is hard to replicate gegenpress in FM 17. 

Edited by Egecann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats what i mean. I watch it on full, because i like to see how we build up from the back. Usually onanything but full it seems to ignore goal kicks and I can't see how we build up. But like you say I do see some pressing but to often it is hap hazard and uncordinated e.g a winger could track back and press a player more intensely meaning that the ball near central mid can keep position , but does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you please cover, which formation you would use vs 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2 etc.

 

I'm thinking you would use the 3-3-1-3 against a 4-4-2, but your input would be very much appreciated.

You have had the single most influence, on the way I perceive tactics today, so thank you, and i'm so looking forward to see what you have for us in FM18 ;)

Btw. When you are not doing these awesome posts. What kind of football are you your self keep going back to? :)

Edited by Brasmuss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Brasmuss said:

Could you please cover, which formation you would use vs 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2 etc.

 

I'm thinking you would use the 3-3-1-3 against a 4-4-2, but your input would be very much appreciated.

You have had the single most influence, on the way I perceive tactics today, so thank you, and i'm so looking forward to see what you have for us in FM18 ;)

Btw. When you are not doing these awesome posts. What kind of football are you your self keep going back to? :)

I think the idea is to always have a man extra at the back and to mirror the opposition midfield, so by and large, the 3 at the back tactic against systems that play 2 up front. The 4-3-3 against systems that employ 1 central striker and an AMC and the 4-2-3-1 against systems with 1 central striker and no AMC.

Just my interpretation. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

Question regarding the decision to go with More Direct Passing:

You wrote:

On 8/25/2017 at 11:59, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Verticality or - for those not a fan of tactical jargon - passing the ball forwards.

I took this to mean that there is a tendency to play the ball forward towards the opponents goal rather than side to side or back.  I didn't take it to mean that there is a tendency to play long passes.  I.E. short but vertical passes would fit the style.  Is this correct?

If so, do you think that the degree to which a player plays the ball forward governed by their mentality as opposed to passing directness?  I.E. would short passing also work for a team instruction if you were playing attacking mentality?  Or do you think that the presence of short passing causes players to play fewer balls forward in addition to shortening the length of the pass they wish to play?

I still get confused about how these two things (mentality and length of desired pass) work together and I'm wondering what your take is int he context of this setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone else used these tactics much? I'm managing Athletic, using these tactics, on FM18 currently 2 games into the 2018-19 season. I've been trying to match up against the opposition -- if they play a defensive midfielder I play 4-2-3-1, if they play an attacking midfielder I play 4-1-2-3, if they play 2 strikers I play 3-3-1-3 - and in 2 of those 3 situations it works perfectly. We finished 3rd in La Liga, picking up big wins against Real Madrid and Barcelona (unbeaten against the latter) with 4-2-3-1 versus 4-1-2-3, even getting the corpse of Aritz Aduriz (who declines rapidly in FM despite maintaining his form in real life, has been this way the past 3 FMs when I've played as Athletic) to score from open play. 

7 of our 9 losses all season however, were playing against 2 man strike forces - domestic 4-4-2 and Sporting Lisbon playing a 4-2-4. Most of the time I played 3-3-1-3 and we just didn't create any chances whilst conceding tons of chances. Switching to 4-2-3-1 just gave me a stupidly open game, and I would like to get the 3-3-1-3 working. Already in the second season we've played against Villarreal's 4-4-2 and only escaped with dignity due to winning a soft penalty (our only shot of the game).

Does anybody else have any suggestions on how to adjust the 3-3-1-3? I don't want to stray from the principles behind the tactic too much - after all, getting a result away to Barcelona playing Very Fluid Attacking with a far inferior team shows they mostly work - but I'm thinking perhaps I need to add a link player, perhaps dropping the AM to the DM strata as a Segundo Volante support? Although the combination of that role's behaviour and our pressing game makes me think even if it did work I'd have to substitute the SV-S every 30 minutes as he'd be gassed.

So yeah, suggestions? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, zlatanera said:

Has anyone else used these tactics much? I'm managing Athletic, using these tactics, on FM18 currently 2 games into the 2018-19 season. I've been trying to match up against the opposition -- if they play a defensive midfielder I play 4-2-3-1, if they play an attacking midfielder I play 4-1-2-3, if they play 2 strikers I play 3-3-1-3 - and in 2 of those 3 situations it works perfectly. We finished 3rd in La Liga, picking up big wins against Real Madrid and Barcelona (unbeaten against the latter) with 4-2-3-1 versus 4-1-2-3, even getting the corpse of Aritz Aduriz (who declines rapidly in FM despite maintaining his form in real life, has been this way the past 3 FMs when I've played as Athletic) to score from open play. 

7 of our 9 losses all season however, were playing against 2 man strike forces - domestic 4-4-2 and Sporting Lisbon playing a 4-2-4. Most of the time I played 3-3-1-3 and we just didn't create any chances whilst conceding tons of chances. Switching to 4-2-3-1 just gave me a stupidly open game, and I would like to get the 3-3-1-3 working. Already in the second season we've played against Villarreal's 4-4-2 and only escaped with dignity due to winning a soft penalty (our only shot of the game).

Does anybody else have any suggestions on how to adjust the 3-3-1-3? I don't want to stray from the principles behind the tactic too much - after all, getting a result away to Barcelona playing Very Fluid Attacking with a far inferior team shows they mostly work - but I'm thinking perhaps I need to add a link player, perhaps dropping the AM to the DM strata as a Segundo Volante support? Although the combination of that role's behaviour and our pressing game makes me think even if it did work I'd have to substitute the SV-S every 30 minutes as he'd be gassed.

So yeah, suggestions? 

I often use/test certain 3-3-1-3 variations in FM every year. The issue that persist with that shape (I assume it's the shape in the opening post) is that the two wingbacks naturally retreat back into wide positions, making it a back five. This is fine, but it leaves the center exposed, especially because the midfielders are placed on top of each other rather than next to each other. Against a 4-4-2 for example, you technically have 2v2 in the middle, but as your DM is often sitting deep, their midfielders can easily switch the play between themselves as they are often not under much pressure.

There are a lot of things that I have tried in different FMs to counter this issue. One is to switch from wingers in AM/LR to AMCR/L positions so they defend inside, only moving wide when closing down a player out wide. In this system they stay in the center when attacking as well, so your wingbacks would need to act more as traditional wingbacks out wide rather than coming inside. 

What has worked best for me defensively is placing the two midfielders next to each other in central midfield, defending more as a flat pairing, thus both having a direct opponent in midfield. In order to get the attacking shape right, you need to put the other on an attack duty and the other on a defend duty. CM/A and DLP/D or CM/D pairing worked the best for me but you can try others as well. I also had the CM to move into channels and roam from position to encourage him to find spaces ahead of him to run into. This of course doesn't achieve a perfectly symmetric shape, but it really is not far away from what you are looking for attacking wise, and defensively it puts more pressure on the opposition midfield two. It does slightly weaken the space in front of your defence as you now have a CM instead of a pure holding midfielder, but then again it is just not possible to have everything and Bielsa surely prefers relentless pressing than an extra player just for coverage in front of the defence. Besides, you already have an extra man at the back against their strikers.

On FM18 I have mainly used the 3-3-1-3 against a 4-4-2 diamond/ 4-3-1-2 that I often faced in Colombia - I would show you the tactic but I just resigned in hope to find another job on my journey, so I can't show it at the moment. I can post a screenshot later if you are interested?. Basically, it was the same formation except that I pushed my wingbacks to the MR/L positions instead, and but them on WM/S roles with sit narrower, cut inside with the ball and get further forward (among some other, more tactic specific instructions). What they do, especially when adding tight marking and closing down to always on the opposition MCR/L players using OIs, is that they get inside and defend against their central midfielders. The drawback is that it leaves the spaces out wide open, so really attacking fullbacks need to be countered by having your wingers (the ones in AMR/L positions) to specifically mark their fullbacks or otherwise they have too much space ahead of them. Also strikers moving outside the three center backs often cause problems.

On the ball, I use exploit both flanks TIs as the wide midfielders, even though they are instructed to sit narrower, still position relatively wide, outside the shape of the opposition diamond. This often lead to nice 2v1 situations against the opposition fullback, with the wide midfielder combining with the winger and often creating good chances that way. There were a lot of risks in turnovers though, as these players were positioned wide and there were a lot of players pushing forward in the middle if we lost the ball, overloading my poor DM. Of course, if you want to play with a Bielsa-inspired attacking tactics and shapes, you need to accept some risk in defence and defensive transitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, juusal said:

I often use/test certain 3-3-1-3 variations in FM every year. The issue that persist with that shape (I assume it's the shape in the opening post) is that the two wingbacks naturally retreat back into wide positions, making it a back five. This is fine, but it leaves the center exposed, especially because the midfielders are placed on top of each other rather than next to each other. Against a 4-4-2 for example, you technically have 2v2 in the middle, but as your DM is often sitting deep, their midfielders can easily switch the play between themselves as they are often not under much pressure.

There are a lot of things that I have tried in different FMs to counter this issue. One is to switch from wingers in AM/LR to AMCR/L positions so they defend inside, only moving wide when closing down a player out wide. In this system they stay in the center when attacking as well, so your wingbacks would need to act more as traditional wingbacks out wide rather than coming inside. 

What has worked best for me defensively is placing the two midfielders next to each other in central midfield, defending more as a flat pairing, thus both having a direct opponent in midfield. In order to get the attacking shape right, you need to put the other on an attack duty and the other on a defend duty. CM/A and DLP/D or CM/D pairing worked the best for me but you can try others as well. I also had the CM to move into channels and roam from position to encourage him to find spaces ahead of him to run into. This of course doesn't achieve a perfectly symmetric shape, but it really is not far away from what you are looking for attacking wise, and defensively it puts more pressure on the opposition midfield two. It does slightly weaken the space in front of your defence as you now have a CM instead of a pure holding midfielder, but then again it is just not possible to have everything and Bielsa surely prefers relentless pressing than an extra player just for coverage in front of the defence. Besides, you already have an extra man at the back against their strikers.

On FM18 I have mainly used the 3-3-1-3 against a 4-4-2 diamond/ 4-3-1-2 that I often faced in Colombia - I would show you the tactic but I just resigned in hope to find another job on my journey, so I can't show it at the moment. I can post a screenshot later if you are interested?. Basically, it was the same formation except that I pushed my wingbacks to the MR/L positions instead, and but them on WM/S roles with sit narrower, cut inside with the ball and get further forward (among some other, more tactic specific instructions). What they do, especially when adding tight marking and closing down to always on the opposition MCR/L players using OIs, is that they get inside and defend against their central midfielders. The drawback is that it leaves the spaces out wide open, so really attacking fullbacks need to be countered by having your wingers (the ones in AMR/L positions) to specifically mark their fullbacks or otherwise they have too much space ahead of them. Also strikers moving outside the three center backs often cause problems.

On the ball, I use exploit both flanks TIs as the wide midfielders, even though they are instructed to sit narrower, still position relatively wide, outside the shape of the opposition diamond. This often lead to nice 2v1 situations against the opposition fullback, with the wide midfielder combining with the winger and often creating good chances that way. There were a lot of risks in turnovers though, as these players were positioned wide and there were a lot of players pushing forward in the middle if we lost the ball, overloading my poor DM. Of course, if you want to play with a Bielsa-inspired attacking tactics and shapes, you need to accept some risk in defence and defensive transitions.

Cheers for the advice, I'll look into it. I experimented with something I remember reading about from when Bielsa managed in Marseille and they went for the jugular against PSG (I think?), where the reporter described it as like he'd told his entire team to man mark their opposite numbers - not a good idea, Atletico destroyed us. Dropping the d line to normal seems to at least tighten us up a little by just making us less vulnerable but other than that I had no ideas. I'm assuming against lesser teams it might work slightly better but still yeah, improvements needed.

I'd definitely be interested to see your interpretation of it in screenshots yeah. 

EDIT:

5a9a45115676b_ScreenShot2018-03-03at06_46_59.thumb.png.3b110d152fafd73a60f71e8b74069170.png

My 2nd string got a creditable 0-0 draw at PSG playing with the DM in the right DM slot and a Segundo Volante-Attack in the left DM slot. I'm not sure how much credence to give those passing maps but my SV-A was No. 18 Benat who appears in the No. 10 position on that passing map (the wingers are screwed up because I switched Susaeta from right to left after 60 minutes) which is how it should look. Looking at the analysis they only had like two shots in the box and our average positions were almost like we were defending in a 4-4-2. This experiment could work, as Benat is backup to Ander Herrera (Stamina 17) who is far better suited to that role anyway.

Edited by zlatanera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, zlatanera said:

Has anyone else used these tactics much? I'm managing Athletic, using these tactics, on FM18 currently 2 games into the 2018-19 season. I've been trying to match up against the opposition -- if they play a defensive midfielder I play 4-2-3-1, if they play an attacking midfielder I play 4-1-2-3, if they play 2 strikers I play 3-3-1-3 - and in 2 of those 3 situations it works perfectly. We finished 3rd in La Liga, picking up big wins against Real Madrid and Barcelona (unbeaten against the latter) with 4-2-3-1 versus 4-1-2-3, even getting the corpse of Aritz Aduriz (who declines rapidly in FM despite maintaining his form in real life, has been this way the past 3 FMs when I've played as Athletic) to score from open play. 

7 of our 9 losses all season however, were playing against 2 man strike forces - domestic 4-4-2 and Sporting Lisbon playing a 4-2-4. Most of the time I played 3-3-1-3 and we just didn't create any chances whilst conceding tons of chances. Switching to 4-2-3-1 just gave me a stupidly open game, and I would like to get the 3-3-1-3 working. Already in the second season we've played against Villarreal's 4-4-2 and only escaped with dignity due to winning a soft penalty (our only shot of the game).

Does anybody else have any suggestions on how to adjust the 3-3-1-3? I don't want to stray from the principles behind the tactic too much - after all, getting a result away to Barcelona playing Very Fluid Attacking with a far inferior team shows they mostly work - but I'm thinking perhaps I need to add a link player, perhaps dropping the AM to the DM strata as a Segundo Volante support? Although the combination of that role's behaviour and our pressing game makes me think even if it did work I'd have to substitute the SV-S every 30 minutes as he'd be gassed.

So yeah, suggestions? 

I think my post in the 3-4-3 thread might be of interest with you, I am also using Athletic. 

 

I found that using 1 DM with all that space ahead of him just doesn't work in the ME. I created the system in response to Atletico's 4-4-2 which was tearing me apart. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my setup that I used against 4-3-1-2 and narrow 4-4-2 diamonds. Keep in mind that this is a formation/tactic designed against a specific shape and has a lot of weaknesses that a lot of formations and tactics look to exploit. I would often change the roles during the game, put my wingers on attack if there is space in behind to exploit etc. Tight marking and close down more for MCR and MCL positions to help my wide midfielders get inside to defend their midfielders, which they did. Of course there were issues with the double role of the wide midfielders/wingbacks so by no means is it perfect. I would also do slight changes to the TIs according to the opponent. I also had the AM on an attack duty previously, but I'm looking to test it with a support duty hoping it would bring a bit more balance.

Oh and by no means is this a recreation, it is just a shape that I like so I'm just trying to make it work. The way I often play this is more patient on the ball than what Bielsa's teams have done.

Also, this did not work against a flat 4-4-2 as my wide midfielders would often close down their central midfielders (and no, I did not use the OIs to mark and close them down against a flat 4-4-2) due to the gaps in the middle, leaving their wingers wide open. I think you could simply switch to a CM-CM pairing rather than a DM-AM one, but I used a 3-4-2-1 variation against flat 4-4-2 in my previous club. Now I just joined a new one so we'll see what I come up with in here, I might not play any 3-3-1-3 variations here at all.

image.thumb.png.6ac167a8f0914aab7124551ef0a9e5ce.png

edit. Forgot the screenshot.

Edited by juusal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JDeeguain said:

I think my post in the 3-4-3 thread might be of interest with you, I am also using Athletic. 

 

I found that using 1 DM with all that space ahead of him just doesn't work in the ME. I created the system in response to Atletico's 4-4-2 which was tearing me apart. 

 

Ah yeah I had seen that. Interesting take, it worked against flat 4-4-2 quite well then?

9 hours ago, juusal said:

Here is my setup that I used against 4-3-1-2 and narrow 4-4-2 diamonds. Keep in mind that this is a formation/tactic designed against a specific shape and has a lot of weaknesses that a lot of formations and tactics look to exploit. I would often change the roles during the game, put my wingers on attack if there is space in behind to exploit etc. Tight marking and close down more for MCR and MCL positions to help my wide midfielders get inside to defend their midfielders, which they did. Of course there were issues with the double role of the wide midfielders/wingbacks so by no means is it perfect. I would also do slight changes to the TIs according to the opponent. I also had the AM on an attack duty previously, but I'm looking to test it with a support duty hoping it would bring a bit more balance.

Oh and by no means is this a recreation, it is just a shape that I like so I'm just trying to make it work. The way I often play this is more patient on the ball than what Bielsa's teams have done.

Also, this did not work against a flat 4-4-2 as my wide midfielders would often close down their central midfielders (and no, I did not use the OIs to mark and close them down against a flat 4-4-2) due to the gaps in the middle, leaving their wingers wide open. I think you could simply switch to a CM-CM pairing rather than a DM-AM one, but I used a 3-4-2-1 variation against flat 4-4-2 in my previous club. Now I just joined a new one so we'll see what I come up with in here, I might not play any 3-3-1-3 variations here at all.

image.thumb.png.6ac167a8f0914aab7124551ef0a9e5ce.png

edit. Forgot the screenshot.

Ah right thanks for sharing. Yeah it does look like it'd get ruined by anything other than those formations, but hey if it works who cares right? I'm a Manchester United fan and we played effectively 6-3-1 against Chelsea last year, but it worked. I've actually not come up against a 4-3-1-2 or 4-4-2 diamond yet, the only diamond shape I've faced is Girona's 5-4-1 and luckily they were so much weaker than us I just out-scored them. You think that shape would work against this?

5a9b39ea80fe6_ScreenShot2018-03-04at00_12_09.thumb.png.c98fd5b904ef3aa9db12551471dacc5b.png

I won 3-2 with a 4-2-3-1 and 2-1 with the 3-3-1-3 so if a bigger team did this for some reason, I'd probably be ruined.

 

Another update for the 3-4-3 wide with SV-A alteration I've been trying out in my save:

5a9b3a56f1460_ScreenShot2018-03-04at00_14_01.thumb.png.511aa49bf475dd93aac2760de1daf7af.png

We absolutely dominated Eibar, Ander Herrera as the SV got an 8.0 although the passing map shows less far forward than Benat had been against PSG. Other than the unsustainability of this until I found someone with an engine (Herrera had a full week's rest before this game and was still in the mid-60%s when I subbed him on 70 minutes) I think this may work out ok. Got Atletico in the cup so we shall soon see. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/03/2018 at 01:17, zlatanera said:

Ah right thanks for sharing. Yeah it does look like it'd get ruined by anything other than those formations, but hey if it works who cares right? I'm a Manchester United fan and we played effectively 6-3-1 against Chelsea last year, but it worked. I've actually not come up against a 4-3-1-2 or 4-4-2 diamond yet, the only diamond shape I've faced is Girona's 5-4-1 and luckily they were so much weaker than us I just out-scored them. You think that shape would work against this?

5a9b39ea80fe6_ScreenShot2018-03-04at00_12_09.thumb.png.c98fd5b904ef3aa9db12551471dacc5b.png

I won 3-2 with a 4-2-3-1 and 2-1 with the 3-3-1-3 so if a bigger team did this for some reason, I'd probably be ruined.

I played in Colombia at the time (now moved to Mexico) and there a lot of teams played those formations. The point of my journeyman save is to do what is possible with each team rather than push a certain system so I am not completely sure if I will revisit the idea, but I would have a few ideas against other shapes.

Oh and I think that my system could work against that narrow 5-4-1 diamond, but you would just need to make sure that the wide midfielders/wingbacks defend against their central midfielders and that the wingers are on support duty and told to man mark the wingback positions, otherwise they would just run riot on the wings.

Of course using the man marking option is never the nicest solution as it creates some inflexibility in your tactic, and it also requires some manual labour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing the old O-zil threads pop back up made me think of this one. Shame it never progressed. Given how well his Leeds team have been this season I may take a whack at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/03/2018 at 01:17, zlatanera said:

Ah yeah I had seen that. Interesting take, it worked against flat 4-4-2 quite well then?

Ah right thanks for sharing. Yeah it does look like it'd get ruined by anything other than those formations, but hey if it works who cares right? I'm a Manchester United fan and we played effectively 6-3-1 against Chelsea last year, but it worked. I've actually not come up against a 4-3-1-2 or 4-4-2 diamond yet, the only diamond shape I've faced is Girona's 5-4-1 and luckily they were so much weaker than us I just out-scored them. You think that shape would work against this?

5a9b39ea80fe6_ScreenShot2018-03-04at00_12_09.thumb.png.c98fd5b904ef3aa9db12551471dacc5b.png

I won 3-2 with a 4-2-3-1 and 2-1 with the 3-3-1-3 so if a bigger team did this for some reason, I'd probably be ruined.

 

Another update for the 3-4-3 wide with SV-A alteration I've been trying out in my save:

5a9b3a56f1460_ScreenShot2018-03-04at00_14_01.thumb.png.511aa49bf475dd93aac2760de1daf7af.png

We absolutely dominated Eibar, Ander Herrera as the SV got an 8.0 although the passing map shows less far forward than Benat had been against PSG. Other than the unsustainability of this until I found someone with an engine (Herrera had a full week's rest before this game and was still in the mid-60%s when I subbed him on 70 minutes) I think this may work out ok. Got Atletico in the cup so we shall soon see. 

 

Like it, but the issue is the movements of the IWB's. As pointed out in another thread(I apologise, as I can't remember which), when two DM's are played, IWB's assume Regular WB duties. Your screenshot even says the same. There's also no way to mitigate this by playing, one directly up top the other, except in an asymmetrical form, but it'll still force one of the IWB's into assuming a WB duty. Not saying that's the core of tactic ('there must be 2 IWB's in the initial tactic'), no, there's so much than that. But if it works with that principle or movement, then we'd need a tactic that enables both IWB's to work. Hope my statement is understandable, though. I see you've made huge strides with your tactic, though, congrats 👍🏿.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...