Problems away from home - 4123

[BlairNo.1]

Prior to the latest update I had a Liverpool save ongoing which was really good. I had a settled tactic that was working well. It was far from unbeatable but I was pretty consistent, scored plenty and solid at the back.

Since the update the tactic seemed to stop working and I found myself conceding lots of goals. The main types seem to be long balls and crosses into the box. 

I am now looking to rebuild a tactic and would like some feedback prior to diving into a new game. I know I won't know alot until I play games but would appreciate any pointers or feedback on any obvious problems.

My intention is to play play quite attacking with high closing down to get possession back quickly. My main attacking threat is going to be the CMa and the 2 IFa. I want the F9 to link the play together and the DLPs to be the player sat back looking to pick out others. I am using WBs in order to make sure we still have a bit of width. The anchorman should sit in front of the defence to help out when others go forward. I have set the IFa to mark the fullbacks of the opposition to encourage then to help defend.

 

[Overmars]

How good are your central defenders? They need to be excellent in the air and very quick in order to deal with the counterattacking threats you will face when your wingbacks are up the field. A halfback role might help, but ultimately, you will need star defenders to be a good defensive side with only two of your back four on defend duty. Without that, you end up playing a lot like the real-life Liverpool does, with Klavan, Matip, and Lovren coming under fire nearly every match.

[jameseccross]

I think I'm having the exact same problem as you - I'm playing a similar style too.  I seem to get caught on the break all the time v any team with pacy wingers.  No matter what instructions I put my full backs on (even with defend), I can't seem to get them to actually mark and I get overrun with a ball wide and a cross to the other winger for a tap in.  Lost 4 nil to stoke this way.

Edited January 1, 2018 by jameseccross

[BlairNo.1]

My defenders are not bad at all but they are certainly not world class. I really just want to find a way to make this formation work and have it balanced in all areas. It seems that I can score lots at the expense of conceding lots, or I can concede few and score few. There doesn't seem to be an inbetween, well I'm not finding it anyway

[BlairNo.1]

I've gone on holiday mode whilst playing FM touch just to get a feel for the tactics and see what the problems are. I've watched every single competitive goal that my team has conceded to date and they have been from set pieces and from my full backs being too aggressive with the closing down and leaving space behind them to be attacked.

Is there anything in particular that people do to setup their full backs in terms of player instructions? I'm thinking to reduce the closing down.

Set pieces are set at default but the majority of goals seem to start from a set piece. Is this just due to my team not being great or is there a better way of setting them up other than default?

 

[Eddie Boop]

14 minutes ago, BlairNo.1 said:

I've gone on holiday mode whilst playing FM touch just to get a feel for the tactics and see what the problems are. I've watched every single competitive goal that my team has conceded to date and they have been from set pieces and from my full backs being too aggressive with the closing down and leaving space behind them to be attacked.

Is there anything in particular that people do to setup their full backs in terms of player instructions? I'm thinking to reduce the closing down.

Set pieces are set at default but the majority of goals seem to start from a set piece. Is this just due to my team not being great or is there a better way of setting them up other than default?

 

Reducing the closing down will help but by far the most effective way to stop conceding the types of goals you're talking about is to go with three centre backs. It's very hard in this ME to stop your full back being dragged forward to confront a wide midfielder, at which point that wide midfielder plays a ball into the space the full-back has vacated, which the striker will always beat the centre back to, and cross in dangerously.

I've noticed that with three at the back, for whatever reason, the wide CBs won't get dragged out to defend the wide areas as much as CBs in a back four do. Which is illogical, but is definitely what I've seen. And even if they do get dragged out, you've still got two CBs in there to deal with the cross. The problem is that often you get an overlapping full back then having space to put in a cross, but a) the full-back is probably a worse crosser than the winger and b) I'd always back my three CBs to deal with it. So it's worth the risk. 

Why not move your anchor man down to a CB, push the full backs up one and leave the rest as is? Sometimes you have to remember this isn't real football and that you have to play the match engine as a match engine. 

[BlairNo.1]

18 minutes ago, Eddie Boop said:

Reducing the closing down will help but by far the most effective way to stop conceding the types of goals you're talking about is to go with three centre backs. It's very hard in this ME to stop your full back being dragged forward to confront a wide midfielder, at which point that wide midfielder plays a ball into the space the full-back has vacated, which the striker will always beat the centre back to, and cross in dangerously.

I've noticed that with three at the back, for whatever reason, the wide CBs won't get dragged out to defend the wide areas as much as CBs in a back four do. Which is illogical, but is definitely what I've seen. And even if they do get dragged out, you've still got two CBs in there to deal with the cross. The problem is that often you get an overlapping full back then having space to put in a cross, but a) the full-back is probably a worse crosser than the winger and b) I'd always back my three CBs to deal with it. So it's worth the risk. 

Why not move your anchor man down to a CB, push the full backs up one and leave the rest as is? Sometimes you have to remember this isn't real football and that you have to play the match engine as a match engine. 

I know what you mean but surely there is a solution which doesn't involve changing shape. I like having the DM in front of the back 4. The thing is if I remove the DM then I would find myself having the same problems as I had when I played a 4231 and getting caught on the counter.

This is my preferred shape and ideally I don't want to move away from it. 

I've lowered the wing backs closing down and will see how that goes. Still need to figure out the set piece problem though :-)

[shadster]

Can relate to this, I don't play the exactly same formation, but is similar. I also play an Anchor man in front of my 4 defenders, because I like the defensive security it provides.

But after the 18.2 update thing changed for me. Still have sucess in the league, but there's  some issues I talked on other threads, that turns to be frustating as I don't know how to deal with them. I just going to point some. The amount of stupid penaltys my team does, I already thinked of asking for help here on the forum, how to try to reduce them. After the update, my team does so may unnecessary fouls inside the penalty area. Other issue, the number of long shots that end near the corner flag. I know that will be said that is due to roles and or duties, and I believe that is a major factor, but this increased a lot after update, and I play with almost the same team and same formation. And finally, don't know if it's your case too, my team is really good at not allowing many good chances, my goalkeeper faces in average less than 2 shots on goal per game, but the true is that teams became way more effective on the counter attack against me after update. They don´t need many chances to score a goal, usually, first shot on goal is a goal.  And as you, the main issue is the Full Backs, as they don't seem to be as agressive as before the update. And in my case I play fluid, control and a slighty higher defensive line. You are playing with normal defensive line, and none of your Wing backs are on the attack, don't know why you have the problems. But I will be paying attention to the answers, as I'm interested to solve my problems as well.

[Overmars]

3 hours ago, BlairNo.1 said:

My defenders are not bad at all but they are certainly not world class. I really just want to find a way to make this formation work and have it balanced in all areas. It seems that I can score lots at the expense of conceding lots, or I can concede few and score few. There doesn't seem to be an inbetween, well I'm not finding it anyway

For my own curiosity, did you try this same formation/tactic on prior versions of FM? I always found this formation and a possession system to be quite sound defensively on prior versions. I have not tested it on FM18, though.

[BlairNo.1]

25 minutes ago, Overmars said:

For my own curiosity, did you try this same formation/tactic on prior versions of FM? I always found this formation and a possession system to be quite sound defensively on prior versions. I have not tested it on FM18, though.

Yes, I've played similar systems with success in several versions of the game but I just don't seem to be able to make it click this time.

[anorthernboy]

I have found a high line and closing down is suicide with a back 4. IRL Liverpool don't have bad defenders it's just that they struggle with the concentration levels needed when we dominate possession and the defence has little to do. Lovren is better when constanly umder the cosh like he was at Southampton.

The balls over the top are a risk/reward situation. It is why I set my front 5 to mark tight, tackle hard and close down more. I try to stop the pass before it is played because I like the reward of playing a  risky high line.

I play as Liverpool with the following:

 

Standard//Flexible

Push higher up

Higher tempo

 

IF/s        DLF/s       IF/a

       RPM     Mezz/a

                 HB

WB/a  CD      CD   IWB/d

                  GK

 

 

IF/a - Stay wider

GK - distribute to CB

Front 5 have close down more, Mark tighter and tackle harder.

 

Even though your wing backs are on support they will still get forward and leave gaps. The right side seems especially vulnerable to counter attacks as the WB, CM/a and IF will all look to go forward putting a huge responsibility on the DM and CB. Once the DM and CB move over to defend the exposed flank your entire defence will have to move over to compensate. All this does is leave the back post wide open to a cross. Any late runners will have a clear run as your DM will be out of position.

Regarding long shots i am thinking of starting a thread so that people can post some screenshots of the long shots and others can then offer advice. We need to see if it is bugs because I have seen some weird angles that shots fly off of at. However I have also scored some peaches.

Danny.

[big daddy]

I played 4-1-2-3 dm wide and my full backs on support are not marking the aml/amrs correctly, they seem unable to stay behind the winger/inside forwards.

they seem to want to give them 5-10 meter head start and then decide to run after them , IRL they  always stand on between the goal and the wide player.

full backs need adjusting in this match engine.

 

 

[jameseccross]

That's what I get - putting them on specific man marking and tight helps a bit, but they still wander off and close down someone else (even if told not to) or fall asleep and let the man wander past them too much.

I get screwed playing against a good team playing 4-3-2-1 or against any team playing chelsea's formation.

[big daddy]

I have my full backs close less and they still chase after the full back and ignore the wide attacking players.

 

[Marc.Foster050]

Personally I don't have this issue but if it is happening on more than once to all of you then post the games to the Bug forum so they can sort it or at least look into it for you. They won't be looking for the ME issues in a tactics forum.

Sorry that sounds like a small rant it really isn't just trying to help :-)

[herne79]

23 hours ago, BlairNo.1 said:

Prior to the latest update I had a Liverpool save ongoing which was really good. I had a settled tactic that was working well. It was far from unbeatable but I was pretty consistent, scored plenty and solid at the back.

Since the update the tactic seemed to stop working and I found myself conceding lots of goals. The main types seem to be long balls and crosses into the box. 

With 2 x IF(A) + using the Control mentality, you're basically telling them to attack and forget about defending.  That'll be more or less evident depending on the player type you have there - low Determination and/or low Work Rate will exaggerate the issue.

To see what I mean, open up the Player Instruction screen of one of those IFs.  Look at the Mentality bar - it'll be pretty high and thus the player will be quite attack focussed.  Telling them to mark the opposition fullbacks won't really help.

But that would be the story both before and after the patch, so quite why you only notice it after the patch makes me think it may be purely coincidental.  Who are you playing as, how far into the season were you before the patch hit and how successful had you been before the patch?  I'm thinking this might have more to do with opposition teams tightening up and playing more cautiously against you, thus denying you the space you used to enjoy, rather than something that dramatically changed in the latest patch.

[Kharza_FM]

This isn't patch specific.. this "feature" of weak side and fullback defending sucking in a back 4 has been in the game since FM 16 and is a huge flaw with the match engine in my opinion... defenders in real life would not exhibit this behavior not even in youth games.

Edited January 2, 2018 by Kharza_FM

[big daddy]

1 hour ago, herne79 said:

With 2 x IF(A) + using the Control mentality, you're basically telling them to attack and forget about defending.  That'll be more or less evident depending on the player type you have there - low Determination and/or low Work Rate will exaggerate the issue.

To see what I mean, open up the Player Instruction screen of one of those IFs.  Look at the Mentality bar - it'll be pretty high and thus the player will be quite attack focussed.  Telling them to mark the opposition fullbacks won't really help.

But that would be the story both before and after the patch, so quite why you only notice it after the patch makes me think it may be purely coincidental.  Who are you playing as, how far into the season were you before the patch hit and how successful had you been before the patch?  I'm thinking this might have more to do with opposition teams tightening up and playing more cautiously against you, thus denying you the space you used to enjoy, rather than something that dramatically changed in the latest patch.

well how would you explain playing on flex counter and the full back is still clueless.

you mark by having the player in front of you, not behind you and hope he does not run.

blocking crosses is also non existent in the game.

[anorthernboy]

It sounds like your fullbacks are catching up to play but then going past the point of play as the ball is turned over. Why don't you try to layer the support and attack. What is your tactical layout? I play the following with Liverpool:

 

Standard/Flexible

Push much higher up

                     CF/a 

AP/s                                    IF/a 

 

           CM/s DLP/d CM/a

 

FB/a      CB             CB       WB/s

 

Close down much more, mark tighter, tackle harder:

CM/a, CF/a 

Close down more, mark tighter, tackle harder:

AP/s, IF/s, CM/s, FB/a, WB/s 

The play on the flanks is great and I just beat Barca 5-2. My full backs both played well.

Have a look at the average positions of your wingers and full backs. If they are not staggered it makes it easy for the opposition to mark you without breaking their defensive structure. Ie two flat banks of four.

Staggering your players pulls the opposition out of their defensive positioning. That's when the fun begins.

Hope it helps.

Edited January 2, 2018 by anorthernboy

[BlairNo.1]

2 hours ago, herne79 said:

With 2 x IF(A) + using the Control mentality, you're basically telling them to attack and forget about defending.  That'll be more or less evident depending on the player type you have there - low Determination and/or low Work Rate will exaggerate the issue.

To see what I mean, open up the Player Instruction screen of one of those IFs.  Look at the Mentality bar - it'll be pretty high and thus the player will be quite attack focussed.  Telling them to mark the opposition fullbacks won't really help.

But that would be the story both before and after the patch, so quite why you only notice it after the patch makes me think it may be purely coincidental.  Who are you playing as, how far into the season were you before the patch hit and how successful had you been before the patch?  I'm thinking this might have more to do with opposition teams tightening up and playing more cautiously against you, thus denying you the space you used to enjoy, rather than something that dramatically changed in the latest patch.

It's odd because I played about 5 seasons pre patch with Liverpool. The only thing I was lacking was the champions league trophy. I had been pretty successful.

I started again post patch and encountered the issues almost straight away.

So what would you suggest to protect the wide areas? I want to use inside forwards as it suits Liverpool's squad. The control mentality is being used as I kind of want to replicate Liverpool's play in some way (high line, closing down etc). It completely wrecks my head this game 

[Bigpapa42]

With higher closing down, I tend to reduce the Closing Down of the two CDs via PIs. makes a difference.

[Chief Scout]

Due to vunerable Liverpool 4 back defence I suggest you to try Knap's last versions of tactic GOODBYE 343 (away or against better opponent) or WOF 343 (home). They are amazing. IF's can be retrained as left and right strikers.

[shadster]

5 hours ago, herne79 said:

But that would be the story both before and after the patch, so quite why you only notice it after the patch makes me think it may be purely coincidental.  Who are you playing as, how far into the season were you before the patch hit and how successful had you been before the patch?  I'm thinking this might have more to do with opposition teams tightening up and playing more cautiously against you, thus denying you the space you used to enjoy, rather than something that dramatically changed in the latest patch.

When I complain about some things after the patch, I always think that this must be a factor as well.. and I didn't mention it on my previous post. I've noticed now all teams on my league start their game on defensive mentality, even big clubs. And most of them play on defensive + very structured, which may add difficulty to the game.. Maybe that's the case here as well.

Edited January 2, 2018 by shadster

[herne79]

2 hours ago, BlairNo.1 said:

It's odd because I played about 5 seasons pre patch with Liverpool. The only thing I was lacking was the champions league trophy. I had been pretty successful.

I started again post patch and encountered the issues almost straight away.

So what would you suggest to protect the wide areas? I want to use inside forwards as it suits Liverpool's squad. The control mentality is being used as I kind of want to replicate Liverpool's play in some way (high line, closing down etc). It completely wrecks my head this game 

Check the post above that one .

Remember that the Control mentality is adding risk, changes your default Team Instructions and increases individual player mentalities (check the PI screen).  There's nothing wrong with doing that so long as you are aware of the impact.  On the other hand, if all you want is a high line, more closing down and perhaps some higher tempo (?) reduce the Mentality to, say, Standard and add those TIs in.

As I said above, those two IFs are going to be very attacking and forward thinking and probably won't track back an awful lot - especially if the player's own attributes don't encourage it.  So then what happens if you're caught in a forward position and get countered down the flanks?

[BlairNo.1]

20 hours ago, herne79 said:

Check the post above that one .

Remember that the Control mentality is adding risk, changes your default Team Instructions and increases individual player mentalities (check the PI screen).  There's nothing wrong with doing that so long as you are aware of the impact.  On the other hand, if all you want is a high line, more closing down and perhaps some higher tempo (?) reduce the Mentality to, say, Standard and add those TIs in.

As I said above, those two IFs are going to be very attacking and forward thinking and probably won't track back an awful lot - especially if the player's own attributes don't encourage it.  So then what happens if you're caught in a forward position and get countered down the flanks?

So rather than using such a control strategy, reduce this down to standard or counter and then modify the shape with instructions?

I don't really see much option but to play with IFs with the team I have. Salah and Mane are ideal for it on the flanks and then Coutinho in an attacking central midfield role. If I do play with a lower mentality am I better playing with more support roles? Don't want the striker to be left stranded if everyone else is not quite as attacking minded

[warlock]

1 hour ago, BlairNo.1 said:

I don't really see much option but to play with IFs with the team I have. Salah and Mane are ideal for it on the flanks and then Coutinho in an attacking central midfield role.

If you haven't already, have a read of Cleon's IF thread just above this one:

On the second page there's a lot of discussion about Liverpool and roles for the players. Seems like some are having success with alternatives to twin IFs.

[BlairNo.1]

6 minutes ago, warlock said:

If you haven't already, have a read of Cleon's IF thread just above this one:

On the second page there's a lot of discussion about Liverpool and roles for the players. Seems like some are having success with alternatives to twin IFs.

Cheers mate, i'll have a butchers at that. Although I am just in the middle of testing a tactic on FM touch that seems to be doing much better. Needs some minor tweaking though as the defensive record differed alot between the counter and standard setups

[herne79]

2 hours ago, BlairNo.1 said:

I don't really see much option but to play with IFs with the team I have.

Inside Forwards don't just come with an attack duty.  I'm not saying you have to change but as you seem to want greater defensive work from them it might be something to consider.

[sporadicsmiles]

That formation with those roles and duties is always going to be vulnerable to a counter attack. You will need to have CBs who have excellent anticipation attributes so they can snuff out a threat before they really get started, and the same for the anchorman, he is going to be key to disrupting attacks as well. Playing against any side with 2 permanent strikers, you are going to often face 2v2 or 2v3 situations, and these are always difficult to defend. There are a couple of ways to deal with this. I often have a FB(D) when I know I face 2 strikers, because then there should always be at least 3v2 in my favour when the opposition attacks after I lose the ball (and he would go on the CM(A) side, where my midfielder is likely to be further from play). If your defense is quite pacey and good with anticipation you could also push the D line up, both to catch players offside, and to put defenders in a better place to make an interception. That is a double edged sword mind, because it leaves more space in behind.

With the closing down, I usually find it better to decide which players I actually want to close down heavily, and use PIs rather than TIs to accomplish this. For example, I do not want my DMC charging around the pitch like a mad bull closing down everyone, I want him to act as a central player who can cover that area if one of the CDs has to go out wide to chase a player and cover for the FB. Then, if I want to have certain players closed down who are not going to be near the players I have given PIs, I will use OIs instead. That way you target a player (or position) specifically without having to worry about closing down players you do not want to have closed down.

[summatsupeer]

If your going to play with two wide forwards who are very attacking, can you afford to use a very attack balanced CM in Coutinho?  I would say you need both CMs to help protect the flanks if the IFs don't need to do it, which requires a big engine and the drive to do the job.

[Cloviss]

I'm having the same issue on this version of fm 18. Playing with a flat four in the back and having so much issues getting a clean sheet. I have tried it with decent to good teams (arsenal/atletico), trying to get a 4-4-2 to work in this version but it just leaves me so frustrated. The only team I had it work with so far is Manchester United, but probably because of me having basically world class defenders and my backs are basically CB's.. 

I have tried to reinforce my defensive line with a number of different roles from my central midfielders but it just doesnt seem to make ammends. No matter how defensive you set your backs, you still seem to get exposed so many times because they 'forget' players or are so horrible on crosses. Even when on a counter mentality and so on. On the other hand playing with 3 CB's makes it all so trivial, especially if you couple it with two strikers or one striker and two shadow strikers behind it.  /rant

 

Either way, if someone has a classic 4-4-2 which is balanced (at least getting a clean sheet every so often), I'd be interested in hearing about it  

[big daddy]

the changed the crosses in the last patch , so now crosses seem op.

could change the name to cross simulator 2018.

I am getting 7-0, 10-0 results at home  on standard 4231 with 2 ti's,

full backs are not marking their zone and all defenders are passive on marking when the cross comes in.

I have had to use more man marking when playing away and park the bus to avoid crosses.

3 man central defenders better at handling it, but sadly ignore the attacker/ wide attacker when the ball comes in.

 I am playing man utd and  have not seen martial , rashford being marked at the far post when the cross comes in leaving them with simple tap in on most of my goals.

goalkeeper seems very passive when the ball comes running through the 6 yard box.  Passive or almost scared of the ball Would like if the engine allowed him to take one step of the line and grab it.

but have not seen this for many fm versions.

[jameseccross]

5 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

If your going to play with two wide forwards who are very attacking, can you afford to use a very attack balanced CM in Coutinho?  I would say you need both CMs to help protect the flanks if the IFs don't need to do it, which requires a big engine and the drive to do the job.

I'm playing it with a DM too

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, jameseccross said:

I'm playing it with a DM too

Why does a DM mean you can have a defensively weak CM instructed to attack on the same side as a defensively weak wide forward instructed to attack? 

If the DM is meant to help defend that flank and not control the area in front of the CBs then he should be in MCR and the CM-A in MC.  Of course now you give more space in between the CBs and midfield but you can't expect to cover everywhere with 3 advanced players who don't have much defensive responsibility.

[jameseccross]

I'm not sure what your point is - the wide attacker isn't going to help Coutinho defend no matter what his instructions are, and similarly the CM isn't going to help much if I get overloaded on the wing, even if he's more defensive.  

With a DM on playmaker he isn't anchored to that spot, so he's helping defend the CM areas too.  It's an attack minded formation, the benefits of giving Coutinho the freedom outweigh the negatives.  As I said earlier in the thread, I've had problems against teams with pacy wingers or the Chelsea formation, so I'm not using it there, more in games I expect to dominate.

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, jameseccross said:

I'm not sure what your point is - the wide attacker isn't going to help Coutinho defend no matter what his instructions are, and similarly the CM isn't going to help much if I get overloaded on the wing, even if he's more defensive.  

With a DM on playmaker he isn't anchored to that spot, so he's helping defend the CM areas too.  It's an attack minded formation, the benefits of giving Coutinho the freedom outweigh the negatives.  As I said earlier in the thread, I've had problems against teams with pacy wingers or the Chelsea formation, so I'm not using it there, more in games I expect to dominate.

My point wasn't clear yet your 7 word reply was?  Also didn't realise I was speaking directly about your system with knowledge of how you adjust it!  I was speaking quite generally looking at the setup of the OP.

Just so its clear, my point is; If you have two attack duty wide forwards they won't help defend much, thats not the job you've given them.  That adds a weakness in front of the FBs unless they get help from somewhere.  With a 3 man midfield that help should come from CM.  DM does help defend centrally pushing up to cover CM or may drop to cover the FB if he pushes up, but he can't do both, if one of the CM's in front of him doesn't pull his weight (missing tackles, not trying to tackle, not getting back quickly etc) then you get a knock on effect of players dragged out of position trying to cover for others.  A defensively weak CM adds a 3rd weak point on top of both flanks, thats too many weak points.  An IF-S will help defend more than a IF-A, is it enough help defensively will depend on the full setup and players used.  Just because a player is in AML/AMR doesn't mean he will never do a defensive job, it depends on role, duty, team mentality and the players attributes.

[jameseccross]

All fair points - but as I said, it's an attack minded formation, and it's based on pressing hard and controlling the game.  It works nicely at breaking worse teams down and the defensive side works by not giving the other team a chance to attack the weak points.

By making it a 4-1-2-3 rather than a 4-2-3-1 you're leaving more scope to be more attacking in the roles you use than if the players were pushed further up the field.  Coutinho isn't defensively minded, but he still has 11 for tackling I believe and his pace means he still presses well and does his fair share of ball winning.

[Kharza_FM]

On 1/2/2018 at 13:12, big daddy said:

you mark by having the player in front of you, not behind you and hope he does not run.

Watch the highlighted RB on this counter attack from a corner.. 3v3 in the back I get that.. but it is his movement and covering defending I have serious issues with and would not happen in any real game!

Transition moment as the ball is played out to the right side and the counter begins.. notice the RB has already started to drop reading the transition

Issue #1 - what happened here?  Why is the RB recovering in the middle of the park and leaving that guy completely unmarked.. really don't think we need another defender marking the guy in the middle or standing on top of the other defender.. things that make you go hmmmm

Seriously.. what is he doing?  He is a RB I don't care if it is a counter either.. he doesn't need to be standing on top of the other defender.. I swear if his acceleration wasn't 15 he would get run over by his teammate

Issue #2 One would think that Paolo should be the guy to close down Favilli here too.. he has a nice angle to close down the crosser and has decent acceleration and speed and has run with Favilli since the break out.. but you would be mistaken... it would be the guy BEHIND the crosser that is going to close down.. ARE YOU FOR REAL HERE?! P.S. Who exactly are the two guys at the penalty spot marking?  The phantom must be at the opera again...

Notice the GKs position in the above.. it's important..

So this situation is an early cross situation or in GK terms a 3 goal situation.  The GK #1 responsibility is to prevent a shot from going in.. the #2 responsibility is to prevent this cross from going right across the six yard box.. his positioning in the shot above was pretty good.  He has good anticipation and acceleration.. he should attempt to come make a play on that or he needs to be going immediately to #3 which is far post.. he moved 1 maybe 2 steps?  I doubt that... Oh yeah what exactly are the 3 defenders in the box DEFENDING?!  The exact same space?

 

And yes I score a ridiculous amount of goals on these exact same stupid defending errors  by the AI.. must be our tactics..

 

 

 

[big daddy]

even when  they have 1 or 2 players staying forward on corners, they move to the sides and , the defender will ignore them until they have received the ball and have acres of space wide to run with the ball

[Kharza_FM]

16 minutes ago, big daddy said:

even when  they have 1 or 2 players staying forward on corners, they move to the sides and , the defender will ignore them until they have received the ball and have acres of space wide to run with the ball

Run of play.. no corner.. here is a great example of defending from the "front"

Both my RB and LB have "Mark Tighter" player instructions and I'm using the Team Instruction "Use Tighter Marking" - I would have assumed that use "Offside Trap" would mean running a Flat back 4 and staying in line with my defending partners.. well at least that is how we teach it at U13..

This is a perfect example of when the line should step up and play them offside before the ball is played as soon as the LB starts to close down the ball and leaves that dangerous 2v1 on the outside.. As soon as Calogero moves to close down Struna.. the entire D line should step forward to play Favilli (right winger) and Palmieri (left winger) offside.. but no they drop even though the Team Instruction "Use Offside Trap" is selected.

[Keyzer Soze]

i might be wrong, but isn't using "tighter marking" and "use offside trap" together a bit strange?

If with "tight marking" we are telling our defenders to stick the the opponent more then usual, wouldn't that make it hard for a proper offside trap strategy to work?

I ask this, because i never use it together...

[Kharza_FM]

1 hour ago, Keyzer Soze said:

i might be wrong, but isn't using "tighter marking" and "use offside trap" together a bit strange?

If with "tight marking" we are telling our defenders to stick the the opponent more then usual, wouldn't that make it hard for a proper offside trap strategy to work?

I ask this, because i never use it together...

I'll leave the match engine analysis to the experts.. but in the real game it isn't strange.  I want you to tightly mark your defensive assignment across the team (distance between you and them while marking.. the opposite would be to give them space because you are afraid of them beating you 1v1 or for speed).  Offside trap should only affect the back line and whether they all step together to play someone offside.  In soccer terms it shouldn't have anything to do with individual marking assignments.

Edited January 5, 2018 by Kharza_FM

[anorthernboy]

But if they are staggered due to marking tightly how can they then push up in a cohesive unit? 

[qwertygod]

2 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

i might be wrong, but isn't using "tighter marking" and "use offside trap" together a bit strange?

If with "tight marking" we are telling our defenders to stick the the opponent more then usual, wouldn't that make it hard for a proper offside trap strategy to work?

I ask this, because i never use it together...

A bit strange....  this is on FM , this is where tactics work if they are the most nonsense. I swear the only consistent success i have on recent years is weird formations with zero strikers. If a real manager tried that they would be out on the kerb before their feet even hit the floor. I often fall into the trap of trying to set tactics based on real life. When i think what would be logical in real life i then completely do the opposite to what would be logical....this is when i have success in FM.

[BlairNo.1]

So i've kind of gone back to basics to try and get something going.

I have created a very straightforward tactic which appears to be delivering results.

Defensively it appears very sound but I could do with making it just that bit better in the goals scored column. Also, I do see to struggle away from home. How do people generally approach away fixtures when you're one of the stronger teams in the division?

 

[Keyzer Soze]

@BlairNo.1

The combo BBM+CM(a) its a bit extreme, because you have two runners, and no one to sit back and play the ball to those runners (you can’t expect the anchorman to do that).

it could work in some games, but you gonna have troubles for sure against teams that will sit deep.

 

[BlairNo.1]

22 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

@BlairNo.1

The combo BBM+CM(a) its a bit extreme, because you have two runners, and no one to sit back and play the ball to those runners (you can’t expect the anchorman to do that).

it could work in some games, but you gonna have troubles for sure against teams that will sit deep.

 

What would you suggest to pair with the CMa? Playmaker on support?

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, BlairNo.1 said:

What would you suggest to pair with the CMa? Playmaker on support?

My usual starting point for support MC is the plain old CM-S.  Does a bit of everything but not as far from his position as a BBM.  From there i'll analyse if I need to modify his positioning and what he's doing.  Switching him to a playmaker will not only do that but will also affect your passing patterns due to the team looking to feed him the ball more.  If he becomes the primary creator, what are your F9 and IF-S doing?

Edited January 7, 2018 by summatsupeer

[Kharza_FM]

3 hours ago, BlairNo.1 said:

What would you suggest to pair with the CMa? Playmaker on support?

This.. just change the AMR to something like a W-Su (IF and MEZ will interfer and be in the same space or you can have your CM-A there if you want)

 

Edited January 8, 2018 by Kharza_FM

[Keyzer Soze]

11 hours ago, BlairNo.1 said:

What would you suggest to pair with the CMa? Playmaker on support?

Agree with what @summatsupeersaid.

I prefer a AP(s) but it all depends on the style of play you want.