Necessary instructions for quick-short passing (Discussion)

[Gegenklaus]

1 hour ago, yonko said:

Those work arounds may work for you, but for me there is still too much crossing with the Winger role in FM for Pep's system replication or using wingers as he does. IF role with strong foot matching the side is the solution for me. Also, another option is the "stay wider" instruction for IF.

What is your idea with using AP on the wing, especially when you have another in midfield and the F9 is a creator role too? Personally I'm not a fan of it. I like my playmakers centrally. Btw, IF-S is also a creators role, just not a ball magnet like AP or F9 roles.

What are you personally a fan of when trying to emulate this style? Hit us with a setup, please - I would love to see it.

[jc577]

26 minutes ago, yonko said:

Those work arounds may work for you, but for me there is still too much crossing with the Winger role in FM for Pep's system replication or using wingers as he does. IF role with strong foot matching the side is the solution for me. Also, another option is the "stay wider" instruction for IF.

What is your idea with using AP on the wing, especially when you have another in midfield and the F9 is a creator role too? Personally I'm not a fan of it. I like my playmakers centrally. Btw, IF-S is also a creators role, just not a ball magnet like AP or F9 roles.

Well the idea behind having an AP on the wing is that he can drift laterally into the half-space, giving him better access/passing angles to the wing & centre. Also, I think that the AP will combine better with the CM-A and than IF-S + Malcom is left footed, so didn’t want him to end up playing the role like a winger. 

[sporadicsmiles]

9 hours ago, yonko said:

Those work arounds may work for you, but for me there is still too much crossing with the Winger role in FM for Pep's system replication or using wingers as he does. IF role with strong foot matching the side is the solution for me. Also, another option is the "stay wider" instruction for IF.

It also depends what you mean by crossing. I do not want my wide players to aimlessly cross the ball, because they are not going to  be strong in the air and it goes against the ethos. However, I am more than happy for them to cross the ball if there is a great chance someone on the other side is going to score. 

[westy8chimp]

On 09/09/2018 at 13:54, Robson 07 said:

For that reason I have never understood this thread https://community.sigames.com/topic/362872-the-art-of-possession-football/ which uses Highly Structured.  If that is how possession works then people are on a different plane to me. 

Sorry to pick on this comment robson... But it's a good example. 

People still thinking you can apply a rule of thumb. I. E 'if this is how possession works' 

It isnt the case that structured = good for possession NOR is it the case that fluid = good for posession. 

In @Cleon possession thread highly structured was the best option in cohesion with his formation, roles, duties and mentality....to achieve his aim.

In my possession thread i used structured. Lets say im creating another possession thread... I dont go into it with any predefined rules...i could use any shape or mentality and achieve 60%+ possession... Id just have to choose the formation and duties wisely. Similarly i could start with any formation and achieve 60%+ by choosing the right mentality and shape etc. 

At some point when deciding a tactic you have to put a stake in the ground and be clear that that is your starting point. For me i assess the squad and identify a key player or a position i have plenty of good options. For instance you may have 5 great cbs but no outstanding wingers so... Back three is your stake in the ground. You may have Pirlo and decide using a Regista is your stake in the ground etc. 

In terms of this discussion its even stranger... With so much confusion over shape... Both you and the OP seem to have a good grasp of what it does (in terms of the difference between fluidity and structure). This should stand you in good stead to understand, situationally, the best way to apply it. 

In one of my threads i dumbed it down to 'if my formation screen shows red areas of concern... I can use fluidity (rather than moving one of my positions) to close that gap.' 

I think in terms of possession tactics thats a good simple rule to follow. If you have width through wingbacks or wingers, and you have one or both of am/dm... Then spacially on the pitch you have good coverage... So a structured approach will work well, there will be passing options pretty much 360 (with the right roles and duties) so you dont need fluidity to make a cb into a dm during transition

If you have less coverage of the pitch, in terms of between the lines and width, then you could consider fluidity... Or skin that particular cat by using the d-line and width TI. 

 

[Robson 07]

10 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Sorry to pick on this comment robson

Not a problem at all.

I can't speak for everyone but I think people see that fluid shapes boost closing down slightly and we've all seen possession based sides on the telly hunting in packs with no spaces between the lines marrying pressing with possession passing.

However, I've also read many a post on here that focus on shape being more about creative freedom levels than anything else with the structured end of shapes keeping things simple, players finding an easier pass over trying something flamboyant that risk conceding the possession ball.

Happy to contribute to the debate, whether right, wrong or giving something for people to react to.  Hopefully we all learn something including me!  Btw, I liked many of your Leverkusen articles including the one on possession.

[westy8chimp]

8 minutes ago, Robson 07 said:

we've all seen possession based sides on the telly hunting in packs with no spaces between the lines marrying pressing with possession passing.

Absolutely, winning the ball back quickly plays as big of a part towards possession as any on the ball behaviour does. 

Its just the concept that, as with evrything in fm, this can be achieved by a number of tactical decisions.

I.e. A narrow 4231 (2dm, 3cm)...you could play contain and highly structured and TI close down much less... But if you have 5 bwms... They are going to close down in a pack. 

Fluidity would be a modifier for say a 442 on standard flex. If you changed from flex to very fluid... You will decrease the mentality of your attackers and increase the mentality of your defenders...so yes, more compact 442 than on flexible... During defensive phase the strikers will be more inclined to come deeper (press in a pack)... In theory if not practice

[Robson 07]

29 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

In theory if not practice

Now we're talking .  If go back to my previous post maybe I can merge the two points I made...?

In theory...you could take a fluid shape to give you a mentality framework which keeps the side compact and gives a small closing down boost.  You could then add "much more disciplined" to lower the creative freedom so that your team plays a more simple (passing) game with less tricks & flicks.

 

[Gegenklaus]

@westy8chimp how would you set up a side to play Pep-ball. Or let me ask in another; how would you emulate Pep’s City?

[westy8chimp]

13 minutes ago, Gegenklaus said:

@westy8chimp how would you set up a side to play Pep-ball. Or let me ask in another; how would you emulate Pep’s City?

Such a tough question

Firstly you and i will, to some extent, view his style differently. 

Secondly, why i dont tend to do emulations, FM is still fairly basic in what you can do... You cant set situational instructions...so straight off the cuff you cant do 99% of what a real life manager would do. Guardiola would never say 'today, mendy you attack and press, walker you stay back and hold' it would be dependant on where the ball is, the time in the match, the score, the feel of how the game is going, strength of opponent etc. 

But if i was going for a guardiola inspired possesion tactic id play either structured or flexible. Flexible in how i view irl (yes aguero and sterling etc help in the press, but not massively... And yes laporte or stones step into midfield... But not all the time) the players dictate this kind of movement (he selects cbs capable of ball carrying when the play dictates its necessity) 

In fm i would go structured because i would have plenty of width (mendy and walker as aggressive fullbacks... Sterling and sane as wingers or ifs) id have fernandinho dm or silva as am (4123 vs 4231) So i dont think fluid would help me as it could be too congested. 

So without too much thought...

Standard

Structured

4123 wide

Gk d - ederson

RWb s - walker

Cb d - stones + laporte

Lwb s - mendy

Hb d - fernandinho

Mez s - silva

Rpm s - kdb

Lw s - sane

Rrmd a - sterling

Dlf a - aguero

-----

Ti much higher dline, much more closing down, stay on feet, play out of defence

Possible tweaks... After a few games if i needed more of the ball id consider shorter passing and work ball into box

I may make both wide men inside forwads... With sane to stay wide (allow space for the mez) and sterling to sit narrower (closer to the rpm to create triangle options) 

 

 

 

[Gegenklaus]

1 hour ago, westy8chimp said:

Such a tough question

Firstly you and i will, to some extent, view his style differently. 

Secondly, why i dont tend to do emulations, FM is still fairly basic in what you can do... You cant set situational instructions...so straight off the cuff you cant do 99% of what a real life manager would do. Guardiola would never say 'today, mendy you attack and press, walker you stay back and hold' it would be dependant on where the ball is, the time in the match, the score, the feel of how the game is going, strength of opponent etc. 

But if i was going for a guardiola inspired possesion tactic id play either structured or flexible. Flexible in how i view irl (yes aguero and sterling etc help in the press, but not massively... And yes laporte or stones step into midfield... But not all the time) the players dictate this kind of movement (he selects cbs capable of ball carrying when the play dictates its necessity) 

In fm i would go structured because i would have plenty of width (mendy and walker as aggressive fullbacks... Sterling and sane as wingers or ifs) id have fernandinho dm or silva as am (4123 vs 4231) So i dont think fluid would help me as it could be too congested. 

So without too much thought...

Standard

Structured

4123 wide

Gk d - ederson

RWb s - walker

Cb d - stones + laporte

Lwb s - mendy

Hb d - fernandinho

Mez s - silva

Rpm s - kdb

Lw s - sane

Rrmd a - sterling

Dlf a - aguero

-----

Ti much higher dline, much more closing down, stay on feet, play out of defence

Possible tweaks... After a few games if i needed more of the ball id consider shorter passing and work ball into box

I may make both wide men inside forwads... With sane to stay wide (allow space for the mez) and sterling to sit narrower (closer to the rpm to create triangle options) 

 

 

 

Are we talking about WB’s in Wingback strata?

[westy8chimp]

4 minutes ago, Gegenklaus said:

Are we talking about WB’s in Wingback strata?

As a back 4 as im using wide players infront too. 

[Gegenklaus]

1 hour ago, westy8chimp said:

As a back 4 as im using wide players infront too. 

Okay. You have given me something to think about.

[sporadicsmiles]

2 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

Rpm s - kdb

 

I am curious why you would use a RPM? I mean, I get the idea behind it but I did not find it to work at all in this kind of formation. He roams around too much, and I found it left me a little short of passing options in the midfield. Given he tends to get a bit closer to the defensive line, I found it ended up with 5 players very squished against the defensive line. It limited my movement a bit. Then again, I like to create movement by having one or two players a little deeper, a player rushing from midfield and a player cutting in from the wings (plus some kind of role where the striker moves laterally or deep, take your pick). Like you say, there is no right way to do things, just different ideas based off our preferences. Indeed, the tactic I posted earlier I would certainly change if being used with a team that did not have Messi in it. It is partially designed around getting the ball to him a lot. 

I do like structured for this kind of thing, too. While you want players close, you do not want them sat on each other for passing. It is too easy to close that down. One of the things I think is that to do possession football well, you need to make the other side chase your players around the pitch as well as keeping the ball. Drag their shape around, and tire them out. 

[westy8chimp]

Im sat by the beach in Spain at the moment watchin the pool game... So didnt put a great deal of thought into the tactic. Rpm based on lack of an AM... Wanted more mobility than an AP. 

Im not familiar with the ppms of the city squad, never been them, but i imagine they have lots which would possibly change a few things in my formation or lineup

[sporadicsmiles]

8 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

Im sat by the beach in Spain at the moment watchin the pool game... So didnt put a great deal of thought into the tactic. Rpm based on lack of an AM... Wanted more mobility than an AP. 

Im not familiar with the ppms of the city squad, never been them, but i imagine they have lots which would possibly change a few things in my formation or lineup

Haha, well I am amazed you are thinking about FM at all in that case. I am only a little jealous of you there.

[sporadicsmiles]

So I am now testing some of the things I learnt at Barcelona in a new save with Arsenal. I am happy with how I did there, but I wanted to be a slightly less amazing side. Arsenal are a great fit for this, since they are a side you can roleplay as looking for a new identity (and I like that kind of thing) after Wenger. 

Anyway, the setup is pretty much the same as I posted earlier (except everything is on the other side, because I have better IFs on the right). I am playing with the database update for the 2018 season, and the only player I have added to the squad is Savic, since Arsenal needed some improvement in the midfield. My first match is against Chelsea, and I was pleasantly surprised by the outcome. 

You can see, we nailed them with superior finishing, and played some excellent football. We did not dominate possession but we did complete 572 passes (83% completion). So things are doing pretty much what I want. I will keep you posted. Also, we scored a couple of goals where we built things from the back after getting the ball back from Chelsea in our half. Very pleasing.

I also wanted to come back to crossing here. Two of my goals came from what the game counts as a cross assist. However, if you watch these, they are not hit and hope crosses from far out wide. One of them was basically a pull-back from about 5m from the post to an open goal, and the other was more a pass when the Mkhitaryan had got into the box, to Welbeck who was in space. Both were along the ground, and both were entirely consistent with playing "the Pep way". 

I wanted to point this out because it is something you should not entirely rely on the way FM collects stats for. If I looked at the game in isolation without watching, I will see 2 cross assists. I could conclude things are not working because I do not particularly want to rely on crosses for my style of play. However, it is misleading, and both crosses were in actuality really good passes directly to someone in a scoring position. 

[westy8chimp]

9 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

am amazed you are thinking about FM at all in that case.

24/7

[sporadicsmiles]

4 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

24/7

Where does admirable dedication stop and obsession begin? 

[yonko]

On 14/09/2018 at 15:38, Gegenklaus said:

What are you personally a fan of when trying to emulate this style? Hit us with a setup, please - I would love to see it.

Personally, I'm a fan of strikerless when I want to create a possession tactic. I'm not happy with the False 9 role, therefore I use either SS or AM-A for my AMC. I'm also fan of multiple playmakers but in the central positions. I've used that since many prior FM editions - I think since FM2010, if I remember correctly.

Currently using the following:

Standard - Fluid - retain possession, shorter passing, play out of defense, work ball into box, push higher up, close down more, prevent short GK distribution, roam from positions 

SK-S

2 WB-S

2 CD-D

HB-D or DLP-D or DLP-S

MCR = DLP-S or AP-S (occasionally BBM when DM is DLP-S)

MCL = AP-A or CM-A

2 IF-S

SS-A or AM-A

PIs:

GK - distribute to CBs or FBs (when facing 2 STs), slow pace down

CM-A - shoot less often, more risky passes

IF-S - shoot less often, get further forward, stay wider

SS/AM-A - shoot less often

I change the roles in my midfield 3 depending on what formation the opponents use and how aggressive is their mentality. If I want to make my system more attacking, I would go for Control and Structured. This will open more horizontal space between my lines, allow for more movement to stretch the opponents. The WBs may be changed to Attack duty as well or add look for overlaps TI. Play Wider is an option too.

If you want to try it with ST as False 9, then definitely use MCL as CM-A and AMR as IF-A to give the F9 enough runs beyond him, on either side. In this case, MCR becomes AP-S and DM becomes DLP-D. Then you can also stagger the fullbacks - DL as WB-A, DR as WB-S

If you've noticed I use mostly old, tried and tested roles. I don't mess too much with the newer roles. I think they are more useful for me when trying to create a different style of play. I may occasionally use RPM-S with DLP-D behind him and CM-A next to him. But the player in that role has to be exceptional midfielder because the RPM role runs the whole show. 

Lastly, Player Traits are also very important to creating a possession style of play. You have to have players of mixed traits - some who come deep, others who get forward/into the area, some who play short passes and others who try through balls often. You have to have runners, controllers, recyclers and blockers.

For example, I like my supporting playmaker to come deep, play short passes, dictate tempo and switch play. While on the other hand, the other playmaker (AP-A who also plays as CM-A) to be more direct and risk taker - try through balls often, run with ball often, move into channels, get forward often or get into the penalty area.

Those are some of my ideas, but I have also learned a lot from couple of very helpful threads by @Cleon (The Art of Possession) and @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! (Pep's Barcelona Very Fluid). Some things they posted in those threads I was already using or I started to use since reading.

The thing to remember is that you have to have an idea about how to play this style and what tools to use. 

[jc577]

@yonko Occasionally I’ve noticed that my F9 receives the ball too early during build-up; he’s come deep to get the ball around the halfway line, but instead of playing a short pass backwards, he dribbles with the ball and takes a long shot, as neither the IF’s or the CM-A has moved past him. Maybe a fluid team shape will eliminate this problem?

[Gegenklaus]

7 hours ago, yonko said:

Personally, I'm a fan of strikerless when I want to create a possession tactic. I'm not happy with the False 9 role, therefore I use either SS or AM-A for my AMC. I'm also fan of multiple playmakers but in the central positions. I've used that since many prior FM editions - I think since FM2010, if I remember correctly.

Currently using the following:

Standard - Fluid - retain possession, shorter passing, play out of defense, work ball into box, push higher up, close down more, prevent short GK distribution, roam from positions 

SK-S

2 WB-S

2 CD-D

HB-D or DLP-D or DLP-S

MCR = DLP-S or AP-S (occasionally BBM when DM is DLP-S)

MCL = AP-A or CM-A

2 IF-S

SS-A or AM-A

PIs:

GK - distribute to CBs or FBs (when facing 2 STs), slow pace down

CM-A - shoot less often, more risky passes

IF-S - shoot less often, get further forward, stay wider

SS/AM-A - shoot less often

I change the roles in my midfield 3 depending on what formation the opponents use and how aggressive is their mentality. If I want to make my system more attacking, I would go for Control and Structured. This will open more horizontal space between my lines, allow for more movement to stretch the opponents. The WBs may be changed to Attack duty as well or add look for overlaps TI. Play Wider is an option too.

If you want to try it with ST as False 9, then definitely use MCL as CM-A and AMR as IF-A to give the F9 enough runs beyond him, on either side. In this case, MCR becomes AP-S and DM becomes DLP-D. Then you can also stagger the fullbacks - DL as WB-A, DR as WB-S

If you've noticed I use mostly old, tried and tested roles. I don't mess too much with the newer roles. I think they are more useful for me when trying to create a different style of play. I may occasionally use RPM-S with DLP-D behind him and CM-A next to him. But the player in that role has to be exceptional midfielder because the RPM role runs the whole show. 

Lastly, Player Traits are also very important to creating a possession style of play. You have to have players of mixed traits - some who come deep, others who get forward/into the area, some who play short passes and others who try through balls often. You have to have runners, controllers, recyclers and blockers.

For example, I like my supporting playmaker to come deep, play short passes, dictate tempo and switch play. While on the other hand, the other playmaker (AP-A who also plays as CM-A) to be more direct and risk taker - try through balls often, run with ball often, move into channels, get forward often or get into the penalty area.

Those are some of my ideas, but I have also learned a lot from couple of very helpful threads by @Cleon (The Art of Possession) and @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! (Pep's Barcelona Very Fluid). Some things they posted in those threads I was already using or I started to use since reading.

The thing to remember is that you have to have an idea about how to play this style and what tools to use. 

Thanks, @yonko. I really like your thoghts on this. Do you have any sort of triggers of when to adapt and change roles? I remember your posts in Özil’s Barca-thread that I used myself as a guideline. Could you give us some examples of certain things that triggers you to do some changes? 

Also good point regarding player types and their PPM’s. As you I like to differentiate between the playmakers: a sort of controller - the Xavi guy who keeps the play flowing; the David Silva/Iniesta-type that operates further up the field and takes charge of the attack. 

In regards to IF’s, what players prefered foot do you go for here?

[yonko]

21 hours ago, jc577 said:

@yonko Occasionally I’ve noticed that my F9 receives the ball too early during build-up; he’s come deep to get the ball around the halfway line, but instead of playing a short pass backwards, he dribbles with the ball and takes a long shot, as neither the IF’s or the CM-A has moved past him. Maybe a fluid team shape will eliminate this problem?

It's possible a more fluid shape can help with this. But like I said, I do not like how the F9 role plays in FM. For starters, it shoots too much - maybe it has too much creative freedom. Even when using Messi, it gets inconsistent ratings. It doesn't drop as deep as it should. It moves into channels and IMO it shouldn't. 

For me the role should be a player who drops deep (deeper than any other ST role), participates in the build up in midfield and then surges into the box. It should remain mostly in central areas too. It shouldn't be a selfish role, but rather a team role that distributes the ball to continue the attacking passing sequence.

15 hours ago, Gegenklaus said:

Thanks, @yonko. I really like your thoghts on this. Do you have any sort of triggers of when to adapt and change roles? I remember your posts in Özil’s Barca-thread that I used myself as a guideline. Could you give us some examples of certain things that triggers you to do some changes? 

Also good point regarding player types and their PPM’s. As you I like to differentiate between the playmakers: a sort of controller - the Xavi guy who keeps the play flowing; the David Silva/Iniesta-type that operates further up the field and takes charge of the attack. 

In regards to IF’s, what players prefered foot do you go for here?

First, I have to correct my previous post that my usual set up actually uses Control mentality. I had started on Standard but found out that the higher mentality moves the ball better and creates some really nice passing sequences.

A trigger for change can be if the opponents uses more passive/deep midfield - example, 2 DMs + 1 CM. Or if they use formation with 3 CDs - then the SS will need more support otherwise he will get low rating and under perform - even Messi in the role. In both scenarios I may make my midfield more aggressive - DLP-D + AP-S + CM-A. 

Other times I may want to open things up in midfield more and not have so many ball magnets near the ball - which also means I may use a CM-A rather than AP-A. It also depends on who I want to play and what kind of Player Traits they have. You can use two players in midfield with "comes deep" trait - play one as DLP while the other as CM-A. The CM will participate in the midfield build up but then also surge in the box with the SS. You just have to understand how the Player Traits will make the player perform the role. Think about how all those elements combine to achieve certain performance and how that effects your tactic/performance. No two player play the same role the same way because it depends on their attributes and player traits. Iniesta is different from Silva and KDB is different from Xavi. They have different roles or maybe perform the same roles differently. Something to think about, right? Silva and KDB are more of a goal threats than Iniesta and Xavi, but the latter are perhaps better at controlling and distributing.

Regarding the IFs, either foot will work. If the strong foot matches the side, then the player will be better at delivering those square passes into the box from the side - I wouldn't call them crosses per se. If the strong foot is opposite of the side then the player will be better at through balls. I don't think either way it matters how much the player will score based on footedness.

[Gegenklaus]

4 minutes ago, yonko said:

It's possible a more fluid shape can help with this. But like I said, I do not like how the F9 role plays in FM. For starters, it shoots too much - maybe it has too much creative freedom. Even when using Messi, it gets inconsistent ratings. It doesn't drop as deep as it should. It moves into channels and IMO it shouldn't. 

For me the role should be a player who drops deep (deeper than any other ST role), participates in the build up in midfield and then surges into the box. It should remain mostly in central areas too. It shouldn't be a selfish role, but rather a team role that distributes the ball to continue the attacking passing sequence.

First, I have to correct my previous post that my usual set up actually uses Control mentality. I had started on Standard but found out that the higher mentality moves the ball better and creates some really nice passing sequences.

A trigger for change can be if the opponents uses more passive/deep midfield - example, 2 DMs + 1 CM. Or if they use formation with 3 CDs - then the SS will need more support otherwise he will get low rating and under perform - even Messi in the role. In both scenarios I may make my midfield more aggressive - DLP-D + AP-S + CM-A. 

Other times I may want to open things up in midfield more and not have so many ball magnets near the ball - which also means I may use a CM-A rather than AP-A. It also depends on who I want to play and what kind of Player Traits they have. You can use two players in midfield with "comes deep" trait - play one as DLP while the other as CM-A. The CM will participate in the midfield build up but then also surge in the box with the SS. You just have to understand how the Player Traits will make the player perform the role. Think about how all those elements combine to achieve certain performance and how that effects your tactic/performance. No two player play the same role the same way because it depends on their attributes and player traits. Iniesta is different from Silva and KDB is different from Xavi. They have different roles or maybe perform the same roles differently. Something to think about, right? Silva and KDB are more of a goal threats than Iniesta and Xavi, but the latter are perhaps better at controlling and distributing.

Regarding the IFs, either foot will work. If the strong foot matches the side, then the player will be better at delivering those square passes into the box from the side - I wouldn't call them crosses per se. If the strong foot is opposite of the side then the player will be better at through balls. I don't think either way it matters how much the player will score based on footedness.

Again, really good points and insight. Thanks for that. 

Silva and de Bruyne, as you say - and I totally aggree - a very different from Iniesta and Xavi and the system too is also different. I know Guardiola change his structure a lot and micromanage - a lot. But there are some trends in his City team, and I adore how he uses the two number 8’s. They play higher up the field. They do of course drop off, if the build up needs it. I really like how he uses the fullbacks to cover for them. The beauty of it all is that the team is so cohesive. They change positions a lot but they keep their mail structure. In their last game against Fullham, I saw Bernardo Silva high in the right half space but then Sterling moves indside and Kyle Walker moves up into the space on the flank. And then Bernardo Silva left his position and went back to cover for Kyle Walker. You of course know all this. But if you were to try to make a FM tactic that makes the two 8’s and the front 3 the malm attackers - how would you set it up? 

Also, what is your experience with Roam From Positions? I never quite been able to spot what it exactly does.

and one last thing; Have you tried using the Dribble less as part of a possession tactic?

sorry for leeching, but I find your approach quite interesting. 

[yonko]

3 hours ago, Gegenklaus said:

Again, really good points and insight. Thanks for that. 

Silva and de Bruyne, as you say - and I totally aggree - a very different from Iniesta and Xavi and the system too is also different. I know Guardiola change his structure a lot and micromanage - a lot. But there are some trends in his City team, and I adore how he uses the two number 8’s. They play higher up the field. They do of course drop off, if the build up needs it. I really like how he uses the fullbacks to cover for them. The beauty of it all is that the team is so cohesive. They change positions a lot but they keep their mail structure. In their last game against Fullham, I saw Bernardo Silva high in the right half space but then Sterling moves indside and Kyle Walker moves up into the space on the flank. And then Bernardo Silva left his position and went back to cover for Kyle Walker. You of course know all this. But if you were to try to make a FM tactic that makes the two 8’s and the front 3 the malm attackers - how would you set it up? 

Also, what is your experience with Roam From Positions? I never quite been able to spot what it exactly does.

and one last thing; Have you tried using the Dribble less as part of a possession tactic?

sorry for leeching, but I find your approach quite interesting. 

Pep always thinks in terms of progression and how to best utilize his players. He also educates them in how to play.

To replicate City you can go with 2 MEZ-S, 2 IF-S (stay wider PI) and CF-S. Control + Structured. Or you can make one of the MEZ into CM-S with custom PIs.

Roam From Position is instruction that makes players search for open space. I find it useful for creating possession tactics. You need intelligent players for both - the style and the instruction.

I use Dribble Less occasionally when I want to kill them game off or when the opponents began to hard tackle my players. Some roles will still dribble (IF, SS, AP-A) but less so than normal. If you re-read @Cleon thread The Art Of Possession there he lists all the TIs for possession style. You just have to decide how many of them in combination you want to use at a given time. Some of them are situational instructions. For me, Dribble Less is one of those situational ones.

I'm glad you find my approach interesting. But in all fairness a lot of it is the sum of my own plus what I've read here in various threads. Cleon's thread is very educational and so is O-zil's. They show you two completely different approaches - one is on Highly Structured shape, the other on Very Fluid, for example. One is traditional 4123 Wide formation, the other is 2323 Strikerless formation. I have mainly operated and created possession tactics using Structured, Flexible or Fluid shapes in combination with Counter, Standard or Control Mentality. There are many ways to achieve it. One just needs to balance and use the tools correctly.

Lastly, the attributes are very important. For me the core ones for possession/short passing game are:

- first touch, passing, technique 

- anticipation, composure, decisions, off the ball, teamwork, vision (maybe concentration too)

My training is focused on that. After the usual pre-season training set up (General Focus on Team Chemistry and 50% Match Training on Match tactics for Fluidity), I set my General Training to Tactics focus and I choose individual role training that cover the attributes I need for the style of play.

I wish future FM editions focus more on the training to impact the tactics and style of play.

[Abdiel_rivera10]

13 hours ago, yonko said:

I choose individual role training that cover the attributes I need for the style of play.

@yonko for example like SK for keepers, CWB for fullbacks, BPD for CD, RPM for midfielders, and CF for attackers or do you have a seperate one for wingers? Or do you have any other soecific roles?

[yonko]

5 hours ago, Abdiel_rivera10 said:

@yonko for example like SK for keepers, CWB for fullbacks, BPD for CD, RPM for midfielders, and CF for attackers or do you have a seperate one for wingers? Or do you have any other soecific roles?

AP is very useful for midfielders and wingers. Also WP role is good if you don't want to focus on physicals - example, Dembele at Barca - he has all the speed he needs already. HB for DMs, Trequartista for AMC/ST. Basically any role that targets the core attributes I mentioned in the previous post. Some exceptions are made - for example, some fullbacks can role train as FB or WB instead of CWB - depends how their anticipation, concentration and decisions attributes are.

[reerdo]

Just read through this thread from the start and there is some great info and ideas in here which has inspired me to make this my last game on FM18 and take a crack at this with Chelsea (as they are my team). It was one of the refrences back on page one to Thomas Tuchel that really got me thinking and lead me to this great article around his Dortmund team :

https://spielverlagerung.com/2015/09/15/team-analysis-tuchels-borussia-dortmund/

That is what my ultimate goal is to try and create in game so been jotting down a few ideas of how I want to line up while at work.

Interested to see if going 'narrow' as a TI and using PI's to give width via the full backs will work in FM the way it 'worked' for Dortmund in real life from the article.

I'm going tgoinw re-read this from the start and take notes :)

[Gegenklaus]

52 minutes ago, reerdo said:

Just read through this thread from the start and there is some great info and ideas in here which has inspired me to make this my last game on FM18 and take a crack at this with Chelsea (as they are my team). It was one of the refrences back on page one to Thomas Tuchel that really got me thinking and lead me to this great article around his Dortmund team :

https://spielverlagerung.com/2015/09/15/team-analysis-tuchels-borussia-dortmund/

That is what my ultimate goal is to try and create in game so been jotting down a few ideas of how I want to line up while at work.

Interested to see if going 'narrow' as a TI and using PI's to give width via the full backs will work in FM the way it 'worked' for Dortmund in real life from the article.

I'm going tgoinw re-read this from the start and take notes

I am looking forward to that as I have tried numerous times to get the shape going. Basically the wingbacks becomes the wingers and the 4-2-3-1 numerous times became the shape Guardiola uses a lot. The sort of 2-3-4-1. The two wide attackers high in the half space, the striker in front, stretching the defense vertically, wingbacks stretch horizontally, the two number six aslong with the number form a line of three - pretty much how the fullbacks and the number 6 at City acts when in possession. 

I have seen a lot of the Dortmund games from the 2015/2016 season and the movements of Kagawa is really hard to get right. I dont think you can actually do that in FM. Even how Hummels acted, a lot of times becoming a number six, pushing into midfield in the wide channel or half space while Weigl would go down and cover for him. 

Gundogans role is also hard. He would at times push up and act like a number 8. Generally though he and Hummels had obvious licens to do long passes. 

[reerdo]

It's definitely going to be an experience (and ultimately a failure probably) but I will have fun trying. I agree that its doubtful I can get a lot of the movement that article discusses to work in the ME but that article is a fantastic insight into how a) real life tactics/managers work and b) how (to me and I may be wrong) it seems to contradict what I 'understand' about how the ME works but then at the same times opens the eyes to options. 

Definitely going to read through some more articles there relating to Sarri and Pep to see what can be moulded together.

[yonko]

2 hours ago, reerdo said:

It's definitely going to be an experience (and ultimately a failure probably) but I will have fun trying. I agree that its doubtful I can get a lot of the movement that article discusses to work in the ME but that article is a fantastic insight into how a) real life tactics/managers work and b) how (to me and I may be wrong) it seems to contradict what I 'understand' about how the ME works but then at the same times opens the eyes to options. 

Definitely going to read through some more articles there relating to Sarri and Pep to see what can be moulded together.

There are limitation in the ME to what we can actually copy from Tuchel, Sarri or Pep. Ultimately, you have to decide what kind of passing tactic you want your team to play and see if it's possible to create using the tools that we have in the game. How attacking you want to be and how possession oriented you want to be?