TIs and PIs for a solid defence - help needed

[karanhsingh]

So in all my games I have struggled to create a solid defence, even though we usually have no problems on the other end of the pitch. Thought would ask over here for some tips. I always thought my problem must be the quality of the players but I now have two premier centre halves in Manolas & Lemos, yet they dont seem to do their job properly. 

The information first, 

our overall shape is a 4-5-1

flat back four with a FB(s), CB(d), BPD(d), FB(a) 

defensive midfielder is a DLP(s)

center mids are MEZ(s) and AP(a)

then I have a Winger(s) and IF(a)

finally a CF(a) 

We play with the following TI

a slightly higher defensive line (as I have good pace in the back-line)

more closing down (to pin the opponents back and goes with higher DL)

balanced width (fairly narrow for tough games)

tight marking (I have tried without this as well not sure what is best)

offside trap (have tried both options again am unsure) 

play out of defence 

look for overlap (not for tough games) 

in terms  of the PI

have reduced the closing down for the back 4 to keep them in position

rest is quite standard

in terms of types of goals

I have noticed we concede a LOT of goals immediately after we score (literally while my tactical changes or shouts are being applied)

also a lot of goals where from crosses coming in and the striker losing his marker

or a ball in to the striker who turns my CB and scores 

or through ball where my CB stands around like a statue and lets the striker through 

I have an amazing keeper in Lafont otherwise would probably end up conceding even more

we give at least 3-4 big chances almost every game

any feedback for me? sorry for the long post!

[Experienced Defender]

36 minutes ago, karanhsingh said:

a slightly higher defensive line (as I have good pace in the back-line)

Having pacey defenders is good, but not enough. What about their positioning, anticipation, concentration... (to name just a few key attributes)?

 

41 minutes ago, karanhsingh said:

more closing down (to pin the opponents back and goes with higher DL)

This also may create a problem. You don't need to have more CD as a TI. Instead, you can tell your forward players to close down (much) more via their PIs. There is no need to have the entire team pressing a lot, because players then tend to come out of position and your defensive shape gets compromised. On top of that, with a higher d-line (which you already use) the level of team pressing is automatically increased a bit. And if you still want all your players to close down more, then look at their Stamina, Workrate, Acceleration, Positioning, Aggression and Teamwork in the first place, to make sure they can do the job.

 

51 minutes ago, karanhsingh said:

tight marking (I have tried without this as well not sure what is best)

TM as a TI is something I use very rarely and only temporarily in a certain stage of a match, but never as part of my basic (starting) tactic. For example, I can go with TM in the finish of a match, coupled with a very defensive tactic, if I have a result I'm satisfied with (such as a narrow lead or a draw against a stronger opponent). Again, as with pressing, I prefer to instruct some individual players to Mark Tighter via their PIs, rather than having my whole team doing that. Simply because I think it's too risky when used all the time.

 

1 hour ago, karanhsingh said:

offside trap (have tried both options again am unsure)

Offside traps are somewhat tricky. They work better if your defenders (especially the central ones) have played together long enough to know each other well, so that they could be better coordinated. Also important is their tactical intelligence (Anticipation, Positioning, Decisions), plus speed (Acceleration, Pace) when a trap fails (which will occasionally happen even if your defenders are the best in the world). It is recommendable that both DCs are on the same duty (defend), though not always necessary.

 

1 hour ago, karanhsingh said:

look for overlap

Depends on your overall tactic for a particular match. IMO, it makes a lot more sense when you play with a more offensive mentality (Control or Attack). Otherwise, it could be redundant. In any case, you should take into account what type of players you have on fullback and wing positions. Personally, I use overlaps only as a tactical tweak on certain occasions, not all the time.

 

1 hour ago, karanhsingh said:

have reduced the closing down for the back 4 to keep them in position

That's good in itself, but be careful. If your defenders are the only players with less CD while all the others are pressing more, it can create gaps between your lines which the OP can exploit.

 

1 hour ago, karanhsingh said:

also a lot of goals where from crosses coming in and the striker losing his marker

or a ball in to the striker who turns my CB and scores 

These may be a direct consequence of the Mark Tighter TI. I cannot say that's the reason for sure, but it's quite possible. 

1 hour ago, karanhsingh said:

or through ball where my CB stands around like a statue and lets the striker through 

Could be due to the high(er) d-line. Plus the gap created by large differences in pressing levels for your defenders and the rest of the team, which I already mentioned above. Your DM acts as a DLP on Support duty. I don't know who plays in this position/role and what are his attributes and PPMs, but I guess that he's not helping your backline as much as he should, which again could well be due to high pressing instructions. Try with reducing his Closing Down. You can optionally tell him to mark tighter and Ease Off Tackles. Changing his duty to Defend instead of Support is also an option worth considering. However, this might require some changes to your other players roles/duties and PIs.

[summatsupeer]

You've talked a lot about your tactic and CBs but I'd look at the other players.  How good defensively are your midfield 3 and FBs?  Considering they're AP-A, MEZ-S and a DLP-S suggests they are all attacking players but you have wide forwards who won't drop to help the flanks as much as wide midfielder.  This will also require more solo work from the FB, one of whom is attack duty and you mention sometimes you use Look For Overlap which will make both more attacking so even the FB-S I guess is good attacking?

[kelabb]

I agree with all the advice above. It could be the CBs are being pulled out of position to cope with somebody further foward being beaten or a gap being opened where it shouldn't. I have found teams defend better when there is not a lot of difference in the player's setup. I notice you have one FB on attack duty. Try dropping that back to support and give him the Get Further Forward PI. He will still go forward, but he'll be caught out of position on transition less, which the CB has to adjust for. If you really want to kep the FB(a) you could set that side flanker to IF(s) so hee'll track back better, which will give the CD more confidence to stay back in position. You could also look at changing the BPD to a CD. He may be finding himself out of postion if he has just played a ball forward and it's been lost.

There are lots of things to try but I'd recommend going back to FBs CDd CDd FBs with no PIs and take away the Tight Marking and More Closing Down TIs. Keep them for tweaks rather than a permanent setting. You haven't indicated what mentality or team shape you are using. I would suggest going to Standard mentality with Flexible shape, and the More Disciplined TI. This will provide some freedom of movement, but not too much and will help keep the team in position. Try making adjustments one at a time, and see what works better (or worse) slowly.

Good luck.

[Snorks]

AM alternative foe the closing down, and one I employed pretty successfully with Liverpool, wsa set the TI to Close Down Much More, but set CDs PI to Close Down much Less, and the FBs on Close Down Less. The PIs override the TIs.

With FBs on Support Duty and either 2s CD or 1CD/1BPD both on Defend, whenever I lost the ball, I had a solid back four - even if the FBs were back-pedalling into position a bit.