433 - Roles and movement, please advice

[ralala]

The idea is to have different attacking movements happening on each side. Which obviously isn't working since I'm posting here.

Current setup:

   

 

Right side :

I want the WB(S) to stay wide and provide triangle-options and crosses.

I want the FP(S) to stay centrally and seek space to recieve the ball in and dictate play from.

I want the PF(S) to come slighly deeper to provide passing options and pull defenders out of position. 

No problems on this side, it's  working as planned.

 

Left side:

I want the IWB(S) to move into the midfield strata in front of the A(D) and to the left of the FP(S)

I do not want him to cross or stay wide. 

I want the MEZ(S) to move widest of the left sided players, to cross or play angled throughballs to the forwards.

I do not want him to move forward centrally

I want the PF(A) to stay in the channel between the fullback and the central defender on the opposing team.

I do not want him to go wide left or move towards midfield.

 

I'm having problems on this side. I can get the IWB(S) to stop crossing, he cuts inside and passes instead.

But I cannot get the MEZ wide and forward enough, and the PF(A) moves to the side and in front of the MEZ instead of staying in the channel.

Looking at the average positions and passing triangles after matches, I find that the variation between left and right much smaller than I intended.

 

Thoughts I've had:

Is the IWB not working due to lack of wide player in midfield strata and/or underlap-instruction not set? 

Is the Mezzala the wrong role for the intended movement? Should I try the CAR?

Is the PF(A) the correct Forward role for this idea? When I set PF(S) I find he drops too deep. Should I use a Poacher instead?

Any suggestions to get the style I want on the left side? 

 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, ralala said:

I want the FP(S)

What role is FP???

[ralala]

Sorry, Advance playmaker AP(S) it should be then,

[Experienced Defender]

I don't know your players, so it's impossible to tell you what roles and duties you should give to each of them, but this particular tactic clearly has a lot of flaws. To begin with (much) higher DL coupled with extremely urgent press and counter-press - all at the same time. Then the setup of your 3 strikers is pretty much uninventive. And so on...

[ralala]

Those three TI's go well togheter. Compress the space, press the players and attack while transition happens higher up the pitch. LoE is standard though, to keep some midfielders guarding lanes instead.

It's succesful enough, but I don't get the forward movement from the left sided players I described - that's were I need input.

[Experienced Defender]

Okay, if attack is your only problem with this tactic, let's see what could be done in that regard. First, a tactic needs to be balanced, sensible and logical in order to work. You also need to consider the formation you use. You system (4123) is one of the riskiest formations that exist, which makes it more tricky to set the tactic up successfully than with more balanced systems. As I said, I don't know your players and therefore cannot know which roles would suit them optimally, but can give you an example of a well-balanced tactic within your formation. Hopefully, it may help you get some ideas. So here is the example:

F9    PFat     CFsu

 

MEZat      DLPsu

ACM/HB

IWBsu     CDde     CDde      FBat

SKde/su

Now, what could be a good/decent setup of team instructions? For example:

Positive mentality

- in possession - shorter passing, play out of defence, higher tempo, be more expressive, work ball into box

- in transition - counter, distribute to CBs and FBs, counter-press

And again, even though you say defense is not an issue for you, your extremely aggressive defensive setup could well have a negative effect on your attacking performance, because everything in tactics is interconnected. 

So here is how I would set up the out-of-possession TIs - higher DL, standard LOE, default pressing, prevent short GKD, use offside trap (and optionally use tighter marking)

On player instructions, I would tell all the midfield three to mark tighter, and the F9 would be told to stay wider.

Now, it's up to you to decide whether or not you want to adopt some of these suggestions. And of course, all questions are welcome.

[sporadicsmiles]

Do you really want to play out of defense? This is not a "keep the ball and finesse it into the goal" setup, it is a "smash them fast and hard" setup to me. You have 3 strikers who will stay pretty high up the pitch at all times. These players are going to be most dangerous during a transition from defense to attack. You should be looking to get the ball forward to them quickly and letting them work together against a defense that is not yet back into position. You could be quite devastating doing that.

If you want to work the ball forward, the strikers are going to be working with limited space. Two of them will look to press against the defensive line, and one may drop slightly deeper. The players pushing against the defense will tend to make space in front of the defenders. You do not have anyone exploiting that space. This is made worse by the extremely high defensive line. You are crushing your team together, and there is no space to exploit.

You would be better off having two players in the front line dropping back if you want to play a more possession oriented tactic. They drop off the defenders into the space between defense and midfield. Not only does this bring them closer to the midfield to aid with build up play, the AI has to try to deal with them. Either dropping their midfield to cover (giving your midfield more time on the ball) or by defenders chasing out (leaving space for the third striker to exploit). Either way, you are creating space and problems. Then you can work out how to exploit that.

In terms of getting a player on the left flank, why not just use a FB(D) or WB(D). They will not bomb forward, and will act as an auxiliary midfielder when called for. You are trying to create a complicated movement pattern, but sometimes it is better to keep things simple. This has the bonus of freeing up a midfielder to play a proactive role in exploiting the space you can create with the movement of your strikers.

[ralala]

Thank you for your kind advice. I always appricate that I get competent answers when I ask on these forums.

However,  I really only need advice on how to get this movement :

If at all possible, of course. I want asymetrical wide play in a symetrical narrow formation. I've been playing since '93 so I always try to make "something else" these days. Suggestions for other kinds of asymetrical movement is also nice, if you have it.