How much does tactic influence results?

[KI Heynckes]

I just lost 5-1 away to Mainz with my RB Leipzig team that comfortably won the league last year. Went 28 matches unbeaten, like 32 if you include the season before (in the league). Then lost 2 more games because we already sealed the title and I played prospects from my U19 and guys who didn't play all year.

They played 4-2-3-1, I played with my fake 4-4-2 (1 CM in DM strata and one striker in AM strata). 

I'm a perfectionist in this regard and I hate it when managers in real life say "yes we played good but just didn't score so what can I and we do". So I tend to question my tactic instantly when I lose, because it basically has to be my fault. But in this game we had multiple big chances in the beginning, then conceded from a Penalty and a Free Kick. I went on higher mentality and after 3-0 switched to 5-3-2, got one goal back at 4-0 but conceded again. In the end we had definitely better chances and if the game had xGs I'd think it'd be like 2.3:2.5 or something. 

So what can I do in this case? When I get home I defo can show my tactic too, but it shouldn't be too bad after thos results and I normally do in-game tweaks a lot too.

I rather want to know, how this is in FM. Do you have to accept that there are matches, where you have more chances and just don't score and opponents hit every shot (and I don't mean this people that show 30-2 shot screens with probably 25 headers from set pieces and longshots and wonder why they lose)? Or does this have to do with my tactic 100%?

I'm really frustrated about this loss and basically question everything rn.

[Keyzer Soze]

I don't understand why you are questioning your tactic, that with a 28 unbeaten run i'm sure is very well addapted to your team, after 2 loses when you say that you already had won the title and decided to play with U19 players and players that didn't play much.

Realistic, what did you expect? win the game?

You probably go to the match with a bunch of weaker players (U19) and others with, probably, lower match sharpness. The players probably were too complacy, and already on "vacation mode"

And the other team? Please don't say that they were a relagation team fighting for their lives!

You got a 28 unbeaten run with Leipzig, something that irl would never happen. Just enjoy your sucess. You're in the right track.

[herne79]

53 minutes ago, KI Heynckes said:

Or does this have to do with my tactic 100%?

It's a significant part but not 100%.

You have all the build up to the match - how you handle the media, how your players react to the media, any other conversations you may have had with your players, player fitness, morale, complacency, injuries, squad rotation, pre-match press conference, pre-match team talk, how you have been performing in the league, and - of course - what your opposition are like.

And even if all of that is perfect you can still lose because no tactic is ever guaranteed to win.  Sometimes you just come up against an opponent who's own tactical system is good at counteracting your own and who's players are up for the fight.  Or sometimes your players just have a bad day at the office.  Or all of the above.

And then there is how the match plays out.  In this case you got unlucky and conceded from two set pieces.  That's going to affect your players and (importantly) the opposition.  Further, you then start tweaking - in fact more than just tweaking you make massive changes, even going so far as to switch formations.  Were these changes tried and tested or you just thought you'd try it out?  If tried and tested what did you see which made you think 3 at the back would be a better choice?  If not tried and tested why are you trying to use a system you've never used before?  Desperation/frustration?

So yeh tactic is important, but understanding the context of what happens and learning from the experience is even more important.