Man Utd - terrible results! Help me please before im sacked!

[Davish123]

d
https://gyazo.com/1bef72239534b73a60f28489521d8f13

 

Could anyone please give me any advice on where I'm going wrong with this tactic? I'm dominating possession nearly every game yet I can't win away and recently im struggling to score goals, but conceding too many, especially away from home.

Edited November 25, 2019 by Davish123

[FMunderachiever]

Im by no means a genius.

But this tactic seems a bit "out there". When im looking at it, im not sure what the plan is?

Central midfield is a huge weakness, Pogba will vacate his position to move out wide leaving Luis the whole of the middle of the pitch to himself.

If anything this tactic would suit direct passing, as all your players are really high up the field? your DLP doesnt have many short options to pass to.

Surely given you have son, rashford, pogba, all players with good pace and technique, you wouldnt want them to stop dribbling? their ability to dribble past someone is a key asset of theirs?

 

Id really look just to get back to a simple 4-1-4-1, and give the players more freedom without instructions. See how the games go and add an instruction here and there perhaps

 

[ryandormer]

Take my advice with a pinch of salt, as I've been having an abysmal season with Arsenal (just got sacked, 9th place at Christmas), but I would try to fit them into a more normal formation. Lo Celso can surely play AMR, and Luis as CM, albeit with a defend duty. Then you have a more traditional 4-2-3-1.

Agree with above, dribble less seems counter productive, as you want your pacey attackers (Son and Rashford) running both off and with the ball. More risky passes might be better, to get those players in behind the defence. And if you want that, then maybe remove the higher line instructions.

You might see a drop in possession, but I think you'd create more good chances.

[Sherkey]

Additionally, seems to me that all the people on your left side of the pitch will be occupying the same area. The IF will cut in, where he is already crowded out by by both Fernandes and lo Celso. None of them can do much other than circulate the ball among each other, maybe why you are also getting high possession stats. And that right side is crying out for some width, can make the full-back more attack oriented, gives another option to pass to. 

Your IF, as mentioned, is kinda neutralised in his movement. You can try changing his role, or trying shifting Fernandes elsewhere. Ideally, two people who are expected to score goals there are Rashford and Son, but you're limiting Son's space, meaning burden falls on Rashford. This also could be a cause for lesser goals.

You can try changing the role of Pogba - less mobile and slightly more defensive - that should give some more stability in the middle. Maybe, make him a DLP, while changing Luis to a DM. That will bring more stability. Is your keeper being caught off the line? You seems to have long range shots against you, basis last match analysis. de Gea is not the best at sweeping, so caution there. 

But ultimately, what do you want to do with this tactic? Can't particularly recommend changes without knowing how you visualise certain players playing. Also, how are you conceding goals? To counters? Long shots? A bit more information would help.

[Davish123]

13 minutes ago, Sherkey said:

Additionally, seems to me that all the people on your left side of the pitch will be occupying the same area. The IF will cut in, where he is already crowded out by by both Fernandes and lo Celso. None of them can do much other than circulate the ball among each other, maybe why you are also getting high possession stats. And that right side is crying out for some width, can make the full-back more attack oriented, gives another option to pass to. 

Your IF, as mentioned, is kinda neutralised in his movement. You can try changing his role, or trying shifting Fernandes elsewhere. Ideally, two people who are expected to score goals there are Rashford and Son, but you're limiting Son's space, meaning burden falls on Rashford. This also could be a cause for lesser goals.

You can try changing the role of Pogba - less mobile and slightly more defensive - that should give some more stability in the middle. Maybe, make him a DLP, while changing Luis to a DM. That will bring more stability. Is your keeper being caught off the line? You seems to have long range shots against you, basis last match analysis. de Gea is not the best at sweeping, so caution there. 

But ultimately, what do you want to do with this tactic? Can't particularly recommend changes without knowing how you visualise certain players playing. Also, how are you conceding goals? To counters? Long shots? A bit more information would help.

First off, thanks for the reply!

Secondly, apologies. I'm not very good tactically on this game and this is my first year of really wanting to learn tactics and get better. I've changed tactic to something different now and will attach that here. Still however, I'm struggling with conceding goals where the opponent just hoofs the ball past my defence and they score. Callum Wilson scored 4 against me! Please can you let me know what you think of this tactic, I'm trying to allow my players a bit more freedom as you said because they can all dribble well, however I still want to be wary to the counter and that's something I'm having a trouble preventing this year. Any tips?

Also, how would you suggest I change this tactic when I feel I am the weaker team/away from home to limit the oppositions chances?

[Johnny Ace]

My, you see the title & then that formation  You seem to have sorted it though, that looks decent

Give it a go but maybe look to remove some TI's. WBIB  & a lower tempo may see you struggle to get chances if the opponent has numbers back    

You could get away with having an IF on Attack instead of the Winger as both the CF(A) & AP(S) will look to roam from central areas. The BWM(D) on the side of the Winger (A) could disjoint you, I like having a Support midfielder behind the Attack duty on the flank  

As for a less offensive option, you could always line up 4-4-1-1 or swap the AM for a DM so 4-1-2-3 

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, Davish123 said:

I am glad that you've at least switched to a normal formation (4231) from the asymmetric one, not least because I absolutely dislike asymmetric formations as such. However, there are still a number of issues. 

First, you are lacking the attacking bite in the form of runners from deep who would more effectively support your attacks in the final third. For example, both fullbacks are played in a pretty much conservative role (FBsu), and neither of the CMs is likely to provide more meaningful penetration either (although in a 4231 you generally need to be very careful with central mids, both in terms of their roles/duties and player quality/reliability). Now, this absolutely does not mean that you should make both FBs (and/or CMs) a lot more attack-minded, because that could well entail too big defensive risk. Instead, what you need to do is find an optimal balance between attacking penetration and defensive solidity/stability. 

Easier said than down, I know. So here is an example of how a 4231 can be set up to meet both these requirements while also taking into account smart use of space that roles create for one another through their interaction:

PFat

Wat            APsu/TQ           IF/IWsu

BBM    CMde

IWBde    CD/BPDde   CDde    FBat

GK/SKde/su

Let me now explain the changes I made compared to your setup...

Let's begin from the front. As you can see, I changed the striker's role from CF into PF, but without changing his duty. Why? 

Given that you have a creator type of role (playmaker) immediately behind the lone striker, there's no need for the lone striker to be played in that same type of role (and creator roles when it comes to strikers are CF, DLF, TQ and F9). Instead, the striker should be played in a rather simple runner/scorer type of role (such as poacher, PF or AF, depending on the style of football you wanna play or you are "forced" to play by your team's reputation). In short - if the AMC creates, then the (lone) striker keeps it simple (runs, exploits spaces and looks to score). And vice versa.

The next change I made is about the midfield duo. You had a BWM on defend duty and CM on support. I opted for a standard CM on defend and BBM instead. Why?

In a 4231 it's vital that you have at least one (if not both) of the CMs in a strictly holding type of role (CMde or DLP on either duty), because the formation is top-heavy and has no DM to directly protect the back-line. And the BWM is not really a holding role even when played on defend duty, simply due to his aggressive manner of defending. So this particular change/tweak was about defensive stability.

The other change in the central midfield is CMsu to BBM. This one is primarily about the aforementioned lack of bite (penetration). While there is absolutely nothing wrong with a standard CM on support in itself, the reason I opted for the BBM in this particular case is (a bit) better mobility that the role provides. In other words - BBM is a bit more of a runner from deep than standard CM. If you are willing to take a bit more risk, you can even try a mezzala on support duty instead of BBM. And given that Man Utd is a top team, that actually may not be a bad idea at all (but be careful anyway). 

So you now have one holder (CMde) and one moderately attack-minded runner (BBM) in the central midfield area. Which in turn directly affects how your fullbacks could/should be set up (again, keeping both the attacking bite and use of space and defensive stability/balance in mind). 

So why an IWB on defend duty on the left? Simply, to provide defensive cover for the more attack-minded roles (BBM and attacking winger) in front of him, plus utilize the central space left by the BBM when he gets forward to support attacking movement in the final third, which is also good from a ball-recycling perspective along with helping the defend-duty CM as his de facto holding midfield partner. And given that Shaw has the trait of getting forward often, the defend duty is a good choice here because it should restrain him a bit in that respect. 

The reason I opted an attack-duty fullback on the other flank is pretty simple. He is there to create natural overlaps with his wide forward partner (IF or IW on support duty), whereas CM on defend is meant to provide defensive cover (I guess McTominay and Matic would be the most logical choice for the role). A WB on attack duty would also create a natural overlap, but in a top-heavy system such as 4231 - that could mean too much of a risk, because WB as a role is reasonably more adventurous/attack-minded than simple standard FB.

Finally, when it comes to roles and duties, I opted to avoid a cover/defend combo in the central defense. Not because it's inherently "wrong" - it isn't - but simply because I feel there is no need to overcomplicate things (unless you clearly know why you want your CBs on different duties and why a particular duty is given to a particular CB). Instead, I prefer to keep it simple when managing good (top) teams, on the assumption that both players are of similar quality, meaning there is no need for one to cover (for) the other. But even if you want to keep the cover/defend combo, the cover-duty CB should be played on the same side as the more attack-minded fullback (in "my" setup it would therefore be the right one). After all, with both CBs on defend duty, you can use Offside trap, which in turn may call for a slightly higher defensive line (albeit not necessarily).

Now, it's time to see what could be improved in terms of your team instructons...

The Positive mentality is a good choice for a top team, so I would keep it 

In possession - I would definitely remove (slightly) lower tempo and instead leave it on default. You have good, technically gifted and reasonably creative players who can move the ball around smoothly, so why would you want to help the opposition defend more easily against you by lowering the tempo? There's no need for that, believe me. I mean, you can play on lower tempo if you want, but I don't see how it's going to benefit you as a top team that will face (pretty much) defensive opposition most of the time. If you want to add some patience to your attacking build-up play, then shorter passing is clearly a better option than slow(er) tempo.

(to be continued later...)

 

 

[Davish123]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

I am glad that you've at least switched to a normal formation (4231) from the asymmetric one, not least because I absolutely dislike asymmetric formations as such. However, there are still a number of issues. 

First, you are lacking the attacking bite in the form of runners from deep who would more effectively support your attacks in the final third. For example, both fullbacks are played in a pretty much conservative role (FBsu), and neither of the CMs is likely to provide more meaningful penetration either (although in a 4231 you generally need to be very careful with central mids, both in terms of their roles/duties and player quality/reliability). Now, this absolutely does not mean that you should make both FBs (and/or CMs) a lot more attack-minded, because that could well entail too big defensive risk. Instead, what you need to do is find an optimal balance between attacking penetration and defensive solidity/stability. 

Easier said than down, I know. So here is an example of how a 4231 can be set up to meet both these requirements while also taking into account smart use of space that roles create for one another through their interaction:

PFat

Wat            APsu/TQ           IF/IWsu

BBM    CMde

IWBde    CD/BPDde   CDde    FBat

GK/SKde/su

Let me now explain the changes I made compared to your setup...

Let's begin from the front. As you can see, I changed the striker's role from CF into PF, but without changing his duty. Why? 

Given that you have a creator type of role (playmaker) immediately behind the lone striker, there's no need for the lone striker to be played in that same type of role (and creator roles when it comes to strikers are CF, DLF, TQ and F9). Instead, the striker should be played in a rather simple runner/scorer type of role (such as poacher, PF or AF, depending on the style of football you wanna play or you are "forced" to play by your team's reputation). In short - if the AMC creates, then the (lone) striker keeps it simple (runs, exploits spaces and looks to score). And vice versa.

The next change I made is about the midfield duo. You had a BWM on defend duty and CM on support. I opted for a standard CM on defend and BBM instead. Why?

In a 4231 it's vital that you have at least one (if not both) of the CMs in a strictly holding type of role (CMde or DLP on either duty), because the formation is top-heavy and has no DM to directly protect the back-line. And the BWM is not really a holding role even when played on defend duty, simply due to his aggressive manner of defending. So this particular change/tweak was about defensive stability.

The other change in the central midfield is CMsu to BBM. This one is primarily about the aforementioned lack of bite (penetration). While there is absolutely nothing wrong with a standard CM on support in itself, the reason I opted for the BBM in this particular case is (a bit) better mobility that the role provides. In other words - BBM is a bit more of a runner from deep than standard CM. If you are willing to take a bit more risk, you can even try a mezzala on support duty instead of BBM. And given that Man Utd is a top team, that actually may not be a bad idea at all (but be careful anyway). 

So you now have one holder (CMde) and one moderately attack-minded runner (BBM) in the central midfield area. Which in turn directly affects how your fullbacks could/should be set up (again, keeping both the attacking bite and use of space and defensive stability/balance in mind). 

So why an IWB on defend duty on the left? Simply, to provide defensive cover for the more attack-minded roles (BBM and attacking winger) in front of him, plus utilize the central space left by the BBM when he gets forward to support attacking movement in the final third, which is also good from a ball-recycling perspective along with helping the defend-duty CM as his de facto holding midfield partner. And given that Shaw has the trait of getting forward often, the defend duty is a good choice here because it should restrain him a bit in that respect. 

The reason I opted an attack-duty fullback on the other flank is pretty simple. He is there to create natural overlaps with his wide forward partner (IF or IW on support duty), whereas CM on defend is meant to provide defensive cover (I guess McTominay and Matic would be the most logical choice for the role). A WB on attack duty would also create a natural overlap, but in a top-heavy system such as 4231 - that could mean too much of a risk, because WB as a role is reasonably more adventurous/attack-minded than simple standard FB.

Finally, when it comes to roles and duties, I opted to avoid a cover/defend combo in the central defense. Not because it's inherently "wrong" - it isn't - but simply because I feel there is no need to overcomplicate things (unless you clearly know why you want your CBs on different duties and why a particular duty is given to a particular CB). Instead, I prefer to keep it simple when managing good (top) teams, on the assumption that both players are of similar quality, meaning there is no need for one to cover (for) the other. But even if you want to keep the cover/defend combo, the cover-duty CB should be played on the same side as the more attack-minded fullback (in "my" setup it would therefore be the right one). After all, with both CBs on defend duty, you can use Offside trap, which in turn may call for a slightly higher defensive line (albeit not necessarily).

Now, it's time to see what could be improved in terms of your team instructons...

The Positive mentality is a good choice for a top team, so I would keep it 

In possession - I would definitely remove (slightly) lower tempo and instead leave it on default. You have good, technically gifted and reasonably creative players who can move the ball around smoothly, so why would you want to help the opposition defend more easily against you by lowering the tempo? There's no need for that, believe me. I mean, you can play on lower tempo if you want, but I don't see how it's going to benefit you as a top team that will face (pretty much) defensive opposition most of the time. If you want to add some patience to your attacking build-up play, then shorter passing is clearly a better option than slow(er) tempo.

(to be continued later...)

 

 

WOW!

 

Thank you. I'll give that a try and let you know how it goes, I'm learning!

 

EDIT: I'm now 14 games unbeaten with my new tactic!

Edited November 26, 2019 by Davish123

[extremeskins04]

I just won the league and the silverware with Man Utd and this is my tactic:  (Keep in mind I do make a few changes to this when I play against Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool.  I go a little more defensive.  They will punish you if you don't.)

It's a 4-1-4-1 because I love Defensive Midfielders and Tonali is one of my favorite players, but other than being biased, I made this work for the way I wanted to play.

- I hate playing in the middle.  Too many times have I see the opposition go into a defensive shell where they're extremely narrow and all your shots are just bouncing off their players.

- I wasn't creating chances.  I was getting alot of shots with not alot of goals.  Complete waste of time.

The changes I made were:

- Play wider, Pass into space, Low or Whipped Crosses, and Overlap BOTH left and right because I have excellent wingers.  And....SHORTER PASSING.  NOT DIRECT.

- The reason is because by playing wider, and instructing wingers to run wide with the ball and Shoot Less Often but Cross More, I am able to SPREAD OUT DEFENSES.

- You spread out the defense to CREATE CHANCES.  Shorter passing does this.  If you do direct passing, you're passing more long balls and you aren't giving the opposing defense enough time to spread.

- Pogba and Martial both ended up getting TOP OF THE LEAGUE in goal scoring in my first season, beating Liverpool's guys and Man City's guys.  Kane was also no match for the Spurs.  

 

Tonali playmakes defensively.  Fernandes commands the field.   And Pogba just does Pogba things.  You don't need to "Play out of the Defense" when you have Ball Playing Defenders.  They don't kick the ball long.  I don't have good aerial players so you play with BPD's who pass to Tonali or the Full Backs who with their pacey'ness work themselves up the pitch to create chances.

It freaking works like a thing of beauty.

 

 

Now I do get a few yellow cards, but I like when my players tackle and it's awesome to tackle someone and take possession away.  I love it so it's worth getting a few suspensions cause of it.  Atleast for me.

 

Edited November 26, 2019 by extremeskins04

[Robson 07]

Also glad you changed formation as there were a number of flaws in the first.  Some good points made by @Experienced Defender pleased they are working out for you.  Small extra from me, I don't think you need to distribute exclusively to your central defenders.  That's a bit one-dimensional and once in a while you may concede a goal from a mistake it brings about.  E.g. up against 2 strikers, one of your guys isn't quite in position to take the ball and has an opponent all over him. 

Edited November 27, 2019 by Robson 07