Input on my 4-1-4-1

[bjoernd]

I'm currently managing Mamelodi Sundowns in the South African Premiership. We are one of the league's top teams, so I'm trying to establish a possession-based tactic. After some tinkering I have right now settled for a 4-1-4-1DM-Wide tactic (see attachment).

 

Team instructions

* Work into box to slow down play and have more players in the area once we shoot

* Wide because most opposition are trying to park the bus, we're trying to pull them apart

* Distribute to CB/FB to create play from the back

* Higher LoE/LoD to push into opponent's half

* Urgent pressing to recover possession soon enough

* Offside trap because High LoD

 

Player Instructions are default, except

* Take fewer risks for the two CD

* Ckise down more for the CWBs

 

This works more or less -- somewhere in the middle of the season we are 3rd in the league (expected 4th), but I feel we are struggling with scoring too much. One example match, we had 44 shots, 4 CCCs and still only managed to score 2. I had a couple of really weird 0-0 draws where we were similarly overloading the opposition with shots, but just did not score. Any thoughts on the tactic in general and my scoring problem in particular would be appreciated.

[cyoung17]

It's suuuuuuuper attacking and not particulalrly balanced. You have a DLF on S who drops into space where you'll then have your wide men in a similar strata, the Mezzala and the AP. How are you creating space when it's just so top heavy? You have no one creating from deep.

How are you defensively? Having 3 very aggressive roles in CM and then attacking fullbacks seems like you'd get killed on the counter.

 

I'd suggest trying something alone the lines of...

 

                          DLF(a)

IF (a)                                       IW (s)

             Dlp (s)     Mez (a)

                     DM (d)

Wb(s)  Cd         Cd            IWB(d) or FB(s)

 

I would also lose the urgent pressing as the positive mentality already ups then. You can then apply PIs to the players you need to press to keep you a bit more solid. 

 

Hopefully that helps a bit.

[Experienced Defender]

29 minutes ago, bjoernd said:

 

29 minutes ago, bjoernd said:

Any thoughts on the tactic in general and my scoring problem in particular would be appreciated

First, the setup of roles and duties is needlessly risky (even if you are a top team in your league). Having too many attack duties and attack-minded roles is no guarantee that you will score a lot of goals or be successful in general. Best tactics are in the first place well-balanced and paying equal (or at least similar) attention both to defense and attack. 

Only the setup of the front 3 roles/duties makes sense, but everything else needs to be changed IMHO. 

You don't have a single holding role in the entire midfield. You may think that BWM on defend duty is a holding role, but it's only nominally such. In reality, it's too aggressive to be a real holder. And then you have 2 very attack-minded and adventurous roles in front of him - mezzala and attacking AP. 

Not to mention how vulnerable your flanks are, where you have the most attack-minded fullback role (CWB) on both sided, and both on attack duty, with none in the midfield to cover for them. 

[bjoernd]

The reasoning behind the CWB(a) was that the AM players both would cut inside and thus I'd want attackers on the flanks.  Would CWB(s) make sense or rather a WB(S) to drop them even further?

And what about having both wing backs on support? Would it be beneficial to leave one on attack to make the tactic open to different scoring pathways?

I'm aware the BWM is not sticking to a position, I was hoping for the AP to do so. Will try to switch for a DLP(s).

As for conceding, I mostly concede from the occasional long shot either from within play or after corners. I did get a few balls over the defense as well, but not at a concerning rate (yet).

[Experienced Defender]

5 minutes ago, bjoernd said:

The reasoning behind the CWB(a) was that the AM players both would cut inside and thus I'd want attackers on the flanks.  Would CWB(s) make sense or rather a WB(S) to drop them even further?

Roles that could make sense in your (4123 wide) system are: FB on attack, WB on support and WB on attack. However, you don't need to use an identical role and duty on both flanks. But before that, you first need to create a better balance in the midfield. 

 

7 minutes ago, bjoernd said:

And what about having both wing backs on support? Would it be beneficial to leave one on attack to make the tactic open to different scoring pathways?

Depends on the rest of your setup. You can have one on support and the other on attack. Or both on support. But both on attack would be too much. And you need to take into account roles, not only duties. Because there are important differences between standard FB, WB and CWB. 

 

13 minutes ago, bjoernd said:

I'm aware the BWM is not sticking to a position, I was hoping for the AP to do so

AP is not a holding/defense-minded role, especially not when on attack duty. The only playmaker role that is holding is DLP. But even if you used a DLP instead of AP, it would still be inadvisable to have BWM in DM position. 

 

23 minutes ago, bjoernd said:

As for conceding, I mostly concede from the occasional long shot either from within play or after corners. I did get a few balls over the defense as well, but not at a concerning rate (yet)

I don't know how (and how much) you are conceding. Just warning you about serious defensive weaknesses of your tactic.

[permanentquandary]

Drop the defensive line, LOE and pressing to default and you might find space in behind to exploit. Drop work into box and you will find the opposition is organised less often.

With a structured shape you will get fast transitions but you also need to play direct to take advantage and get the ball in behind quickly.

But with a good deal of possession conceded you must also have more conservative roles and duties set to absorb the pressure. Otherwise you will concede goals a lot.

If after this you are on less than 40% possession you should adopt more support duties in midfield.

With regards to conceding from corners on edge of area you should set some players to man mark and go back as well as have a player on the edge of the area. If you put more than 3 on 6 yard box zones (near middle and far is perfect) then there will be too much space on the edge of the box and your players won't be able to push out fast enough to close down opposition players lurking outside the area.

Edited January 6, 2020 by permanentquandary

[bjoernd]

Thanks for the input guys! I played about a year in-game after the changes and am getting much better results. Winning most games that we're expected to win and haven't had that frustrating feeling of not hitting the goal anymore.