Plymouth Argyle Tactics Help

[danbanbury]

Hi Everyone,

I am after some tactical help. I'm currently in 2030 playing as Plymouth Argyle, we've been in the premier league for the last 6 seasons where we have steadily progressed from favorites for relegation to finishing in the top 6 last season and qualifying for the Europa League despite still having the 17/16th lowest wage budget.

After taking inspiration from Cleon and Herne's articles/posts about possession based tactics i have tried to create my own take on it. It's not going too badly, we're fairly solid in defense however we are blunt in attack and struggle creating opportunities on a consistent basis. I think i struggle with making changes based on what's unfolding during matches. So any advice on this that would help me better understand making the right changes would be appreciated. I'd also welcome any comments/ recommendations on the base tactic.  If you'd like to see any other info from the save then let me know. I'm not driven by having a high possession % however, i would like to control/dominate games with an attractive style of football which usually goes hand in hand with higher possession.

PI's

Front 5 - Roam from position, close down more.

IWB, FB and CDL  - Take fewer risks

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Here is the base tactic, best 11 and previous results:

Edited May 18, 2020 by danbanbury

[Zemahh]

2 hours ago, danbanbury said:

It's not going too badly, we're fairly solid in defense however we are blunt in attack and struggle creating opportunities on a consistent basis.

By the sound of it (2030, established Premier League club), you're now probably at the point where teams will be approaching matches against you very carefully, if not straight up defend for their lives. While your tactic looks well balanced, you're perhaps being too safe for breaking down stubborn defences.

Some suggestions:

• DLFsu -> DLFat: will still hold the ball up, but also look to be a threat himself; given that you have an IF, AP and MEZ behind him, all looking for risky passes, maybe he could run onto one or two
• FBat -> WBat: while FB is the safer choice, you might need more width against parked buses, with the IF cutting inside; with a DMd, you should be able to afford some additional risk
• Remove Work Ball Into Box: when teams defend for their lives, there will be very few chances as it is; WBIB limits them even further, as players will be extra patient, instead of taking their chances when they come
• Add Higher Tempo/Wider width: try dragging teams around a bit more, higher tempo/extra width could help with that; with Shorter Passing + Dribble Less + WBIB, you're not really taking much risk, which makes it easy for teams to defend

Hopefully, that gives you some ideas.

[danbanbury]

11 hours ago, Zemahh said:

By the sound of it (2030, established Premier League club), you're now probably at the point where teams will be approaching matches against you very carefully, if not straight up defend for their lives. While your tactic looks well balanced, you're perhaps being too safe for breaking down stubborn defences.

Some suggestions:

• DLFsu -> DLFat: will still hold the ball up, but also look to be a threat himself; given that you have an IF, AP and MEZ behind him, all looking for risky passes, maybe he could run onto one or two
• FBat -> WBat: while FB is the safer choice, you might need more width against parked buses, with the IF cutting inside; with a DMd, you should be able to afford some additional risk
• Remove Work Ball Into Box: when teams defend for their lives, there will be very few chances as it is; WBIB limits them even further, as players will be extra patient, instead of taking their chances when they come
• Add Higher Tempo/Wider width: try dragging teams around a bit more, higher tempo/extra width could help with that; with Shorter Passing + Dribble Less + WBIB, you're not really taking much risk, which makes it easy for teams to defend

Hopefully, that gives you some ideas.

Hey @Zemahh, thanks for taking the time to have a look and reply, it's much appreciated.

What you've said makes alot of sense to me. I think instead of just taking those suggestions and just chucking them in, I'll implement them one at a time and try to pick up the subtle changes they can make before layering in the next one. Hopefully that'll help improve my understanding of the changes to make during a game by spotting differences in movement etc. Ill keep you posted on how it goes when I get time to play. 

I was having a look at my front 3/4 and they generally have good dribbling, flair and decisions. I was thinking that by having dribble less I'm stifling them and how effective they could be especially my aml. What do you think of the idea of removing dribble less and adding them as PIs to the back 5/6?

If anyone else has any suggestions or opinions please get them in, I'm keen to discuss ideas. Especially if anyone has advice on reading situations in matches better. 

[Zemahh]

9 hours ago, danbanbury said:

I was having a look at my front 3/4 and they generally have good dribbling, flair and decisions. I was thinking that by having dribble less I'm stifling them and how effective they could be especially my aml. What do you think of the idea of removing dribble less and adding them as PIs to the back 5/6?

Sounds good. However, keep in mind that against stacked defences, when you're a clear favorite to win, you might need that defensive midfielder or a full back making a dribble, attracting defenders to them and creating that extra bit of space your other players can expose. If you want to score goals, you need to take risks somewhere, especially against parked buses.

Personally, I would remove the team instruction as you said and not add any player instructions, unless certain players' dribbling is actually problematic (i.e. they're consistently dribbling themselves out of possession). I imagine there's plenty of quality in your squad, being an established Premier League club in 2030.

[danbanbury]

2 hours ago, Zemahh said:

Sounds good. However, keep in mind that against stacked defences, when you're a clear favorite to win, you might need that defensive midfielder or a full back making a dribble, attracting defenders to them and creating that extra bit of space your other players can expose. If you want to score goals, you need to take risks somewhere, especially against parked buses.

Personally, I would remove the team instruction as you said and not add any player instructions, unless certain players' dribbling is actually problematic (i.e. they're consistently dribbling themselves out of possession). I imagine there's plenty of quality in your squad, being an established Premier League club in 2030.

@Zemahh that's a fair point, agree with what you're saying about the dribbling. I managed to play two games tonight, drew both, 0-0 and 1-1. Both games against teams near us in the table, that takes us to 12 unbeaten however only three of those were wins. As you can imagine setting the dribbling back to normal and taking a few more risks with the changes you suggested meant sacrificing some possession %.

Its probably too early to judge the changes after two matches but we've still looked toothless in both games, I can't remember creating a chance where I thought we should've scored and the keeper has pulled off a worldie save.

Would you suggest giving it a few more games to adapt? 

Edited May 19, 2020 by danbanbury

[Experienced Defender]

I think a couple of tweaks could improve the tactic considerably, based on your players' profiles. What I would definitely remove is the "Dribble less" instruction, because it makes no sense at all IMHO. Other potential tweaks would not be so "dramatic", but rather fine-tuning. 

[Zemahh]

12 minutes ago, danbanbury said:

As you can imagine setting the dribbling back to normal and taking a few more risks with the changes you suggested meant sacrificing some possession %.

Instead of looking at the possession percentage number, go into Analysis screen and check your Heat Map, Key Passes and Crosses Completed. That should give you a decent idea of whether you're actually creating any good quality chances—the possession percentage number means very little, if most of that possession is completely non-threatening. Is there plenty of passes into opposition box? Are you relying solely on crosses? Are there any penetrating passes at all, or are you keeping most of your possession far away from opposition goal?

Anyway, without changing too much of your tactic, I would try something like this (assuming you're predicted to win most of your matches):

• Positive
• Shorter Passing
• Counter-Press
• Higher Defensive Line

[danbanbury]

4 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I think a couple of tweaks could improve the tactic considerably, based on your players' profiles. What I would definitely remove is the "Dribble less" instruction, because it makes no sense at all IMHO. Other potential tweaks would not be so "dramatic", but rather fine-tuning. 

My rationale behind using dribble less was to encourage the players to make a pass instead of potentially dribbling and loosing the ball however, looking at my players, especially the front three, it doesn't make sense to stifle some of their strengths. So I agree with that recommendation from yourself and @Zemahh. What other changes would you suggest? I'm open to suggestions and discussing different ideas. I'm not after a plug and play, more the rationale behind the choices if that makes sense?

[danbanbury]

17 minutes ago, Zemahh said:

Instead of looking at the possession percentage number, go into Analysis screen and check your Heat Map, Key Passes and Crosses Completed. That should give you a decent idea of whether you're actually creating any good quality chances—the possession percentage number means very little, if most of that possession is completely non-threatening. Is there plenty of passes into opposition box? Are you relying solely on crosses? Are there any penetrating passes at all, or are you keeping most of your possession far away from opposition goal?

Anyway, without changing too much of your tactic, I would try something like this (assuming you're predicted to win most of your matches):

• Positive
• Shorter Passing
• Counter-Press
• Higher Defensive Line

I completely agree with you @Zemahh, what I was getting at when I mentioned the possession % was that despite the decrease, the hope would be that the changes would make the attack more potent.

Thats a great suggestion, i'll be honest I've never really utilised the analysis tab properly. When I'm next on, I'll check out the previous matches. I'll probably post them on here with my thoughts and see what you think? It will be good to see if I'm on the right track.

Thanks for the suggestion again, howcome you switch midfield roles and duties so much? Also what do you use to create the picture? Sorry for the overload of questions! 

Edited May 19, 2020 by danbanbury

[Zemahh]

7 minutes ago, danbanbury said:

I'm not after a plug and play, more the rationale behind the choices if that makes sense?

Was meant merely as a starting point I would build on, rather than a plug and play tactic.

Reasoning behind the choices (again, assuming you're one of the strong teams in the league):

• IF-Su cutting inside, WB-At behind him overlapping aggressively
• DLP-De acting as pivot, recycling possession and covering the space WB-At leaves behind
• With a holding midfielder in DLP-De, DM-Su can afford to step higher and support attacks
• Winger stretching play and consequently creating gaps in the middle
• DLF-Su dropping deep and moving into channels, opening up space for either IF-Su or CM-At

Your tactic was already pretty well balanced and a good starting point to begin with, but perhaps you're struggling to create quality chances because A) you're taking too little risk with Shorter Passing + Dribble Less + WBIB and B) you don't have enough players actually trying to score goals—Winger and MEZ will both hang around in wider areas/half spaces, DLF-Su will drop deeper, AP on Support duty will look to stay around the central midfield area and the only one actually trying to score goals could be the IF, which could be too little threat against defensive teams.

Just now, danbanbury said:

Also what do you use to create the picture?

Not sure if I'm allowed to post links to 3rd party websites, but if you Google "line up builder" or similar there should be plenty.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

My rationale behind using dribble less was to encourage the players to make a pass instead of potentially dribbling and loosing the ball however, looking at my players, especially the front three, it doesn't make sense to stifle some of their strengths

Exactly. When it comes to the "Dribble less", I would apply it only to Brown as a player instruction. And I would definitely not play him as a mezzala, much less with the attacking duty. 

 

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

What other changes would you suggest? I'm open to suggestions and discussing different ideas. I'm not after a plug and play, more the rationale behind the choices if that makes sense?

Well, I can tell you how I would set up your players within a basic tactic with the following explanation if you don't mind? My tactical approach is basically very simple - how players create space for one another in attack, how they then use that space and who and how is supposed to provide defensive cover for the more attack-minded teammates (especially fullbacks and deep midfield runners). Variants are dependent on the style of play I want to implement, which is in turn dependent on the players I have. Such approach really makes my tactical decisions easy to make.

[danbanbury]

9 hours ago, Zemahh said:

Was meant merely as a starting point I would build on, rather than a plug and play tactic.

Reasoning behind the choices (again, assuming you're one of the strong teams in the league):

• IF-Su cutting inside, WB-At behind him overlapping aggressively
• DLP-De acting as pivot, recycling possession and covering the space WB-At leaves behind
• With a holding midfielder in DLP-De, DM-Su can afford to step higher and support attacks
• Winger stretching play and consequently creating gaps in the middle
• DLF-Su dropping deep and moving into channels, opening up space for either IF-Su or CM-At

Your tactic was already pretty well balanced and a good starting point to begin with, but perhaps you're struggling to create quality chances because A) you're taking too little risk with Shorter Passing + Dribble Less + WBIB and B) you don't have enough players actually trying to score goals—Winger and MEZ will both hang around in wider areas/half spaces, DLF-Su will drop deeper, AP on Support duty will look to stay around the central midfield area and the only one actually trying to score goals could be the IF, which could be too little threat against defensive teams.

Not sure if I'm allowed to post links to 3rd party websites, but if you Google "line up builder" or similar there should be plenty.

Sorry @Zemahh that didn't come as across as I wanted it too. I just meant that I didn't want someone to chuck a tactic at me and say just use that.

The advice that you've give me is spot on in terms of suggestions and the thought process behind it. What you've said about mez/winger combo makes alot of sense now, I don't think I really I fully understood the role properly before using it. I'll look at the analysis and think about your suggestions when I'm next on.

Thank for that, I'll have a Google. 

Edited May 20, 2020 by danbanbury

[danbanbury]

8 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Exactly. When it comes to the "Dribble less", I would apply it only to Brown as a player instruction. And I would definitely not play him as a mezzala, much less with the attacking duty. 

 

Well, I can tell you how I would set up your players within a basic tactic with the following explanation if you don't mind? My tactical approach is basically very simple - how players create space for one another in attack, how they then use that space and who and how is supposed to provide defensive cover for the more attack-minded teammates (especially fullbacks and deep midfield runners). Variants are dependent on the style of play I want to implement, which is in turn dependent on the players I have. Such approach really makes my tactical decisions easy to make.

That's a very fair point regarding brown, looking at it, his stats aren't really made for the role at all. Terrible dribbling etc. 

That would be great if you don't mind taking the time for that. If it helps I'd be happy to post images of the rest of the squad?

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, danbanbury said:

That would be great if you don't mind taking the time for that

Let's start with your front 3. The first thing I noticed is that you play them all on support duty. That is likely to lead to insufficient penetration and thus makes it easier for opposition to defend. Therefore, at least one of them should be given an attacking duty. That one can be either the striker or one of the wide forwards. Personally, I would opt for Ngongang. But not only that I would change his duty. I would also change his role from a winger into IF. He is left-footed and has the trait to cut inside from the left. As important, his relevant technical and attacking attributes are awesome. Which combined can make him a real thorn in the side of opposition defenses. As a left-footed IF on attack duty coming from the left flank, he can be not just a goal threat himself, but also someone who will create space for his teammates by drawing defenders out of position. That would basically allow him to frequently have at least 2 good options - either finish the attacking move on his own or play a cut-back pass/cross for an onrushing teammate. 

One of these onrushing teammates - besides the 2 other forwards - would be your attacking mezzala. But unlike your setup, he would be played in the right CM spot. And the player would be Luiz Henrique, not Brown. Brown would be the more conservative of the 2 CMs and would therefore logically occupy the left CM spot. 

So we now have 2 roles sorted out definitely and one partially among the front 5:

??

IFat                                ??

??su      MEZat

Do you now have an idea of how the other 3 roles could be set up to good effect (of course, taking into account the players playing in those positions)?

[Zemahh]

5 hours ago, danbanbury said:

What you've said about mez/winger combo makes alot of sense now, I don't think I really I fully understood the role properly before using it.

MEZ could still work with a Winger, especially with the IWB-Su/At behind (creating overloads/overwhelming the opposition), just try to keep his movement in mind. For example, if you have a Winger and MEZ both straying wider, then there's also DLF who likes to move into channels (pockets of space between central defender and full back), who is going to be centrally, actually trying to score goals? A CM-At could be an option, especially since runners from deep are hard to mark for the defensive opposition. The IF-Su might score a goal or two, but if you wanted him to be your main goal threat, Attack duty makes more sense, as Experienced Defender said.

[danbanbury]

18 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Let's start with your front 3. The first thing I noticed is that you play them all on support duty. That is likely to lead to insufficient penetration and thus makes it easier for opposition to defend. Therefore, at least one of them should be given an attacking duty. That one can be either the striker or one of the wide forwards. Personally, I would opt for Ngongang. But not only that I would change his duty. I would also change his role from a winger into IF. He is left-footed and has the trait to cut inside from the left. As important, his relevant technical and attacking attributes are awesome. Which combined can make him a real thorn in the side of opposition defenses. As a left-footed IF on attack duty coming from the left flank, he can be not just a goal threat himself, but also someone who will create space for his teammates by drawing defenders out of position. That would basically allow him to frequently have at least 2 good options - either finish the attacking move on his own or play a cut-back pass/cross for an onrushing teammate. 

One of these onrushing teammates - besides the 2 other forwards - would be your attacking mezzala. But unlike your setup, he would be played in the right CM spot. And the player would be Luiz Henrique, not Brown. Brown would be the more conservative of the 2 CMs and would therefore logically occupy the left CM spot. 

So we now have 2 roles sorted out definitely and one partially among the front 5:

??

IFat                                ??

??su      MEZat

Do you now have an idea of how the other 3 roles could be set up to good effect (of course, taking into account the players playing in those positions)?

Having Ngongang play as inside forward on the left isn't something I've ever really considered, I thought about using him in that role in the amr position previously. I think it's a good idea and can see the logic behind it too. He's definitely my best player it would be good to make him the focal point of the team. 

Based on what yourself and zemmah have said I would probably keep Enzo as a DLF on support, dropping in to create space for Ngongang. 

Matt brown, I would either go with a CM with a support duty with the dribble less PI or DLP(s) but considering his PPMs I think basic CM role would be more suitable as I wouldn't want a dlp to get forward whenever possible. This way he can keep up with play and link up with Ngongang. I haven't been on tonight to get the screenshot of the rest of the squad but I've got a feeling some of my other players maybe more suitable for the balance of the team. 

The AMR position is stumping me a little ill be honest. Barrera is fairly good with both feet but with his dribbling and passing ability I think he's more suited to role that favours cutting inside/roam a little bit. For variety I wouldn't go with another inside forward role. So would be between an IW(s) or AP (s). Choosing these roles though I'd be worried they occupy the same space as the mezz. 

What are you thoughts on that and the logic of my thought process behind it? Am I on the right line of thinking?

Edited May 21, 2020 by danbanbury
Wording change

[Experienced Defender]

13 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Based on what yourself and zemmah have said I would probably keep Enzo as a DLF on support, dropping in to create space for Ngongang

You can play him as a supporting DLF, it's a good and logical role within this context, although I personally would prefer him as an F9 as a more dynamic type of deep striker. He has very good attributes for that role. A potential problem with playing him as a DLF is his low bravery (only 9). 

 

13 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Matt brown, I would either go with a CM with a support duty with the dribble less PI or DLP(s) but considering his PPMs I think basic CM role would be more suitable as I wouldn't want a dlp to get forward whenever possible

I would rather play him as a DLP on support with the "Dribble less" PI added, not only because that's a holding role (unlike the standard CM), which would allow the left back to be more attack-minded (but not on attack duty), but he also has the right set of attributes for a DLP. 

His trait to "get forward often" will affect him regardless of the role, but less so as a (holding) DLP than CM on support. Besides, his good mental attributes should help him make the right decision as to when it's safe to get forward and when not. 

14 hours ago, danbanbury said:

This way he can keep up with play and link up with Ngongang

He would link up with Ngongand even better as an AP on support. But the problem is that it would make your midfield overly shaky defense-wise, given the mezzala in MCR. I am not sure your team is good enough to take that much risk without defensive consequences. Another possible problem with playing him as an AP would be his poor dribbling. On top of that, you don't need to link him up directly with Ngongang. Keep in mind the deep striker and attack-minded left back, they can help link up play on that side nicely. Remember: never look at roles in isolation and always pay as much attention to defending as you do to attacking. 

 

14 hours ago, danbanbury said:

The AMR position is stumping me a little ill be honest. Barrera is fairly good with both feet but with his dribbling and passing ability I think he's more suited to role that favours cutting inside/roam a little bit. For variety I wouldn't go with another inside forward role. So would be between an IW(s) or AP (s). Choosing these roles though I'd be worried they occupy the same space as the mezz

My preference would be IW on support duty. As for "occupying the same space as the mezzala", that would be a problem if both were played on the same duty. But your mezzala is on attack, so that combination can work great, leading to some nice and dynamic interplay. My experience is that a mezzala can work quite fine with any wide forward role as long as they are given different duties (and of course, provided the players have the right attributes for their respective roles and the system as a whole is balanced). 

[danbanbury]

28 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

You can play him as a supporting DLF, it's a good and logical role within this context, although I personally would prefer him as an F9 as a more dynamic type of deep striker. He has very good attributes for that role. A potential problem with playing him as a DLF is his low bravery (only 9). 

Fair enough, what are the key differences between the two that would make you select a false 9? You mentioned his attributes suit the role but what are the subtle differences you'd expect to see between how the roles perform?  I hope that question makes sense. 

32 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I would rather play him as a DLP on support with the "Dribble less" PI added, not only because that's a holding role (unlike the standard CM), which would allow the left back to be more attack-minded (but not on attack duty), but he also has the right set of attributes for a DLP. 

His trait to "get forward often" will affect him regardless of the role, but less so as a (holding) DLP than CM on support. Besides, his good mental attributes should help him make the right decision as to when it's safe to get forward and when not.

I get the logic behind that and after taking onboard what yourself and zamahh have discussed i would agree that my team isn't good enough yet to afford to take more risks by using an AP role.  This team in comparison with the rest of the league has us just above average in most categories so really we are probably punching slightly above our weight in achieving a 6th placed finish last season.

37 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

My preference would be IW on support duty. As for "occupying the same space as the mezzala", that would be a problem if both were played on the same duty. But your mezzala is on attack, so that combination can work great, leading to some nice and dynamic interplay. My experience is that a mezzala can work quite fine with any wide forward role as long as they are given different duties (and of course, provided the players have the right attributes for their respective roles and the system as a whole is balanced). 

That's a cool point, i'll try it and see how it plays out. i was worried about this before, which is why i opted for aml as a winger on support and a mezz (A) as i thought the winger would stay wide and the half space would be free for the mezz.

What are you thoughts on the back 5 roles and duties? It would be good to consider the team as a whole.

Here are the rest of my squad, it would be good to get your opinions on the system and if you think any of the other players would be a better fit.

Backup Keeper - Young prospect who came through the academy.

2nd Choice Central Defenders, Marin regularly rotates with Emilio.

2nd Choice fullbacks

DM Option - I signed Kenneh this season for some additional experience and versatility in the team.

CM Options - I can see Arias getting more minutes in the Mezz role this season. He looks an exciting prospect.

Alternative AML/AMR/ Striker Options - Guinashvili can play in multiple roles across the front three, also thought he could be useful as a potential runner from midfield. Maybe in the mezz role.

Players out on loan - These are the ones that i feel could become part of the squad.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

what are the key differences between the two that would make you select a false 9?

In this particular case it's nothing other than the player's attributes. As I said, DLF would also be a good choice as a role, but this particular player looks better as an F9 to me due to his great technical skills, agility and speed coupled with relevant mental attributes. 

The key difference between DLF and F9 is that the latter is more dynamic, especially with the ball.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

What are you thoughts on the back 5 roles and duties? It would be good to consider the team as a whole

Given that the front 5 now look like this:

F9/DLFsu

IFat                              IWsu

DLPsu    MEZat

You need the fullbacks to provide attacking width in the first place. Roles that can do that are: FB on attack, WB on attack and WB on support. (CWB  is not an option here because it works better in narrow systems, where he is the only wide player on his flank).

Looking at the front 5, I would go with WB on support on both flanks. Do you know why? 

P.S: I see that you posted a number of new player screenshots. I hope that you have not replaced all or most players from the previous screenshots, because such a huge change of the squad can have an adverse effect on the team and performance.

[danbanbury]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

In this particular case it's nothing other than the player's attributes. As I said, DLF would also be a good choice as a role, but this particular player looks better as an F9 to me due to his great technical skills, agility and speed coupled with relevant mental attributes. 

The key difference between DLF and F9 is that the latter is more dynamic, especially with the ball.

Fair enough that makes sense to me. I think it would be good for me to watch both in action to be able to spot the variation in movement etc.

 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

P.S: I see that you posted a number of new player screenshots. I hope that you have not replaced all or most players from the previous screenshots, because such a huge change of the squad can have an adverse effect on the team and performance.

That's the rest of my squad, I thought I'd post them as it could be useful if there are players that you would pick in the first 11 with a different role for example. 

I'll be honest I'm not 100% sure however, my guess would be as that the front 5 is quite aggressive in comparison to the previous set up its probably to ensure there is support out wide without taking too much risk. If you had a WB attack on the right flank the only people covering would be the DM and rcb as the mezz will be further forward. Also the wb(s) would be a little deeper I'd imagine giving another passing option, creating a neat triangle between three. Then on the left, ngongang has an attacking role and will be aiming to run at defenses aggressively, having an attack duty here would leave that flank very exposed. 

That's assuming you wouldn't change the DM, CB or GK roles?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

my guess would be as that the front 5 is quite aggressive in comparison to the previous set up its probably to ensure there is support out wide without taking too much risk. If you had a WB attack on the right flank the only people covering would be the DM and rcb as the mezz will be further forward. Also the wb(s) would be a little deeper I'd imagine giving another passing option, creating a neat triangle between three. Then on the left, ngongang has an attacking role and will be aiming to run at defenses aggressively, having an attack duty here would leave that flank very exposed

Yes 

See how simple tactical creation can be  

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

That's assuming you wouldn't change the DM, CB or GK roles?

Ideally, the DM would be played in the half-back role, considering roles and duties around (an attack-minded fullback on each flank and the attacking mezzala in front of him). 

Nothing wrong with the current CB and GK roles, as long as the players suit them. I don't know though why you opted to play the keeper as SK on defend duty rather than support, but I guess there is some good reason?

[danbanbury]

47 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Yes 

See how simple tactical creation can be  

Awesome, thank you. Haha i wouldn't call it simple! I'll try to implement these changes and see how it goes first.

47 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Ideally, the DM would be played in the half-back role, considering roles and duties around (an attack-minded fullback on each flank and the attacking mezzala in front of him). 

Nothing wrong with the current CB and GK roles, as long as the players suit them. I don't know though why you opted to play the keeper as SK on defend duty rather than support, but I guess there is some good reason?

I think that the half back role would work well. Samyn or Kenneh could play there comfortably i believe. With regards to the keeper i opted for SK (D) initially as his passing isn't great and i was aiming for a possession based system so wanted him to be more cautious with the counter attacking balls. What do you see in him that makes him suitable for the support role? i have been looking at signing this player. He's currently transfer listed and i've have had a few scouts look at him and all put him as the highest recommended player. What are your thoughts on him? I quite like him, his passing is better however his vision isn't great and he's all left foot.

In terms of PI's and Team instructions/ Mentality based on this discussion currently looks like the following:

Front three plus Mezzala, have roam from position and close down more.

Is that a good starting point?

When i get a few minutes i'll try a few games and see how it plays out and I'll look into the analysis tabs and see what i can gain from there like @Zemahh has suggested.

[danbanbury]

Hey @Zemahh, i finally manged to get 5 minutes on FM. I went and looked at some of the analysis from the last couple of games prior to change the tactic.  Here are the heat maps, completed crosses, Key passes and Chances. Could i get your thoughts on this please? Looking at this from my point of view it paints a pretty bleak picture. Not many successful passes. Only one decent key pass into the box.  Not much possession in the oppositions box. It's no wonder we don't score many goals.

Heat Map

  

Shots

 

Key Passes

 

Crosses

 

Chances

 

[olegmelnikov]

Great thread, mates! Thank you! 

5 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

You need the fullbacks to provide attacking width in the first place. Roles that can do that are: FB on attack, WB on attack and WB on support. (CWB  is not an option here because it works better in narrow systems, where he is the only wide player on his flank).

Does it make sense to give PI Stay wider to fullbacks? 

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Ideally, the DM would be played in the half-back role, considering roles and duties around (an attack-minded fullback on each flank and the attacking mezzala in front of him). 

Just a small question, What do you think of Anchor man for DM position in this setup? Of course, if player's attributes fully fit for playing as Anchor man. 

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

When i get a few minutes i'll try a few games and see how it plays out and I'll look into the analysis tabs and see what i can gain from there like @Zemahh has suggested.

I hope you will share the analysis with us =) Do you have a plan how to analyze it? Are you going to compare your old setup with new one? 

[Zemahh]

57 minutes ago, danbanbury said:

Hey @Zemahh, i finally manged to get 5 minutes on FM. I went and looked at some of the analysis from the last couple of games prior to change the tactic.

Yep, I'm noticing same things as you:

• Heat maps indicating you have most of your possession in non-threatening areas
• Only key passes seem to be happening towards wide areas, indicating lack of penetration centrally
• Mostly low quality shots

Ideally, you want shots from open play, centrally, and close distance—areas 1, 2 and 3, in the picture above. Looking at some of yours, they're coming from area 3 at best and even some of those are probably set piece headers, which are generally considered low quality chances.

ED gave you some tips already. In order to create scoring chances against teams defending deep, your tactic needs to have some kind of movement patterns, pulling the opposition around. Imagine opposition defenders marking your players, how would you go about pulling them out of positions, consequently creating space your other players can expose?

Here's two good threads on creating movement patterns:

• https://community.sigames.com/topic/520253-how-to-create-complex-attacking-patterns-to-break-down-defensive-teams/
• https://community.sigames.com/topic/513829-pairs-combinations-the-ultimate-guide-released/

Anyway, that doesn't mean you should have 5 clear cut chances every game of course, especially not against defensive teams. Your league's Team Detailed stats should give you a decent idea of where you are in comparison to other teams, in terms of shots, chances, conversion ratio, etc. Then compare that to your expectations, see what areas you're underperforming in and have a think how to fix it.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Zemahh

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, danbanbury said:

With regards to the keeper i opted for SK (D) initially as his passing isn't great... What do you see in him that makes him suitable for the support role?

Yes, you are right. He is really not good enough for support duty (assuming we are talking about Clarke)  

 

3 hours ago, danbanbury said:

 

3 hours ago, danbanbury said:

i have been looking at signing this player. He's currently transfer listed and i've have had a few scouts look at him and all put him as the highest recommended player. What are your thoughts on him? I quite like him, his passing is better however his vision isn't great and he's all left foot

Well, he does not look like a good choice for a SK on support duty either. But seems to have good potential, so might become good enough over time. 

 

3 hours ago, danbanbury said:

 

3 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Is that a good starting point?

Roles and duties look good, but instructions could well be a problem - that's the part we haven't discussed. 

Try to be less aggressive when defending, not only because it's defensively safer but also in order to allow more space for your forwards. I am specifically referring to the much higher LOE. There is no need for extremes. 

Higher D-line + standard LOE + split block is a combination that works best for me under the Positive mentality when I play that sort of football. It gives me both defensive solidity and a sufficient level of aggressiveness in trying to win the ball. 

A couple of in-possession TIs will also probably need to be added along with shorter passing, but let's first sort out the defensive part.

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, olegmelnikov said:

Does it make sense to give PI Stay wider to fullbacks? 

It's not only about staying wider but also getting forward to support both the wide partner that moves inside and the DLP. And that's even more important for the style of play he wants to achieve. 

 

2 hours ago, olegmelnikov said:

Just a small question, What do you think of Anchor man for DM position in this setup? Of course, if player's attributes fully fit for playing as Anchor man

Anchor man is also a good choice, especially if you want the DM to be almost entirely focused on protecting the back-line. 

[danbanbury]

9 hours ago, Zemahh said:

Yep, I'm noticing same things as you:

• Heat maps indicating you have most of your possession in non-threatening areas
• Only key passes seem to be happening towards wide areas, indicating lack of penetration centrally
• Mostly low quality shots

Ideally, you want shots from open play, centrally, and close distance—areas 1, 2 and 3, in the picture above. Looking at some of yours, they're coming from area 3 at best and even some of those are probably set piece headers, which are generally considered low quality chances.

ED gave you some tips already. In order to create scoring chances against teams defending deep, your tactic needs to have some kind of movement patterns, pulling the opposition around. Imagine opposition defenders marking your players, how would you go about pulling them out of positions, consequently creating space your other players can expose?

Here's two good threads on creating movement patterns:

• https://community.sigames.com/topic/520253-how-to-create-complex-attacking-patterns-to-break-down-defensive-teams/
• https://community.sigames.com/topic/513829-pairs-combinations-the-ultimate-guide-released/

Anyway, that doesn't mean you should have 5 clear cut chances every game of course, especially not against defensive teams. Your league's Team Detailed stats should give you a decent idea of where you are in comparison to other teams, in terms of shots, chances, conversion ratio, etc. Then compare that to your expectations, see what areas you're underperforming in and have a think how to fix it.

It's not surprising the more you look at it why weren't scoring goals 😂. That image is really useful. Thanks for those links I will have a read through!

[danbanbury]

10 hours ago, olegmelnikov said:

I hope you will share the analysis with us =) Do you have a plan how to analyze it? Are you going to compare your old setup with new one?

Yeah once I've played a few games I'll try and do a comparison, it'll be interesting to see the differences. You can see some of the analysis from the previous setup a few post up. 

[danbanbury]

7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

10 hours ago, olegmelnikov said:

Does it make sense to give PI Stay wider to fullbacks? 

It's not only about staying wider but also getting forward to support both the wide partner that moves inside and the DLP. And that's even more important for the style of play he wants to achieve.

@Experienced Defender correct me if I'm wrong but my thoughts would be that you end up restricting their natural movement, for example the Mezz might have run in trouble and turns back to look for out ball to the wing back but if he's sat wider than normal to receive the pass it becomes abit more riskier. Hope that makes some sort of sense. 

[danbanbury]

9 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Try to be less aggressive when defending, not only because it's defensively safer but also in order to allow more space for your forwards. I am specifically referring to the much higher LOE. There is no need for extremes. 

Higher D-line + standard LOE + split block is a combination that works best for me under the Positive mentality when I play that sort of football. It gives me both defensive solidity and a sufficient level of aggressiveness in trying to win the ball. 

A couple of in-possession TIs will also probably need to be added along with shorter passing, but let's first sort out the defensive part.

I see what you mean. By having such a high line of engagement there isn't any space to play into when we win the ball bigger up. It would also bring the units closer together making us more compact and harder to play through. Would it aid with ball retention aswell due to them being closer together?

In regards to that other keeper, he's available on a free at the end of season. I think I'll try to pick him up for nothing due to potential and sell on value. Then look for an upgrade on Clarke to play sk(s). 

What are your thoughts on the transition and attacking instructions? 

[Experienced Defender]

7 hours ago, danbanbury said:

@Experienced Defender correct me if I'm wrong but my thoughts would be that you end up restricting their natural movement, for example the Mezz might have run in trouble and turns back to look for out ball to the wing back but if he's sat wider than normal to receive the pass it becomes abit more riskier. Hope that makes some sort of sense. 

Player instructions are not so literal. Telling a player to "stay wider" does not mean he will hug the touchline all the time. Instead, it just encourages him to use wider areas a bit more often, i.e. as the player sees fit. The same applies to any other instruction. But I think @olegmelnikov was actually asking about adding the "stay wider" PI to a FB on support duty instead of using a WB on support.

[Experienced Defender]

7 hours ago, danbanbury said:

I see what you mean. By having such a high line of engagement there isn't any space to play into when we win the ball bigger up. It would also bring the units closer together making us more compact and harder to play through

Yes  

 

7 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Would it aid with ball retention aswell due to them being closer together?

Ball retention is more about roles and duties than defensive compactness. 

 

7 hours ago, danbanbury said:

What are your thoughts on the transition and attacking instructions? 

These are instructions I would suggest you consider adding, based on your style of play and your players' attributes:

- either "Play out of defence" or "Distribute to CBs and FBs" (try them alternately to see which one works better for how you want to play)

- work ball into box and be more expressive (use both at the same time because they tend to offset potentially negative effects of each other)

- overlap left (to encourage more dynamic interplay among the wide players on the left flank and DLP)

Instructions you could use occasionally as in-match tweaks, rather than being part of your regular starting tactic:

- counter-press (be careful if or when applying it, especially against strong opposition)

- underlap right (for a similar reason as the overlap left, although this one is potentially riskier defensively)

P.S: Remove the "take short kicks" and let the keeper decide which manner of distribution he feels is the safest for him.

[danbanbury]

3 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Player instructions are not so literal. Telling a player to "stay wider" does not mean he will hug the touchline all the time. Instead, it just encourages him to use wider areas a bit more often, i.e. as the player sees fit. The same applies to any other instruction. But I think @olegmelnikov was actually asking about adding the "stay wider" PI to a FB on support duty instead of using a WB on support.

Fair enough, that's good to know. I'm learning a hell of a lot in this thread. Apologies i read that wrong, i thought he was referring to a wing back role.

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

These are instructions I would suggest you consider adding, based on your style of play and your players' attributes:

- either "Play out of defence" or "Distribute to CBs and FBs" (try them alternately to see which one works better for how you want to play)

- work ball into box and be more expressive (use both at the same time because they tend to offset potentially negative effects of each other)

- overlap left (to encourage more dynamic interplay among the wide players on the left flank and DLP)

Instructions you could use occasionally as in-match tweaks, rather than being part of your regular starting tactic:

- counter-press (be careful if or when applying it, especially against strong opposition)

- underlap right (for a similar reason as the overlap left, although this one is potentially riskier defensively)

P.S: Remove the "take short kicks" and let the keeper decide which manner of distribution he feels is the safest for him.

What are the negatives you would find with each of those instructions? 

It's interesting you mention the counter press. I've never given much thought to it other than 'yeah i'd like my team to try and win it back as soon as they'e lost it' I guess against better opposition they would simple play around and out of the press easily?

Also in your opinion, where do you see the weaknesses in the team being? In terms of players and tactics.

Edited May 22, 2020 by danbanbury

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, danbanbury said:

What are the negatives you would find with each of those instructions? 

The potentially negative effect of the "Work ball into box" is that it can overcomplicate play in the final third by insisting on patience when trying to break the opponent down. Therefore I prefer to couple it with the "Be more expressive" to sort of "relax" the play a bit. 

Another potential problem with the Work ball into box is that in case your players are not good enough technically and mentally, there is the risk that you can lose the ball at an inopportune moment and thus allow the opposition to launch a quick counter while your players are overcommitted in attack. But I think your players should be capable of executing the instruction without too much defensive risk. 

The defensive risk relative to the Overlaps and Underlaps is that both instructions slightly increase the mentality of the related fullback/wing-back. They also slightly reduce the mentality of the wide forward or wide midfielder btw. 

4 hours ago, danbanbury said:

It's interesting you mention the counter press. I've never given much thought to it other than 'yeah i'd like my team to try and win it back as soon as they'e lost it' I guess against better opposition they would simple play around and out of the press easily?

The risk of the counter-press is that it can fail and thus leave your defense overly exposed, either because your players are not good enough to execute it properly or because the opposition are good enough to play their way through your counter-press. Basically the same kind of risk is associated with any aggressive manner of defending. 

 

4 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Also in your opinion, where do you see the weaknesses in the team being? In terms of players and tactics

I can't remember that I noticed any glaring weaknesses that should be a cause for some big concern, although even the world-class teams have some weak points. There is no perfect team nor a perfect tactic. 

[danbanbury]

38 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Another potential problem with the Work ball into box is that in case your players are not good enough technically and mentally, there is the risk that you can lose the ball at an inopportune moment and thus allow the opposition to launch a quick counter while your players are overcommitted in attack. But I think your players should be capable of executing the instruction without too much defensive risk. 

The defensive risk relative to the Overlaps and Underlaps is that both instructions slightly increase the mentality of the related fullback/wing-back. They also slightly reduce the mentality of the wide forward or wide midfielder btw.

Thank you for taking the time to explain these things to me, it's really useful. Hopefully other people will be able to learn from it too. 

 

41 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I can't remember that I noticed any glaring weaknesses that should be a cause for some big concern, although even the world-class teams have some weak points. There is no perfect team nor a perfect tactic. 

What do you do when you play against other teams, do you analyse them prior to the match  change the system at all to exploit potential weaknesses?

Also how do you go about setting up your plan B and C, for example do you have a main tactic and two other alternative formations based on the same principles, an altogether different style or 3 of the same formation with subtle changes to the roles/instructions? Hope that makes sense. Against a stronger team say a Liverpool, it will be difficult to implement the same game plan if you were to play against a Norwich. 

[Experienced Defender]

Just now, danbanbury said:

What do you do when you play against other teams, do you analyse them prior to the match  change the system at all to exploit potential weaknesses?

i take a look at the scout report, but I never make any big chances to my primary tactic because it's already built on my players' strengths and weaknesses. I can only make a couple of tweaks when playing against top teams to improve defensive solidity a bit more (for example, both wide forwards on support duties to make sure they always track back to help the fullbacks in defense). In other matches, I can only make small in-match tweaks if necessary and based on what I observe watching the match. 

 

6 minutes ago, danbanbury said:

Also how do you go about setting up your plan B and C, for example do you have a main tactic and two other alternative formations based on the same principles, an altogether different style or 3 of the same formation with subtle changes to the roles/instructions? Hope that makes sense. Against a stronger team say a Liverpool, it will be difficult to implement the same game plan if you were to play against a Norwich

The stronger the team you manage is, the less you need to adapt tactically. And vice versa, of course. I personally follow these couple of principles:

- If I create a secondary tactic for matches against "special" opposition, it should not be overly different from my primary tactic;

- If the secondary tactic employs a different formation, that formation must be analogous to the one from the primary tactic

[olegmelnikov]

8 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Player instructions are not so literal. Telling a player to "stay wider" does not mean he will hug the touchline all the time. Instead, it just encourages him to use wider areas a bit more often, i.e. as the player sees fit. The same applies to any other instruction. But I think @olegmelnikov was actually asking about adding the "stay wider" PI to a FB on support duty instead of using a WB on support.

Sorry, I tried my best to express my thoughts properly, but my English is still on double intensity training =) So, I asked about "stay wider" PI to a WB on support - my idea was that it can help to lure opposition defender and open space for Mezzala or Box to box player.

 

6 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Fair enough, that's good to know. I'm learning a hell of a lot in this thread. Apologies i read that wrong, i thought he was referring to a wing back role.

I fully agree that this thread is much more about learning how to create tactic than just ready made solution.

Waiting for your first results =)

[danbanbury]

6 hours ago, olegmelnikov said:

I fully agree that this thread is much more about learning how to create tactic than just ready made solution.

Waiting for your first results =)

I have only had a chance to play 4 games, once I've played a few more Ill give an update on it

[danbanbury]

7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

(for example, both wide forwards on support duties to make sure they always track back to help the fullbacks in defense)

How do you find that affects the team when attacking? 

Are there other changes that you make?

7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

In other matches, I can only make small in-match tweaks if necessary and based on what I observe watching the match

I think this is where I struggle, knowing when to make changes and what changes to make. I have read through the examples from @herne79 in his post and he provides useful info on it. Do you have any tips/advice on in match changes? I know you provided a couple of suggestions in your previous post. 

 

7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

The stronger the team you manage is, the less you need to adapt tactically. And vice versa, of course. I personally follow these couple of principles:

- If I create a secondary tactic for matches against "special" opposition, it should not be overly different from my primary tactic;

- If the secondary tactic employs a different formation, that formation must be analogous to the one from the primary tactic

In this case then, you'd only really consider adapting tactically from the start against the typical big teams, Liverpool, man City etc? As we're a well established Upper mid table team.

Would you mind suggesting an example of alternative secondary tactic for this case? Or is it too soon as I've not provided an update on how the main tactic is going. 

 

[danbanbury]

So far, we've played 8 games. I wouldn't say that's enough time to judge it on. I'll try and provide some screenshot and examples when I get more time. We are creating more chances however we seem to be making a few individual mistakes at the back at that's costing us. 

Out of the 8 games, we've won 3, drawn 2 and lost 3. The two out of the three we've won however have been against much weaker opposition, we've beaten Red star in the europa, Southampton in the league and Wrexham in the fa Cup. 

Draws against wolves and Newcastle. Defeats against man United 1-0 (acceptable). Arsenal 2-1, mistake from the samide at lb led to a goal, and a 1-0 defeat against West brim with a mistake from a centre back trying to play a pass to the mezzale whose marked tightly. Not sure what to make of it really. Will provide more info later. 

[Experienced Defender]

12 hours ago, olegmelnikov said:

So, I asked about "stay wider" PI to a WB on support - my idea was that it can help to lure opposition defender and open space for Mezzala or Box to box player

I don't think it's necessary, especially as he basically wants to play a more control/possession style of football + WB already provides width and is more dynamic than a standard FB in terms of movement

[Experienced Defender]

6 hours ago, danbanbury said:

14 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

(for example, both wide forwards on support duties to make sure they always track back to help the fullbacks in defense)

How do you find that affects the team when attacking? 

Are there other changes that you make?

These things vary from tactic to tactic and from team to team, so there is no universal answer. But the point is - once you have created a tactic that really suits the team you manage, do not make big changes even against top teams. Especially avoid - or at least be very sensible with - team mentality changes, because the team mentality has an automatic effect on all other instructions (along with individual player mentalities). 

 

6 hours ago, danbanbury said:

I think this is where I struggle, knowing when to make changes and what changes to make. I have read through the examples from @herne79 in his post and he provides useful info on it. Do you have any tips/advice on in match changes?

As I said earlier, all tweaks I make during a match (if any) are based solely on what I observe while watching. It's advisable to watch the first 15 minutes in the full mode and then - if everything goes according to plan - switch to the Comprehensive. You can always hit the "Pause" button to see where each of your player is and what he is doing during any phase of play. That can help a lot. 

 

6 hours ago, danbanbury said:

In this case then, you'd only really consider adapting tactically from the start against the typical big teams, Liverpool, man City etc? As we're a well established Upper mid table team.

Would you mind suggesting an example of alternative secondary tactic for this case?

Let's imagine this is my (your) primary setup:

F9

IFat                                 IWsu

DLPsu   MEZat

HB

WBsu   CDde   BPDde    WBsu

SKde

Against top teams it may be tweaked into this (for example):

DLFat

IFsu                                      Wsu

DLPsu    CMat

HB

FBat     CDde   BPDde    FBsu

SKde

Let's now imagine these are your regular team instructions:

Mentality - Positive

In possession - shorter passing, play out of defence, work ball into box, be more expressive and overlap left

In transition - counter-press

Out of possession - higher DL and higher LOE (without a split block)

Against top teams, the instructions may be tweaked in this way:

Mentality - (still) Positive

In possession - standard passing and be more expressive (no play out of defence, no work ball into box and no overlap left)

In transition - distribute to CBs and FBs and counter (but no counter-press)

Out of possession - higher DL and standard LOE (plus a "small" split block involving only the striker and attacking CM)

Remember, this was just an example to help you better understand the point, not to just copy and paste it to your tactic.

[Experienced Defender]

Btw, you need to be realistic in your expectations when you play against top teams. Try your best to win or avoid a defeat, but do not be too disheartened if you lose, because that's quite normal. 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

So far, we've played 8 games. I wouldn't say that's enough time to judge it on

Honestly, 8 games should be enough to judge if a tactic works/suits your players or not (speaking about official matches of course, not friendlies). 

 

1 hour ago, danbanbury said:

We are creating more chances however we seem to be making a few individual mistakes at the back at that's costing us

Analysis of this will require that you (again) post a screenshot of your current tactic that has produced these results and performances. Because one single instruction or role/duty can make a huge difference, either for better or worse. 

[danbanbury]

36 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Honestly, 8 games should be enough to judge if a tactic works/suits your players or not (speaking about official matches of course, not friendlies). 

 

37 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Analysis of this will require that you (again) post a screenshot of your current tactic that has produced these results and performances. Because one single instruction or role/duty can make a huge difference, either for better or worse. 

Here is the current tactic and the results over the course of these 8 games.

 

 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Btw, you need to be realistic in your expectations when you play against top teams. Try your best to win or avoid a defeat, but do not be too disheartened if you lose, because that's quite normal. 

I completely agree. I wouldn't expect results against teams like united or Arsenal however, Wolves, Newcastle and West Brom i'd expect to be doing a little better.  Starting to worry that i'm going to sacked if this keeps going ha. What are your thoughts on it? Or am i over reacting to the last few results? If you would like me to post screens from the analysis sections or in-game clips let me know. 

[danbanbury]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

These things vary from tactic to tactic and from team to team, so there is no universal answer. But the point is - once you have created a tactic that really suits the team you manage, do not make big changes even against top teams. Especially avoid - or at least be very sensible with - team mentality changes, because the team mentality has an automatic effect on all other instructions (along with individual player mentalities). 

That makes sense, for example you wouldn't go from playing with a positive mentality to defensive? How about up or down one notch to balanced or attacking if it called for it? Or as you said with minor tweaks it's not really necessary?

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

As I said earlier, all tweaks I make during a match (if any) are based solely on what I observe while watching. It's advisable to watch the first 15 minutes in the full mode and then - if everything goes according to plan - switch to the Comprehensive. You can always hit the "Pause" button to see where each of your player is and what he is doing during any phase of play. That can help a lot.

I'll certainly give this a go. Even then its still requires having an understanding of what to change based on what you see? I think that's what I'm lacking and will need to work on. Do you have any advice about identifying suitable changes or links to any articles/posts perhaps?

 

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

DLFat

IFsu                                      Wsu

DLPsu    CMat

HB

FBat     CDde   BPDde    FBsu

SKde

I think I can see why you've made those changes. DLF (A) ensures someone acros the front three is still trying to be more penetrative. The cm(a) gives those forward runs from midfield however is less aggressive than the mezzla and obviously doesn't drift wider. Then the WB roles changed to more Conservative rtavie full back options however the fb on attack can still provide the width and support to the inside forward and a passing option for the dlp. Have I understood this correctly? 

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

In possession - standard passing and be more expressive (no play out of defence, no work ball into box and no overlap left)

In transition - distribute to CBs and FBs and counter (but no counter-press)

Out of possession - higher DL and standard LOE (plus a "small" split block involving only the striker and attacking CM)

Remember, this was just an example to help you better understand the point, not to just copy and paste it to your tactic.

I appreciate that, thanks for taking the time to go through all of this with me. It's good to understand the changes that you would make. 

Against bigger teams, chances will be alot loss frequent therefore you want to move the ball in a slightly more direct manner, by adjusting the passing, the tempo increases slightly and removing the other instructions should help get the forward quicker and be less patient in trying to get the ball into the box. The full back on attack should still provide a decent amount of support and encouraging the overlap could be an easy target for the opposition to counter. The counter instruction will get us on the front foot when we win the ball back. 

The small split block will ensure we still press the opposition without giving them too much easy ball but reduce the potential gaps left by the pressing players. It's that a fair way of looking at it? 

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, danbanbury said:

 

These results don't look bad, except perhaps the defeat by WBA (although I don't know what's their reputation in your save in 2031). Btw, I can't see which of those matches have been played at home and which were away games. 

 

2 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Nothing wrong with this tactic in and of itself (provided all roles are assigned to players with suitable attributes). Tweaks worth consideration may include:

- distribution to CBs and FBs instead of the Play out of defence (to add a bit of directness in the build-up phase of play)

- playing one of the CBs on the cover duty, given that you don't use offside trap

- In case your defense struggles against opposition balls over the top, either drop the mentality to the Balanced or drop the defensive line to standard

Do you use any kind of split block? 

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, danbanbury said:

Wolves, Newcastle and West Brom i'd expect to be doing a little better.  Starting to worry that i'm going to sacked if this keeps going ha. What are your thoughts on it? Or am i over reacting to the last few results?

What are their respective reputations compared to your team and where have these 3 matches been played (home or away)? 

As for the risk of being sacked, it should depend on your results and league position relative to the board expectation.