my 4231 and issues

[mbar8t6]

I'm in my 4th season now with Aston villa and haven't done all to bad, 14th, 9th, 6th and currently battling for the top 4 with about 4 games to go, but after an awesome start, the whole campaign has felt like a struggle and it could have been a lot better. I have some things that keep happening that i just don't understand why, not sure if certain parts are player related or some major flaw in my tactic.

I was playing on positive but have recently dialled it back to try and stop conceding silly goals. i also had my RWB on attack and instead of the DLP i had a BWM. when we play well we score plenty but its the annoying games we dominate and cant find a breakthrough that annoy me and 90% of the time i cant fix it. i've had a game with 6 clear cut chances and failed to score but aside from that is when i'm losing these games i dominate that gets me and certain things i see happen all to often that i have questions about and hoping someone can help me understand why.

firstly the pressing and generally stopping the opponent, why are my team so bad at it, they just walk around me at times and my players just don't do enough, yet my opponents regardless of who they are can close us down easily and force us to either lose the ball or go backwards, i am running a split block BTW the front 4 are all set to close down more.

counter pressing for the most part has been totally ineffective because the opponent bypasses the front 4 instantly with a single pass or just dribble the length of the pitch and score

closing down crossers, why can we never prevent a cross and counter from it, my fullbacks don't get close enough to the crosser and have no effect

why when my fullbacks are in a position to cross do they take to long about it and end up shut down by opposing fullbacks, I've tried cross from deep and hit early crosses but it doesn't seem to help. the amount of goals I've conceded due to my player kicking the ball against a defender and the counter from it is ridiculous

counter attacks, why are my team so slow on the counter and never make use of it and score, i concede a bunch on the counter and often times the ai only need 2 players to tear us up but my team cant do it, the opponent will regroup before we make use of the chance.

 

what mistakes am i making here? this is how i want my team to play, fast short passing playing out from the back, i know the 2 play makers looks wrong but maddison has been great for me as a APM and the DLP is something I've only just changed to try a more passive role instead of the BWM. also walker-peters is not my main RB i have an amazing Argentine wonder kid. can anyone help me understand why the things I've mentioned are happening?

[CaptCanuck]

More experienced folk than me will chime in with better advice I am sure, but a couple questions:

• RE: closing down crossers - with IWs and WBs aren't they going to be occupying a lot of similar space? IWs already bringing out FBs to defend and/or IWs and WBs passing the ball amongst them in close quarters, since you have short passing on? If they are tika-takaing it in the corner, that's not going to promote crosses. What does it look like in game and also in player analysis in regards to heatmaps and passes made/received between those pairs? IFs are surely better (on at least one side?) if you want well spaced quality overlaps and crosses
• RE: slow counter attacks - you've given your GK 3 things to do; distribute quickly, to CBs, to WBs... instruction overload? And maybe the GK doesn't have good enough attributes to do that work quick enough? Why not a single instruction to go through your playmaker and let him sort it out? Or just have distribute quickly, without the specific positions.

Anyways, I'm a newb so YMMV, but on first blush those two things had me thinking my ramblings above :-)

[TheGoodRebel]

Hi there.

It sounds like you've been making steady progress already, so I'd avoid making wholesale changes where possible.

Two things that I have spotted though that might help;

1. You've got a DLP and an AP - I'd look to get rid of one of these (possibly the AP) as it's recommended to only utilise one playmaker. If you're going to build from the back then it's more logical to keep the DLP as opposed to the AP.
2. I'd possibly switch the DLP to being the left-sided player in your central midfield. The reason for this being your AML has an attack duty and your MCL and DL also have support duties. This means you're slightly vulnerable in terms of defensive cover on your left flank. It would make more sense to have the MCL as your DLP so that you have the defensive cover. Or, alternatively, if your adamant your MCR needs to be the DLP then perhaps give the AMR the attack duty and switch your AML to a support duty.

I hope this makes sense. Good job with the progress you've made so far.

[mbar8t6]

14 minutes ago, CaptCanuck said:

More experienced folk than me will chime in with better advice I am sure, but a couple questions:

• RE: closing down crossers - with IWs and WBs aren't they going to be occupying a lot of similar space? IWs already bringing out FBs to defend and/or IWs and WBs passing the ball amongst them in close quarters, since you have short passing on? If they are tika-takaing it in the corner, that's not going to promote crosses. What does it look like in game and also in player analysis in regards to heatmaps and passes made/received between those pairs? IFs are surely better (on at least one side?) if you want well spaced quality overlaps and crosses
• RE: slow counter attacks - you've given your GK 3 things to do; distribute quickly, to CBs, to WBs... instruction overload? And maybe the GK doesn't have good enough attributes to do that work quick enough? Why not a single instruction to go through your playmaker and let him sort it out? Or just have distribute quickly, without the specific positions.

Anyways, I'm a newb so YMMV, but on first blush those two things had me thinking my ramblings above :-)

The right hand side is normally an IF and my RWB was the attacking one so that’s where is normally is, but even then that’s where the issue shows itself most of the time and my rwb still doesn’t cross when it’s best to. Regarding the slow counters it’s more when we win the ball in front of our box in open play that we look slow, whereas my opponents never have that problem 

[Experienced Defender]

19 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

I was playing on positive but have recently dialled it back to try and stop conceding silly goals

Lowering the mentality alone does not improve your defensive solidity. It's much more about good compactness (DL/LOE combo) and balance of roles and duties than the team mentality. You can be more defensively solid under the most attacking than under the most defensive mentality. 

 

24 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

firstly the pressing and generally stopping the opponent, why are my team so bad at it, they just walk around me at times and my players just don't do enough, yet my opponents regardless of who they are can close us down easily and force us to either lose the ball or go backwards, i am running a split block BTW the front 4 are all set to close down more.

counter pressing for the most part has been totally ineffective because the opponent bypasses the front 4 instantly with a single pass or just dribble the length of the pitch and score

closing down crossers, why can we never prevent a cross and counter from it, my fullbacks don't get close enough to the crosser and have no effect

Which all suggests that your team is simply not good enough to execute such an aggressive manner of defending successfully. You can ask whatever you want from your players, but whether they are able to put it into effect is an entirely different question. And on top of all that, you use the 4231 formation which is inherently tricky per se. 

[mbar8t6]

17 minutes ago, TheGoodRebel said:

Hi there.

It sounds like you've been making steady progress already, so I'd avoid making wholesale changes where possible.

Two things that I have spotted though that might help;

1. You've got a DLP and an AP - I'd look to get rid of one of these (possibly the AP) as it's recommended to only utilise one playmaker. If you're going to build from the back then it's more logical to keep the DLP as opposed to the AP.
2. I'd possibly switch the DLP to being the left-sided player in your central midfield. The reason for this being your AML has an attack duty and your MCL and DL also have support duties. This means you're slightly vulnerable in terms of defensive cover on your left flank. It would make more sense to have the MCL as your DLP so that you have the defensive cover. Or, alternatively, if your adamant your MCR needs to be the DLP then perhaps give the AMR the attack duty and switch your AML to a support duty.

I hope this makes sense. Good job with the progress you've made so far.

Hi thanks. Yeah the DLP is a recent trial. He’s normally a BWM covering for an RWB on attack which was why he’s on that side, I’m a bit torn because my APM is pretty productive and I like to think he would be the only tying it all together with the 3 players around him but I will try his as just a normal AM and see how he plays

[mbar8t6]

6 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Lowering the mentality alone does not improve your defensive solidity. It's much more about good compactness (DL/LOE combo) and balance of roles and duties than the team mentality. You can be more defensively solid under the most attacking than under the most defensive mentality. 

 

Which all suggests that your team is simply not good enough to execute such an aggressive manner of defending successfully. You can ask whatever you want from your players, but whether they are able to put it into effect is an entirely different question. And on top of all that, you use the 4231 formation which is inherently tricky per se. 

I wasn’t exactly trying to make us more defensively solid i was more thinking to take some of the risk out of the play and stop playing some of the silly passes that end up deflecting away and we get countered from it. I’ve built my team around work rate, bravery and aggression where possible, my midfield should be fine, the fullbacks Angelino isn’t great but I have pellegrini there usually and my RWB has all the right attributes, my centre backs are pretty top class I think, I don’t see why they wouldn’t be good enough. Most teams I play against play a 4231 and I’ve seen awful players in Cm roles. I recently played united who had Grealish and havertz with 10 tackling each as their 2 cms with maguire at the back and still playing a high line. Why can they pull it off?

[Experienced Defender]

39 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

I don’t see why they wouldn’t be good enough

There is a difference between being good in general and being good enough to play a certain style of football or to execute certain instructions. 

 

42 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

Most teams I play against play a 4231 and I’ve seen awful players in Cm roles. I recently played united who had Grealish and havertz with 10 tackling each as their 2 cms with maguire at the back and still playing a high line. Why can they pull it off?

i don't know why they can pull it off. But i do know that AI tactics are more often than not actually pretty poor. When we lose to an AI team, that's more often because our tactic was poor than because theirs was good. Of course, there are exceptions when you lose to AI because their players are so much better than yours that you simply don't have any chance (or vice versa). 

 

48 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

I wasn’t exactly trying to make us more defensively solid i was more thinking to take some of the risk out of the play and stop playing some of the silly passes that end up deflecting away and we get countered from it

There are better ways of doing that than changing the mentality. For example, you could have kept the Positive mentality but dropped the tempo to medium (default) instead of higher and remove the Counter TI in order to avoid needless and premature losses of possession, especially as your tactic suggests that you consider your team strong enough to dominate (most of the) matches. 

On the other hand, an instruction such as tight marking does not make much sense (if any) relative to both your style of play and the formation you use (4231). 

Last but not least, CF as a role - while great in itself - tends to struggle in top-heavy systems because it needs more space to thrive on. And even more so when he has a playmaker immediately behind himself, which is also a creative role. 

[mbar8t6]

Yeah that makes sense. The tight marking I only put on because it was suggested in the analysis for opponents getting touches in our box so I just went with it, I’ll turn it back off. We do dominate most games too most of the time when we lose it’s against silly teams 1-0 or against a big team away from home which I can’t really argue with. Yeah the CF hasn’t been great, I switch him between AF and CF as there the roles he’s best at and doesn’t have the aggression to be a PF. I have Calvert-Lewin who has been solid as a PF in previous seasons but Jorge had an electric start to the season and I’ve kinda just stuck with him as first choice but struggling to get the best out of him in second half of the season. Struggling to score goals again at the moment against weak sides and that’s another thing I really struggle with and pretty much always have done on FM even clear cut chances are being missed regularly and I don’t know how to fix that either 

Edited May 28, 2020 by mbar8t6

[mbar8t6]

So I've made a few changes now, into season 5 and its started pretty well. 19 games in all comps, 15 wins, 3 draws and 1 defeat, conceding only 10 goals so far. while its going well there are still some things I'm not sure on. firstly my wingers are nowhere near as productive and quite often we are struggling to score goals, quite a few games have been 1-0 with the odd bigger win, and for the life of me I cant get my wingbacks to work how i'd like, they get into crossing positions and either cut it back to outside the box, dribble into the box or kick it against the defender. even when they have plenty of time and space to put in a cross they don't unless they receive the ball on the byline. I've tried, cross more often and cross from deep but it doesn't seem to make a difference. Any ideas? or is it just a trait of the ME this year? also I've started to use focus through the middle of the pitch to try and focus my play through the 3 central players who are good passers and creative in the hope that they draw the opposition to them leaving space out wide for my wingers to cut in and also due to my wingbacks being pretty useless. is that how it would work or am I well out in my thinking here? what are any big draw backs to how I've now set the team up and any reasons to why we are now not creating as many good chances.

 

 

Also i guess the mezzala probably isn't the best role here? i played against spurs who also played a 4231 and ndombele looked like he was playing as a mezzala and their attacking shape looked so much better with plenty of players forward in good positions compared to mine with my 2 cms not ever offering to much when we were high up the pitch leaving my front 4 looking isolated. My thinking was he can also bring the ball forwards by dribbling up inside the half space with passing options either side of him?

Edited May 29, 2020 by mbar8t6

[Experienced Defender]

4 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

 

5 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

So I've made a few changes now, into season 5 and its started pretty well. 19 games in all comps, 15 wins, 3 draws and 1 defeat, conceding only 10 goals so far. while its going well there are still some things I'm not sure on. firstly my wingers are nowhere near as productive and quite often we are struggling to score goals, quite a few games have been 1-0 with the odd bigger win, and for the life of me I cant get my wingbacks to work how i'd like, they get into crossing positions and either cut it back to outside the box, dribble into the box or kick it against the defender. even when they have plenty of time and space to put in a cross they don't unless they receive the ball on the byline. I've tried, cross more often and cross from deep but it doesn't seem to make a difference. Any ideas? or is it just a trait of the ME this year?

It has nothing to do with the ME. It takes just a brief look at your tactic to spot a number of contradictions. Given the tactic, your record of 15 wins. 3 draws and only 1 defeat is excellent, so you should actually be grateful to the ME. Because if the ME was perfect, your results would be much worse.

Let's now list the obvious issues:

- clear lack of penetration = too little support for the lone striker

- focusing play through the middle in a tactic that is obviously intended to control and dominate play makes no sense, since the middle is exactly the area in which opposition is the most densely packed, meaning you are playing directly into their hands

- high tempo and passing into space coupled with overly aggressive defensive instructions = trying to take advantage of space that virtually does not exist 

- the Counter TI in a tactic like this is more likely to produce many needless and premature losses of possession than anything really effective

[mbar8t6]

3 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

It has nothing to do with the ME. It takes just a brief look at your tactic to spot a number of contradictions. Given the tactic, your record of 15 wins. 3 draws and only 1 defeat is excellent, so you should actually be grateful to the ME. Because if the ME was perfect, your results would be much worse.

Let's now list the obvious issues:

- clear lack of penetration = too little support for the lone striker

- focusing play through the middle in a tactic that is obviously intended to control and dominate play makes no sense, since the middle is exactly the area in which opposition is the most densely packed, meaning you are playing directly into their hands

- high tempo and passing into space coupled with overly aggressive defensive instructions = trying to take advantage of space that virtually does not exist 

- the Counter TI in a tactic like this is more likely to produce many needless and premature losses of possession than anything really effective

But I don’t know how to give more support for the striker? I do sometimes turn the pass into space off depending on what’s happening in the game but I just thought it would increase the chance of my midfielders dishing the ball out to my wide players who are in space. So how can I go about changing it, is it more suited to being short passing with low tempo then? I clearly don’t know what I’m doing as you’ve pointed out but I don’t know how to make it work properly 

[mbar8t6]

Would a SS in the AMC slot offer more support to the striker? Then it’s just an aggressive 442 in a way? Maybe playing narrow to keep my players closer together but then how do I get around a stacked narrow defence? Is having both wide men cutting in a problem? I can take the criticism on board, that’s what I’m looking for but also helping me understand how another way would be better would help

[Starsurfer]

3 hours ago, mbar8t6 said:

Would a SS in the AMC slot offer more support to the striker? Then it’s just an aggressive 442 in a way? Maybe playing narrow to keep my players closer together but then how do I get around a stacked narrow defence? Is having both wide men cutting in a problem? I can take the criticism on board, that’s what I’m looking for but also helping me understand how another way would be better would help

Your tactic shows the MEZsu, IWsu, AMsu, IFsu, and PFat all attacking the same space (middle of pitch AM strata). This is highlighted in your screenshot with the bright green squares. This makes it easy for opponents to defend and crowd your players out. Playing narrow will make it worse. If you watch the matches in full, you will see the players frequently running into each other. My advice is to imagine each player's position during the attacking phase and position them (using roles/duties) with sufficient passing lanes to one another.

 

Hope this helps. 

[DarJ]

I already posted this on another thread so I won't after this.

Use a tool like this.

Your formation is generally your defensive shape. With that tool you can put your players where you want them to be in attack; doing that opens your eyes to potential weaknesses in what you're trying to achieve, then you can make adjustments with instructions and roles.

For example in the screenshot my right flank is very exposed, even the left flank to an extent so I could maybe use an IWB-d, HB etc. It Just helps you think more and see the bigger picture.

[mbar8t6]

6 hours ago, Starsurfer said:

Your tactic shows the MEZsu, IWsu, AMsu, IFsu, and PFat all attacking the same space (middle of pitch AM strata). This is highlighted in your screenshot with the bright green squares. This makes it easy for opponents to defend and crowd your players out. Playing narrow will make it worse. If you watch the matches in full, you will see the players frequently running into each other. My advice is to imagine each player's position during the attacking phase and position them (using roles/duties) with sufficient passing lanes to one another.

 

Hope this helps. 

I’ve never really looked at this as a problem before to be honest. So that puts my only real option down to using out and out wingers instead of IW or IF? Or maybe going back to my WB overlapping more to stretch the pitch? I never thought it’s a bad thing to have the Wingers cutting in. Like even with 4141 dm wide a lot of people use 2 players cutting in with 1 mez in the centre pairing so maybe they’d have one less player contesting the centre of the AM strata but still must be pretty similar in its attacking shape? I’d rather use a 4141 anyway but I can never get them to work and maybe this is partly why but I’ve never been a fan of out and out wingers, I see them more as crossers but I don’t always want crosses I like players cutting in onto their stronger foot. Which is pretty normal IRL 

[mbar8t6]

42 minutes ago, DarJ said:

I already posted this on another thread so I won't after this.

Use a tool like this.

Your formation is generally your defensive shape. With that tool you can put your players where you want them to be in attack; doing that opens your eyes to potential weaknesses in what you're trying to achieve, then you can make adjustments with instructions and roles.

For example in the screenshot my right flank is very exposed, even the left flank to an extent so I could maybe use an IWB-d, HB etc. It Just helps you think more and see the bigger picture.

What is that tool?

[DarJ]

22 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

What is that tool?

It's an app called football board

[Experienced Defender]

23 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

So that puts my only real option down to using out and out wingers instead of IW or IF?

Who said that you have to use the same (type of) role on both flanks, in the first place? When it comes to roles and duties, it's all about space creation and utilization, while maintaining proper balance between attacking penetration and defensive protection. Take a look at this for example:

PFat

IWsu          AMat         Wat

DLPde   BBM

And compare it to your setup of the front 6. You'll certainly notice the difference, but do you understand the logic behind setting roles and duties up in this way instead of how you set them up in your tactic?

[mbar8t6]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Who said that you have to use the same (type of) role on both flanks, in the first place? When it comes to roles and duties, it's all about space creation and utilization, while maintaining proper balance between attacking penetration and defensive protection. Take a look at this for example:

PFat

IWsu          AMat         Wat

DLPde   BBM

And compare it to your setup of the front 6. You'll certainly notice the difference, but do you understand the logic behind setting roles and duties up in this way instead of how you set them up in your tactic?

I didn’t mean to use 2 of the same in regard to that comment I more meant it as to use an out and out winger instead of a IW or IF in regard to one side of the setup. Yeah I do see the logic behind it to get players occupying different lanes like The wing, the half spaces and the centre and trying to cover more of them for more options as opposed to just filling up the centre. But I didn’t see it like that, I see it as only one player cutting in at a time and even then I don’t imagine them occupying the central lane, just coming in narrower into the half space and playing a pass for the striker in the centre or going all the way if there is space or the striker is out of position and the AMC is deeper. The duties I’ve always maybe been to reserved with but I always thought too many players on attack duties in the front 4 wasn’t a good thing.

I’ve already set it up as you’ve put it above but with a CM-s with the stay wider pi instead of a BBM so he acts a bit like a mez but maybe not quite as advanced? Could be wrong with my thinking here but haven’t palyed a game with it yet, and a WBa on the IF/IW side to overlap after the IW cuts inside 

[Experienced Defender]

52 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

The duties I’ve always maybe been to reserved with but I always thought too many players on attack duties in the front 4 wasn’t a good thing

It depends on how you want to play and which roles you give those attack duties to and how you distribute them. Of course, it's certainly not necessary to have 3 out of 4 attack duties like in my example. But you definitely need to give opposition defenses something to think about, one way or the other. 

 

55 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

a WBa on the IF/IW side to overlap after the IW cuts inside

Yes, that absolutely makes sense - especially as you have a holding CM (DLP) on that side. Although in a tricky and inherently vulnerable top-heavy system such as 4231 I would rather go with a FB on attack duty than WB on attack. For the sake of defensive safety. 

[mbar8t6]

10 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

It depends on how you want to play and which roles you give those attack duties to and how you distribute them. Of course, it's certainly not necessary to have 3 out of 4 attack duties like in my example. But you definitely need to give opposition defenses something to think about, one way or the other. 

 

Yes, that absolutely makes sense - especially as you have a holding CM (DLP) on that side. Although in a tricky and inherently vulnerable top-heavy system such as 4231 I would rather go with a FB on attack duty than WB on attack. For the sake of defensive safety. 

Yeah the WB or FB thing is always something I’m not quite sure on which to go for and what the clear difference actually is between the 2. To me I’ve always seen a FB as someone who starts in the defensive line and a WB as a part of a back 5 with a more advanced role like alonso and Moses in contes Chelsea team. When both roles on FM are used from the same RB/LB   It becomes a bit blurred for me. in my mind the FB will literally just run up and down, be an outlet for a pass but be all or nothing in a way, not becoming part of the midfield in possession. The WB I see a season more of a midfielder in possession becoming part of the passing game and carrying the ball forward on top of being out wide ready to receive a pass. But as my record so far shows I don’t know what I’m on about :-)

[mbar8t6]

Would you also use a FBs on the opposite side instead of a WBs?

[Experienced Defender]

2 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

Yeah the WB or FB thing is always something I’m not quite sure on which to go for and what the clear difference actually is between the 2

WB is inherently more attack-minded than FB, also more inclined to run with the ball and a bit more aggressive when defending due to his higher initial positioning. 

 

2 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

Would you also use a FBs on the opposite side instead of a WBs?

Depends on how those in front of him are set up and how capable the player himself is. 

[mbar8t6]

6 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

WB is inherently more attack-minded than FB, also more inclined to run with the ball and a bit more aggressive when defending due to his higher initial positioning. 

 

Depends on how those in front of him are set up and how capable the player himself is. 

I have matias vina there who is pretty well rounded but doesn’t really excel at anything in particular. Most of his needed attributes are 13-15 other than his pace, off the ball and determination at 16. Maybe more suited to being a FBs I’ll give it a try and see how it goes. I’ve had angelino for ages too who is brilliant attacking but defensively his marking, positioning and bravery are poor so ive stopped using him

[Experienced Defender]

3 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

I have matias vina there who is pretty well rounded but doesn’t really excel at anything in particular. Most of his needed attributes are 13-15 other than his pace, off the ball and determination at 16. Maybe more suited to being a FBs I’ll give it a try and see how it goes. I’ve had angelino for ages too who is brilliant attacking but defensively his marking, positioning and bravery are poor so ive stopped using him

Can you post a screenshot of his (their) player profile(s)?

[mbar8t6]

37 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Can you post a screenshot of his (their) player profile(s)?

 

 

also my RB

[mbar8t6]

also what would you do with this guy, keep him as a LW, retrain to be IF on the right like i have been or train him as a striker?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, mbar8t6 said:

 

 

also my RB

Okay, both Angelino and Vina look good enough to play as a FB on attack duty on the left (provided your LCM/DLP is defensively reliable enough to provide proper cover). 

Moyano can definitely play as a WB on support. But if you play him as a WB on support, then I would rather play the MCR as a carrilero than either a BBM or CMsu. 

1 hour ago, mbar8t6 said:

 

1 hour ago, mbar8t6 said:

also what would you do with this guy, keep him as a LW, retrain to be IF on the right like i have been or train him as a striker?

Depends entirely of where I need him most in my tactical setup. I never consider players in isolation from my tactical style. This guy can play anywhere up front, which is a great asset on his part. 

In terms of training, I would probably train him in the CF role on attack duty, but it does not mean that I would necessarily play him in that role. Because training a player is primarily about developing as many attributes as possible, and is not necessarily associated with the actual role he will play within the tactic. 

[mbar8t6]

18 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Okay, both Angelino and Vina look good enough to play as a FB on attack duty on the left (provided your LCM/DLP is defensively reliable enough to provide proper cover). 

Moyano can definitely play as a WB on support. But if you play him as a WB on support, then I would rather play the MCR as a carrilero than either a BBM or CMsu. 

 

Depends entirely of where I need him most in my tactical setup. I never consider players in isolation from my tactical style. This guy can play anywhere up front, which is a great asset on his part. 

In terms of training, I would probably train him in the CF role on attack duty, but it does not mean that I would necessarily play him in that role. Because training a player is primarily about developing as many attributes as possible, and is not necessarily associated with the actual role he will play within the tactic. 

Ok thanks I will try all of that out then. 

The thing I’m still noticing a lot in my games though is at times it’s still looking like my players have limited options in attacking situations, sometimes the players are still just looking too spread out, we are still winning though so maybe I’m just looking to much into the comprehensive highlights and focusing too much on the negative plays but even in my last match which we won 4-0 I didn’t once think that was a great passage of play. I’ve set my front 4 all to roam from position to see if they would link up better but maybe that’s just overkill. I’ve also gone slightly shorter passing and lower tempo to try give more time to get players involved but also I’m unsure if that’s how it would work. I’m getting tempted to take what I’ve learned and try to apply it to a 4141 dm wide and see if that’s any better but I don’t want to halt our momentum at the same time

[mbar8t6]

@Experienced Defender just played a game v city, somehow drew 1-1 but they dominated us at our place. looking into the match analysis after at average positions they were so narrow but it makes them so much harder to stop. my players just seem to far apart, is it better to play the 4231 on narrower width while attacking? playing wide just seems daft, also then in terms of counter pressing being narrow makes more sense as players are already tight together and in much better position to press, hence why city are so good in game?

this is both teams average positions 

[Experienced Defender]

@mbar8t6 Post a screenshot of the tactic you are using now (following the tweaks you've made in the meantime). Otherwise I cannot tell if there are any obvious flaws in it. 

Btw, I guess a draw against a top team like City is a great result (apart from performance). 

[mbar8t6]

33 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

@mbar8t6 Post a screenshot of the tactic you are using now (following the tweaks you've made in the meantime). Otherwise I cannot tell if there are any obvious flaws in it. 

Btw, I guess a draw against a top team like City is a great result (apart from performance). 

I'm happy with the draw tbh i'm just seeing the same thing in attack frequently, struggling now to create good chances again. there has been a few games against weaker teams that we dominate but never create good enough chances.

the 2 BPD may be overkill but i don't think its adding to the issues right now. i've messed with roam from position on the 3 attacking mids, but currently only have it on my IF. my CM currently has roam from position. i did try the CAR at CM but my RWB got injured and this RB is young and not really that great so made him a FB while he's in the team until Moyano comes back. I stepped tempo back up to standard too but only recently to see if that makes any difference in finding the openings a bit faster without rushing and wasting the ball.

Am i better off just ditching the 4231 and go 4141DM wide?

Edited May 30, 2020 by mbar8t6

[mbar8t6]

Could Maddison and my IF both having PPM for coming deep to get the ball be an issue? Should I try get them to unlearn it?

[Experienced Defender]

3 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

The key problem here is the AMC's support duty, which creates congestion in the middle due to the IF coming inside and CMsu being to close. When I proposed a setup with the AM on attack, there was a good reason for that - space creation and utilization. 

If you are afraid to play the AM on attack duty for defensive reasons, then i would recommend having both holding CMs but a more attack-minded RB. Like this:

PFat

IFsu        AMsu        Wat

DLPsu   CMde

FBat   CD    BPD    WBsu

This setup means less penetration and is therefore more suited for a patient possession style than a more progressive one. If that's what you want, then okay. But keep in mind that every tactical decision has both pros and cons. I don't know what your players are capable of, so I cannot tell you how exactly I would play with them (and whether I would use the 4231 formation at all). 

18 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

the 2 BPD may be overkill but i don't think its adding to the issues right now

Playing both CBs in the BPD role means you are more likely to lose possession cheaply, which is okay if you want to play a counter-attacking or fast attacking style. But that would require certain tweaks elsewhere. 

 

21 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

i've messed with roam from position on the 3 attacking mids

I would use that particular PI only for the AMC. Too many players allowed to roam can lead to poor structure. I generally always look to keep player instructions at a minimum. The simpler a tactic, the better. 

 

29 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

Am i better off just ditching the 4231 and go 4141DM wide?

The 4141dm wide (a.k.a. 4123 wide) definitely allows more room for maneuver due to its well-balanced structure. 

[mbar8t6]

9 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

The key problem here is the AMC's support duty, which creates congestion in the middle due to the IF coming inside and CMsu being to close. When I proposed a setup with the AM on attack, there was a good reason for that - space creation and utilization. 

If you are afraid to play the AM on attack duty for defensive reasons, then i would recommend having both holding CMs but a more attack-minded RB. Like this:

PFat

IFsu        AMsu        Wat

DLPsu   CMde

FBat   CD    BPD    WBsu

This setup means less penetration and is therefore more suited for a patient possession style than a more progressive one. If that's what you want, then okay. But keep in mind that every tactical decision has both pros and cons. I don't know what your players are capable of, so I cannot tell you how exactly I would play with them (and whether I would use the 4231 formation at all). 

Playing both CBs in the BPD role means you are more likely to lose possession cheaply, which is okay if you want to play a counter-attacking or fast attacking style. But that would require certain tweaks elsewhere. 

 

I would use that particular PI only for the AMC. Too many players allowed to roam can lead to poor structure. I generally always look to keep player instructions at a minimum. The simpler a tactic, the better. 

 

The 4141dm wide (a.k.a. 4123 wide) definitely allows more room for maneuver due to its well-balanced structure. 

I’m happy to have him on attack, would you still use the Wa too and have 3 out of the 4 on attack duty? Is him coming deep to get the ball adding to congestion anyway or is it not a bad trait for a AMC to have? I’d rather go for the more penetration approach anyway, is the short passing a bad move in this respect also adding to a more patient possession approach? Say now I have the AMCa and got rid of the One of the BPD, what of team instructions in general anything looking like it’s the wrong way of doing it?

[Experienced Defender]

11 hours ago, mbar8t6 said:

I’m happy to have him on attack, would you still use the Wa too and have 3 out of the 4 on attack duty?

Yes in the primary tactic, i.e. when you are the (clear) favorite. But in tough matches, I would switch the winger to support, along with a couple other small tweaks to give you more defensive solidity overall. 

 

11 hours ago, mbar8t6 said:

Is him coming deep to get the ball adding to congestion anyway or is it not a bad trait for a AMC to have?

That particular trait is all the more reason to have him on attack duty. 

 

11 hours ago, mbar8t6 said:

I’d rather go for the more penetration approach anyway, is the short passing a bad move in this respect also adding to a more patient possession approach?

Short passing should not be a problem under the Positive mentality. Potential tweaks I would consider include adding either both Work ball into box and Be more expressive or just Be more expressive (without WBiB). Try both variants to see which works better for your team. I would also avoid having both Play out of defence and Disribute to CBs activated at the same time, especially when passing is also set to shorter. Because you don't need to slow the play down too much and thus allow the opposition to reorganize easily. 

 

11 hours ago, mbar8t6 said:

Say now I have the AMCa and got rid of the One of the BPD, what of team instructions in general anything looking like it’s the wrong way of doing it?

Well, besides the potential tweaks I mentioned above, I personally found that a combination of Higher DL and Standard LOE coupled with a split block generally works better for me than the higher LOE, so that's something you may also consider and experiment with. 

Btw, I am curious why have you opted to play the SK on defend duty rather than support? Is that because his attributes are not good enough for support duty or something else?

[mbar8t6]

9 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Yes in the primary tactic, i.e. when you are the (clear) favorite. But in tough matches, I would switch the winger to support, along with a couple other small tweaks to give you more defensive solidity overall. 

 

That particular trait is all the more reason to have him on attack duty. 

 

Short passing should not be a problem under the Positive mentality. Potential tweaks I would consider include adding either both Work ball into box and Be more expressive or just Be more expressive (without WBiB). Try both variants to see which works better for your team. I would also avoid having both Play out of defence and Disribute to CBs activated at the same time, especially when passing is also set to shorter. Because you don't need to slow the play down too much and thus allow the opposition to reorganize easily. 

 

Well, besides the potential tweaks I mentioned above, I personally found that a combination of Higher DL and Standard LOE coupled with a split block generally works better for me than the higher LOE, so that's something you may also consider and experiment with. 

Btw, I am curious why have you opted to play the SK on defend duty rather than support? Is that because his attributes are not good enough for support duty or something else?

Ok i do quite often go with work ball into the box, not at the start of a game but if we are being wasteful or having crosses blocked constantly i do put it on, be more expressive also i have used out of desperation but maybe i need to do it more. The standard LOE is something i did use in my last few games last night to try keep my team more compact in the defensive phase and also try to lure the opponent out that little bit higher.

the tempo is another thing i find myself tweaking constantly because i just cant work out whats best, i'd like it slightly higher but then i also think its more likely to result in better build up play on slower, but also will that just allow defences to settle too much, so maybe standard is the best option here, but i'm still unsure.

the SK was just to be a bit more low risk, he has decent throwing and kicking but lacks in first touch and passing so I thought he was maybe better on a defend role

[Experienced Defender]

38 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

 

39 minutes ago, mbar8t6 said:

the SK was just to be a bit more low risk, he has decent throwing and kicking but lacks in first touch and passing so I thought he was maybe better on a defend role

Yeah, his technical attributes are unfortunately too poor for anything other than defend duty. 

[mbar8t6]

@Experienced Defender I don't know if  you can be bother to have a look at this, or anyone else for that matter, but i just lost this game 1-0 they did nothing special didn't even seem to play particularly defensive yet their defenders are so much more effective than mine, so are their midfield. do i need extremely urgent pressing? shoulld my 2 CM's be closing down more? my CB pairing just seem so docile at times but i can never say that for the ai. yeah we missed a few CCC but even so they still pretty much outplay me using the same formation with a pretty much rubbish team. what could i have done differently, games like this just baffle me, if you need good players to use 4231 then why can they get away with it

 

Aston Villa v Brighton.pkm

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, mbar8t6 said:

@Experienced Defender I don't know if  you can be bother to have a look at this

Unfortunately, it's technically impossible for me to do, because I play FM on another PC, which on top of that is not even mine. Hopefully someone else can jump in. 

Btw, I don't know what your tactic looks like at the moment after tweaks you have probably made in the meantime. 

[mbar8t6]

5 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Unfortunately, it's technically impossible for me to do, because I play FM on another PC, which on top of that is not even mine. Hopefully someone else can jump in. 

Btw, I don't know what your tactic looks like at the moment after tweaks you have probably made in the meantime. 

Ah ok no worries, i've not really changed that much, only pi i have are on my AMC to roam and to move into channels. my IW/IF i been switching between the 2 but he's been awesome in previous seasons both getting goals and assists but now anyone i play there plays rubbish and always has a low rating, we dp so much better against the bigger teams, they're barely getting chances. The tactic is working there are just thing that I know could be better

I've also gone narrow because at times i think my players just look to far apart with traffic between them

 

what other roles for a striker can be good? i have a decent brazilian who has scored 27 odd in 29 but it looks much better than it is, i think hes had 4 hat-tricks and scored 4 once or twice but most of the time i struggle to get him involved, hes a natural AF but is it best to stick with DLF or PF? i do use him as a PF but he has low aggresion and i've never got on with the DLF role

 

 

 

[Experienced Defender]

Just now, mbar8t6 said:

only pi i have are on my AMC to roam and to move into channels

Roaming is okay, but why move into channels when there is the striker directly in front of him that is already hard-coded to move into channels? Do not use PIs just for the sake of using them. 

Why higher tempo and why narrower attacking width? If I remember correctly, these are not the tweaks we discussed. 

[mbar8t6]

15 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Roaming is okay, but why move into channels when there is the striker directly in front of him that is already hard-coded to move into channels? Do not use PIs just for the sake of using them. 

Why higher tempo and why narrower attacking width? If I remember correctly, these are not the tweaks we discussed. 

I thought maybe if he moved into channels aswell then they could occupy a different channel and that could have helped occupy the defenders more, as it says channels between the FB and CB and there are 2 of those, I wasn’t adding it just for the sake of it but if it’s a bad move I’ll take it back off.

higher tempo just to try and pick the opportunities out a bit faster, and just generally speed up the play a little and I thought maybe it could help wide players actually cross the ball instead of waiting to be closed down so they can kick the ball at a defender instead.

narrower because I think my players always look to spread out and sometimes passing options look so limited and if we’re closer together then passing and moving should be easier? Also maybe if my IF was a bit narrower and closer to the build up he might actually contribute more. But I’m guessing I’m wrong on all points here anyway

Edited May 31, 2020 by mbar8t6

[mbar8t6]

I think I’m done with this system, it’s literally poor against defensive teams, just lost at home to bottom of the league West Brom who again matched me in the 4231 but what I don’t get is they’re bottom of the league with 3 wins after 34 games for a reason, they get battered constantly so how can my team struggle so much to break them down. If I try and play like they do against big teams then I get battered. I literally have no idea how to break these teams down and this tactic still just doesn’t seem to have any penetration at all

[CaptCanuck]

If they are batterable, then you need tactics to batter them with.

If you're supposed to be gegenning, then why don't you have a higher LOE and counter? Those are key gegen tenants. And positive might not be enough for a crap team, go attacking. You need to overwhelm them.

And distributing to fullbacks seems to negate the inherent ability Jordan has to come deep, pick up the ball, and distribute. TBH Henderson, Bennacer, and Maddison can all do a job in that regard (although Bennacer's Dwell PT isn't the best for a fast-paced style). Angelino in attack mode is going to bomb forward on his own accord and can be picked out by the midfielders.

Anyhoo, just some ideas based on that last screenshot. That you're a top 6 club with Villa in season 4 shows you've got a lot good going, so I'm sure you'll sort it eventually :-)

[mbar8t6]

9 minutes ago, CaptCanuck said:

If they are batterable, then you need tactics to batter them with.

If you're supposed to be gegenning, then why don't you have a higher LOE and counter? Those are key gegen tenants. And positive might not be enough for a crap team, go attacking. You need to overwhelm them.

And distributing to fullbacks seems to negate the inherent ability Jordan has to come deep, pick up the ball, and distribute. TBH Henderson, Bennacer, and Maddison can all do a job in that regard (although Bennacer's Dwell PT isn't the best for a fast-paced style). Angelino in attack mode is going to bomb forward on his own accord and can be picked out by the midfielders.

Anyhoo, just some ideas based on that last screenshot. That you're a top 6 club with Villa in season 4 shows you've got a lot good going, so I'm sure you'll sort it eventually :-)

for the most part not doing the higher LOE or countering as thats what experienced defender suggested, its not even really a gegenpress anyway that was just the style i started on, its more possesion based. Bennacers dwell on the ball ppm is long gone its the first thing i did after he joined. 

[CaptCanuck]

Ah OK - gotcha :-) I'd been reading the thread off and on, but was thinking solely in the scenario of sticking it to crap teams and I saw customized gegen and was thinking that was the plan. And I use a custom gegenpress against poor teams and counter-attack against equal/better teams and it's worked OK.

[mbar8t6]

42 minutes ago, CaptCanuck said:

Ah OK - gotcha :-) I'd been reading the thread off and on, but was thinking solely in the scenario of sticking it to crap teams and I saw customized gegen and was thinking that was the plan. And I use a custom gegenpress against poor teams and counter-attack against equal/better teams and it's worked OK.

I can't set up counter attacking tactics at all, always failed massively and we get battered more than we would if we just go out swinging. I've played CM/FM every year since cm 97/98 but since the tactical overhaul to its current form i find it much harder to get things to work

[HUNT3R]

9 hours ago, mbar8t6 said:

I think I’m done with this system, it’s literally poor against defensive teams, just lost at home to bottom of the league West Brom who again matched me in the 4231 but what I don’t get is they’re bottom of the league with 3 wins after 34 games for a reason, they get battered constantly so how can my team struggle so much to break them down. If I try and play like they do against big teams then I get battered. I literally have no idea how to break these teams down and this tactic still just doesn’t seem to have any penetration at all

They didn't sit back that much here, you're right, but you need to watch the match again. Your 2 centrebacks, 1 fullback and DLP knocking the ball among themselves happens a lot. Then they very slowly move it forward, but that's it. Once they do move it a bit forward, there aren't many options available. The other MC is usually marked and your AMC is far too keen to bomb forward (doing it too early as well), so he's not available either. It almost always results in a very long ball wide (usually to the left) and then it results in a cross.

The key in this formation is getting the AMC's role sorted out. Right now what he's doing would ideally suit a play style where you're working it forward quicker or where you have more space in midfield, maybe against a 2 man midfield setup.

Though there were issues (and I'll add that I only watched the first 35 mins) you had the better chances and I'd say you were unlucky a couple of times that Jorge didn't score.

I don't know if these issues are ones you regularly face, but it did seem to be issues preventing you from being better in this match.