Adjusting my tactic for away games

[michelb86]

Currently I am doing a Spurs game, which is going pretty well. Last season I ended up as third and in the semi finals of the Champions League. There is one reason why I didn't became champion, and that's my result in away games. I use one tactic for both home and away. Home I have only lost against United, but away I have only won 7 out of 18 and lost against lower seeded teams. So I would like to make some adjustments on my home tactic for away games, but what to change?

This is my current tactic for home games (with control, shorter passing, balanced width and pass into space):

I am scoring a lot, but in away games I am vulnerable in defense. Most goals seem to come from crosses, but poor marking and giving too much space.
I tried changing the CWB to a Support duty, but this didn't really help much. They are the main strenght of the squad and create a lot of changes, so I don't prefer to change them to Full Backs (bad experience with this, I barely create chances then). I also thought about increasing width, but then I would give away even more space. Maybe I'm thinking in the wrong direction, but I really don't know what to do.

What would you suggest to improve for the away tactic if I want to use the same (narrow diamond) formation? I don't have good wingers in my squad.

 

[vasilli07]

You can consider using a lower mentality and wingbacks instead of CWB as they don't have roaming. Or maybe 1 support WB and 1 attacking WB.

Btw, what's your team shape? That affects how your team defends as well.

 

[apalobod]

First. FM has a little problem. It's easier to cross in FM than in real life, even for AI teams. This means that it is difficult to avoid a relatively high number of crosses. Especially when AI teams use four wide players and your team only two. 4-4-2 diamond narrow is hard to manage in the last versions of FM. Not impossible, but hard.


Second. It's important to know how are conceded these goals
- more goals conceded from "interception > one (or at most two) passes > cross > goal", or
- more goals conceded from "interception > build up play, more passes > cross > goal"


In the first case there is a problem with your wide defenders. AI defenders don't have enough time to get in the your own third. Your wide defenders have, by default, some instructions (PI) that can be risky : get further forward, stay wider and roam from position. Your wide defenders are (much) too far from their direct opponents when your team loses the ball. This problem could be partly solved by changing their roles from CWB / A to WB / A. But this is a risky move because "roam form position" + "stay wider" = "play almost like a winger from time to time". You 'll lose a "winger" and 'll win an offensive defender. This means less crosses and goals scored and, maybe, less crosses and goals conceded. On the other hand, your wide defender is atracting his opponent (AI team wide midfielder). If your defender will move to his own (your) half then his opponent
will do the same thing. One solution could be to increase distance between your penalty area and AI forwards. In other words, a higher defensive line. But is risky. There are needed many attempts to find an optimal combination between roles (CWB or WB), duties (attack or support, although attack seems to be slighlty more useful), defensive line (normal, higher or much higher ?) and even 'use offside trap'. In some cases could help is one of central defenders is tightly marking his opposite striker (as cross target). But this is not working sometimes.


In the second case there there is a problem with your midfielders and even strikers. They are not doing enough to prevent the AI team to pass. Your BBM could 'kill' left (your right) wide players, or at least AI left defender. But this means to tell his to do that(opposite instructions). You have an enganche, who can be (if you have the right player) a real beast in term of closing down. He could close down AI left (your right) central midfielder. Your right side will be reasonably protected. On the left side ... trial and error. Is working a CWB - support ? A WB - attack ? A WB - support ? A FB - attack ? Everything is possible. In any case, a higher defensive line is useless because your team is already pushed ho its penalty area.


One more word. "Width" is not a defensive instruction. Any team (even Manchester City playing against Boreham Wood) will play (from defensive point of view, when the team doesnt have the ball) narrower than its opponent. Or at least as narrow as its opponent. Of course, there are mements when some players there are wider, but they are by default trying to stay narrower than their opponents. If a team will win the ball then it can play no matter how widely wishes.

 

[wkdsoul]

Pay attention to how the other team is setting up rather than the stadium you are in.

 

[maxchaplin55]

People annoy me when they say that FM has a problem regarding crosses. It doesn't. Just that some people themselves have problems defending crosses. Any team playing a 41212 narrow will be vulnerable on the flanks. You have one defender who is constantly bombing forward, and when you lose the ball once he is forward, usually there will be one opposition winger ready to attack and maybe even a full back doubling up. You will need to consider man marking instructions as an option for maybe your striker or central players.

 

[Gump]

For me, your midfield is the thing that you wanna sort out. If you break down your tactic in bits, you have 2 attackers, 2 ''wingers'' from the CWB's, Enganche, a BBM & DLP with S. Thats 7 players dedicated to being offensive. I dont know if youre trying to have a possession tactic here or what is the general vision of how this tactic is intended to play out, but you have a lot of offensive-minded players and not many defensive. You concede crosses because your CWB's end up being so high up the pitch that it leaves gaps on the flanks that most 4-4-2's and 4-2-3-1's etc with the their wide players will utilise, they will break on the counter with pace, cross in, combine it with the stupid defender marking issues that this game is still partly tied with, boom, they score.

I would try toying out with the midfielders and making them more passive / defending orientated, more just holding midfielders with the idea of the rest of ur attacking force using them to recycle possession. The DLP is good, but I would use it with defend instead of support with perhaps more risky passes & more direct passing to enforce him playing more key passes if the chance arises. The other one I would simply put down as maybe Central midfielder with defend or support and make him just hold his position around, maybe allowing him some more freedom, maybe not, you need to test it yourself and find the right role.
Also consider having tackle harder on the midfielders as you wanna have them win the ball back faster whenever you lose it.

Defenders I would toy around with Stopper & Cover roles, it seems to work better than just defend. Make sure to tight mark, maybe even tackle harder.

You can try to keep your CWB's, but I tend to find Wing backs work better as others have said above me aswell, WB with Attack offers enough crosses offensively while retaining some form of solidity at the back.

 

[michelb86]

Wow, all thanks for the extensive reactions! Let me try to go in to depth a bit more, also with what my opinion was about how the tactic should work. Just want to say that at home it's absolutely stunning, scoring lots of goals and lost only once in the season. But for some reasons, all this success goes out of the window when I'm playing away.

For me, your midfield is the thing that you wanna sort out. If you break down your tactic in bits, you have 2 attackers, 2 ''wingers'' from the CWB's, Enganche, a BBM & DLP with S. Thats 7 players dedicated to being offensive. I dont know if youre trying to have a possession tactic here or what is the general vision of how this tactic is intended to play out, but you have a lot of offensive-minded players and not many defensive. You concede crosses because your CWB's end up being so high up the pitch that it leaves gaps on the flanks that most 4-4-2's and 4-2-3-1's etc with the their wide players will utilise, they will break on the counter with pace, cross in, combine it with the stupid defender marking issues that this game is still partly tied with, boom, they score.

I would try toying out with the midfielders and making them more passive / defending orientated, more just holding midfielders with the idea of the rest of ur attacking force using them to recycle possession. The DLP is good, but I would use it with defend instead of support with perhaps more risky passes & more direct passing to enforce him playing more key passes if the chance arises. The other one I would simply put down as maybe Central midfielder with defend or support and make him just hold his position around, maybe allowing him some more freedom, maybe not, you need to test it yourself and find the right role.
Also consider having tackle harder on the midfielders as you wanna have them win the ball back faster whenever you lose it.

Defenders I would toy around with Stopper & Cover roles, it seems to work better than just defend. Make sure to tight mark, maybe even tackle harder.

You can try to keep your CWB's, but I tend to find Wing backs work better as others have said above me aswell, WB with Attack offers enough crosses offensively while retaining some form of solidity at the back.

The bold part really summarizes what I think is going wrong (when playing away, although I use the same tactic).
I already changed the mentality from Control to Standard and made the DLP on Defend instead of Support and introduced Man Marking. What I thought was that, based on the FM description, a CWB was an upgrade of the WB and providing more defensive support. But I would change it to a WB and see how it goes.
I had a CM(S) before, instead of the BBM, but found the BBM helping a lot offensively. I'll try to change it back to CM(S) to see it gives more defensive support.

It's important to know how are conceded these goals
- more goals conceded from "interception > one (or at most two) passes > cross > goal", or
- more goals conceded from "interception > build up play, more passes > cross > goal"

In the first case there is a problem with your wide defenders. AI defenders don't have enough time to get in the your own third. Your wide defenders have, by default, some instructions (PI) that can be risky : get further forward, stay wider and roam from position. Your wide defenders are (much) too far from their direct opponents when your team loses the ball. This problem could be partly solved by changing their roles from CWB / A to WB / A. But this is a risky move because "roam form position" + "stay wider" = "play almost like a winger from time to time". You 'll lose a "winger" and 'll win an offensive defender. This means less crosses and goals scored and, maybe, less crosses and goals conceded. On the other hand, your wide defender is atracting his opponent (AI team wide midfielder). If your defender will move to his own (your) half then his opponent
will do the same thing. One solution could be to increase distance between your penalty area and AI forwards. In other words, a higher defensive line. But is risky. There are needed many attempts to find an optimal combination between roles (CWB or WB), duties (attack or support, although attack seems to be slighlty more useful), defensive line (normal, higher or much higher ?) and even 'use offside trap'. In some cases could help is one of central defenders is tightly marking his opposite striker (as cross target). But this is not working sometimes.


In the second case there there is a problem with your midfielders and even strikers. They are not doing enough to prevent the AI team to pass. Your BBM could 'kill' left (your right) wide players, or at least AI left defender. But this means to tell his to do that(opposite instructions). You have an enganche, who can be (if you have the right player) a real beast in term of closing down. He could close down AI left (your right) central midfielder. Your right side will be reasonably protected. On the left side ... trial and error. Is working a CWB - support ? A WB - attack ? A WB - support ? A FB - attack ? Everything is possible. In any case, a higher defensive line is useless because your team is already pushed ho its penalty area.

I will watch back some games tonight, but I'm almost certain it's the first option (and thus the problem is in the positioning of the backs) like explained above. So like I mentioned, I will change the role of the CWB to WB, and try to build in more defensive stability from the midfield.