How can I improve this tactic to make it more defensively solid?

[Hyphron]

Hi all,
I'm currently sitting pretty at the top of the championship with QPR with only a few games to go. You might think this is silly me posting this as the tactic seems to be working nicely but I know if I'm going to cope in the premier league I need to make this tactic more defensively secure. This has been quite inconsistent for me, some games I will destroy opponents and others I will lose by fine margins, but there have been a few things that I have noticed when losing games. I am extremely vulnerable to crosses and set pieces, my centre halves seem to just either entirely miss the ball, score an own goal, pass the ball to the striker or lose their marker entirely and allow them in behind. I've tried marking the full backs/wingers and closing them down but every cross that goes into that box just seems to cause my centre halves a lot of trouble. Other times I mostly get done by balls over the top but I can happily accept that this is likely when I am playing such a high line. Other times I lose games simply because of straight red cards of penalties given away but again I can accept this due to the high pressing game I play and the hard tackling I set my players to do. Apologies for the long winded post but I just thought that if I provided as much detail as I can then I'll get the best response. If i see an example of whats happening again in the last couple of games, I will upload a screenshot of exactly what I mean. Thanks guys!

League Table:

View attachment 147503


Formation and Instructions:

View attachment 147509

Player Instructions:

Goalkeeper (None)
Centre Backs (None)
Wing Backs:
View attachment 147508

Central Midfielder(DEF):
View attachment 147507
Box To Box Midfielder (SUP):
View attachment 147506

Wingers:
View attachment 147505

 

[WJ]

All your issues can be traced back to the pair of CMs. That CM/D just has far too much to do because absolutely everyone is just bombing forward. Who's actually defending? The CM/D has to cover 2 flanks as well as the middle?!

This is the reason the 4-2-3-1 has 2 holding midfielders IRL.

 

[Hyphron]

What sort of changes can I make to improve this? I dont want to change the full backs as they are my main goal scoring threat, especially my right back with 16 assists. Should I change the box to box midfielder to a more defensive role?

 

[WJ]

What sort of changes can I make to improve this? I dont want to change the full backs as they are my main goal scoring threat, especially my right back with 16 assists. Should I change the box to box midfielder to a more defensive role?

I already gave you the answer.

All your issues can be traced back to the pair of CMs. That CM/D just has far too much to do because absolutely everyone is just bombing forward. Who's actually defending? The CM/D has to cover 2 flanks as well as the middle?!

This is the reason the 4-2-3-1 has 2 holding midfielders IRL.

 

[duca015]

All your issues can be traced back to the pair of CMs. That CM/D just has far too much to do because absolutely everyone is just bombing forward. Who's actually defending? The CM/D has to cover 2 flanks as well as the middle?!

This is the reason the 4-2-3-1 has 2 holding midfielders IRL.

I do not think this is huge issue that he has... He plays slow methodical game, without too much risks, there is lot of movement and lot of options going forward, and likely he will not be, most of times, exposed on counter easily, as once he loses ball, his team is close and in good position to press (and he is aggressively pressing), so this gives time for other players to reorganize.

Problem that he will have is against teams that have technical ability to quickly move the ball forward and switch sides, such as Arsenal, Totenham and Man Utd. They will change few quick passes, switch sides and who la, he is wide opened. When this happens, changing only CM role will hardly be viable solution. He must think about width and about keeping shape, denying space, not forcing mistakes by aggressive closing down.

 

[WJ]

I do not think this is huge issue that he has... He plays slow methodical game, without too much risks, there is lot of movement and lot of options going forward, and likely he will not be, most of times, exposed on counter easily, as once he loses ball, his team is close and in good position to press (and he is aggressively pressing), so this gives time for other players to reorganize.

Problem that he will have is against teams that have technical ability to quickly move the ball forward and switch sides, such as Arsenal, Totenham and Man Utd. They will change few quick passes, switch sides and who la, he is wide opened. When this happens, changing only CM role will hardly be viable solution. He must think about width and about keeping shape, denying space, not forcing mistakes by aggressive closing down.

Uhm, all of what you just said ties directly in with what I said, so I can't see why or how you can disagree.

He is wide open everywhere, so teams just need to work the ball forward. They don't even need to be that good. The CM/D cannot cover the left, right and middle at the same time - although for some reason, he's being asked to.

Keeping shape is exactly the point, which is why he needs 2 midfielders to cover for those 2 attacking fullbacks.

There are 4 attackers ahead of the 2 midfielders, so the holders don't need to go anywhere.

 

[duca015]

Uhm, all of what you just said ties directly in with what I said, so I can't see why or how you can disagree.

He is wide open everywhere, so teams just need to work the ball forward. They don't even need to be that good. The CM/D cannot cover the left, right and middle at the same time - although for some reason, he's being asked to.

Keeping shape is exactly the point, which is why he needs 2 midfielders to cover for those 2 attacking fullbacks.

There are 4 attackers ahead of the 2 midfielders, so the holders don't need to go anywhere.

I was not concise enough obviously...

I meant to say that only change of BMB CM to lets say CM-sup, would not do him any good, and it is not solution for his problems.

Obviously, his formation is working most of time, as he does not face opponents that see opening, or do not have quality to use it. If you remember, I posted here maybe month or two back formation that has similar goals and similar idea, and also had only one holding midfielder, and also had same problems.

At time, I thought that problem could be solved with simple role change or something, but later I found out that much more effective is just change in approach - instead of playing extreme narrow, change it to balance or even slightly wide setup.

Yes, from theoretically point, change of role probably would be good and give him some defensive stability, but it will also change some movements that he had achieved in team. On the other hand, change of width will give him some more options i going forward, and at same time it will deny space for diagonal passes that could split him defensively.

From my point of view, more important is to change width, then to change role to one particular player, to become less aggressive in closing down if you see issues that it causing, and sometimes, with his extreme narrow formation and extreme aggressive closing down, it will.

So, my point is, if it is working, do not try to fix it, but if it does not, then look for main problem and try to fix it at beginning, and do not try to just patch it up quickly. Changing role would be quick fix that may or may not work, but change of approach (less closing down and play with more width) could do major change.

 

[WJ]

I was not concise enough obviously...

I meant to say that only change of BMB CM to lets say CM-sup, would not do him any good, and it is not solution for his problems.

Obviously, his formation is working most of time, as he does not face opponents that see opening, or do not have quality to use it. If you remember, I posted here maybe month or two back formation that has similar goals and similar idea, and also had only one holding midfielder, and also had same problems.

At time, I thought that problem could be solved with simple role change or something, but later I found out that much more effective is just change in approach - instead of playing extreme narrow, change it to balance or even slightly wide setup.

Yes, from theoretically point, change of role probably would be good and give him some defensive stability, but it will also change some movements that he had achieved in team. On the other hand, change of width will give him some more options i going forward, and at same time it will deny space for diagonal passes that could split him defensively.

From my point of view, more important is to change width, then to change role to one particular player, to become less aggressive in closing down if you see issues that it causing, and sometimes, with his extreme narrow formation and extreme aggressive closing down, it will.

So, my point is, if it is working, do not try to fix it, but if it does not, then look for main problem and try to fix it at beginning, and do not try to just patch it up quickly. Changing role would be quick fix that may or may not work, but change of approach (less closing down and play with more width) could do major change.

He has 2 issues. Balls over the top and easy crosses. Both are caused by exactly the same thing - a **** midfield not providing enough cover. The B2B (amazingly with Get Further Forward too) leaves his partner all alone, so there's little pressure in transition.

You can say what you want, but that IS the issue and if the OP bothers to look, he'll see it in his matches. Yeah he got away with it somewhat, but good luck in the Premier League when you're one of the weaker teams.

Changing role isn't a quick fix. It's a proper fix. You don't need 5 players + 2 wingbacks attacking. That's stupid in general, but especially as a newly promoted team.

 

[maxchaplin55]

I think some time needs to be taken to read a few guides.

Too much to be 'suggested' in my opinion.

Opposition teams will get used to your team because its so samey, its almost symmetrical in roles. Personally, for me that's an issue.

 

[WJ]

Opposition teams will get used to your team because its so samey, its almost symmetrical in roles. Personally, for me that's an issue.

How will opposition teams get used to his team because it's symmetrical?

 

[maxchaplin55]

How will opposition teams get used to his team because it's symmetrical?

Sorry, I wasn't clear - I meant opposition teams will get used to his team because he's attacking the same way on both flanks.

By saying personally, I mean it is my personal preference to never have both flanks attacking the same way.

 

[WJ]

Sorry, I wasn't clear - I meant opposition teams will get used to his team because he's attacking the same way on both flanks.

It's still not clear.

If you mean, you create more varied chances, then yes, completely.

 

[duca015]

He has 2 issues. Balls over the top and easy crosses. Both are caused by exactly the same thing - a **** midfield not providing enough cover. The B2B (amazingly with Get Further Forward too) leaves his partner all alone, so there's little pressure in transition.

You can say what you want, but that IS the issue and if the OP bothers to look, he'll see it in his matches. Yeah he got away with it somewhat, but good luck in the Premier League when you're one of the weaker teams.

Changing role isn't a quick fix. It's a proper fix. You don't need 5 players + 2 wingbacks attacking. That's stupid in general, but especially as a newly promoted team.

Well I degree... Both are caused by lack of width. Most of teams will fail to switch ball properly and most of time he will get away with it, same issue you spoted in my formation, and I had not this problem either, at least most of time, but when I did, only change of CM role was not fix, but it was change of width.

Basically, opponents who do beat him, make a trap for him by overloading defensive middle, and then using width to quickly start breaks. Then having one more player in middle is not huge help, as most of time opponent is playing over the top, in other words - over him, so he is useless. If he had balanced width, I would agree with you, but in this case, having CM-sup instead of BMB-sup who pushes up more would actually hurt him even more, as he would have one less player closing down in hurry high, which mean, opponent has more time to create situation out on wide form where he can start a counter.

I know, because I have tested it. Here. http://www.fm-base.co.uk/forum/atta...5-can-tactic-better-how-tactics_-overview.png

And you will notice that I did not even going to extremes with width, and I was still beaten in this way.

 

[WJ]

Well I degree... Both are caused by lack of width. Most of teams will fail to switch ball properly and most of time he will get away with it, same issue you spoted in my formation, and I had not this problem either, at least most of time, but when I did, only change of CM role was not fix, but it was change of width.

Basically, opponents who do beat him, make a trap for him by overloading defensive middle, and then using width to quickly start breaks. Then having one more player in middle is not huge help, as most of time opponent is playing over the top, in other words - over him, so he is useless. If he had balanced width, I would agree with you, but in this case, having CM-sup instead of BMB-sup who pushes up more would actually hurt him even more, as he would have one less player closing down in hurry high, which mean, opponent has more time to create situation out on wide form where he can start a counter.

I know, because I have tested it. Here. http://www.fm-base.co.uk/forum/atta...5-can-tactic-better-how-tactics_-overview.png

And you will notice that I did not even going to extremes with width, and I was still beaten in this way.

Changing the BBM to a CM in your case would have been stupid. It's a completely different formation and works in a different way to a 4-2-3-1. You're also using a completely different Mentality. I can't see how you're comparing the two.

----

OP, upload any PKM with that tactic and I (or anyone else) can easily show you that this is an issue.

 

[Hyphron]

So I finished the championship season well testing out some new holding midfield partnership's and it worked out well. I came into the premier league season and first 2 games of the season managed to beat liverpool and arsenal convincingly. Things were looking good. However, next 2 games I played Swansea away and Sunderland in the Capital one Cup.


View attachment 1056749View attachment 1056750


My team fell to pieces again from set pieces. I've changed the midfield partnership yet still they keep making the same mistakes when dealing with crosses etc. Here's some videos of the goals im conceding, hopefully this will make it easier for you to analyse:

http://sendvid.com/xoom81wd

https://sendvid.com/51cpixi0

https://sendvid.com/dcauiwzm

(UPDATE: just beat leicester 3-0 at home after those 2 horrible losses, as you can see the tactic is very hit and miss)

 

[vasilli07]

You are playing an extremely high closing down game so I just wonder if your players have the attributes to do it. Even if the roles are right but if your players doesn't have the right attributes to do the job for you, it will still fail.

 

[WJ]

You want us to analyse 5 seconds of video? If you want something analysed, upload a PKM and show the tactic used.

Can't view the attachments, but remember, you're now one of the weakest teams, so don't expect too much.

 

[Hyphron]

Surprisingly im on fire atm. Sitting top of the league 7 wins, 1 draw, 2 losses. Cup game seemed like a blip I guess. I've taken tackle harder off my full backs and put on ease off tackles and this seems to have stopped the amount of crosses by quite a bit as previously they were just completely mistiming the challenge and allowing the winger/full back through unmarked. However, heres the PKM of the cup game where I got smashed by sunderland. Thanks for all of the advice btw, tactic is slowly making a lot of progress.

Sunderland v Q.P.R..pkm - Speedy Share - upload your files here

 

[WJ]

Surprisingly im on fire atm. Sitting top of the league 7 wins, 1 draw, 2 losses. Cup game seemed like a blip I guess. I've taken tackle harder off my full backs and put on ease off tackles and this seems to have stopped the amount of crosses by quite a bit as previously they were just completely mistiming the challenge and allowing the winger/full back through unmarked. However, heres the PKM of the cup game where I got smashed by sunderland. Thanks for all of the advice btw, tactic is slowly making a lot of progress.

Sunderland v Q.P.R..pkm - Speedy Share - upload your files here

I'm just going to quote myself. It makes things easier.

If you want something analysed, upload a PKM and show the tactic used.

Can't view the attachments, but remember, you're now one of the weakest teams, so don't expect too much.

 

[callamity]

Sorry, I wasn't clear - I meant opposition teams will get used to his team because he's attacking the same way on both flanks.

By saying personally, I mean it is my personal preference to never have both flanks attacking the same way.

this is still not true because this will depend entirely on the players attributes, ppm's etc it is unlikely to get to identical players who will make exactly the same decision on both flanks at the same time.




back to OP this formation has been discussed at length and in real football isnt even a formation you will see anyone using, real teams use 2 dm's I read an article recently on rafa benitez when implementing this formation onto a save and his use of the two dm's but i cannot remember where it was if i find the link i will post it.

As wj previously noted the issues mainly come from the cm's in this formation not having the right roles and not doing the right things is the nail in the coffin for this formation.