Tactical Help Required

[Cookie1]

Hi guys. I am currently playing as Corinthians in the Brazilian First Division. I like to play a 4-1-2-3 DM Wide formation, but for some reason or other, its not getting me the results I want. I played for about ten league matches with this formation and I didn't win even one game. I then used a 4-3-1-2 Narrow formation and i started winning again.

So, the thing is that I'd really like to play with the 4-1-2-3 DM Wide formation, but cant seem to get it to work. Anybody who can help me with this please?


The Player Instructions are as follows.

Goalkeeper - Roll it out, Distribute to fullbacks
Central Defenders - Close down much less
Box to Box mid - Get Further Forward, Move into Channels, Shoot Less Often
Advanced Playmaker - More Direct Passing

All other players have default PIs.

 

[Dynamo_ZahnZee]

you're leaving massive gaps open on your flanks to be exposed as your full backs push up field into attacking positions. Structured, more disciplined and stick to positions means that no one will be looking to cover or plug those gaps, instead they're focusing on remaining in their assigned positions; that includes your full backs who're focused on pushing forward and are expecting your team to have the ball and thus are taking up creative positions to launch attacks from of make forward runs. They're not positioned to make covering defensive runs or tracking opponents moving into pockets of space since defending is not an instruction you've told them to concern themselves with and you've instructed the team not cover the gaps they leave open.

And once you leave the space wide, you allow the opposition to drag your defensive line out of position by stretching the pitch. The wing back was pretty much a Brazilian invention so you're playing a dangerous game playing a tactically system that's weakness is the traditional strengths of the Brazilian game.

 

[WJ]

You should be ripped apart in any league with a system like this, not just Brazil.

Defensively, both fullbacks are bombing down the flanks. Okay, so who's covering? 1 Anchorman covering 2 fullbacks. An Anchorman, who's job it to sit in the middle to screen the defence, so he doesn't close down much. So with the flanks left wide open, either the nearside defender will have to go cover or maybe the DM. that leaves only 2 players back, in the middle and in all sorts of trouble. They need help. Your advanced playmaker won't and your BBM with Get Further Forward definitely won't.

Attacking-wise, what's the plan for creating goals? Who's creating, how and for who?

On the scoring side, who's scoring apart from the AF, being far advanced of everyone else? Do the others support him enough?

 

[Cookie1]

you're leaving massive gaps open on your flanks to be exposed as your full backs push up field into attacking positions. Structured, more disciplined and stick to positions means that no one will be looking to cover or plug those gaps, instead they're focusing on remaining in their assigned positions; that includes your full backs who're focused on pushing forward and are expecting your team to have the ball and thus are taking up creative positions to launch attacks from of make forward runs. They're not positioned to make covering defensive runs or tracking opponents moving into pockets of space since defending is not an instruction you've told them to concern themselves with and you've instructed the team not cover the gaps they leave open.

And once you leave the space wide, you allow the opposition to drag your defensive line out of position by stretching the pitch. The wing back was pretty much a Brazilian invention so you're playing a dangerous game playing a tactically system that's weakness is the traditional strengths of the Brazilian game.

I want my team to send in lots of crosses. Thats why I set them to attack. I dont want to set my wide attackers to "Winger" because that would make my fullbacks pretty useless in attack. I note your point though. Any suggestions on how to fix this? Because i dont want just a flat back four. I want my fullbacks to overlap regularly and send crosses into the box.

EDIT : Also see point number one in my reply to WJ.

 

[Cookie1]

You should be ripped apart in any league with a system like this, not just Brazil.

Defensively, both fullbacks are bombing down the flanks. Okay, so who's covering? 1 Anchorman covering 2 fullbacks. An Anchorman, who's job it to sit in the middle to screen the defence, so he doesn't close down much. So with the flanks left wide open, either the nearside defender will have to go cover or maybe the DM. that leaves only 2 players back, in the middle and in all sorts of trouble. They need help. Your advanced playmaker won't and your BBM with Get Further Forward definitely won't.

Attacking-wise, what's the plan for creating goals? Who's creating, how and for who?

On the scoring side, who's scoring apart from the AF, being far advanced of everyone else? Do the others support him enough?

1. I used Anchor Man as i want to create a sort of back 3 when my team is caught on the counter. This back 3 should be shortly joined by the fullbacks so I figured I was covered defense-wise.

2. Wont the BBM only "Get Further Forward" when my team is in possession? Shouldnt he help out with the defense when the opposition are attacking?

3. The AP is on support, not attack. So I am struggling to understand why he wont help the defense?

4. The plan attacking-wise is to get crosses into the box for the striker or the two wide attacking mids to get on the end of them, or overlapping runs into the box by the BBM ( hence the "Get Further Forward" PI), or the AP with his direct passing to send any of the front 3 clean through the defense.

5. Only the striker seems to be scoring the goals currently. Occasionally a midfielder also chips in but thats about it. And yes the striker usually plays the ball back to one of the midfielder, so he has a decent amount of support.

 

[WJ]

1. I used Anchor Man as i want to create a sort of back 3 when my team is caught on the counter. This back 3 should be shortly joined by the fullbacks so I figured I was covered defense-wise.

3 is okay to keep back, but generally there should be someone else fairly close to help out (fall back quickly) to make it 4 at the back. The problem is that if any one of the three players get dragged out wide, you're in trouble.

2. Wont the BBM only "Get Further Forward" when my team is in possession? Shouldnt he help out with the defense when the opposition are attacking?

Yes obviously, but the point is that he'll be "further forward", so it takes time to transition to the defensive shape.

3. The AP is on support, not attack. So I am struggling to understand why he wont help the defense?

Again, he's advanced, so it takes time to transition back.

4. The plan attacking-wise is to get crosses into the box for the striker or the two wide attacking mids to get on the end of them, or overlapping runs into the box by the BBM ( hence the "Get Further Forward" PI), or the AP with his direct passing to send any of the front 3 clean through the defense.

Is this happening? Specifically the numbers inside the box - are you getting the desired effect?

5. Only the striker seems to be scoring the goals currently. Occasionally a midfielder also chips in but thats about it. And yes the striker usually plays the ball back to one of the midfielder, so he has a decent amount of support.

Doesn't sound like he has a lot of scoring support though, so you're entirely relying on 1 player to score here.


---

Maybe this will help. When you have the ball in their final 3rd, this is what your shape will look like, roughly.

http://lineupbuilder.com/?sk=f3jx2

Look how open you are.

If the DC pulls wide, you're screwed: http://lineupbuilder.com/?sk=f3jx3

If the DM pulls wide, it's a little better, but still bad: http://lineupbuilder.com/?sk=f3jx3

Either way, look at the oceans of space in front of the defence. They can pull you wherever they want.

 

[Cookie1]

3 is okay to keep back, but generally there should be someone else fairly close to help out (fall back quickly) to make it 4 at the back. The problem is that if any one of the three players get dragged out wide, you're in trouble.

Here's the problem, If I select one of the Central Mids to drop deep to help with the defense, I lose an important attacking option. I want runs into the box by a midfielder, which I wont be able to get if only one central mid is in an advanced attacking position. Only one of my players will be in a central attacking midfield area, so the Complete Forward will lack vital support from the central position.

Yes obviously, but the point is that he'll be "further forward", so it takes time to transition to the defensive shape.

Without further forward PI, he wont be making late overlapping runs into the box, I lose an attacking option in a tactic where scoring opportunities will already be low.

Again, he's advanced, so it takes time to transition back.

I feel a DLP stays too deep, so my attack again will lack support.

s this happening? Specifically the numbers inside the box - are you getting the desired effect?

I am getting crosses in from the right flank (most of them are those which the keeper tips over the bar and the FM commentary says that "PLAYER X WILL STRUGGLE TO CLAIM HE MEANT THAT"), few are being met by my players and even then only one or two out of about a 100 crosses end up in the back of the net. From the left, my left back is for some reason crossing it to outside the box (not always though. He sends in crosses to the box as well but there are few of those), to the central midfielders, who are taking long shots, again most of the time off target.
There are only a couple of players in the box, one the striker and one the wide attacker from the opposite flank from which the cross was delivered.

Doesn't sound like he has a lot of scoring support though, so you're entirely relying on 1 player to score here.

Surely the striker has enough support!

http://lineupbuilder.com/new.php?sk=f3jx2

 

[WJ]

Here's the problem, If I select one of the Central Mids to drop deep to help with the defense, I lose an important attacking option. I want runs into the box by a midfielder, which I wont be able to get if only one central mid is in an advanced attacking position. Only one of my players will be in a central attacking midfield area, so the Complete Forward will lack vital support from the central position.



Without further forward PI, he wont be making late overlapping runs into the box, I lose an attacking option in a tactic where scoring opportunities will already be low.



I feel a DLP stays too deep, so my attack again will lack support.

Okay, so then you'll have to accept that defensively, you'll likely struggle.

I am getting crosses in from the right flank (most of them are those which the keeper tips over the bar and the FM commentary says that "PLAYER X WILL STRUGGLE TO CLAIM HE MEANT THAT"), few are being met by my players and even then only one or two out of about a 100 crosses end up in the back of the net. From the left, my left back is for some reason crossing it to outside the box (not always though. He sends in crosses to the box as well but there are few of those), to the central midfielders, who are taking long shots, again most of the time off target.
There are only a couple of players in the box, one the striker and one the wide attacker from the opposite flank from which the cross was delivered.

You haven't actually given an answer here, but it sounds like the BBM who you want in the box, isn't in the box, as intended.

Surely the striker has enough support!

OBVIOUSLY not. Your own quote - Only the striker seems to be scoring the goals currently.

So, no, he doesn't get the scoring support.


Good luck with your tactic.

 

[Cookie1]

Thanks for your reply WJ. Appreciate your help.

 

[WJ]

Thanks for your reply WJ. Appreciate your help.

You're sticking your fingers in your ears here when you've created a thread asking for help and both of us have now pointed out the same issues. I've even shown graphics to show that you're leaving yourself open but for some reason, you're just refusing to listen.

DEFENCE:

Because managers IRL wanted to send both fullbacks forward, they came up with the 4-2-3-1. TWO holding midfielders to sit and protect and cover for the TWO fullbacks now freed of that heavy defensive responsibility. There are still 4 attackers ahead of the holding midfielders, so attacking-wise, it's still potent enough.

You (as has been pointed out more than once by more than one person) have ONE player holding and covering for TWO fullbacks. It's, defensively speaking, a huge risk. If you look at other popular shapes, 4-4-2s and even the 4-1-2-2-1 like you have, there is usually 1 holding midfielder with 1 fairly defensive (in that he doesn't get that far forward) fullback, also making a solid 4 staying back. You have 3.

ATTACK:

Every attack should still have decent movement, creating space and placement of players in their own space.

If you looked at all at the first graphic, you'll see the BBM and IF on top of each other - bad space management. You will see the winger sitting wide, in the way of the fullback and the end up falling over each other so this is also occasionally bad space management. You will also see no one really being too much of a threat inside the box, apart from the striker. Guess what that is? Bad space management.

Look at the graphic. You have a horizontal line there of about 6 players All 6 of them are moving forward. What does that mean? The defence just have to keep shape because everyone is slowly moving toward them.

If any of the 6 receives the ball, what options do they have? Run at the defence waiting for them, pass sideways to the other 5 or ahead for the striker. That's why the wides will receive a fair amount of ball here. The AP sits where he is. The BBM will be ever so slightly more advanced, but make the dangerous runs you want late only. The IF will do the same as the BBM. The Winger will sit wide and Fullbacks are wide charging forward.

Eventually, you've passed sideways enough that the fullbacks overlap and you can cross. No one is really getting into the box apart from the striker, so again all the burden is on him. It may be fine if there aren't that many defenders in the box, but it will be an issue if there are unless he's Hulk in full neon Hulk Mode. He'll need to be faster, anticipate better and be aerially better and stronger than the defenders. That's why I said he needs support in the box. Someone else to help score as well.

It all goes back to my first post. Who is creating, how and for who? You mention fullbacks to cross and they're crossing for the forward. That means that you have 4 other players doing nothing or you haven't thought about what they're doing.

Do players have passing options?I'd argue NO, because they do, but it is sideways and boring. If it's what you want, then fine, but get players into the box.

---

You need to really think about what you're doing here how you're going to use players.

 

[Cookie1]

You're sticking your fingers in your ears here when you've created a thread asking for help and both of us have now pointed out the same issues. I've even shown graphics to show that you're leaving yourself open but for some reason, you're just refusing to listen.

DEFENCE:

Because managers IRL wanted to send both fullbacks forward, they came up with the 4-2-3-1. TWO holding midfielders to sit and protect and cover for the TWO fullbacks now freed of that heavy defensive responsibility. There are still 4 attackers ahead of the holding midfielders, so attacking-wise, it's still potent enough.

You (as has been pointed out more than once by more than one person) have ONE player holding and covering for TWO fullbacks. It's, defensively speaking, a huge risk. If you look at other popular shapes, 4-4-2s and even the 4-1-2-2-1 like you have, there is usually 1 holding midfielder with 1 fairly defensive (in that he doesn't get that far forward) fullback, also making a solid 4 staying back. You have 3.

ATTACK:

Every attack should still have decent movement, creating space and placement of players in their own space.

If you looked at all at the first graphic, you'll see the BBM and IF on top of each other - bad space management. You will see the winger sitting wide, in the way of the fullback and the end up falling over each other so this is also occasionally bad space management. You will also see no one really being too much of a threat inside the box, apart from the striker. Guess what that is? Bad space management.

Look at the graphic. You have a horizontal line there of about 6 players All 6 of them are moving forward. What does that mean? The defence just have to keep shape because everyone is slowly moving toward them.

If any of the 6 receives the ball, what options do they have? Run at the defence waiting for them, pass sideways to the other 5 or ahead for the striker. That's why the wides will receive a fair amount of ball here. The AP sits where he is. The BBM will be ever so slightly more advanced, but make the dangerous runs you want late only. The IF will do the same as the BBM. The Winger will sit wide and Fullbacks are wide charging forward.

Eventually, you've passed sideways enough that the fullbacks overlap and you can cross. No one is really getting into the box apart from the striker, so again all the burden is on him. It may be fine if there aren't that many defenders in the box, but it will be an issue if there are unless he's Hulk in full neon Hulk Mode. He'll need to be faster, anticipate better and be aerially better and stronger than the defenders. That's why I said he needs support in the box. Someone else to help score as well.

It all goes back to my first post. Who is creating, how and for who? You mention fullbacks to cross and they're crossing for the forward. That means that you have 4 other players doing nothing or you haven't thought about what they're doing.

Do players have passing options?I'd argue NO, because they do, but it is sideways and boring. If it's what you want, then fine, but get players into the box.

---

You need to really think about what you're doing here how you're going to use players.

Who said I'm not listening to your or anybody else's opinion? I appreciate your help, that's why I posted my previous message. If it somehow sounds like I am not listening to you or I dont value your opinion, I apologise. This was certainly not my intention. I wouldnt ask your help if i didnt want to listen to you.

Thanks for your detailed reply about the tactics. I am currently in pre-season friendlies, so I will make changes and see how it goes. Also I do want players to get into the box, but I want a patient approach attacking-wise, as I want a possession based style and dont want to be too direct.

Based on your opinion, I think these are the changes that ought to help:
1- change the full back on the winger side to support duty instead of attack. That would keep four players back when we get caught on the counter.
2- Interchange the roles of the central mids so that the BBM operates on the other side and does not hinder my IF.
3- change my striker to DLF on support to allow for the runs of the IF and the BBM.

That okay in your opinion?

 

[WJ]

Thanks for your detailed reply about the tactics. I am currently in pre-season friendlies, so I will make changes and see how it goes. Also I do want players to get into the box, but I want a patient approach attacking-wise, as I want a possession based style and dont want to be too direct.

If you want the patient play, just keep an eye on the fullbacks here. They may be to eager to bomb forward, ruining the patience you want. Might be worth then either looking to change to a more structured shape, which will lower their Mentality, or to change to something like a CWB/S to get Support but also late runs forward.

1- change the full back on the winger side to support duty instead of attack. That would keep four players back when we get caught on the counter.

I don't see an issue with this. According to you, your Winger is already providing the crosses you need and you refuse to change one of the CMs, so it's the only other way.

2- Interchange the roles of the central mids so that the BBM operates on the other side and does not hinder my IF.

Now you're starting to think about space. The Winger is wide, so inside of him, there will be space. If the BBM isn't aggressive enough in getting forward still, think about maybe a CM/A.

3- change my striker to DLF on support to allow for the runs of the IF and the BBM.

Careful with this one. It's going to really change how you play. I'd firstly see if you're getting what you want with the other changes before doing this. The potential issue I see here is that your fullbacks (or the one at least if you change) will be too quick to get forward and you'll have no one in the box when he's ready to cross.

It's all a question of timing here, so Tempo, Duties and Team Shape can tweak these things and how the tactic blends together.

 

[Cookie1]

If you want the patient play, just keep an eye on the fullbacks here. They may be to eager to bomb forward, ruining the patience you want. Might be worth then either looking to change to a more structured shape, which will lower their Mentality, or to change to something like a CWB/S to get Support but also late runs forward.

I don't see an issue with this. According to you, your Winger is already providing the crosses you need and you refuse to change one of the CMs, so it's the only other way.


Now you're starting to think about space. The Winger is wide, so inside of him, there will be space. If the BBM isn't aggressive enough in getting forward still, think about maybe a CM/A.



Careful with this one. It's going to really change how you play. I'd firstly see if you're getting what you want with the other changes before doing this. The potential issue I see here is that your fullbacks (or the one at least if you change) will be too quick to get forward and you'll have no one in the box when he's ready to cross.

It's all a question of timing here, so Tempo, Duties and Team Shape can tweak these things and how the tactic blends together.

Thanks WJ. I'll make the changes to the tactic and let you know.

Also one question that's a bit off topic here:
Does using the same tactic in all 3 slots increase tactic familiarity faster than having the tactic in one slot and leaving other two slots empty?

 

[WJ]

Thanks WJ. I'll make the changes to the tactic and let you know.

Also one question that's a bit off topic here:
Does using the same tactic in all 3 slots increase tactic familiarity faster than having the tactic in one slot and leaving other two slots empty?

I've never tried it, so I don't know, but I don't think it'll make a difference. To be safe, I'd stick with just the one tactic.

 

[Cookie1]

Thanks WJ. I'll make the changes to the tactic and let you know.

There you go. I made the changes you suggested and so far so good. (As can be seen I have played mostly weaker teams so far)

Any other suggestions you may have are also welcome.

EDIT: Marquinhos Gabriel is not my natural striker. My first choice striker is currently injured, but he has an average rating of 9.03. So the striker also seems okay as a complete forward.

 

[WJ]

Glad to see things are looking good for you.