All is well: Except scoring goals. Especially 1-on-1 situations.

[C-Mon]

PROBLEM: Team is creating loads of chances, but scores on very few. After eight games, I currently have 4 goals on 94 shots, 46 of which are on target. Admittedly, some of these are probably long shots, but at least half of them are from point blank range.

Team: Southampton in the English Premier League

Formation: Wingless 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-1-2

Often Used Team Instructions: Control/Attacking, Balanced, Retain Possession, Shorter Passing, Work Ball Into Box

Expectations: Board expects me to play attacking, possession-oriented football. This fits well with my own ideology. In regards to table-finish, they expect mid-table, and I'm currently 16th with a fair amount of points to get up.

Details:

I'm currently playing a Southampton-save on FM14, where I've managed to apply my strategy and tactics quite quickly. I prefer playing dynamical football with many players behind the ball in defense and many players participating in attack, preferably whilst controlling possession, or at least, having the better part of possession. (Think present-day Juventus.) In terms of build-up play, it's working quite well: Soton generally has the larger share of possession and also makes better use of the ball, carving open the opposition defense several times per match.

The problem is though, my players aren't scoring. Especially not in one-on-one situations, where the opposition goalkeeper tends to save every effort. In fact, I'm pretty sure I'm yet to see a goal scored by my team in such a situation, and I sometimes have dozens of them in a game. It's worth mentioning that I had the same issue on my Juventus save, but did not have this problem whilst managing a random Singaporean side.

What am I doing wrong?

[RTHerringbone]

Have a read of this, and then post the detail we need to help, and you'll be able to get some advice:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/327822-Asking-For-Help-PLEASE-READ-THIS

[C-Mon]

Have a read of this, and then post the detail we need to help, and you'll be able to get some advice:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/327822-Asking-For-Help-PLEASE-READ-THIS

Apologies, and thank you. I've edited the post with some more specific details.

[RTHerringbone]

Could you give an indication of the Roles and Duties you use? A screenshot would be the easiest way to do this.

[C-Mon]

Could you give an indication of the Roles and Duties you use? A screenshot would be the easiest way to do this.

This is the current setup mid-match against Sunderland. In general, I prefer the narrow 4-2-3-1 formation for its potential for moving the ball around in their final third, though as far as roles go, they're not too different. Both backs are generally set to attacking, one central midfielder is generally always set to defending whilst the other(s) are set to support:

[tieio]

Needs a supporting player up front, this looks like a last minute - need a goal really bad - tactic. I bet if that TM became a F9 in support you would have some better luck.

[C-Mon]

Needs a supporting player up front, this looks like a last minute - need a goal really bad - tactic. I bet if that TM became a F9 in support you would have some better luck.

DISCLAIMER: I'm gonna try this in my next match, so the following is just for argument's sake:

Wouldn't this mainly serve to create more chances though? My problem isn't as much creating goals as it is converting the chances I'm already creating.

[tieio]

DISCLAIMER: I'm gonna try this in my next match, so the following is just for argument's sake:

Wouldn't this mainly serve to create more chances though? My problem isn't as much creating goals as it is converting the chances I'm already creating.

I believe that if the defenders are drawn out of position better using what I suggested that it will create more time and space to convert those chances. Converting is not just about getting guys forward, it is about creating space and time to capitalize. You have plenty of help coming from the wings, this is a nice looking setup except for the lack of a supporting player up front to draw defenders. This is a tactic I could park the bus against easily.

[C-Mon]

I believe that if the defenders are drawn out of position better using what I suggested that it will create more time and space to convert those chances. Converting is not just about getting guys forward, it is about creating space and time to capitalize. You have plenty of help coming from the wings, this is a nice looking setup except for the lack of a supporting player up front to draw defenders.

Well, I think you're right about that. Although there's been some really poor finishing going on, I guess a fair share of the good chances have been from tight angles or pressured situations.

This is a tactic I could park the bus against easily.

Well, it's not for lack of trying from the CPU's part. Every team apart from the top 7 seems to be trying to park the bus against me, though play-wise I generally manage to weave through them. Having a potential offensive backing three of Lallana, Gaston Ramirez and Gaitan help in that regard, I guess, though I'll try using a more supporting player in offense to see if it can free up more space for the attacker. Next up is West Brom, should be at least one point...

[C-Mon]

Well, uh, I'm not sure what to say about the first attempt.

Things looked rather different now, with West Brom completely outplaying me from the beginning, forcing me to play a counter game. It did work with Lambert as a False Nine, in that he was able to pull out two defenders and lay on the ball for an equaliser. Didn't go that well though in the end, where West Brom scored two additional goals from defensive slip-ups. 3-1.

Could just be a one-off though, a single match isn't really much of a sample size. I'll try a similar approach again.

[C-Mon]

Further experimentation using either 1 supporting and 1 attacking striker, or 1 supporting striker and AMC and two attacking AMC's:

vs. Fulham - 1-3: Attacking-wise, same deal as before, create bags of chances, convert none. Saints' goal come from a headed corner. Fulham's goals are: a convenient Lovren own-goal, a just as convenient penalty, and a really weird situation where two defenders collide and fall over, gifting the ball to the Fulham striker.

vs. Liverpool - 0-0: Though they're dominating possession, it starts well. Defense is doing their job, and although my midfield is being sloppy, I still get the first gigantic chance of the game, though it's offside. Past half-time, Liverpool have softened a bit and I'm getting chances, though not enough to expect to win it following the barrage in the beginning. 0-0 is a fair result, all things considered.

vs. Arsenal - 0-2: Arsenal is currently the best attacking side in the league and I try to lock them down by playing a five-man backline. So much for that when they have Mertesacker on set pieces, who score both their goals on headers. In truth, I'm not being much less productive than them, but still, no goals. In hindsight, such a defensive formation might not have been too shrewd of me, but then again, it did work wonders in open play. Amusingly, the post-game journalist criticizes me for only relying on headed goals.

vs. West Ham - 2-0: Morale was terrible, but a team-meeting straightened that out. Maybe this is what results in a much needed win for my side. I steamroll them possession wise, and I might say as much that 2-0 is a disappointing win, since I rack up no less than 14 shots on target, many of them from situations I'd often consider sitters.

So a small conclusion: Setting one striker to support may have a tendency to lower the amount of chances created, or that might be down to my tinkering. Either way, the problem remains relatively unsolved: Most finishes are still square on the goalkeeper.

[AvatarST]

How are your two box to box midfielders working? I feel like the BBM isn't a role that's as aggressive or gets forward as advertised. It seems to be a more possession oriented player in my experience. They'll do lots of sideways passes and kinda just hang out deep, which can be good if that's what you're looking for, but pretty terrible otherwise.

BWM also seems to be a little too aggressive for a holding role perhaps?

To be honest I'd do something like this:

Wanyama: CM (D). BMW(D) won't hold position enough which isn't really that helpful to keep possession. I think the reason why you're still keeping the ball well is because as mentioned, BBMs like to hang out deep for some reason, but do not really provide a good attacking option or a goalscoring threat. They're kinda similar to the CM(S) role.

Cork: CM (A).

Romero: Leave as BBM. Or move him to the left side and Cork to the right if he's got better stats for putting chances away and attacking in general. But you want your CM(A) on the left IMO because that's where your support striker is so they'll combine better.

Lambert: F9 or DLF(S) would work fine.

This would generate some better movement between the lines I think. Experiment a bit with mentality too. Control, Counter or Standard might be better for the style you want to play. I find that combining Counter with Hassle Opponents and Push Higher Up makes my team be eager to win the ball but pass it around more carefully when they have it.

If all else fails, go for a 4-1-3-2 instead of 4-3-1-2. I find that it can be pretty tricky to get players in the AMC position to work. It can work but you probably need a brilliant player and very good support.

EDIT: I noticed that, with my suggestions, you'd end up with perhaps too many players on an attacking duty, rushing to try and get forward. Consider an AM (S), AP(S) or a Trequartista (he's more of a support player) in the AMC position if you notice that behaviour.

[C-Mon]

How are your two box to box midfielders working? I feel like the BBM isn't a role that's as aggressive or gets forward as advertised. It seems to be a more possession oriented player in my experience. They'll do lots of sideways passes and kinda just hang out deep, which can be good if that's what you're looking for, but pretty terrible otherwise.

This is actually true, when I think of it. Cork and Romero play kind of consistently "OK", but they don't do much apart from that in their BBM roles. Most of their contributions are recycling possession, taking a few pot shots from distance and generally just being a crutch to lean on. I do play possession oriented, but I also appreciate players trying to search for progressive options rather than just shoving the ball along.

BWM also seems to be a little too aggressive for a holding role perhaps?

Not as much of a problem as you'd initially think. Wanyama covers a lot of ground and is one of the main reasons why I keep it relatively tight at the back. Of course, his job entails that he doesn't contribute much going forward, and with the BBM's not doing it either...

To be honest I'd do something like this:

Cork: CM (A).

I'll try pushing Cork forwards, or replace him with Steven Davies who seems to be a more attacking option, stats-wise.

Romero: Leave as BBM. Or move him to the left side and Cork to the right if he's got better stats for putting chances away and attacking in general. But you want your CM(A) on the left IMO because that's where your support striker is so they'll combine better.

Romero is a good, physical allrounder that covers a lot of ground. His attributes are slightly defense-oriented, but being 19, I'm trying to give him more polish through training. I'll keep him as a BBM and try giving him a few specialized instructions in time.

Lambert: F9 or DLF(S) would work fine.

Working on it. As a supporting striker, he plays well, but of course, the people around him aren't putting the chances he's carving out for them, which causes the fans to call for him being replaced. Still, I only have three real attacking options and I'm not about to drop him.

This would generate some better movement between the lines I think. Experiment a bit with mentality too. Control, Counter or Standard might be better for the style you want to play. I find that combining Counter with Hassle Opponents and Push Higher Up makes my team be eager to win the ball but pass it around more carefully when they have it.

If all else fails, go for a 4-1-3-2 instead of 4-3-1-2. I find that it can be pretty tricky to get players in the AMC position to work. It can work but you probably need a brilliant player and very good support.

Thanks for your help, I'll try tweaking around with mentalities for a bit and see if perhaps being a bit more efficient with possession (expect this to happen with a more attacking central midfield and a better tie-up in front) leads to better opportunities. And if all else fails, yes, maybe I'll try a 4-1-3-2. Right now, I'm pushing the 4-2-3-1 though, with Lambert as a F9 and Lallana, Gaitan and Ramirez coming up behind him.

[C-Mon]

Posting here again at the following request in GD:

@ C-Mon - can you post your 4231 tactic in your thread in TTF?

From the 4312 one that you posted - I would suggest it is the usual problem with 'Attacking' (mentality) tactics - they create lots of chances by simply battering the opposition - but because (by your own statement in that thread) they all 'park the bus' the chances are actually snatched / rushed ones (even if the game (incorrectly) defines them as CCC / HC). There also (to me) looks like you have too many runners / finishers in that setup, with no-one playmaking from deep to try and finesse a goal. However, I should add that the 4312 formation is not one that I have tried personally so I may be talking rubbish.

If that were me, I'd make the AM into an AP(S), one of the strikers into a support role and drop the strategy to control (or lower).

My 4-3-1-2 tactic has usually been my go-to formation in all the FM games, because it fits well with my preferred ideologies. I tried it in my Southampton-save as an alternative to the first one when it didn't work, but I don't really have the players to pull it off. My side-oriented central midfielders lack the combination of creativity and ground-coverage that I need and my AMC options do possess both creative ability and goalscoring ability (then again, who knows about that last one, eh?). You wonder if there's someone to make play from deep: generally, that'd be job of the two CM's that aren't the anchor. Still, as I said, Romero and Cork just aren't good enough. I've reverted back to the starting formation, the narrow 4-2-3-1, and I've altered the instructions quite a bit:

So that's my standard formation right now. The instructions are to Drop Deeper and Work The Ball Into The Box. Results-wise, things are going better, but I'm not happy about it cause' my team isn't playing the kind of football I want them to. Things mostly happen on the break now, they still miss just about every 1v1 chance, and I spend most of the time sitting back, watching the opponents burn 1v1's like I did.

[RTHerringbone]

Out of interest, what is your vision of how you will score goals?

Who makes the pass from deep? Who holds the ball and who finishes?

[C-Mon]

Out of interest, what is your vision of how you will score goals?

Who makes the pass from deep? Who holds the ball and who finishes?

Through-balls, 45 degree layoffs and shots just outside the box. Through balls result in 1v1's, which aren't really working unless they're from an angle. 45 degree balls have always been difficult to pull off but, I feel they're trying when they get into the positions (at which point the shot is usually blocked or saved). Long shots are a different story, but have never been something you could rely on anyways

Who makes the pass from deep isn't really important, could be a stretched ball from the central midfielders or a short probe by a more advanced player. Otherwise, the "route" there should primarily be through one-twos, triangle- and square-plays.

[jujigatame]

I'm not sure any tactical change is going to improve your conversion rate on 1-on-1s. Seems like strikers are too eager to blast the ball at the keeper's chest head-on. You're right that conversion rate for 1-on-1s seems to get better when they approach from an angle.

[Rob4590]

Given that I was the one who asked you to come back in here and post your 4231, I would suggest the following:

In this formation, the 2 MCs are holding players - and unfortunately neither the BBM or the BWM are that (the BBM obviously wants to get forward and the BWM runs around trying to do the ball winning rather than sitting in front of the 2 DCs. I'd change the BWM to a simple CM(D), and maybe either a CM(S) or DLP(S) for the other one - this will then give you defence some protection. I'd also suggest that the 2 full backs are too attacking - having one on attack is fine, but both is again a bit gung-ho (even though I can see why you have done it to try and give some width to your attack. The TQ will drift wide in this formation anyway so I'd suggest the DL is swapped to a support duty, while leaving the DR on attack to overlap the AM(A) who will make runs into the box. You do need to make sure that he (the AM) roams I would suggest, otherwise the center is going to get very congested. Final thing would be that I'm not convinced by an F9, who drops deep, when you already have three AMCs - I'd have thought a CF(A or S) or an AF(A) would have stetched the opponents better, giving more space for your playmakers to do their thing.

But I'm sure RTH or Cleon (and others) will be able to give you further (and better) advice as well.

[Rob4590]

Through balls result in 1v1's, which aren't really working unless they're from an angle.

Just to follow up on this - you've identified that 1v1s are better from slightly wider - and yet you have all your attackers in central areas.......

[Bestieboy666]

Reading through many posts on this forum there are some who always blames your tactics. I also have a scoring problem although I create far more chances than the opposition. This alone suggests your tactic is working but your players just don't score. Why would you want to change a tactic that generates 5-10 ccc's per game. Please understand I am mostly successful in most games but its annoying as hell when you dominate matches to lose a lead or lose the game to an oppositions one shot on target, last minute penalty, last minute own goal, last minute header from a corner. A few times a season is bad luck, every 3 games or so is a problem.

[C-Mon]

Just to follow up on this - you've identified that 1v1s are better from slightly wider - and yet you have all your attackers in central areas.......

Which is why I've decided to shelve '14 until the next patch comes through. Trying to circumvent "playing attackers centrally" as if it were a common mistake should be a non-issue.

I appreciate the help you're trying to give me, but again, I don't really need it. The problems you're adressing aren't really problems, for me. My defense is tight, my two CM's have personalized instructions to ensure they cover ground backwards if we lose the ball and while I agree with you on the lengthwise stretch of opponents with a more attacking striker, again, this only causes more straight-on-goal 1v1s and I think we've both come to the conclusion that it's simply not a viable strategy...

[Rob4590]

this only causes more straight-on-goal 1v1s and I think we've both come to the conclusion that it's simply not a viable strategy...

Please don't put words into my mouth - I did NOT say that - I said that YOU claim to have an issue with straight on goal 1v1s - and yet you insist on playing your attacking 4 all in the middle.

I do NOT have such a problem - perhaps you therefore DO need to look at your tactics to see why you do....

[C-Mon]

Please don't put words into my mouth - I did NOT say that - I said that YOU claim to have an issue with straight on goal 1v1s - and yet you insist on playing your attacking 4 all in the middle.

I do NOT have such a problem - perhaps you therefore DO need to look at your tactics to see why you do....

Because we play different tactics. And I get it, if I play a different style of football that doesn't primarily rely on 1v1s, yes, I'll probably score more. But the orginal question (the one in the GD thread) wasn't "how do I score more goals?", rather "Why can't my players score 1v1s?". I was asked to make a thread here, and I did just that. Then I realized that your run-of-the-mill 1v1s in general are really hard to score from (for both teams) , and abandoned this thread to start discussion back in the GD thread again.

[Wesley6]

Could you post up your original 4231 tactics you mentioned in the OP? I'm sorry I can't really help with your problems but I think I will die of happiness to just see my side create a 1 on 1 chance

I'll try it on my Arsenal side and see what happens!

[C-Mon]

Could you post up your original 4231 tactics you mentioned in the OP? I'm sorry I can't really help with your problems but I think I will die of happiness to just see my side create a 1 on 1 chance

I'll try it on my Arsenal side and see what happens!

It's not that different from the tactic up there, really. Firstly, use a striker with an attacking duty instead. Secondly, instruct the BBM to get forward more often. Thirdly, the mentality should be control (or attacking, if you feel daring). The instructions are: Work Ball Into Box (prevent too many long shots), Shorter Passing + Retain Possession, Drop Deeper (to compensate slightly for two high backs and only one anchor).

If you have a collectovely creative team, use Fluid. If not, stay Balanced.

I think that's it. Typing from my phone right now so I don't have the tactic handy, but that's the jist of it

[Wesley6]

It's not that different from the tactic up there, really. Firstly, use a striker with an attacking duty instead. Secondly, instruct the BBM to get forward more often. Thirdly, the mentality should be control (or attacking, if you feel daring). The instructions are: Work Ball Into Box (prevent too many long shots), Shorter Passing + Retain Possession, Drop Deeper (to compensate slightly for two high backs and only one anchor).

If you have a collectovely creative team, use Fluid. If not, stay Balanced.

I think that's it. Typing from my phone right now so I don't have the tactic handy, but that's the jist of it

Cheers, I'll give it a go and see what happens!

[Wesley6]

Right, so I've had a little tinker and this is what I've ended up with:

4231narrow

GK(D)

FB(A) CB(D) CB(D) WB(S)

DLP(D) BBM(S)

AM(S) AP(S) T(A)

CF(A)

Pretty pleased with it so far - I've only played two friendlies with this against very easy opposition, scored 15 goals in them though and averaged 75% possession. Struggled to beat the mighty Dukla Prague with my tactics before so things are looking up. The real test will come when we start the league games I guess. Most of my goals seem to come from the AM(S) position but all the front four are contributing to play which is pleasing.

Control, Balanced - Team Instructions: Retain Possession, Work Ball into Box, Drop Deeper, Hassle Opponents, Higher Tempo, Exploit the Middle.

Also developed a wider formation...

4231wide

GK(D)

FB(A) CB(D) CB(D) WB(A)

DLP(D) BBM(S)

AP(S) AP(S) T(A) IF(S) IF(S)

CF(A)

Counter, Balanced - Team Instructions: Retain Possession, Work Ball into Box, Drop Deeper, Exploit the Middle, Shorter Passing.

[Wesley6]

Hmm, first league game was a 2-2 home draw against Southampton...

We started off really well, Monreal opening the scoring before Giroud should have added a couple of goals but missed (a through ball put him in but a defender blocked his shot, and he failed to finish a cross). Not sure if I would count them as 1on1s but he should have done better. I was pleased with the chance creation though. Southampton grabbed an equalizer through a corner then took the lead when a through ball put their striker between my center backs and he finished well. Disappointed with the goals but I had forgotten to change the defending corner instructions so maybe that will improve, my right back was off the pitch injured at the time as well. Sagna was playing CB due to injuries so hopefully with my more recognized CBs back we will be more solid.

They shut up shop after the goal and tried to hit us on the counter, they only created one other chance - again from a corner - but we struggled to break them down. Not really sure what the point of my wide formation is, it doesn't really do anything!! Need to tweak the narrow one to find more space against defensive sides.

EDIT: Forgot to say we equalized through a penalty.

[C-Mon]

They shut up shop after the goal and tried to hit us on the counter, they only created one other chance - again from a corner - but we struggled to break them down. Not really sure what the point of my wide formation is, it doesn't really do anything!! Need to tweak the narrow one to find more space against defensive sides.

The wide one doesn't look too bad on paper - however, you are asking them to exploit the middle which in large excludes a player on either side. I'm thinking that you should perhaps remove this instruction, or if you want to keep it, ask them to play narrower in order to involve them more.

[Wesley6]

Yeah I guess I forgot to take that out, was tweaking it from my narrow one. It was primarily meant to be a containing, retain possession tactic so switching to it when I need a goal I guess wouldn't work. I have a spare tactics slot so I'm gonna experiment a bit.

[BiggusD]

Please don't put words into my mouth - I did NOT say that - I said that YOU claim to have an issue with straight on goal 1v1s - and yet you insist on playing your attacking 4 all in the middle.

I do NOT have such a problem - perhaps you therefore DO need to look at your tactics to see why you do....

Actually, I also play a wingless 4231 just like him and the two wide AMC's and the striker share the goals between them equally. The striker is a physical guy who are there for breakthroughs, crosses and tap-ins. The wide (attacking) AMC's are regularly cutting in from just the kind of angle you want to exploit the near post keeper bug.

Scoring goals isn't a problem for me, not 1-on-1's either. What is a problem is an inexplicable fluctuation in player effort and intelligence. My 4231 tactic looks quite a bit like the one in here.

The OP's 4132 tactic has two problems up front as I see it. One of them has been pointed out; the lack of a support role to draw defenders out of position. The other has not been pointed out yet; A Target Man is not really a creative role. He will not look to create chances for others or himself that much. He is an early passing option meant to lay off simple passes and the target of crosses and that's it. It's a fairly limited role and Lambert is good enough to do more. The same with the Poacher role - it is a very selfish role where he will only look to feed off what others create and not create anything himself (other than from running with the ball). A DLF-S + AF-A partnership is likely to help you create more types of chances - for instance Eduardo laying off to Lambert who then takes it with him to the box. In addition, the AMC-A is a fairly aggressive role especially in an Attack strategy - he will also look to finish himself rather than playing more intelligently - and I think he moves mostly up and down vertically instead of finding space where there are holes.

Edit: in conclusion, the chance of missing alone with the keeper increases the longer the player has got the ball before he shoots. The poacher and the AMC are both likely to run with the ball for a while before shooting and there aren't that many completeted crosses for the TM and he doesn't move much so he's likely to be marked well in the box. The Attack strategy is also a rather direct and "urgent" one, further increasing the likelyhood of the forwards going for a quick shot rather than moving the ball laterally in front of goal, which is essential to put the keeper at a disadvantage.

So I think the solution is to play more patiently without the use of shouts (reducing the amount of Attack duties and using Control, Standard or Counter instead of Attack).

[Wesley6]

I just had Giroud miss a 1-on-0 chance cross came in and he nipped onto it infront of the keeper leaving him with an open goal. He proceeded to stand still until a defender could come tackle him.