Help with my deep 4231

[bamba2019]

Hi all, ive never been on for making my own tactics as I never really understood the creator screen. However this year I've found the tactics creation easier to use so I've had a crack at my own tactics. 

Now ive tried this and can't seem to get my strikers to score. And we don't create many chances. It's the first season and we are in 7th 9 games in. Only singing was tonali. Would appreciate any pointers into where I'm falling short. 

 

Also front 4 are all set to press more tackle harder and tight mark. 

Sorry for shocking picture I don't know how to screen shot on laptop 

[Experienced Defender]

Do you have a clear idea on what style of football you want to play. A deep 4231 is generally more suitable for a direct counter-attacking style than control (or) possession-based ones. 

Defense-wise, the Get stuck in TI can be pretty much risky when used with a higher d-line. 

[bamba2019]

Sort of yeah. I want to attack direct when it's on but don't want to waste possession

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, bamba2019 said:

Sort of yeah. I want to attack direct when it's on but don't want to waste possession

Okay. If so, I would suggest adding higher tempo and work ball into box, and reducing attacking width by 1 notch (to fairly narrow). Run at defence should be removed IMO. 

In terms of roles, it doesn't look bad (assuming that you assigned them to the right players). I would consider just a couple of changes. For example, either change the DLP's role to support, so that he would be more attack-minded in attacking transitions, or change his role altogether (to HB, ACM or DM on defend). An example:

PO/AF

Wat             AMsu              IFsu

 

VOLsu     HB

WBde      CDde     BPDde    FBat

SKsu

Positive

- play out of defence, higher tempo, work ball into box, fairly narrow, overlap left (optionally - be more expressive)

- counter, distribute to CBs and FBs (optionally - counter-press)

- higher DL, standard LOE, prevent short GKD (optionally - use offside trap)

Player instructions:

DL/WBde - sit narrower

DMCL/VOLsu - get further forward, mark tighter

DMCR/HB - mark tighter (optionally - close down less)

AMC/AMsu - roam from position, mark tighter (optionally - take more risks)

ST/PO - move into channels

So that could be one possible version. Another one could be something like this:

F9

Wat               SS               IFsu

 

VOLsu     DLPsu

WBde     CDde   CDde    WBsu

SKsu

Mentality and team instructions would be same as in the previous example. As for PIs, the F9 would be told to roam from position. Both DMs to mark tighter. Left WB (defend) to sit narrower. And the volante to get further forward.

So as you can see, neither of the above example setups is too dissimilar to your setup.

 

 

[bamba2019]

42 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Okay. If so, I would suggest adding higher tempo and work ball into box, and reducing attacking width by 1 notch (to fairly narrow). Run at defence should be removed IMO. 

In terms of roles, it doesn't look bad (assuming that you assigned them to the right players). I would consider just a couple of changes. For example, either change the DLP's role to support, so that he would be more attack-minded in attacking transitions, or change his role altogether (to HB, ACM or DM on defend). An example:

PO/AF

Wat             AMsu              IFsu

 

VOLsu     HB

WBde      CDde     BPDde    FBat

SKsu

Positive

- play out of defence, higher tempo, work ball into box, fairly narrow, overlap left (optionally - be more expressive)

- counter, distribute to CBs and FBs (optionally - counter-press)

- higher DL, standard LOE, prevent short GKD (optionally - use offside trap)

Player instructions:

DL/WBde - sit narrower

DMCL/VOLsu - get further forward, mark tighter

DMCR/HB - mark tighter (optionally - close down less)

AMC/AMsu - roam from position, mark tighter (optionally - take more risks)

ST/PO - move into channels

So that could be one possible version. Another one could be something like this:

F9

Wat               SS               IFsu

 

VOLsu     DLPsu

WBde     CDde   CDde    WBsu

SKsu

Mentality and team instructions would be same as in the previous example. As for PIs, the F9 would be told to roam from position. Both DMs to mark tighter. Left WB (defend) to sit narrower. And the volante to get further forward.

So as you can see, neither of the above example setups is too dissimilar to your setup.

 

 

Thank you for that. I will give theses a try, why would you get rid of run with ball just out of interest?  

[Experienced Defender]

23 minutes ago, bamba2019 said:

why would you get rid of run with ball just out of interest?

Because it's a team instruction and as such - it affects all players (except those whose roles are hard-coded to dribble less). You already have enough players up front who will dribble/run with the ball by virtue of their roles. And finally, it increases the risk of losing the ball needlessly. Run at defence generally makes more sense in more fluid systems in which players move forward together in a synchronized manner, supporting one another along the way (and of course, this requires having really good players throughout the system).

[bamba2019]

Thanks very much for that