Lack of play through the middle

[Sebas]

Hello everyone.

Lately i've loaded up a save with Real Madrid and i'm trying to create a tactic that can hopefully integrate smart and talented players in the future, mainly focused on players with high vision and talent.

This is the tactic i'm using:

Usually i would play Bale on the left and Asensio on the right but Bale is injured at the moment.

It isn't the most dynamic tactic out there but i find it balanced enough to perform, specially with a team as good as Real Madrid. Main ideas are mainly:

• Wing Backs providing width (i'm a bit hellbent on not playing IWB because i prefer my wingers to play closer to my strikers)
• IF's playing in the channels, looking to connect with my DLF and play one-twos.
• Playmakers tasked with finding forwards in space and play throughballs for them or for my Wing Backs.
• Half Back to provide a better structure when playing out of the back, allowing my Wing Backs some defensive support before bombing forward.
• Sweeper Keeper + BPD combo to provide an alternative when playing out of the back is difficult because of opposition pressing.

None PI's aside from asking my 3 forwards to press more often and my left IF to get forward more often.

It has gotten me great results already, including beating Atlético 3-0 at the European Supercup and beating Valencia 3-1 at home. I'm pleased with its wingplay and my fullbacks generally are able to throw in great crosses and grab assists regularly.

I'm concerned however with its lack play through the middle. I know that most teams in the league will sit back, crowd the middle and concede space out wide, which we have often taken advantage of through my wingbacks crosses. However i still feel like both my playmakers and my left IF could get more involved in creating chances as they usually struggle to make through balls or create chances if it isn't a cross.

My striker isn't playing too great either. I wanted him to spearhed my attack but to work as an attacking pivot aswell for my IF's to make one-twos. He isn't shooting as much as i hoped to and he can be very anonymous specially against a packed defense.

This are Karim Benzena's stats:

In general i would just like to give my team a different edge by being efficient creating chances in the middle aswell as through the wings. I feel like i have very talented players with high mental and technical abilities to unlock defenses but i can't seem to give them the best tactical platform to create chances the way i want them to. 

These are my recent matches's action zones:

  

Very wide-ish approach as you can see

So thats it basically. I'm not struggling by any means but i would to provide my team with a different edge when we play and create chances, regardless of the opposition. I often watch Man City games in real life and i see KDB and David Silva playing greath through balls even against very defensive teams in the premier league and i would like to replicate that. At the moment it feels like im too dependent on crosses and my two playmakers aren't being influential when creating chances. 

Any advises are welcome. Thanks in advance.

 

 

[lferreira]

Alright, defense looks alright and as Real you can afford to have two wingbacks. What you could/should do to improve play in the middle:

- Change one of the playmakers for something else (a Mezzala, for example), could be Modric.

- Have your DM as a DM on support or defense (on higher mentalities play him on defend duty) - he will be a slightly deeper option in midfield.

- If you're keeping the DLP next to a Mezzala, have an IWB-Su on the same side as the DLP. I'd rather have Marcelo as he's a more technical player. Carvajal could be a more conservative FB-Su. 

- To provide more width one of your IFs could be a Winger. 

- If you want a spearhead who drops deep and then makes runs into the box, a DLF-At should work, but you have to consider that Benzema may not have the physical stats to get to the box in time. I suspect that's the case.

Your team instructions, however, look pretty solid. I'd try something like this for a formation:

--------------------Sk-Su---------------------

FB-Su ----BPD-De--CD-De----IWB-Su

----------------DM-De/Su-----------------

-------------Mez-At---DLP-Su------------

IF-Su-----------------------------------W-At

-------------------DLF-At-------------------

A Trequartista would work wonders too but I'm not sure Benzema can play as one, I mostly play lower leagues and underdog teams. 

Edit - if you keep your formation, try to tweak the positioning of your left IF. Check if he's being fed enough and where he's receiving the ball - can he make a run? Does he have enough space to dribble/cut inside? Playing with two IFs usually means teams will defend narrow and your wingbacks will be the "out ball", hence the crosses. 

[Experienced Defender]

Since your you say the tactic works well for you, I would recommend against making changes (as long as it works), even though I personally would tweak it a bit. For example, I would not play with 2 PMs literally next to each other. Instead, I would rather keep Kroos as a DLP but would change Modric into a mezzala (preferably on attack, but in the particular case of Modric I might rather opt for support duty, because of his advanced age). 

Apart from that, the tactic in general looks good to me  

2 hours ago, Sebas said:

None PI's aside from asking my 3 forwards to press more often and my left IF to get forward more often

Rather than telling the IF on support to get forward more, I would tell him to sit narrower, and for two reasons:

1. because the system has none in AMC, so he can explore that space and thus be encouraged to act as a sort of quasi-AMC

2. in order to leave more space on the flank for the naturally overlapping WB

That should create more dynamic interplay in the opposition half and final third. And even more so if you decide to try a mezzala instead of the AP.

[Sebas]

hace 1 hora, lferreira dijo:

Alright, defense looks alright and as Real you can afford to have two wingbacks. What you could/should do to improve play in the middle:

- Change one of the playmakers for something else (a Mezzala, for example), could be Modric.

- Have your DM as a DM on support or defense (on higher mentalities play him on defend duty) - he will be a slightly deeper option in midfield.

- If you're keeping the DLP next to a Mezzala, have an IWB-Su on the same side as the DLP. I'd rather have Marcelo as he's a more technical player. Carvajal could be a more conservative FB-Su. 

- To provide more width one of your IFs could be a Winger. 

- If you want a spearhead who drops deep and then makes runs into the box, a DLF-At should work, but you have to consider that Benzema may not have the physical stats to get to the box in time. I suspect that's the case.

Your team instructions, however, look pretty solid. I'd try something like this for a formation:

--------------------Sk-Su---------------------

FB-Su ----BPD-De--CD-De----IWB-Su

----------------DM-De/Su-----------------

-------------Mez-At---DLP-Su------------

IF-Su-----------------------------------W-At

-------------------DLF-At-------------------

A Trequartista would work wonders too but I'm not sure Benzema can play as one, I mostly play lower leagues and underdog teams. 

Edit - if you keep your formation, try to tweak the positioning of your left IF. Check if he's being fed enough and where he's receiving the ball - can he make a run? Does he have enough space to dribble/cut inside? Playing with two IFs usually means teams will defend narrow and your wingbacks will be the "out ball", hence the crosses. 

Thanks for the feedback!

• I'm not sure if playing a Mezzala with an IF in the same side is a good idea, wouldn't they be mainly be trying to sit on the same space?  I always try to pair a Mez with a Winger for that reason, although in this case i'm playing with inverted wingers trying to play in the channels, close to my striker.
• Changing my DM is a good shout, as Casemiro generally tends to not offer much when he is in a defensive duty and the opposition are camping on their own half as he really doesn't have much to do in defensive terms. I will try that.
• As i said before, i'm a little hesitant on playing with IWB's because i prefer them to be the ones stretching the pitch, allowing my wingers to come inside. 
• I think a DLF on attack reflects what i want from him. He'll be dropping into the channels, not making forward runs too often but still looking to attack the box because of his high mentality. I wonder what do you mean by Benzema not having the physical stats to play that role? he does have great balance and control to hold the ball, good pace and acceleration to attack the box and great shooting to finish his chances, alongside with great mentals to play practically any role as a striker.

The point after you edited your post is an interesting one because i often have matches where my playmakers (and the rest of the team in general) struggle to find any of my 3 forwards, and when they do, they often just dribble inside before either shooting or switching the play but they hardly combine between each other. This happens very often when i play defensive sides who pack the space in front of the defense (sides playing with one DMC, two DMC's, playing with 3 at the back, etc). This i think is the weakest point of my tactic and the one i'm trying to fix right now.

[wixxi]

I would second lferreira's suggestion of changing the DM to a slightly more supporting role/duty such as DM/S however DM/D could still work. I think combining this with a change to more attacking roles for the CMs could help to drive the midfield forward while staying compact in the event of transitions and combined with the higher d-line + loe should fit into the tactic well. However would probably tweak this slightly when playing top teams since it would leave vulnerability against the counter with double WB - I would probably go with a DM/D to create a 2-1 block for those situations

[Sebas]

hace 29 minutos, Experienced Defender dijo:

Since your you say the tactic works well for you, I would recommend against making changes (as long as it works), even though I personally would tweak it a bit. For example, I would not play with 2 PMs literally next to each other. Instead, I would rather keep Kroos as a DLP but would change Modric into a mezzala (preferably on attack, but in the particular case of Modric I might rather opt for support duty, because of his advanced age). 

Apart from that, the tactic in general looks good to me  

Rather than telling the IF on support to get forward more, I would tell him to sit narrower, and for two reasons:

1. because the system has none in AMC, so he can explore that space and thus be encouraged to act as a sort of quasi-AMC

2. in order to leave more space on the flank for the naturally overlapping WB

That should create more dynamic interplay in the opposition half and final third. And even more so if you decide to try a mezzala instead of the AP.

Thank you! 

• Yes, i often have both playmakers playing way too close to each other which is bad for circulating the ball efectively. I would change the role of one of them but it just seems counter intuitive. I want both of them to be responsable of finding my strikers in advanced areas and having only one of them being a playmaker would prioritize the play through him. Plus for some reason playmakers always move way too much towards the ball, making my team very loopsided, regardless of using only one or two playmakers. For now it seems logical to me to keep playing with 2 paymakers as i want both of them to be focused with making my team tick.
• I will try asking my left IF to play more narrower. What you say makes sense though would that mean that an attacking wing back is more logical to use in that wing configuration?
• As i said before when i replied to lferreira. I'm hesitant to try a Mezzala with a IF as i find them both playing the same space. Specially with a team of this reputation, space will be scarse so i need to spread my players evenly on the whole pitch. What do you think of this?

That is just to answer what you said. I still think that the main trouble i'm having is getting my three strikers to combine well and more often. They often have very low ratings if they don't score or assist and can often dissapear from the game. I'm trying to teach Asensio, Brahim and Ceballos (along with Vinicius when he unlearns to shoot from distance) to play one-twos (none of the players on the squad have this PPM btw) to see if it can spice up my attack but i'm not to sure if this will do the trick.

I value your opinion a lot as i have seen your responses on other threads and you give some very logical feedback. If possible i would like, if you answer back on this thread, to take note of the second part of this reply regarding my three players up top not combining well enough. Cheers!

[Experienced Defender]

54 minutes ago, Sebas said:

I will try asking my left IF to play more narrower. What you say makes sense though would that mean that an attacking wing back is more logical to use in that wing configuration?

You mean a wing-back on attack duty instead of support? 

 

55 minutes ago, Sebas said:

As i said before when i replied to lferreira. I'm hesitant to try a Mezzala with a IF as i find them both playing the same space. Specially with a team of this reputation, space will be scarse so i need to spread my players evenly on the whole pitch. What do you think of this?

Have you watched Rashidi's videos featuring a tactic that uses the very combination of a mezzala (on attack) and IF (on support)? I think the tactic is called "Firefox" or something like that. With the right players, a combo of mezzala and IF can work wonders. Yes, they do operate in adjacent areas of the pitch but there is nothing wrong with that. To the contrary, such an interplay can help with creating overloads, so it can prove very useful, especially when you are a top team struggling to break down defensive opposition.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

If possible i would like, if you answer back on this thread, to take note of the second part of this reply regarding my three players up top not combining well enough

 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

I still think that the main trouble i'm having is getting my three strikers to combine well and more often. They often have very low ratings if they don't score or assist and can often dissapear from the game

First, you don't have 3 strikers but one striker and 2 wide forwards. But the problem is not with them as players, nor with their roles - because a combo of IFsu, IFat and DLFat is a good one. However, you cannot look at things in isolation. You need to keep in mind that your strikers/forwards are an integral part of the tactic as a whole, not an independent entity. And here comes into play what I already suggested in relation to the issue of having both CMs as playmakers. I still believe that changing one of them into a mezzala would benefit your front 3 as well, but I cannot help you if you insist on playing with 2 PMs in central midfield: 

 

2 hours ago, Sebas said:

For now it seems logical to me to keep playing with 2 paymakers as i want both of them to be focused with making my team tick

Therefore, you need to decide whether you are willing to get rid of one PM (role, not player) or not. If you are, I'll be glad to help with some more advice.

[Sebas]

 

hace 22 minutos, Experienced Defender dijo:

First, you don't have 3 strikers but one striker and 2 wide forwards. But the problem is not with them as players, nor with their roles - because a combo of IFsu, IFat and DLFat is a good one. However, you cannot look at things in isolation. You need to keep in mind that your strikers/forwards are an integral part of the tactic as a whole, not an independent entity. And here comes into play what I already suggested in relation to the issue of having both CMs as playmakers. I still believe that changing one of them into a mezzala would benefit your front 3 as well, but I cannot help you if you insist on playing with 2 PMs in central midfield: 

 

Therefore, you need to decide whether you are willing to get rid of one PM (role, not player) or not. If you are, I'll be glad to help with some more advice.

Sure, don't take it the wrong way, i'm willing to change any part of my tactic in order to improve it. I just wasn't too convinced that the problem was playing with 2 playmakers in the mid. I'll try a couple of games with a Mez (S) and IF (S) on the left side with the IF (S) instructed to sit narrower and close down more. Maybe i can see some good interplay between the two between the two playing more closely and also it may help with the ball circulation in the middle with having 2 centermids more spread out.

I thought the same about the front 3 as the roles chosen made sense to me. Not too sure if the three up front have the PPM's needed to make more combinations in between them though (both Isco and Asensio have run with the ball often and Asensio has shoots from distance aswell). As i said before, i'm training a couple of offensive players two play more one-twos, maybe that could help?

hace 1 hora, Experienced Defender dijo:

You mean a wing-back on attack duty instead of support? 

Yes i meant a Wing Back on attack duty, although keeping in mind that i'l try a Mezzala on his flank i think it might be a little bit too offensive.

Will also take a look at the Rashidi video you suggested.

Edit: I may not have described efectively what i'm looking to improve on this tactic but just to clarify, i'm looking for two things: (1) have my CM's be more influential in the attacking phase and playing more througballs for my IF's and my striker and (2) Make my front 3 make more combinations in between them to unlock compact defenses. These problems are more frequent when playing against more defensive sides.

[Experienced Defender]

Just now, Sebas said:

I just wasn't too convinced that the problem was playing with 2 playmakers in the mid

In my humble of opinion, that's the key - and probably the only real - problem with your tactic. Because as I already said - apart from the 2 PMs, the tactic looks nice. 

 

4 minutes ago, Sebas said:

Yes i meant a Wing Back on attack duty, although keeping in mind that i'l try a Mezzala on his flank i think it might be a little bit too offensive

I would play the mezzala (Modric) on the opposite side (MCR), whereas DLP (Kroos) would be in MCL. I have analyzed your preferred starting 11 from your tactic screenshot (including both their attributes and traits), and I have a very clear idea as to how I would play with them. Would you like to know what's my idea? Of course, you don't have to play the way I would, but can use my setup just as a starting point to give you some food for thought.

[lferreira]

6 hours ago, Sebas said:

Thanks for the feedback!

• I'm not sure if playing a Mezzala with an IF in the same side is a good idea, wouldn't they be mainly be trying to sit on the same space?  I always try to pair a Mez with a Winger for that reason, although in this case i'm playing with inverted wingers trying to play in the channels, close to my striker.
• Changing my DM is a good shout, as Casemiro generally tends to not offer much when he is in a defensive duty and the opposition are camping on their own half as he really doesn't have much to do in defensive terms. I will try that.
• As i said before, i'm a little hesitant on playing with IWB's because i prefer them to be the ones stretching the pitch, allowing my wingers to come inside. 
• I think a DLF on attack reflects what i want from him. He'll be dropping into the channels, not making forward runs too often but still looking to attack the box because of his high mentality. I wonder what do you mean by Benzema not having the physical stats to play that role? he does have great balance and control to hold the ball, good pace and acceleration to attack the box and great shooting to finish his chances, alongside with great mentals to play practically any role as a striker.

The point after you edited your post is an interesting one because i often have matches where my playmakers (and the rest of the team in general) struggle to find any of my 3 forwards, and when they do, they often just dribble inside before either shooting or switching the play but they hardly combine between each other. This happens very often when i play defensive sides who pack the space in front of the defense (sides playing with one DMC, two DMC's, playing with 3 at the back, etc). This i think is the weakest point of my tactic and the one i'm trying to fix right now.

A Mezzala-At with a IF-Su can be absolutely devastating and leaves a lot of space for your other wide player to attack (as the defence will get drawn to one side), or a late runner from midfield for an open pot shot at goal from just outside the box. If you watch @Rashidi, he even mentions in one of his gamechanger videos that this is a "classic" goal for the 4-1-2-3. 

About the Wingbacks, you can of course have them as they are if you want two IFs. As @Experienced Defendersaid, the problem with your tactic is that you have two playmakers and one of them will not run with the ball. Both roles have take more risks, so what happens in your midfield play is that the move starts from there, but doesn't continue there for long.

What I mean is that probably the running WBs are the bread and butter of your playmakers as they're the guys running into space, so they find them more often and then the play develops from the wing. Check your key pass combinations - your playmakers will be one of them in this setup, and you'll probably have a playmaker-wingback combination very high on the list as well as the IF and the WB connecting.

See if Benzema is involved in any of them.

[Overmars]

Your front three will be positioned narrowly among 4 or 5 defenders. Your own half back and central defenders will be hanging back. Your two playmakers will have the ball, and neither will be readily attacking the box, instead opting to seek out a pass recipient. Either they will end up passing to each other or to your wingbacks, since they will be in the space vacated by the inside forwards. And from there, the match engine mechanics take over, and you will get cross after cross after cross.

In FM19, the way people generally change this typical attack is by using inverted wingbacks and giving the central midfielders licence to go forward themselves. Attacks through the middle can occur more easily that way because an IWB(a) and/or a CM(a)/MEZ(a) racing into the box can pull attention away from your front three and create more varied passing opportunities. If you don't have those runs through the middle, you get a mostly stationary front three waiting for something to happen, and that something will almost always be a cross.

[summatsupeer]

Not sure what you've changed with previous advice so I'm looking at original.

I think your main issue is you've setup the roles&duties to be quite vertical mostly on the flanks, DLF-At, IF-At, IF-Su (due to added PI) and 2xWB-Su.  Your two CM are wanting to collect the ball to feet, once they do who are they going to play a through ball to?

Then your using Positive with Play Out Of Defence and Shorter Passing so slowing your transitions down and letting opponents get back, especially as your 3 central midfielders will typically be deep to collect the ball.  How does that work when all 3 forwards are making Forward Runs Often and two are very high mentality?

As DLF-At I'd say he's looking to lay it off and make a run or feed a wide player before charging into the box himself.  Playing mostly on the shoulder isn't really going to make him available as "the wall" for 1-2s.

If you want such a focus running in behind you can't be so patient with the ball.  If you want more interplay you need less focus on running in behind and more close support.

[Sebas]

hace 19 horas, Experienced Defender dijo:

In my humble of opinion, that's the key - and probably the only real - problem with your tactic. Because as I already said - apart from the 2 PMs, the tactic looks nice. 

 

I would play the mezzala (Modric) on the opposite side (MCR), whereas DLP (Kroos) would be in MCL. I have analyzed your preferred starting 11 from your tactic screenshot (including both their attributes and traits), and I have a very clear idea as to how I would play with them. Would you like to know what's my idea? Of course, you don't have to play the way I would, but can use my setup just as a starting point to give you some food for thought.

I've made the changes you suggested and match performance has gone through the roof. Will make a separate post to talk about it but i feel that playing a Mezzala (in this case, i'm playing a Mez on support on the right as you suggested) with a DLP-S really improved the general attacking play of the team. The centermids are more spread out, giving each other more space to dictate play and the Mezzala in particular is working wonders with the IF's, specially when he enter the area and causes confusion at the opposition's defensive line. Doesn't happen too often as i often choose to play Modric or Isco in this role and both have the drops deep to collect the ball PPM so they don't make too many forward runs when playing this role.

And yeah i would be glad if you could show me what tactic you would play with this team. Keep in mind though that i'm mainly looking for 2 inside forwards and one striker playing closely together, trying to combine and play one-twos with 2 center mids supporting them and both wing backs stretching the pitch and providing the width. Your setup may differ from the way i'm trying to play with this team but it can definately spark some new ideas for me and help me being more versatile with the team, so go ahead please.

hace 15 horas, lferreira dijo:

A Mezzala-At with a IF-Su can be absolutely devastating and leaves a lot of space for your other wide player to attack (as the defence will get drawn to one side), or a late runner from midfield for an open pot shot at goal from just outside the box. If you watch @Rashidi, he even mentions in one of his gamechanger videos that this is a "classic" goal for the 4-1-2-3. 

About the Wingbacks, you can of course have them as they are if you want two IFs. As @Experienced Defendersaid, the problem with your tactic is that you have two playmakers and one of them will not run with the ball. Both roles have take more risks, so what happens in your midfield play is that the move starts from there, but doesn't continue there for long.

What I mean is that probably the running WBs are the bread and butter of your playmakers as they're the guys running into space, so they find them more often and then the play develops from the wing. Check your key pass combinations - your playmakers will be one of them in this setup, and you'll probably have a playmaker-wingback combination very high on the list as well as the IF and the WB connecting.

See if Benzema is involved in any of them.

Yes. I guess i was too focused on this trending positional play idea that every player has to play in a different spot on the pitch in order to create a more dynamic attacking approach. I've started playing with a Mez-S in the middle and it really started to make my team tick way more. The thing that is different is, as i've said before when answering to Experienced Defender, is that the players i'm using for this role have a PPM that prevents them from getting forward too often, so it is rather rare for me to see them surging into the box. They do position themselves higher up the pitch than the DPL-S, often unmarked infront of the space inbetween the opposition centerback and fullback. Modric has been great in this role actually, either shooting from distance when having the chance or laying it off for either the WB-S overlapping or for one of the IFs to dribble inside and take a shot.

I see what you and Experienced Defender meant by playing two playmakers so close to each other in the sense that it may make them pass the ball to each other too much, and with both WB-S and IF's making forward runs (I've actually set my left IF-S to sit narrower instead of getting forward more often) they wouldn't have too many people to pass to as everybody would be making runs instead of trying to combine.

Overall i'm very happy with the changes i've made although i'm still concerned about the performance of certain players. Isco in particular is being hard to get to perform consistently, which is odd as i thought he was the player with the best attributes+PPMs combination in the squad to play the way i want to.

[Sebas]

hace 5 horas, Overmars dijo:

Your front three will be positioned narrowly among 4 or 5 defenders. Your own half back and central defenders will be hanging back. Your two playmakers will have the ball, and neither will be readily attacking the box, instead opting to seek out a pass recipient. Either they will end up passing to each other or to your wingbacks, since they will be in the space vacated by the inside forwards. And from there, the match engine mechanics take over, and you will get cross after cross after cross.

In FM19, the way people generally change this typical attack is by using inverted wingbacks and giving the central midfielders licence to go forward themselves. Attacks through the middle can occur more easily that way because an IWB(a) and/or a CM(a)/MEZ(a) racing into the box can pull attention away from your front three and create more varied passing opportunities. If you don't have those runs through the middle, you get a mostly stationary front three waiting for something to happen, and that something will almost always be a cross.

Thanks for commenting. I like the way you described that pattern as it often happened like that. I've since changed one IF (the one the left on a support duty) to stop making forward runs that often and it resulted in my centermids having another option to pass and combine before trying to find either my right IF-A or a WB-S overlapping. 

And also i agree with your second paragraph. I'm a bit hesitant to try an IWB as i deliberately want my IF working closer with the Striker rather than widening the pitch and looking for crosses. I feel like i lack a runner in the centermid, with a lot of my midfield options having the drop deeper to collect the ball PPM i'm unsure if they can fulfill that role effectively as a surprise outlet in the final third. I'll look into the transfer market to find a good option (Bernardo Silva would be ideal as he is both young, technically and mentally fantastic, fast and phisically impressive and more importantly has PPM that can generate that kind of movement regardless of the role chosen)

hace 1 hora, summatsupeer dijo:

Not sure what you've changed with previous advice so I'm looking at original.

I think your main issue is you've setup the roles&duties to be quite vertical mostly on the flanks, DLF-At, IF-At, IF-Su (due to added PI) and 2xWB-Su.  Your two CM are wanting to collect the ball to feet, once they do who are they going to play a through ball to?

Then your using Positive with Play Out Of Defence and Shorter Passing so slowing your transitions down and letting opponents get back, especially as your 3 central midfielders will typically be deep to collect the ball.  How does that work when all 3 forwards are making Forward Runs Often and two are very high mentality?

As DLF-At I'd say he's looking to lay it off and make a run or feed a wide player before charging into the box himself.  Playing mostly on the shoulder isn't really going to make him available as "the wall" for 1-2s.

If you want such a focus running in behind you can't be so patient with the ball.  If you want more interplay you need less focus on running in behind and more close support.

Well, on paper the idea i had was that the IF-S on the left, regardless of him being instructed to get forward more often would still look to combine with both playmakers because of his support mentality, with Benzema dropping deep because of his role even while playing on an attacking duty being another option for my centermids to pass and combine before looking to find my right IF-A. I think that both instructing my IF-S on the left to get forward more often and playing my striker with such an offensive mentality made them more focused on getting in the opposition area quickly rather than dropping a little and looking to combine with me playmakers. Both WB-S were chosen to support my IF and to stretch the pitch, and with both IF pinning their respective opposion fullback, it made sense that the only space available was being exploited my Wing Baks getting forward and my playmakers passing to them. 

I've since changed my tactic to have one DPL-S on the left, a Mez-S on the right and instructing my left IF-S to sit narrower to combine with my centermids instead of getting forward more often and my players are combining more often, making my attack more dynamic and not depending on my WB-S dropping a good cross. Although this is often the way we score against very defensive opposition generally playing with 3 at the back defensive configurations.

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, Sebas said:

i would be glad if you could show me what tactic you would play with this team. Keep in mind though that i'm mainly looking for 2 inside forwards and one striker playing closely together, trying to combine and play one-twos with 2 center mids supporting them and both wing backs stretching the pitch and providing the width. Your setup may differ from the way i'm trying to play with this team but it can definately spark some new ideas for me and help me being more versatile with the team, so go ahead please

Okay. So this is how I would set up your preferred starting 11:

DLFat

IFsu                                    IFat

DLPsu     MEZsu

HB

FBat       CD      BPD      FBsu

SKde

These are PIs I would use:

DCL/CD - Varane - stay wider

DR/FBsu - Carvajal - sit narrower

HB - Casemiro - mark tighter

AML/IFsu - Isco - sit narrower

Mentality remains the same - Positive

As for team instructions:

- in possession - same as yours + work ball into box (an instruction that should help you achieve what you want in the final third) - low crosses (I would leave them on default and let the players decide what type of cross is optimal at the moment)

An instruction you may consider as an occasional option - higher tempo (moving the ball quicker can sometimes confuse defenses of weaker opposition)

- in transition - same as yours + counter + distribute to FBs (in addition to CBs)

- out of possession - basically same as yours, although I would occasionally drop the LOE just a notch (to standard) to try and encourage a defensive opponent out of their defensive shell (you can experiment with this tweak and see when it works and when not)

Now, there is one more option that you can try in certain situations:

- remove the Prevent short GKD and tell your front 3 + the mezzala to close down more

So my tactic, including the setup of roles and duties is very similar to yours. The only changes are:

- AP changed into MEZ (already discussed and explained)

- LB (Marcelo) changed from WBsu to FBat (to get more penetration on the left and create a natural overlap with Isco, although this natural overlap would occur with the WB on support as well)

- RB (Carvajal) as a FBsu instead of WBsu (because the mezzala and attacking IF are on his side, he needs to play a bit more conservative role)

Any questions?

 

[summatsupeer]

6 hours ago, Sebas said:

Both WB-S were chosen to support my IF and to stretch the pitch, and with both IF pinning their respective opposion fullback, it made sense that the only space available was being exploited my Wing Baks getting forward and my playmakers passing to them. 

...

not depending on my WB-S dropping a good cross. Although this is often the way we score against very defensive opposition generally playing with 3 at the back defensive configurations.

Glad you've seen an improvement.

Just want to point out what I think is a commonly made mistake. I often see people say something like "WBs to provide width" and then complain they're "cross heavy".  This is typically due to slow tempo and/or short passes that slow transitions down and lets opponents not only get behind the ball, but easily drop towards there box.  At that point you have to break them down, runs in behind are less effective since there's no space so its more about passes to feet or beating a player with a dribble.  The only space is on the flanks and once the WB gets it, likely doesn't have much option except to cross it.

A simple FB-Su can "provide width", its more a question of when and where.  Typically a little later and deeper which can draw defenders/midfielders out and create space for the wide forward or central midfielder rather than having him overlap and swinging a cross into a packed box.  Even though your on Attacking mentality, that Much Shorter Passing will slow things down not only due to passing distance but it affecting tempo to the point you allow defences to drop to there box. If want a more patient/possession style then i'd prefer the forward to be support and link more and the FBs to be more patient, probably need a bit more patience adding through TIs to though with so many Real Madrid players like Bale liking to shoot from distance that patience could suddenly be gone with a pot shot.

If want an earlier attacking option, then might want them to take more risks earlier on to give width during transitions when the opponents defence is still dropping towards there own goal and aren't deep+narrow and organized, but this needs the right balance of mentality+passing+tempo to get them the ball and use that run. Your front 3 roles+duties should be in good position to do so but the ball movement would need to be adjusted.

[Sebas]

En 29/8/2019 a las 17:08, Experienced Defender dijo:

Okay. So this is how I would set up your preferred starting 11

Thank for you suggestions. Sorry i couldn't answer back sooner but i had a busy couple of the days lately. I do have a couple of things i would like to point out:

As for PIs i'm intrigued by your decision to ask the left center-back to move wider. First thing i noticed though is that you moved my BPD to the right (is that to move him away from my DPL so that he's not bypassed during the initial build up from the back?). Regarding the instruction itself, is that for him to cover for the FB-A on the left when we have the ball?

I'm also wondering whats the reasoning behind asking my HB to mark tighter and would love if you could explain why.

As for team instructions:

• I'm a bit hesitant about using WBIB as i'm not against my fullbacks/wingbacks crossing the ball and taking advantage of space in wider areas (specially with Benzema and Bale being very good in the air). Maybe i could use it when playing against 3 at the back or against opposition that is good in the air in defense?
• Why would you use counter? i know that Real has great players to play on the counter but must of the time (specially in La Liga) opposition defenses will mostly stay back and soak up pressure so space to counter will mostly be scarse. On top of it i have the feeling (can't say if it is the reason why) that using counter speeds things up a bit too much during transitions and i see my players attempt more long-shots or way too risky passes that often end up giving possession away. Considering that TIs are mostly choosen to play a more possession orientented game i don't understand whats the benefit of ticking the counter instruction (specially considering the context of the teams that real often play against).

I agree with pretty much everything else you suggested. My team recently suffered a bit of a slump in terms of performance but we are still winning matches. I'm considering getting a striker more tasked with scoring goals than being a pivot to make one-twos in the final third. Can i ask you how would you integrate an AF-A/PF-A/Poacher into the tactic? 

 

[Sebas]

En 29/8/2019 a las 20:00, summatsupeer dijo:

Glad you've seen an improvement.

Just want to point out what I think is a commonly made mistake. I often see people say something like "WBs to provide width" and then complain they're "cross heavy".  This is typically due to slow tempo and/or short passes that slow transitions down and lets opponents not only get behind the ball, but easily drop towards there box.  At that point you have to break them down, runs in behind are less effective since there's no space so its more about passes to feet or beating a player with a dribble.  The only space is on the flanks and once the WB gets it, likely doesn't have much option except to cross it.

A simple FB-Su can "provide width", its more a question of when and where.  Typically a little later and deeper which can draw defenders/midfielders out and create space for the wide forward or central midfielder rather than having him overlap and swinging a cross into a packed box.  Even though your on Attacking mentality, that Much Shorter Passing will slow things down not only due to passing distance but it affecting tempo to the point you allow defences to drop to there box. If want a more patient/possession style then i'd prefer the forward to be support and link more and the FBs to be more patient, probably need a bit more patience adding through TIs to though with so many Real Madrid players like Bale liking to shoot from distance that patience could suddenly be gone with a pot shot.

If want an earlier attacking option, then might want them to take more risks earlier on to give width during transitions when the opponents defence is still dropping towards there own goal and aren't deep+narrow and organized, but this needs the right balance of mentality+passing+tempo to get them the ball and use that run. Your front 3 roles+duties should be in good position to do so but the ball movement would need to be adjusted.

Thats a very fair point and i haven't thought about it that way before. I'm mainly inclined to play a more possession oriented approach regardless of the team i manage but i've actually tried to be more flexible and try a more direct approach while still keeping a possitive/attacking mentality (both in terms of tactical mentality and general tactical approach). 

Which changes would you consider to make in order to make the ball move forward more quickly without turning into a counter attacking side (if i understand correctly)?

Thanks in advance.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

As for PIs i'm intrigued by your decision to ask the left center-back to move wider

The idea is for the LCB to cover for the attacking fullback on that side, but that particular PI is not necessary, so you don't have to use it. I use it when I have a high-quality CB, which Varane definitely is. Otherwise, I look to avoid it. 

 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

First thing i noticed though is that you moved my BPD to the right (is that to move him away from my DPL so that he's not bypassed during the initial build up from the back?)

That's the main reason, yes. Another reason is that Varane IMHO is a bit more reliable defensively than Ramos, which is why I opted to put him on the side of the more attack-minded fullback, so Ramos - who is the BPD - automatically goes to the right side. 

 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

Regarding the instruction itself, is that for him to cover for the FB-A on the left when we have the ball?

Yes, as I already explained above  

 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

I'm also wondering whats the reasoning behind asking my HB to mark tighter and would love if you could explain why

I generally tend to instruct defensive and central midfielders to mark tighter, especially when I play in a more defensive fashion (not necessarily a low mentality), because it's a safer way to put pressure on the opposition during their build-ups than more urgent pressing (and sometimes I combine TM with get stuck in a.k.a. hard tackling). But since there is no reason to play defensively with a team like Real, I use this PI only for the DM (regardless of the role) and only if he is really good in terms of defending (which Casemiro clearly is). So the decision to use the TM PI or not depends on the quality of the DM as a player. If I think he is good enough to mark tightly, I'll use the PI. Otherwise, I won't. Simply. 

 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

I'm a bit hesitant about using WBIB as i'm not against my fullbacks/wingbacks crossing the ball and taking advantage of space in wider areas (specially with Benzema and Bale being very good in the air). Maybe i could use it when playing against 3 at the back or against opposition that is good in the air in defense?

You don't have to use WBiB if you don't want. I explained why I proposed this TI: 

 

On 29/08/2019 at 23:08, Experienced Defender said:

work ball into box (an instruction that should help you achieve what you want in the final third)

Plus, the Be more expressive TI is there to somewhat counterbalance the WBiB. The combo of WBiB and BME is something I often use for Man Utd, and in most cases it works pretty nicely against defensive opposition. 

Btw, as you mentioned Bale (who was not in your initial screenshot), I would play him in AMR, rather than AML. 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

Why would you use counter? i know that Real has great players to play on the counter but must of the time (specially in La Liga) opposition defenses will mostly stay back and soak up pressure so space to counter will mostly be scarse

As an extra attacking weapon. Precisely because the opposition will stay back and defend, defend, defend, you should use all the attacking tools available, because you never know when an opportunity for a swift counter-attack may occur. In some matches it won't occur at all, but on occasional it will. And Real players are good enough to take advantage of any extra space the opposition may leave, so you don't lose anything with the Counter TI. 

 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

On top of it i have the feeling (can't say if it is the reason why) that using counter speeds things up a bit too much during transitions and i see my players attempt more long-shots or way too risky passes that often end up giving possession away. Considering that TIs are mostly choosen to play a more possession orientented game i don't understand whats the benefit of ticking the counter instruction (specially considering the context of the teams that real often play against)

Again, do not use the Counter (or any other instruction I proposed) if you don't want or simply don't like it. I scored a number of goals with Man Utd against these defensive opponents precisely via counter-attacks utilizing Matrial's blistering speed (along with good passing ability of my midfielders). In many cases it was enough for me to just drop the LOE a notch (from higher to standard) to achieve these lethal counter-attacks. 

 

1 hour ago, Sebas said:

Can i ask you how would you integrate an AF-A/PF-A/Poacher into the tactic?

In your current system (4123) or some other formation? With Benzema or some other player up front?