Direct Counter-Attack ... any success?

[OldManPar77]

Using this shape with the Direct Counter-Attack setting however, just seem to be constantly on defend, at least not conceding as many goals as on other styles though but, very little positive action. On seeing the reserves / youth results coming through who play the same style and the stats from their games though, they win, and win well albeit against much lesser opposition.

There are player instructions on the Defenders and Mids to take fewer risks.

I've been tempted to remove Get Stuck In as been getting a lot of yellow cards and resulting 2nd yellows.

Anyone had any success playing Direct or Fluid Counter-Attack - Any thoughts/suggestions on the roles I've selected.

[Experienced Defender]

14 hours ago, OldManPar77 said:

First off, preset tactics usually need some tweaking in order to be effective (some presets need a lot of tweaks, some just a few). 

Then, you also need to consider the formation you are using. Yours is the narrow flat 433, which is a tricky system to set up properly compared to more common ones (e.g. 4141 dm wide or 442).

In terms of roles and duties, your setup is extremely one-dimensional - absolutely no difference between the left and right sides.

So these are the first 3 things you need to think about before discussing the rest of your tactic. 

[Jean0987654321]

If you want to play a counter attacking style, you have to consider the numbers in defense. In that tactic, you only have 8 guys including the goalkeeper defending the goal. THAT is a lot to ask for them. I would suggest moving your wider strikers back to the midfield strata in order for defensive solidarity and such it will bring the opposition offense more out and committed and then those counters can happen

[OldManPar77]

Thank you both for the comment. I tried a few variations of the Direct/Fluid Counter-Attacks changing the F9s to be Wingers/IFs/IWs and adjusting some of the TIs depending on what I was seeing however nothing seemed to stem the onslaught of shots against and minimal for. I'm having better success with control poessesion based TIs and a similar 4-3-3 wide shape. 

I liked the idea of the 4-3-3 narrow with the idea that we could hit them hard through the middle when we got the ball however it did not prove to be the case.

[Experienced Defender]

13 hours ago, OldManPar77 said:

I liked the idea of the 4-3-3 narrow with the idea that we could hit them hard through the middle when we got the ball however it did not prove to be the case

You can play that style of football using the narrow 433 formation, but you need to set it up in a different way. Btw, you don't necessarily have to use a low mentality (like the Cautious) in order to be solid in defense and/or play a counter-attacking style. 

You also need to take your players' strengths and weaknesses as well as your club's reputation when deciding about the style of football you want to play. 

If you want, I can give you an example of how the narrow 433 could be set up to achieve the style you want to implement.

[sporadicsmiles]

Why a flat 433 rather than the 41221 with wingers and a DMC? The latter formation is infinitely easier to set up than the flat 433 (the exploit that made these formations very successful in previous versions is not there now). 

[OldManPar77]

On 19/01/2020 at 16:18, Experienced Defender said:

You can play that style of football using the narrow 433 formation, but you need to set it up in a different way. Btw, you don't necessarily have to use a low mentality (like the Cautious) in order to be solid in defense and/or play a counter-attacking style. 

You also need to take your players' strengths and weaknesses as well as your club's reputation when deciding about the style of football you want to play. 

If you want, I can give you an example of how the narrow 433 could be set up to achieve the style you want to implement.

Hi - thanks, yeah, it would be good to see your perspective on this for a narrow 4-3-3. The team I'm trying to build something for is RKC - I'm in S3 and currently playing in the Dutch 2nd Div. They are a 2 star team - The board expect entertaining football and to make the most of set pieces. S1 with them was fairly successful when played a fairly basic 4-4-2 however early doors S2 that came unstuck and since then have been chasing "the answer" 

My main concern is stopping the opposition scoring and if I can nick a goal here or there then good.

[OldManPar77]

On 19/01/2020 at 17:00, sporadicsmiles said:

Why a flat 433 rather than the 41221 with wingers and a DMC? The latter formation is infinitely easier to set up than the flat 433 (the exploit that made these formations very successful in previous versions is not there now). 

I'm not looking to exploit anything its just a formation I like. I'm partial to the 4-3-3 wide but am wanting something with more punch down the middle.

My other preferred shape 5-3-2 hasn't given me much to smile about either.

I'm thinking its an RKC thing as am having joy in other saves.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, OldManPar77 said:

it would be good to see your perspective on this for a narrow 4-3-3. The team I'm trying to build something for is RKC - I'm in S3 and currently playing in the Dutch 2nd Div. They are a 2 star team - The board expect entertaining football and to make the most of set pieces

I am not familiar with your team, so I really cannot tell you if the narrow 433 would be a good choice of formation. I can only give you a couple of examples on how you can set such system up for a direct counter style under the Cautious mentality.

Example 1

TMat   F9    AF

BWMsu  CMde  BBM

WBsu    CDde  NCBde    WBde

GK/SK?

Example 2

F9   PO   CFat

BWMsu  CMde   CAR

WBsu    CDde  NCBde   WBsu

GK/SK?

If you go with the Cautious mentality, these could be your starting/basic instructions:

- higher tempo, more direct passing, focus through the middle, early crosses, overlap left, overlap right (and set pieces, because the board wants them)

- counter, distribute quickly

- standard DL, lower LOE, more urgent, get stuck in (and defensive width either standard or wider, because you use a narrow formation, so narrow def width could be an unwelcome overkill)

If you have any questions relative to the above, feel free to ask 

[OldManPar77]

Thank you @Experienced Defender I will have further play about and see how it goes.

[sporadicsmiles]

4 hours ago, OldManPar77 said:

I'm not looking to exploit anything its just a formation I like. I'm partial to the 4-3-3 wide but am wanting something with more punch down the middle.

 

Fair enough. The flat 433 is just a lot harder to get right, because you are relying on your strikers having good movement and you will always be more vulnerable defensively.