Need help with CM roles

[W-Walton]

Hi guys,

I need help with the three central midfielders and what kind of roles they should play, to suit the tactic in general and the other roles.

- It would be great if my CM-R (Behrens) could cover up for my right wingback. Would a Carrilero (su) or Central Midfielder (d) be a better option?
- Should my DLP be set on defend or support? He's better suited for the support role skillswise.

Any help or tactical advises in general would be much appreciated. 

Edited January 3, 2021 by W-Walton

[LHurlz]

You lack some central penetration, a CM(A) or Mez(A) would be good in there.

Aside from that, your TIs just look very toothless to me. Much shorter passing, work ball into box, lower tempo, be more disciplined.. it seems to me that you're just keeping possession for the sake of it and you'll struggle badly to score goals because you have no bite in there.  No verticality in your passing, no creative freedom, I see a lot of 0-0s in that tactic 

[W-Walton]

54 minutes ago, LHurlz said:

You lack some central penetration, a CM(A) or Mez(A) would be good in there.

Aside from that, your TIs just look very toothless to me. Much shorter passing, work ball into box, lower tempo, be more disciplined.. it seems to me that you're just keeping possession for the sake of it and you'll struggle badly to score goals because you have no bite in there.  No verticality in your passing, no creative freedom, I see a lot of 0-0s in that tactic 

Maybe a CM (a) could fit and I could try that with the CM-R.

Well, last 5 games went 3-2, 1-1, 5-3, 3-1, 4-1.

 

[LHurlz]

Just now, W-Walton said:

Maybe a CM (a) could fit and I could try that with the CM-R.

Well, last 5 games went 3-2, 1-1, 5-3, 3-1, 4-1.

 

I'm baffled, every time I've attempted a similar set up its 0-0s all over the place, but fair enough

Sounds like you're getting fairly decent results so maybe best not to toy with it too much I guess 

[W-Walton]

Just now, LHurlz said:

I'm baffled, every time I've attempted a similar set up its 0-0s all over the place, but fair enough

Sounds like you're getting fairly decent results so maybe best not to toy with it too much I guess 

Here's the results for the season. 

But that's not the case. I follow the games closely and see things that doesn't work well and I want to improve the tactic all the time.

And in this case I'm unsure about my central midfielders and how I should set up their roles. 

[LHurlz]

Well for your style of play it's hard to go wrong with the classic trio of DM(D)/Anchorman with a DLP(S) and Mez(A) ahead of him, but it depends what exactly you're looking for from your CMs that you're not already getting.

Either way looks like you've got a pretty good tactic going there, some smashing results 

[frukox]

4 hours ago, W-Walton said:

Hi guys,

I need help with the three central midfielders and what kind of roles they should play, to suit the tactic in general and the other roles.

- It would be great if my CM-R (Behrens) could cover up for my right wingback. Would a Carrilero (su) or Central Midfielder (d) be a better option?
- Should my DLP be set on defend or support? He's better suited for the support role skillswise.

Any help or tactical advises in general would be much appreciated. 

Results would be better if your playstyle matches with the role/duty distribution. Let's look at your attack structure first. An old school static big lump who may attract direct passes sometimes for flick-ons. Two wingers going inside at different times, two wingbacks providing width going up at diffrent times and to support this structure you have to use two static roles(Behrens has the right role there- he is your late runner into the box) so that you would have depth to your attack. Any attacking role would collide with wingers except IFA side if you were to adopt a counterattacking style. If wings are your strength and you have an all-round creative force in the midfield who can keep the ball under pressure go for this kind of structure but if not, the tactic may not work at all. As always, creating different angles for attack while keeping the balance in accordance with instructions is the key to any successful tactic as well as tweaking it slightly every game during matches to get the best out of the in-match situations. By the way, swapping wbs' duties might be better- IFA would have an early support pinning any wingers there so that IFA would be in a 1vs1 situation. That's what you want, right?:) Meanwhile, your right side could be better involved in transitions if you were to use a WBS there. 

You may need at least two dynamic runners going into channels to better disrupt the defensive structure of the opposition. Now your system has none unless any of two in your attacking trio have the trait of moving into channels.

When it comes to your instructions, what I see is a high-block adopting very narrow slow, boring(imo) and cautious tiki-taka which would probe space on the flanks without taking too many risks. Is that what you want? If your team has much better mentals and technicals and better physicals go for it. Btw, your tactic seems to work, then why changing it?

 

Edited January 3, 2021 by frukox