We Are Facing A Hot Striker and My Defense Is Slow 😳 Any Ideas?

[LyghtWayve]

I play a 3-4-2-1 with 3 at the back and defensive wingers in the middle.  My defense is slow.  I would mark their hot striker but we are too slow to keep up with him.  I am thinking perhaps just sit back and force them outside by bunching up the middle.  Also, I am thinking we need to stay compact and low so that they don't tear us to pieces if we try to engage them high and get burnt.

I am wondering what I could do via player instructions to keep this striker at bay.  The ones feeding him assists are also fast and so I don't want my guys to go out to engage them and get left in the dust.  I also don't want to sit back all day just let them hurl shots at us.

Any ideas? Thanks.

[zindrinho]

Many ideas, but what are the weaknesses of this Hot striker? And what are the strengths of your defence? If he's a lone striker and you have 3 at the back and he's fast and you're slow then sit back and have your strongest tallest CB in the center of the 3 and personally man mark the hot striker. If their striker is better in the air than your strongest tallest CB then it's not a guarantee but still good advice IMO.

post some tactics pics, always helps.

[LyghtWayve]

1 minute ago, zindrinho said:

Many ideas, but what are the weaknesses of this Hot striker? And what are the strengths of your defence? If he's a lone striker and you have 3 at the back and he's fast and you're slow then sit back and have your strongest tallest CB in the center of the 3 and personally man mark the hot striker. If their striker is better in the air than your strongest tallest CB then it's not a guarantee but still good advice IMO.

post some tactics pics, always helps.

I like that idea.  However, supposed the striker is faster than my best CB?

My tactics are posted.

[LyghtWayve]

Also, here is my out of possession tactic.

[zindrinho]

21 minutes ago, LyghtWayve said:

I like that idea.  However, supposed the striker is faster than my best CB?

 

then you have your 2 other CBs acting as normal CBs and hopefully dropping off and/or tackling the hot striker while he's running from your center CB.

Pace doesnt matter that much, the most important thing with specifically marking the lone striker is jumping reach. I've had Johan Djorou keep everyone from Harry Kane to Sergio Aguero completely shut off the game on FM17. You really want to have 3CBs to do this though, otherwise you leave just 1 cb alone while the other one is chasing the striker all over the pitch.

Your tactics are way too immersive and different from mine for me to have any proper input, I've never played that way so I have no idea how your players other than the CBs will behave, sorry.

[LyghtWayve]

22 minutes ago, zindrinho said:

then you have your 2 other CBs acting as normal CBs and hopefully dropping off and/or tackling the hot striker while he's running from your center CB.

Pace doesnt matter that much, the most important thing with specifically marking the lone striker is jumping reach. I've had Johan Djorou keep everyone from Harry Kane to Sergio Aguero completely shut off the game on FM17. You really want to have 3CBs to do this though, otherwise you leave just 1 cb alone while the other one is chasing the striker all over the pitch.

Your tactics are way too immersive and different from mine for me to have any proper input, I've never played that way so I have no idea how your players other than the CBs will behave, sorry.

Thanks.  Your advice helps out.  So, to be clear, I will tell one of the CBs to mark their hot striker.  Is this different from just selecting "tight marking" in opposition instructions?  If I select "tight marking" in opposition instructions, do I still have to tell a specific person to mark the player?

[zindrinho]

Tight marking is a Team Instruction (TI)

Specifically marking a player is a Player Instruction (PI), just press a player on your tactic screen to find his PI:

 

[Experienced Defender]

Your tactic as a whole looks to me like a much bigger problem than just your slow defense dealing with a "hot striker". It's fairly unbalanced. You play with a much lower LOE under a low team mentality while at the same time having a very porous central midfield setup, which puts unbearable pressure on your defense. 

Remember, defending is a collective (team) responsibility, in which midfield plays an even greater role than defenders. 

Attacking-wise, you play all front three on attack duties - which suits fast styles of play - but then at the same time you use the Hold shape in transition plus in-possession TIs that obviously favor a very slow and patient possession football (short pass + low tempo + WBiB + low team mentality). Therefore, your tactic is quite contradictory overall.

In short, rather than focusing solely on the slow defense vs. hot striker, you should look to address the fundamental weaknesses of your tactic as a whole in the first place. 

[LyghtWayve]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Your tactic as a whole looks to me like a much bigger problem than just your slow defense dealing with a "hot striker". It's fairly unbalanced. You play with a much lower LOE under a low team mentality while at the same time having a very porous central midfield setup, which puts unbearable pressure on your defense. 

Remember, defending is a collective (team) responsibility, in which midfield plays an even greater role than defenders. 

Attacking-wise, you play all front three on attack duties - which suits fast styles of play - but then at the same time you use the Hold shape in transition plus in-possession TIs that obviously favor a very slow and patient possession football (short pass + low tempo + WBiB + low team mentality). Therefore, your tactic is quite contradictory overall.

In short, rather than focusing solely on the slow defense vs. hot striker, you should look to address the fundamental weaknesses of your tactic as a whole in the first place. 

If I only I even knew my tactic had a fundamental weakness much less address it - LOL!   Seriously though, your feedback is helpful.  I need to watch more tactics videos.  Do you have any recommendations?  I have a big match coming up against Reading and I am on the hot seat.

Thanks.

[LyghtWayve]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Your tactic as a whole looks to me like a much bigger problem than just your slow defense dealing with a "hot striker". It's fairly unbalanced. You play with a much lower LOE under a low team mentality while at the same time having a very porous central midfield setup, which puts unbearable pressure on your defense. 

Remember, defending is a collective (team) responsibility, in which midfield plays an even greater role than defenders. 

Attacking-wise, you play all front three on attack duties - which suits fast styles of play - but then at the same time you use the Hold shape in transition plus in-possession TIs that obviously favor a very slow and patient possession football (short pass + low tempo + WBiB + low team mentality). Therefore, your tactic is quite contradictory overall.

In short, rather than focusing solely on the slow defense vs. hot striker, you should look to address the fundamental weaknesses of your tactic as a whole in the first place. 

Also, why did you say the midfield was porous?  I thought one CM on support and the other on attack was well-balanced.

[Sneaky Pete]

6 hours ago, LyghtWayve said:

Also, why did you say the midfield was porous?  I thought one CM on support and the other on attack was well-balanced.

Players that suit the APa role are generally (ofc not always) terrible defensively, while the BWM role tends to chase the ball around like a headless chicken, and on support will press quite far up the pitch.

The net result is a midfield with no structural integrity. Your CBs basically have to do all of the defensive work on their own.

[cardassianrefugee]

6 hours ago, LyghtWayve said:

Also, why did you say the midfield was porous?  I thought one CM on support and the other on attack was well-balanced.

So I'm not very experienced so take my input with a grain of salt.

You currently have no players in the defensive midfield, your bwm(s) will run around trying to press the opposition and your ap(a) will be getting into advanced areas when in possession leaving space behind. This will leave a lot of space in your midfield for the opposition to exploit.

I would look at changing at least one (maybe both) of these two into a holding midfield role. Someone that will hold position and provide some defensive cover. 

[HUNT3R]

Fast strikers never bother me. There are enough ways to deal with them. 

- Have equally (or close to) fast defenders. You said you don't have this.

- Play deeper. If you hold your shape without playing with a high line, he cannot beat your defence for pace as they are already in position and through balls or early crosses will have limited danger. Even if they are attempted, there's just no space for pace to have an (big) effect.

And if I don't have the pace to match, I would favor attributes like Positioning and Anticipation (with Decisions) to make up for it. If they see situations better and can make better/quicker decisions, that should offset any quickness differences, along with the tactical decisions I made earlier.

Generally speaking, whether a deep or high line, I don't tend to have my defenders mark quick players tight either (unless I can match their quickness) because a quick burst of acceleration could leave my defender marking nothing but fresh air.

[woolymuffler]

Maybe not a popular opinion, but for OIs I will often set Never Tight Mark, Easy Tackling and even Never Press if the striker just completely outclasses my Center Backs. I know a lot of people look at it as "this is their danger man, I need to shut him down", but my assumption is I don't have anyone on my team who can actually mark, press and tackle him consistently. The theory is to preserve the defenders cushion at all costs, avoid closing with them and try not to let them get behind the defense. Fast players tend to rely on this speed and score most of their goals on breakaways, so if your defenders keep their distance, the attacker will often lose the ball by trying to kick it past them. This has actually helped me negate some truly terrifying strikers (admittedly in League 1, but many of the attackers there are quite fast and my center backs were 10 pace or slower).

However, if the striker has amazing speed, is very skillful and can shoot from distance, there honestly may not be much you can do. Stand off them deep and they will score from the edge of the box, close with them and they will blow past your defenders, try to mark them and they will score from breakaways when your marker can't keep up. However, even if this scenario I would still try standing off, not marking tightly and defending narrow as the best chance you have and just hope they don't shoot well from distance on the day and you block the shots on target by having as many bodies between them and the goal as possible.

This year, I have been using Stay on Feet, and even lower pressing much more than I used to and it can be quite effective against a better team operating at high tempo. Your players spend less time getting dragged around by players they can't stay close to and I find they often just give me the ball if I don't engage with them, whereas they will tear me to pieces if I try to tight mark and close them down. Though if you can't defend crosses then this isn't a great idea (and if you are both slow and poor in the air, you are back to "not much you can do").

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by woolymuffler

[Experienced Defender]

15 hours ago, LyghtWayve said:

Do you have any recommendations? 

I have many, but you first need to decide what (primary) type/style of football you actually want to play and why. Just keep in mind that with only 3 men at the back and no DM to offer more direct protection to them, you can hardly play any sort of defensive football. Unless you are willing to change the formation as well. 

 

15 hours ago, LyghtWayve said:

Also, why did you say the midfield was porous?  I thought one CM on support and the other on attack was well-balanced

That depends on the system (formation). Yours have only 2 players in central midfield and none in DM, which means at least one of the CMs needs to be played in a holding role, whereas the other can either also be a holder or at least a covering role or moderate runner. But in either case, neither should be played on attack duty. In your formation, no CM is a holder and one of them (AP) has an attacking duty. Again, if you had a holding DM behind them, a partnership of a BWM and attacking AP would be quite satisfactory. But you don't. 

[Luizinho]

10 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Fast strikers never bother me. There are enough ways to deal with them. 

- Have equally (or close to) fast defenders. You said you don't have this.

- Play deeper. If you hold your shape without playing with a high line, he cannot beat your defence for pace as they are already in position and through balls or early crosses will have limited danger. Even if they are attempted, there's just no space for pace to have an (big) effect.

And if I don't have the pace to match, I would favor attributes like Positioning and Anticipation (with Decisions) to make up for it. If they see situations better and can make better/quicker decisions, that should offset any quickness differences, along with the tactical decisions I made earlier.

Generally speaking, whether a deep or high line, I don't tend to have my defenders mark quick players tight either (unless I can match their quickness) because a quick burst of acceleration could leave my defender marking nothing but fresh air.

This is good advice.

Although if your overall defensive strategy is about pushing up high and pressing the opposition in their half - then dropping deeper would be counter productive. I wonder what else could be done without scarifying the high line?

I guess it’s risk versus reward

Edited February 1, 2021 by Luizinho

[LyghtWayve]

On 31/01/2021 at 17:24, Experienced Defender said:

Your tactic as a whole looks to me like a much bigger problem than just your slow defense dealing with a "hot striker". It's fairly unbalanced. You play with a much lower LOE under a low team mentality while at the same time having a very porous central midfield setup, which puts unbearable pressure on your defense. 

Remember, defending is a collective (team) responsibility, in which midfield plays an even greater role than defenders. 

Attacking-wise, you play all front three on attack duties - which suits fast styles of play - but then at the same time you use the Hold shape in transition plus in-possession TIs that obviously favor a very slow and patient possession football (short pass + low tempo + WBiB + low team mentality). Therefore, your tactic is quite contradictory overall.

In short, rather than focusing solely on the slow defense vs. hot striker, you should look to address the fundamental weaknesses of your tactic as a whole in the first place. 

Is this better and more coherent?

[Experienced Defender]

43 minutes ago, LyghtWayve said:

Is this better and more coherent?

The setup of roles and duties definitely looks better - and considerably so 

However, instructions are still highly questionable, to say the least.

[LyghtWayve]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

The setup of roles and duties definitely looks better - and considerably so 

However, instructions are still highly questionable, to say the least.

Why are the instructions questionable?  Thanks for your insight and feedback.  It is helping me learn the game.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, LyghtWayve said:

Why are the instructions questionable?

Because you seem to be trying to play hardcore possession football with a low LOE, stay on feet and regroup, which is obviously contradictory. 

Plus, even apart from the style of play you want to implement (whichever it is), there is absolutely no need to use so many instructions. Especially if you are not a top-level tactician.

Keep the tactic as simple as possible, because most instructions are essentially already defined through your selection of roles and duties. 

[LyghtWayve]

17 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Because you seem to be trying to play hardcore possession football with a low LOE, stay on feet and regroup, which is obviously contradictory. 

Plus, even apart from the style of play you want to implement (whichever it is), there is absolutely no need to use so many instructions. Especially if you are not a top-level tactician.

Keep the tactic as simple as possible, because most instructions are essentially already defined through your selection of roles and duties. 

I will reduce tactical instructions.  That's good advice.

It seemed to me that a lower line of engagement would keep them from getting caught up too far upfield.  Stay on feet is designed for them not to go in so hard on a tackle and thus let the opposition, which is faster, get by them.  Regroup is so that they retain their shape instead of trying to counter press since the other team is faster.  It seemed to me that such an approach is consistent with keeping the ball since I don't want them chasing the other team around.  If those instructions are not compatible with possession football, how so?  Thanks.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, LyghtWayve said:

If those instructions are not compatible with possession football, how so?

Possession football is about being patient when attacking and looking to win the ball back as quickly as possible when defending. So how can then passive defensive instructions such as low LOE and/or regroup and/or stay on feet be possession-friendly? 

Your in-possession TIs are possession-oriented, but out-of-possession ones definitely not.

[LyghtWayve]

1 minute ago, Experienced Defender said:

Possession football is about being patient when attacking and looking to win the ball back as quickly as possible when defending. So how can then passive defensive instructions such as low LOE and/or regroup and/or stay on feet be possession-friendly? 

Your in-possession TIs are possession-oriented, but out-of-possession ones definitely not.

I see.  Thanks.

[Robson 07]

To pass short you would want team mates in proximity, nearby.  Seems logical to support a short passing game.  Two, maybe three options within what 10 to 20 metres?

If that's the basis of building up play why would you suddenly float crosses?   A nice loopy high cross, from who to who?

[LyghtWayve]

2 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

To pass short you would want team mates in proximity, nearby.  Seems logical to support a short passing game.  Two, maybe three options within what 10 to 20 metres?

If that's the basis of building up play why would you suddenly float crosses?   A nice loopy high cross, from who to who?

I see.  I am learning to think more holistically with these comments.  Now I am seeing that tactical instructions should work together as a coherent whole.

[LyghtWayve]

15 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

To pass short you would want team mates in proximity, nearby.  Seems logical to support a short passing game.  Two, maybe three options within what 10 to 20 metres?

If that's the basis of building up play why would you suddenly float crosses?   A nice loopy high cross, from who to who?

By the way, are player roles the way you ensure teammates are in close proximity?

[Robson 07]

It's a collection of things.

Player movement is one of them.  Roles and PPMs to the extent of instructions like stays wider, gets forward etc.  But also duties, how often they commit to make forward runs...support players tends to create more of a pack.

Additionally the length you set passing to, team width, in transition instructions....I suppose what you're talking about is shape and there are a lot of factors.