Help with Newcastle

[bdixon]

My aim is to try and achieve some success with my local team, which is Newcastle United. My goal is to play some enjoyable to watch football, things I would like to happen:

• Wilson to be top goalscorer 
• St Maximim to be the main assister
• A strong engine room midfield.

This is what I have came up with on my first attempt and would like some critic please.

 

[HUNT3R]

That's very attacking for a team sitting in 17th IRL. Are you lining up like this (the Mentality, roles, duties and counter pressing) against every team?

[bdixon]

Um, yes and guess what having a torrid time. Currently played 6 W1 D1 L4. If we lose our next game I'm considering revert back to my go to 4-1-2-3.

Edited April 11, 2021 by bdixon

[HUNT3R]

The formation isn't the issue. You're setting up like you're a top 6 team (and I am one and my team isn't this aggressive) but you're not. You need to take into consideration the context of where/what you are as a club. Even if it means going really aggressive against weaker/same tier teams, keeping in mind how teams line up home and away, vs playing stronger teams and being a bit more passive. This is a highly aggressive tactic with players who aren't good enough compared to others and a lot of teams in the league.

[bdixon]

So after a pretty fantastic 1st season which resulted in finishing 6th in the league and winning the Carabao Cup, it would now seems after buying new players which that I'm not having as much luck and losing silly games. Most times I'm conceding to the first shot on target, this has happened almost 5 times this season after 13 games. I kind of getting the feeling last season was a fluke, especially with the amount of goals Wilson scored. 

Could you advise where I'm going wrong? Is it balanced, or I'm I so far away from a decent tactic I should start over. I'm out of ideas.

This is my go to tactic with my strongest players.

[YLSFM00]

23 minutes ago, bdixon said:

So after a pretty fantastic 1st season which resulted in finishing 6th in the league and winning the Carabao Cup, it would now seems after buying new players which that I'm not having as much luck and losing silly games. Most times I'm conceding to the first shot on target, this has happened almost 5 times this season after 13 games. I kind of getting the feeling last season was a fluke, especially with the amount of goals Wilson scored. 

Could you advise where I'm going wrong? Is it balanced, or I'm I so far away from a decent tactic I should start over. I'm out of ideas.

This is my go to tactic with my strongest players.

The main problem I see here is the fact that your full backs are pretty conservative and won't be able to support your wingers, but though that's a concern, your midfield pair of B2B and CM on support is even bigger of a concern, because with that you have no defensive holding midfielder there and you'll be wide open after losing the ball. I'd chance the B2B to DLP on defend, and make your 2 FB'S a bit more attacking, whether that be using the Get Further Forward PI on them or changing the role or duty to something like FB on attack or WB on support.

[YLSFM00]

 

2 minutes ago, YLSFM00 said:

The main problem I see here is the fact that your full backs are pretty conservative and won't be able to support your wingers, but though that's a concern, your midfield pair of B2B and CM on support is even bigger of a concern, because with that you have no defensive holding midfielder there and you'll be wide open after losing the ball. I'd chance the B2B to DLP on defend, and make your 2 FB'S a bit more attacking, whether that be using the Get Further Forward PI on them or changing the role or duty to something like FB on attack or WB on support.

I'd also add another attack duty on one of your IW'S.

Edited April 14, 2021 by YLSFM00
Fixed error

[Experienced Defender]

56 minutes ago, bdixon said:

Could you advise where I'm going wrong?

The following is just my personal view:

- no holding midfield role in a top-heavy system without a DM (instead, you have both runner roles, one of which is roaming at that)

- aggressive pressing coupled with less-than-optimal defensive compactness

- all 5 midfield roles (2 CMs + 3 in AM strata) essentially operating in same areas, creating needless congestion

- potential isolation/lack of proper support for the lone striker as the only player with the attack duty + in the most advanced/attack-minded of all striker roles

- fullback roles too conservative to consistently provide wide attacking support to their inside-oriented wing partners, especially in more advanced phases of attack

[bdixon]

18 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

The following is just my personal view:

- no holding midfield role in a top-heavy system without a DM (instead, you have both runner roles, one of which is roaming at that)

- aggressive pressing coupled with less-than-optimal defensive compactness

- all 5 midfield roles (2 CMs + 3 in AM strata) essentially operating in same areas, creating needless congestion

- potential isolation/lack of proper support for the lone striker as the only player with the attack duty + in the most advanced/attack-minded of all striker roles

- fullback roles too conservative to consistently provide wide attacking support to their inside-oriented wing partners, especially in more advanced phases of attack

- I've been thinking about a holding role, but couldn't decided. Would a DLP(D) be a good role to go with? Would this impact the the AP(S) role?

- Not sure what you mean by this?

- Again, not really sure what I can change. 

- I suppose changing one of the wide players to IF(A) could be a could option.

- Would changing them to WB(S) help? Or would I need at least one of them on attack duty?

[YLSFM00]

1 hour ago, bdixon said:

- Not sure what you mean by this?

By optimal defensive compactness, he means that the gap between the DL and the LOE isn't compatible with the aggressive pressing. Optimal defensive compactness is when the DL is 1 higher then the LOE, so something like High DL and Standard LOE would be optimal.

 

1 hour ago, bdixon said:

- Would changing them to WB(S) help? Or would I need at least one of them on attack duty?

FB (AT) and WB (SU) could work.

[bdixon]

1 hour ago, YLSFM00 said:

By optimal defensive compactness, he means that the gap between the DL and the LOE isn't compatible with the aggressive pressing. Optimal defensive compactness is when the DL is 1 higher then the LOE, so something like High DL and Standard LOE would be optimal.

 

FB (AT) and WB (SU) could work.

Ok, I see what you mean. Is this a little more balanced?

 

 

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, bdixon said:

ve been thinking about a holding role, but couldn't decided. Would a DLP(D) be a good role to go with? Would this impact the the AP(S) role?

There is no "good" or "bad" role. What is "good" or "bad" depends on what you want to achieve in terms of playing style. 

Anyway, holding midfield roles are: CM on defend duty, BWM on defend duty and DLP on either duty. The BWM can be potentially risky due to its aggressive manner of defending, but is anyway considered a holding role when played on defend duty. 

2 hours ago, bdixon said:

Not sure what you mean by this?

@YLSFM00 explained very well  

[Experienced Defender]

3 minutes ago, bdixon said:

 

3 minutes ago, bdixon said:

Is this a little more balanced?

It now looks very good in terms of balance and coherence 

[bdixon]

So I thought I had created a well balanced tactic which would help me achieve some decent results, however I'm really struggling to beat teams in the bottom 3 at home. I thought I strengthen quite well over the summer but everything I attempt doesn't seem to work. What is becoming very frustrating is the opposition scoring with their first attempt, I have no idea how to stop this.

We are currently sat 11th, which for Newcastle isn't to bad but I have lost 8 games with 5 of those at home.

Please help me before I get sacked. I have no idea how to get my team winning.

[Experienced Defender]

In terms of roles and duties, only the striker's role looks potentially problematic (speaking of your latest tactic, which I rated as well-balanced). Not only because the AF as the most advanced and attack-minded striker role can often end up isolated, especially in aggressive systems and/or against defensive opposition, but also because you have an IF on attack duty, which is a similar type of role to the AF in the sense that both roles are focused primarily on attacking the box and scoring. Suggestion: change the AF into CF on attack duty to get better interaction between him and the attacking IF. DLF on attack is also a good choice, especially if possession is your priority in terms of playing style. 

That's the only role-related tweak I could suggest as potentially helpful and logical at this point. When it comes to potential tweaks regarding instructions, that's something you have to sort out by yourself by carefully watching matches and making logical decisions based on what you observe. It's possible that tweaking the striker's role alone will suffice, but none of us can know that in advance, so any suggestion would be rather speculative (because we neither manage your team nor watch your matches). 

Another potentially problematic area you need to pay attention to is player selection relative not just to roles/duties but also the very formation. For example, does Ward-Prowse have a proper set of attributes to play in central midfield within a top-heavy formation such as 4231 (regardless of the role)? How good are his defense-related attributes (tackling, positioning, acceleration, bravery, stamina, work rate, teamwork, aggression etc.)? 

[bdixon]

8 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

In terms of roles and duties, only the striker's role looks potentially problematic (speaking of your latest tactic, which I rated as well-balanced). Not only because the AF as the most advanced and attack-minded striker role can often end up isolated, especially in aggressive systems and/or against defensive opposition, but also because you have an IF on attack duty, which is a similar type of role to the AF in the sense that both roles are focused primarily on attacking the box and scoring. Suggestion: change the AF into CF on attack duty to get better interaction between him and the attacking IF. DLF on attack is also a good choice, especially if possession is your priority in terms of playing style. 

That's the only role-related tweak I could suggest as potentially helpful and logical at this point. When it comes to potential tweaks regarding instructions, that's something you have to sort out by yourself by carefully watching matches and making logical decisions based on what you observe. It's possible that tweaking the striker's role alone will suffice, but none of us can know that in advance, so any suggestion would be rather speculative (because we neither manage your team nor watch your matches). 

Another potentially problematic area you need to pay attention to is player selection relative not just to roles/duties but also the very formation. For example, does Ward-Prowse have a proper set of attributes to play in central midfield within a top-heavy formation such as 4231 (regardless of the role)? How good are his defense-related attributes (tackling, positioning, acceleration, bravery, stamina, work rate, teamwork, aggression etc.)? 

Thank you for the reply. 

Here is a screenshot of my midfield two. I'm not too sure if a change in formation would be better overall, but that is something I will look at next season.

 

[Experienced Defender]

The midfield two look okay in terms of relevant attributes. I feared that JWP had poor tacking and positioning, but he is better in that regard than I expected.