please improve my tiki-taka tactic

[Novem9]

Its good in general and beautiful combinations (reason why I try to create this one), but I want to see more in attacking and finishing. Many scores 1-0, 1-1 and possession which converted in domination by Arteta, but I want domination by Pep Guardiola  

[CARRERA]

43 minutes ago, Novem9 said:

You did a good job here setting up your team and i only have a few considerations for you to think about.

You may miss out a chance when playing with an IWB on the left flank. He will be more centrally oriented and so is your IW when he has the Ball. So there is noone occupying the space left behind. Having that said, you have a great chance here to create a massive overload on the left flank with your mezzala staying wider anyways and moving into channels to provide inside passing options for your wider roles while pulling out more defensive players of the other team towards that side of the pitch. All that will open up more space to the right flank so your team can look for the switch play with the other IW who is staying wide or make it easier for the BBM to exploit space centrally.

Also i noticed, that you have quite a few players with create freedom at the bottom of your formation, namely your DLP, BPD, SK, IWB (if you keep him), but noone in the attacking third. Creative freedom and utilizing your flair can be quite handy to unlock defensive sides. Therefore i would add "Be more Expressive" TI. 

When you try to work the ball into box and therefore refrain from shots and crosses, your players need to take risks elsewhere to not get stuck or pass around meaningless. "Pass into Space" can help your players doing that.

Tempo is about how quickly your team is trying to build up their attack and looking for a goal scoring opportunity by making faster decisions.  If thats what you are looking for, thats fine. I would remove play out of defense and work ball into box then. A lower tempo is more about building up patiently and looking for the right opportunity to becomre aggressive. My recommendation is to go with a standard/ slightly lower tempo here. If you decide to go with the lower tempo, i would remove Counter, as it also encourages quicker transitions, like tempo does. 

As you dont seem to have trouble defensively, keep what you got here.

 

[Novem9]

25 минут назад, CARRERA сказал:

You may miss out a chance when playing with an IWB on the left flank. He will be more centrally oriented and so is your IW when he has the Ball. So there is noone occupying the space left behind. Having that said, you have a great chance here to create a massive overload on the left flank with your mezzala staying wider anyways and moving into channels to provide inside passing options for your wider roles while pulling out more defensive players of the other team towards that side of the pitch. All that will open up more space to the right flank so your team can look for the switch play with the other IW who is staying wide or make it easier for the BBM to exploit space centrally.

 

excellent point! I will check between WB(s)-MEZ-IW and IWB-MEZ-W, because I like how IWB moves for center where DLP loses default position

 

28 минут назад, CARRERA сказал:

. I would remove play out of defense and work ball into box then

Don't get this  Remove if higher tempo or lower/standart?

 

29 минут назад, CARRERA сказал:

Tempo is about how quickly your team is trying to build up their attack and looking for a goal scoring opportunity by making faster decisions

insofar as I want to focus my tactic on possession, I use much shorter passing. Slightly higher tempo is my attempt to compensate short passing (which I really like in this) + create a chances in dynamics, not only lazy possession attempts.
Honestly don't remember how correct is it  

[CARRERA]

5 minutes ago, Novem9 said:

Don't get this  Remove if higher tempo or lower/standart?

Sorry, i meant to remove both when playing with a higher tempo. If you rather look for the more dynamic movement, you might also look to change the DLP to a more dynamic role like RPM or a player mainly focussing on defense like the Anchor or Half Back (which would suit when playing with an IWB). A playmaker is not nessecarily needed when more dynamic.

 

[YLSFM00]

It seems like an okay tactic to me tbh but I'd look to add more width on the left side with your IW and IWB

Tight marking also isn't compatible with urgent pressing from what I remember, I'd also remove wbib cause it can overcomplicate attacking play too much and up the passing directness up to shorter as maybe much shorter could also overcomplicate things. For a tiki taka tactic, I'd also remove counter TI, down to you whether you hold shape or leave it undone.

 

[Experienced Defender]

Tight marking makes no sense in a tactic/tactical style like yours. 

If you insist on playing a short-passing game, especially in combination with other possession-friendly TIs such as PoD and WBiB, then the lone striker would make more sense on support duty.

The lack of width on the left flank may also prove an issue, although not necessarily too much in a heavily possession-oriented style (which also depends on your players' qualities and abilities).

[Novem9]

Thank you for your answers , this is very helpful!
I tested all things you wrote step by step to see difference. Despite I don't use some of them in new version, notes have a sence and I don't ignore them  

Current version:

 

With regret, I came to the conclusion that this tactic is not productive at a distance, since there are difficulties to create a chances still (I tested few versions with different roles, but it the same all times). It was expected I guess. Or I doing something wrong still  

Could you help me in updated version please?
If this one is impossible to improve in current borders, I guess to keep possession but make this tactic more pragmatic, like to use more direct passing for example, not much shorter as now. This tactic I tested in topteam, but it will be great if pragmatic version will be slightly less dependent of players attributes (within reasonable limits, like 6th team of a league for example)

Let's take the updated tactic (above) as the starting point.

Really need your fresh eyes and advices  Many thanks in advance!

[Experienced Defender]

49 minutes ago, Novem9 said:

When it comes to roles and duties, the WB support would make more sense on the left (behind the IW) and FB support behind the winger. 

But even then, the setup would still not be optimally suited to a short-passing game.

[Novem9]

6 часов назад, Experienced Defender сказал:

But even then, the setup would still not be optimally suited to a short-passing game.

How appropriate to change BBM -> CM(s) ?

What do you think about MEZ(a) in this style? He looks too detached and useful just in a small part of the field.
I start to think to chage him to MEZ(s) or another role.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Novem9

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Novem9 said:

How appropriate to change BBM -> CM(s) ?

Nothing special. Both roles belong to the midfield runner category, although the BBM has greater freedom of movement. But changing the BBM to CM would not make any decisive difference in your current setup IMO. 

 

2 hours ago, Novem9 said:

What do you think about MEZ(a) in this style?

Provided that you have a suitable player for the role, the combination of an attacking mezzala and supporting IW is one of my favorite. The problem is the FB on support behind them, which is why I suggested the swap of fullback roles in my previous post.

[glengarry224]

11 hours ago, Novem9 said:

Thank you for your answers , this is very helpful!
I tested all things you wrote step by step to see difference. Despite I don't use some of them in new version, notes have a sence and I don't ignore them  

Current version:

 

With regret, I came to the conclusion that this tactic is not productive at a distance, since there are difficulties to create a chances still (I tested few versions with different roles, but it the same all times). It was expected I guess. Or I doing something wrong still  

Could you help me in updated version please?
If this one is impossible to improve in current borders, I guess to keep possession but make this tactic more pragmatic, like to use more direct passing for example, not much shorter as now. This tactic I tested in topteam, but it will be great if pragmatic version will be slightly less dependent of players attributes (within reasonable limits, like 6th team of a league for example)

Let's take the updated tactic (above) as the starting point.

Really need your fresh eyes and advices  Many thanks in advance!

I think that you have trouble creating chances because you don't really have anyone attacking the central attacking area or working off of your DLF.  Who is supposed to be your primary scorer? The IW(s) is not attacking the box without the ball and trying to score or work off of a DLF like an IF(a) would.  The IW(s) is good for possession but it is more of a creative role, and he will usually start wide and sometimes try to carry the ball laterally, looking for teammates to set up.  Mez(a) goes wide and moves into channels. 

According to the game, the DLF's "main function is to link the attack to the midfield.  He aims to drop deep into space and hold up the ball before supplying linking passes to teammates..."  With an attacking duty, the DLF "will look to fashion chances for himself in addition to playing others in."  However, the DLF is not usually a role which leads the line, solo, and instead usually has a second striker or attacking forward to play to and off of.  He drops deep, moves into channels and holds up the ball.  So, you'll have both the DLF and Mez more out wide and no one attacking the center.  The more typical solo-striker roles are AF, P, TM, CF, PF.

I'm sure that there are successful formations with a solo striker set on DLF but this might be part of your problem.

[Novem9]

@glengarry224 Oh thank you! 

9 часов назад, glengarry224 сказал:

I think that you have trouble creating chances because you don't really have anyone attacking the central attacking area or working off of your DLF.  Who is supposed to be your primary scorer? The IW(s) is not attacking the box without the ball and trying to score or work off of a DLF like an IF(a) would.  The IW(s) is good for possession but it is more of a creative role, and he will usually start wide and sometimes try to carry the ball laterally, looking for teammates to set up.  Mez(a) goes wide and moves into channels. 

 

I want to switch MEZ(a) -> CM(a). What do you think about this? + Probably it really need to use IF(a)

 

9 часов назад, glengarry224 сказал:

The more typical solo-striker roles are AF, P, TM, CF, PF.

Is Trequartista bad choice for my context? If I will use IF(a), could I use F9? I guess IF and F9 have a good interaction in moving?

Edited May 7, 2021 by Novem9

[Novem9]

Oh this is have much more sense:

IF(a)---F9(s)---W(s)
---CM(a)---DLP(s)---
------DM(d)------
WB(s)---CB(d)---CB(d)---IWB(s)

Edited May 7, 2021 by Novem9

[Experienced Defender]

17 minutes ago, Novem9 said:

IF(a)---F9(s)---W(s)
---CM(a)---DLP(s)---
------DM(d)------
WB(s)---CB(d)---CB(d)---IWB(s)

The opposite central midfield setup would make a lot more sense. Like this:

F9

IFat                                 Wsu

DLPsu   CMat

DMde

WBsu   CDde  CDde  IWBsu

[glengarry224]

On 07/05/2021 at 01:39, Novem9 said:

@glengarry224 Oh thank you! 

I want to switch MEZ(a) -> CM(a). What do you think about this? + Probably it really need to use IF(a)

 

Is Trequartista bad choice for my context? If I will use IF(a), could I use F9? I guess IF and F9 have a good interaction in moving?

Yes, without PIs like 'stay wider', a CM(a) will attack more straight up the pitch.  But also, as you recognize, it's not the same as an IF(a), or a second striker, because the CM(a) comes from deeper, has more defensive responsibilities in the midfield and has linking responsibilities.

Trequartista can attack the middle but is more a playmaker role, not really a solo-scorer role, and which is hard-coded to roam from position.  It is a creative, ball magnet role - teammates are instructed to play the ball to him - that plays no defense.  Kinda like an AP but who plays much less defense and when out of possession, roams around looking for space.  A T can work in conjunction with another playmaker role, like a DLP, in a possession based system, but it can be complicated.

The F9 system, with ED's edits, looks pretty good.  Of course, any system relies upon the talents of your players.  A striker with great acceleration, agility and finishing, but low vision and decision making will not be a great F9.  Try it and see if it works.

Edited May 10, 2021 by glengarry224

[afailed10]

Struggling to understand why you would use Counter in a possession system. Besides, ticking Higher tempo on a Positive mentality might force things out too much. After these 2 I'd observe the matches and see which player is running out of options.

I'd also ask to work ball into box and change the winger to another role who doesn't look to dribble wide and self-isolate from teammates .