Looking for feedback (433 tactic)

[RCCook]

Looking for some feedback on a new tactical set-up. Playing as Wolfsburg, season 6. Team is a top 4 side, finishing in the Champions League places the last couple seasons.  

As we play a lot of high-pressing sides, I'm looking to play a possession game, using our movement and passing to open up space in the opposition defense.  

Does this selection of roles/duties/instructions look like it will get the job done? I've debated whether to use a carrilero or a DLP on the left side of midfield. The two players I have there can play either role. One is a bit better CAR, the other a bit better DLP.  

Team strengths: strength, marking, tackling, jumping reach, most mental attributes. The wide forwards, MEZ, and center backs all have good pace.  

Team weaknesses: heading, corners, acceleration 

Board expectations are that we play defensively sound football, and score from set pieces.  

As always, feedback much appreciated!

[Prolix]

I am a big proponent of using an Advanced Playmaker (support) in place of the Deep Lying Playmaker in systems like this. The DLP is obviously very cautious/stable as a second holding midfielder, but I don't think the AP is excessively aggressive with the good structure all around him. He has a bit more license to move to hurt the opponent and combine with the front 3.

The AP plays in the space between your opponent's defence and midfield, and the DLP plays in the space between your defence and midfield. IMO, you want more of the former from one of the two "8s" in a 4-3-3.

Edited May 12, 2021 by Prolix

[Experienced Defender]

23 minutes ago, RCCook said:

Does this selection of roles/duties/instructions look like it will get the job done?

Your setup of roles and duties really looks very good for a possession-based, short-passing approach you want to implement 

Instructions also make sense, although I would not insist on the WBiB at all costs (or at least not all the time). Because there will be situations when such instruction is likely to overcomplicate your attacking play and thus potentially do more harm than good. 

[zabyl]

17 hours ago, RCCook said:

Does this selection of roles/duties/instructions look like it will get the job done?

If i use a possession based 4-3-3 with a defend duty DM, i would rather use 2 roaming roles on 2 CM strata (or roaming PI activated on both) for increasing movement and creating more space similar to Guardiola's Barcelona.

[crusadertsar]

23 hours ago, zabyl said:

If i use a possession based 4-3-3 with a defend duty DM, i would rather use 2 roaming roles on 2 CM strata (or roaming PI activated on both) for increasing movement and creating more space similar to Guardiola's Barcelona.

Exactly. Especially if you want to replicate Guardiola's Free 8s.  Both CMs need to be dynamic roles. Like BBMs and Mezzalas.

[Keyzer Soze]

On 13/05/2021 at 14:57, zabyl said:

If i use a possession based 4-3-3 with a defend duty DM, i would rather use 2 roaming roles on 2 CM strata (or roaming PI activated on both) for increasing movement and creating more space similar to Guardiola's Barcelona.

I agree with you, but only if none of the CM slots are filled with a MEZ. 

Because the Mezzala not only have roam from position hardcoded, but also the get forward, and if you pair him with another player that roam from position you can easily loose your midfield stability. 

So, for me I would go with a roaming playmaker and a box-to-box midfielder, or a BBM with a CM with roam from position PI. 

When I use a MEZ (support or attack duty) I prefer to pair him with a more "static" player like a DLP(s) or a AP(s). 

[RCCook]

On 12/05/2021 at 15:36, Prolix said:

I am a big proponent of using an Advanced Playmaker (support) in place of the Deep Lying Playmaker in systems like this. The DLP is obviously very cautious/stable as a second holding midfielder, but I don't think the AP is excessively aggressive with the good structure all around him. He has a bit more license to move to hurt the opponent and combine with the front 3.

The AP plays in the space between your opponent's defence and midfield, and the DLP plays in the space between your defence and midfield. IMO, you want more of the former from one of the two "8s" in a 4-3-3.

The reason I went with a DLP there is because the 2 players I have for that role are pretty much DLP/CAR types. Both have excellent Stamina, Vision, and Passing attributes, but are poor in Dribbling and Flair, and don't provide that much offensively other than their passing and the occasional goal from a long shot. 

Tactic is working OK so far (3 wins, 2 losses, 1 draw in the 6 matches I've played) but struggles against fast, high-pressing sides. Had a match against Hertha last night where we only had 5 shots all match, but won 1-0 thanks to a long-range goal from the mezzala. Hertha aren't a particularly good team, but with their speed and high rate of closing down, they were able to restrict us from doing much once we got into the attacking third. 

I did remove WBIB, as I do have a number of players who have good ratings in Long Shots, and sometimes, a 30-yard screamer is the only way you can score...

 

[zabyl]

4 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

I agree with you, but only if none of the CM slots are filled with a MEZ. 

Because the Mezzala not only have roam from position hardcoded, but also the get forward, and if you pair him with another player that roam from position you can easily loose your midfield stability. 

So, for me I would go with a roaming playmaker and a box-to-box midfielder, or a BBM with a CM with roam from position PI. 

When I use a MEZ (support or attack duty) I prefer to pair him with a more "static" player like a DLP(s) or a AP(s). 

That's a different approach that i respect...

But for me, these two played exactly like that. In my opinion; Iniesta played like a hybrid of a mezzala & playmaker with using both left & central areas on CM & AM strata while Xavi played like a roaming playmaker who dropped DM strata or climbed to AM. With Messi's intelligent play; triple roaming playmakers dominated central areas with ease. Pep used this trio to create space for wide forwards and they did the job.

[Prolix]

1 hour ago, RCCook said:

The reason I went with a DLP there is because the 2 players I have for that role are pretty much DLP/CAR types. Both have excellent Stamina, Vision, and Passing attributes, but are poor in Dribbling and Flair, and don't provide that much offensively other than their passing and the occasional goal from a long shot.

I think you could still get away with it. While Dribbling and Flair are listed as preferred attributes, the AP-s isn't actually instructed to Dribble More (unlike the AP-a). I would expect a significant difference from allowing even that DLP-archetype player a bit more freedom of movement and an inclination to impact play in the final third. He will play the role differently than a player with a different set of attributes and traits, but that's okay! 

IMO it's a tactical question of what you want from the left-sided #8 in your 4-3-3. If your answer is that you want that disciplined/holding DLP, that's fine. But then maybe there are tweaks to be made elsewhere. (For example: a more aggressive wingback on the left side to create overloads with the IF-a while the DLP and HB provide security behind them.)

Edited May 14, 2021 by Prolix

[RCCook]

1 hour ago, Prolix said:

I think you could still get away with it. While Dribbling and Flair are listed as preferred attributes, the AP-s isn't actually instructed to Dribble More (unlike the AP-a). I would expect a significant difference from allowing even that DLP-archetype player a bit more freedom of movement and an inclination to impact play in the final third. He will play the role differently than a player with a different set of attributes and traits, but that's okay! 

IMO it's a tactical question of what you want from the left-sided #8 in your 4-3-3. If your answer is that you want that disciplined/holding DLP, that's fine. But then maybe there are tweaks to be made elsewhere. (For example: a more aggressive wingback on the left side to create overloads with the IF-a while the DLP and HB provide security behind them.)

This is my starter on the left side of CM- his backup has a fairly similar attribute spread, just not quite as good:

 

Edited May 14, 2021 by RCCook

[RCCook]

Played a few matches over the weekend using an AP in place of the DLP, and I didn't really notice much difference. I've also been experimenting with the Be More Expressive TI, which appears to help a little against the high-pressing sides.

The one thing I did notice is that the AP version seems a bit more effective at breaking down sides who park the bus, while the DLP version seems to work better against the big clubs like Bayern and Dortmund.

[Prolix]

5 hours ago, RCCook said:

The one thing I did notice is that the AP version seems a bit more effective at breaking down sides who park the bus, while the DLP version seems to work better against the big clubs like Bayern and Dortmund.

Well, yeah. 

[RCCook]

Made a couple tweaks to the tactic- removed Prevent Short GK Distribution, replaced it with a split block (front 3 and the MEZ), and added Be More Expressive.

The tactic has been very effective defensively, but we can't score consistently, and struggle to get penetration in the attacking third. I've tried adjusting the tempo, adding WBIB, changing the DLP to an AP (or even a CAR) but nothing works for more than a match or two.

I feel like my players are well-suited to the roles/duties, and the tactic seems sound, so I'm at a loss as to why it's been ineffective offensively. Any suggestions?

 

[CARRERA]

1 hour ago, RCCook said:

The tactic has been very effective defensively, but we can't score consistently,

How do your attacks play out?

• Is your frontline becoming too compressed / flat?
• Is your team skipping opportunities for penetrating space?
• Is your team making stupid decision like crossing the ball into the box even if there is a better passing option?
• Is your team recycling possession if there is no good opportunity?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, RCCook said:

Made a couple tweaks to the tactic- removed Prevent Short GK Distribution, replaced it with a split block (front 3 and the MEZ), and added Be More Expressive

Why have you added the BMEx TI? I mean, what's the exact reasoning behind it? 

Overall, the tactic looks good, especially the setup of roles and duties. So either that tactical style is not optimally suited for your team or perhaps it is about your player selection relative to certain roles or you just need to make a tweak or two in order for the tactic to start working on a (more) consistent basis. Anyway, you should be pretty close to sorting it out finally 

[RCCook]

Attacks usually play out with recycling possession around the edge of the box, or cross/pass/shot attempts that get blocked.

I'd added BME because I have a lot of creative players and good passers. Did try something I hadn't done before in my last match- dropping the mentality to Balanced- and we were much more effective in the final third. I'll give that a go for a few matches and see if that does it.

Edited June 6, 2021 by RCCook

[Experienced Defender]

29 minutes ago, RCCook said:

Did try something I hadn't done before in my last match- dropping the mentality to Balanced- and we were much more effective in the final third

Good. It means that your players play better with a more patient and considered approach, because it gives them more time to make better decisions. 

[Zemahh]

2 hours ago, RCCook said:

I feel like my players are well-suited to the roles/duties, and the tactic seems sound, so I'm at a loss as to why it's been ineffective offensively. Any suggestions?

Your tactic looks fairly well balanced, but you could try making two small tweaks:

• DLPsu -> APsu: HB should already be offering enough cover by himself, which makes another holding role redundant
• Left WBsu -> CWBsu: offer width a bit more aggressively behind the IFat, who tends to cut inside very early (WBsu only runs wide with the ball, CWB stays wide even without it)

Since you mentioned you lack penetration in the final third, you could also try removing Shorter Passing for a few games and see how that goes. With Play Out Of Defence, DLF and AP, your tactic should already be fairly possession oriented as it is. From my experience, Shorter Passing (especially when combined w/ balanced/low tempo) can sometimes stifle your players too much, especially against stubborn defences, when occasional direct switches of play can be quite useful; perhaps try using Slightly Lower Tempo instead, which should give your players more time to get in dangerous positions before they receive the ball.

Other than that, I don't see much wrong with your tactic. If things don't click after a few games, perhaps the issue is elsewhere, as ED mentioned.

[RCCook]

On 06/06/2021 at 17:00, Zemahh said:

Your tactic looks fairly well balanced, but you could try making two small tweaks:

• DLPsu -> APsu: HB should already be offering enough cover by himself, which makes another holding role redundant
• Left WBsu -> CWBsu: offer width a bit more aggressively behind the IFat, who tends to cut inside very early (WBsu only runs wide with the ball, CWB stays wide even without it)

Since you mentioned you lack penetration in the final third, you could also try removing Shorter Passing for a few games and see how that goes. With Play Out Of Defence, DLF and AP, your tactic should already be fairly possession oriented as it is. From my experience, Shorter Passing (especially when combined w/ balanced/low tempo) can sometimes stifle your players too much, especially against stubborn defences, when occasional direct switches of play can be quite useful; perhaps try using Slightly Lower Tempo instead, which should give your players more time to get in dangerous positions before they receive the ball.

Other than that, I don't see much wrong with your tactic. If things don't click after a few games, perhaps the issue is elsewhere, as ED mentioned.

I changed the DLP to an AP, and the tactic is working MUCH better now. Still working out some issues against high-pressing sides, but overall, looking a lot more like what I'd intended it to. Scoring a lot from counters and cross-field balls where the AI press leaves an unmarked forward on one side of the pitch. 

[Prolix]

7 hours ago, RCCook said:

I changed the DLP to an AP, and the tactic is working MUCH better now.

[RCCook]

1 hour ago, Prolix said:

Like you said, the AP being more mobile/willing to roam than the DLP really helps. Thanks!