Help needed with creating chances

[trueblue9877]

With this tactic my defending is quite solid as it is usually top 10 in the league even after promotions however, I can struggle to score goals but the scoring is usually in the middle of the league, how can I improve the offence.

[Prolix]

I can't really tell how you want your team to score goals. The AF is the only player attacking the box and is very isolated. The 2x wingers have only the AF to aim at with their crosses, and they aren't even instructed to aggressively attack the byline (which might at least put them in the vicinity of the striker). As far as I can tell your only routes to goal are 1.) for your BPDs or AP to pass the ball to a forward and hope that they dribble until something happens, or 2.) aggressively pressing and relying on the Counter instruction to get a lot of bodies swarming forward when you force a turnover. Neither of these are reliable/sustainable.

This tactic is certainly very solid and hardworking without the ball. But you need to go back to the drawing board and decide how you want your team to play when they're in the established possession phase.

Edited July 8, 2021 by Prolix

[trueblue9877]

1 hour ago, Prolix said:

I can't really tell how you want your team to score goals. The AF is the only player attacking the box and is very isolated. The 2x wingers have only the AF to aim at with their crosses, and they aren't even instructed to aggressively attack the byline (which might at least put them in the vicinity of the striker). As far as I can tell your only routes to goal are 1.) for your BPDs or AP to pass the ball to a forward and hope that they dribble until something happens, or 2.) aggressively pressing and relying on the Counter instruction to get a lot of bodies swarming forward when you force a turnover. Neither of these are reliable/sustainable.

This tactic is certainly very solid and hardworking without the ball. But you need to go back to the drawing board and decide how you want your team to play when they're in the established possession phase.

Well my plan for when we have the ball is to try to create 2 v 1s against the opposition FB, sometimes I switch to using IF (S) which actually  works better than W (S) but eventually  hits a wall where you just can't  win sometimes  so I switch to wingers to try to attack with more width, but I thought that by adding an AP that the striker wouldn't  get isolated, because  when I change it to DLF  or TM to try and get the striker more involved, it NEVER works.

[Prolix]

What movement actually creates a 2v1 against the opposition FB? Assuming you mean the W-s + WB-s on either flank, what is to stop the opposition from 9 times out of 10 matching you up 2v2 with their flank players? It's a lot to rely on for the opposition FB to step out early to your W before they have support from their own wide attacker and to then find your AF with a pass into that channel. There's just very little coordination of attacking movement from your players.

Could you explain what you mean by hitting a wall when you use an IF? 

[trueblue9877]

3 hours ago, Prolix said:

What movement actually creates a 2v1 against the opposition FB? Assuming you mean the W-s + WB-s on either flank, what is to stop the opposition from 9 times out of 10 matching you up 2v2 with their flank players? It's a lot to rely on for the opposition FB to step out early to your W before they have support from their own wide attacker and to then find your AF with a pass into that channel. There's just very little coordination of attacking movement from your players.

Could you explain what you mean by hitting a wall when you use an IF? 

The wingers are set to  roam from position .

[facman]

10 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

 I thought that by adding an AP that the striker wouldn't  get isolated

I think you may be misunderstanding what an Advanced Playmaker on support does. The AP(S) is hard coded to sit in the hole, collect the ball and spray passes around, not drive forward with the ball or get into the box. If you want to support the striker then you need to either go with an IF(A) or IW(A) in one of your flank roles, or change your CM(S) to be someone who gets much more adventurous in attack, such as a Mezzala or BBM.

[Mike J]

Initial thoughts are that a single Attack duty means you're going to lack penetration and movement between the lines. Even if you manage to get a 2v1 on the flank I don't see who you're trying to play in other than the AF who will likely have 2 defenders marking him. You central midfielders are both just going to sit outside the box so you'll probably recycle possession quite well but nobody is trying to attack the box from midfield. That makes defending very easy because the only threat is a single striker.

I'd try either changing at least one of the wingers to an IF or changing the AP/S to an AP/A or maybe switch the roles a bit to get a DLP/S and a Mezzala/A. 

[bibird.]

A good tact to take with this could be to consider how you would shut down your tactic if you were your opposition.

For example, a deep defensive line denies space for your AF to run in behind and creates a packed defence for your WBs and Wingers to cross into. Reserved wide players would mean your strategy of doubling up on the flanks would be easy to stifle. A couple of energetic midfielders would be free to press your supporting central midfielders, so as not to give them time on the ball. They wouldn't even have to worry about players moving laterally into space behind them, as your WBs and Wingers would stay wide and AF just runs into the opposition CBs.

What sort of changes could you make to your tactic that might help your side pose more of a threat to the defence?

[trueblue9877]

On 09/07/2021 at 01:29, Prolix said:

What movement actually creates a 2v1 against the opposition FB? Assuming you mean the W-s + WB-s on either flank, what is to stop the opposition from 9 times out of 10 matching you up 2v2 with their flank players? It's a lot to rely on for the opposition FB to step out early to your W before they have support from their own wide attacker and to then find your AF with a pass into that channel. There's just very little coordination of attacking movement from your players.

Could you explain what you mean by hitting a wall when you use an IF? 

What I mean is that for 2/rds of a season you will be winning and the tactic will work fine but when you hit March you will just start losing.

Edited July 10, 2021 by trueblue9877

[Gdansk]

16 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

What I mean is that for 2/rds of a season you will be winning and the tactic will work fine but when you hit March you will just start losing.

What has this to do with IF? This more has to do that all your tactic is hope for long balls into an AF or IF and when teams start taking you seriously they don't give you the space to run into anymore.

[trueblue9877]

4 hours ago, Gdansk said:

What has this to do with IF? This more has to do that all your tactic is hope for long balls into an AF or IF and when teams start taking you seriously they don't give you the space to run into anymore.

Oh I always thought it was because IF congests the play in the middle and teams typically defend narrower so in  my mind, I thought that using BBM + IF was playing right into that so I switched to wingers.