Defensive Width

[jaybz]

Searched the forums and found lots about attacking width, but no discussion of defensive width.

Has anyone played around much with wide or narrow defensive width?

I've been tempted by narrow defensive width ('show outside') when I'm sitting back more, or playing a less aggressive press when my team is flagging, but because of the strength of wing-play I'm a bit reticent to do so. Has anyone had good / bad experience with it?

[DarJ]

32 minutes ago, jaybz said:

but because of the strength of wing-play I'm a bit reticent to do so

If you centerbacks are fgood in the air you should be okay but I'll advice you to use OI to tight mark the wide players and strikers so when the ball is in the wide areas someone will close down that flank quickly and the other players in the box will have someone marking them 

[CARRERA]

5 hours ago, jaybz said:

Has anyone played around much with wide or narrow defensive width?

With the Defensive Width you can manage where to funnel the others team attack. To Make a good decision it is important to understand where your defensive formation is naturally exposed and where it is naturally well protected. Then funnel the attacks into the well protected area to relieve the exposed areas. If all areas are equally protected / exposed you can just leave it on a balanced width. 

Important areas around this decision are the following:

• Behind the Defensive Line (Can be influenced by the "Defensive Line" TI)
• In front of the Defensive Line (This area can be protected by 1 or 2 Defensive Midfielders; With no DM's that area is usually naturally exposed)
• Wide Areas (With Wide Players in the AM strata, your team is usually naturally exposed as well as when playing with wing backs; Fullbacks and CM strata wide players will help you to protect the wings)

You can slightly differ from those "rules" by setting up roles in a certain way. But those considerations mentioned above should affect how you set up your formation. It's also taken into consideration how you are looking to defend in general. If you are looking for a high line pressing style, better pick a formation that can defend wide and has players in a high defensive position. If you are looking for a deeper defensive block, pick a well protected formation in wide areas (or even all above mentioned) to be able to defend in a narrow shape.

Some footage for better visuals:

Exposed in front of the Defense; Protected in Wide Areas

Spoiler

Exposed in Wide areas; Protected in front of the defense

Spoiler

 

[Aoyao]

width in attack

[nully29]

Simoky put, with narrow defense you invite crosses. With wide defense you invite long shots.

[Lasson]

You can also funnel the opposition through OI’s, which is what I’m doing currently.

[zemaniano85]

21 hours ago, CARRERA said:

With the Defensive Width you can manage where to funnel the others team attack. To Make a good decision it is important to understand where your defensive formation is naturally exposed and where it is naturally well protected. Then funnel the attacks into the well protected area to relieve the exposed areas. If all areas are equally protected / exposed you can just leave it on a balanced width. 

Important areas around this decision are the following:

• Behind the Defensive Line (Can be influenced by the "Defensive Line" TI)
• In front of the Defensive Line (This area can be protected by 1 or 2 Defensive Midfielders; With no DM's that area is usually naturally exposed)
• Wide Areas (With Wide Players in the AM strata, your team is usually naturally exposed as well as when playing with wing backs; Fullbacks and CM strata wide players will help you to protect the wings)

You can slightly differ from those "rules" by setting up roles in a certain way. But those considerations mentioned above should affect how you set up your formation. It's also taken into consideration how you are looking to defend in general. If you are looking for a high line pressing style, better pick a formation that can defend wide and has players in a high defensive position. If you are looking for a deeper defensive block, pick a well protected formation in wide areas (or even all above mentioned) to be able to defend in a narrow shape.

Some footage for better visuals:

Exposed in front of the Defense; Protected in Wide Areas

  Reveal hidden contents

Exposed in Wide areas; Protected in front of the defense

  Reveal hidden contents

 

That's interesting, but if you want to use a specific formation, let's say a 4231, you know your problems will be front of defense and wings. How can you tweak it to make it less vulnerable, obviously without changing formation? I was thinking to push the defensive line being higher than the LoE and using defensive wide width? 

[CARRERA]

1 hour ago, zemaniano85 said:

That's interesting, but if you want to use a specific formation, let's say a 4231, you know your problems will be front of defense and wings. How can you tweak it to make it less vulnerable, obviously without changing formation? I was thinking to push the defensive line being higher than the LoE and using defensive wide width? 

I totally agree, 4-2-3-1 (2x CM) is one of the most offensive formations and its naturally exposed both in front of the defense and at the wings. So you really want to press high and aggressively which additionally makes you exposed behind the defensive line. So what i would do is looking for two defensively strong central midfielders and make at least one of them a holding role with defend duty and use a balanced defensive width as there is no clear area thats well protected. Alternatively you could use 2x holding CM's (maybe 1 defend duty and one DLP on support) and try to funnel the play into that area by defending wide, which is still risky but would encourage your press in the final third.

You need to try whats working better for your team.

[glengarry224]

If you set your defense narrow or wide, also be aware, each match, of your opponent's formation and strengths, and how they are scoring their goals.  After say 8 games, I like to look at the analyst report to see where my opponent's assists are coming from and where they are conceding from.

If your opponent has good inverted wingers, with good dribbling and flair, narrow will suit you well, but be aware of marauding fullbacks who can cross.   Same if your opponent plays a narrow formation like 3-5-2.

If your opponent has great fullbacks with good crossing, and a striker with great jumping, heading, otb, bravery and strength narrow will be a problem and you might need to play standard width, close down fullbacks or man mark opponent fullbacks with your wingers or some combination of those.  Of course, as others wrote, it always depends upon how good your CBs and GK are in the air, relatively, to their attackers.  

If the analyst report shows that your opponent has a lot of crossing assists from his right flank, from his right winger, maybe keep narrow but tell your LW or LB to man mark the RW and/or use OIs like 'trigger press', 'mark tighter', tackle harder'.

[OldManPar77]

On 14/12/2021 at 10:56, jaybz said:

Searched the forums and found lots about attacking width, but no discussion of defensive width.

Has anyone played around much with wide or narrow defensive width?

I've been tempted by narrow defensive width ('show outside') when I'm sitting back more, or playing a less aggressive press when my team is flagging, but because of the strength of wing-play I'm a bit reticent to do so. Has anyone had good / bad experience with it?

Essentially, show them outside means the opposition will get to the wings, cross and score.

Showing them inside means the opposition will get to the wings, cross and score.

Oh, meant to add, should just leave it on standard. Will mean the opposition will use the wings to cross and score...

Edited December 19, 2021 by OldManPar77

[nully29]

5 at the back wide defense is very good to protect from far post crosses. Your full back will always mark far post and, if tall enough, will clear the cross.