Players punting the ball over the bar

[busngabb]

I'm in my first season on FM23 after a break from the game. I'm finding I'm creating a lot of chances and a lot of clear cut chances. But in the vast majority of cases, the players (Calvert-Lewin, Demarai Gray, Dwight McNeil etc) just punt the ball 30 yards over the bar like you'd see an Aussie Rules or Gaelic football player do. Is this just a weakness of the animations on the game, or is this supposed to be telling me something? I.e that the players have no composure or are terrible, or that the tactic is somehow creating the wrong kind of chances? I was showing a lad I follow on YouTube about it and he said it means the players are having too many shots per game and the game removes the chance of too many goals by doing this. He said to set all attacking players to 'shoot less often' to prevent it or use a less OP tactic. But my tactic isn't OP, I'm 13th at the moment, first season with Everton with an average number of goals scored and an above average number conceeded and only 6 points above relegation. I tried that but then didn't score for two games, so it didn't feel the right thing to do.

[Johnny Ace]

Post your tactic up @busngabb, no one can help without seeing what it is 

[busngabb]

[busngabb]

There you go. I seem to get a decent amount of chances, mostly balls in behind the fullbacks for the inside forwards to go through on goal. Also a lot where the central striker is played in. The shots seem very rushed and more often than not go about 30 yards over the bar. Almost like I've got some 'shoot on sight' type option ticked, but I don't think there is one anymore.

[Johnny Ace]

First things that scream out to me are:

• The Higher Tempo - it gives players less time to think on the ball, that combined with:
• The amount of Attack duties - highly aggressive roles being told to speed things up generally leads to a shot at first sight 

I would start by trying the default tempo and having both IFs on Support and see if that's any better 

 

[busngabb]

2 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

First things that scream out to me are:

• The Higher Tempo - it gives players less time to think on the ball, that combined with:
• The amount of Attack duties - highly aggressive roles being told to speed things up generally leads to a shot at first sight 

I would start by trying the default tempo and having both IFs on Support and see if that's any better 

 

Cheers, I'll try that. How on earth is someone supposed to pick stuff like that up from the match engine though?

[The3points]

Generally, if you've got loads of attack duties, the bottom unit can't connect to the top unit well and that leads to long balls to bridge the gap. Similar to higher tempo: if it is taking a toll the players will make many on the ball mistakes. The shot then kind of is a representation of all this: the strikers getting the ball quick and making decisions quick.

[Johnny Ace]

9 hours ago, busngabb said:

Cheers, I'll try that. How on earth is someone supposed to pick stuff like that up from the match engine though?

It's kind of telling you with the players blasting the ball over the bar 

[busngabb]

11 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

It's kind of telling you with the players blasting the ball over the bar 

Is it? A player is through one on one with the keeper, takes two steps and smashes it thirty yards over and I'm supposed to see that means the team is playing with too many attacking roles? There is no genuine football meaning behind that. That's a game specific thing, surely?

Whilst you're responding, what is your take on sites like ratemytactic? I plugged mine into that yesterday after watching another episode of AFL highlights at Goodison Park and it says the tactic is good, well above the recommended scores. If I make the changes you've suggested, it significantly lowers the attacking scores, particulalry reducing the number of attacking duties? Are they worth bothering with or just a crude attempt using some know features of the match engine?

I've tried making the changes you've suggested and I've not seen as many obvious examples of it in the next few games, but I've not seen many shots in general either.

[Johnny Ace]

10 minutes ago, busngabb said:

Is it? A player is through one on one with the keeper, takes two steps and smashes it thirty yards over and I'm supposed to see that means the team is playing with too many attacking roles? There is no genuine football meaning behind that. That's a game specific thing, surely?

Well, if there's something annoying you with how your team play, the tactic is a good indication of why. You pretty much have a front 4 with all of them on Attack playing at a higher tempo, it's a good reason why chances would be wasted

13 minutes ago, busngabb said:

Whilst you're responding, what is your take on sites like ratemytactic? I plugged mine into that yesterday after watching another episode of AFL highlights at Goodison Park and it says the tactic is good, well above the recommended scores. If I make the changes you've suggested, it significantly lowers the attacking scores, particulalry reducing the number of attacking duties? Are they worth bothering with or just a crude attempt using some know features of the match engine?

 I've played around with it before, it's just hitting a score with roles and duties to get the stars. If it rates a tactic with 2 at the back as good, I wouldn't put much stock into it myself 

18 minutes ago, busngabb said:

I've tried making the changes you've suggested and I've not seen as many obvious examples of it in the next few games, but I've not seen many shots in general either.

Adjust the duties until you find the sweet spot you're happy with 

[busngabb]

13 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

 If it rates a tactic with 2 at the back as good, I wouldn't put much stock into it myself

Not a fan of it? My thinking was that the fullbacks in my squad aren't the quickest or the fittest, so having them there meant they had less distance to run to support the play. You think that's a bad setup?

[Johnny Ace]

2 minutes ago, busngabb said:

Not a fan of it? My thinking was that the fullbacks in my squad aren't the quickest or the fittest, so having them there meant they had less distance to run to support the play. You think that's a bad setup?

I think it's risky, very interesting but it's risky. Those Wingback won't defend the fullback positions as well as if you played a back 4. I think it's something you could work with though 

[dazza11]

On 24/07/2023 at 23:00, busngabb said:

I do agree with other comments that your team set up is part to cause for lots of missed chances, however clear and obvious they seem to you. I would make your AP (s) to allow more creativity in the pocket to give better link play. If you insist on the double IFA & AF then I would drop the high press and move to a mid block - this will give those players more space to break into. Right now you are closing down like mad in the final third, winning the ball, and then your guys are all set to effectively shoot on sight with those roles, hence probably why lots of chances, but fewer goals. 
Or if you want to play the high press id go for IWs, APs, IFA, PFA or even a TF with Broja or DCL if you still have him. 
 

I’ve never tried my fb in that area with only 2cb - to make it more stable defensible you could change ur A to a HB and maybe the vol to either hold position or change role to a dlps- you have enough players going forward with the front four and ur wb’s. 
 

Also the quality of your players isn’t ideal for high level finishing, Broja only has something like 13 finishing at start of game, Scott ( assuming it’s the kid from Bristol) is a youngster and McNeil and Danjuma irl aren’t renowned for banging in 20 goals a season which is why I would def change one of their roles to be more creative.