2
First and foremost, I am a big fan of tinkering tactics in accordance to the opposition. A lot of FM players like to make a tactic and stick with it for all purposes. Fair enough if that works for you, but I prefer to make adjustments for each match with the opposition in mind. If such a frequent rate of changes is something you fundamentally disagree with, I doubt you would agree with much of the content in this post.
As someone who has preferred to play as modest teams more often than not in my 13+ years of playing football management simulations, I have developed into quite a defensive player. I like my teams to be compact, organized, possession orientated, and difficult to break down. Just as can be said in real life, if the team isn’t one of the better ones in the division, you have much more chance of preventing the opposition from scoring than you have of scoring yourself.
This can be and often is the platform for their results. To be boring but effective is ultimately what the defensive manager sets out to achieve. Of course, it is not unheard of to play defensive football when managing a top tier side, too. The most decorated real life example of this would be none other than Jose Mourinho.
Your Squad
It is important to identify which of the two types of defensive football your squad is most suited to. You should also be able to identify which players are surplus to requirements as a result of not being suited to the style of play you wish to impose. Furthermore, it's a good idea to ensure that future signings are not incompatible to this aim. It may well take a couple of seasons before you have a squad which is suited to stifling the opposition and winning at all costs. Alternatively, you may want to run the risk of an overhaul within the first transfer windows in order to get the sort of players you need.
If you choose to follow this guide, then in an ideal world you shall either possess, or be working towards building one type of squad. For the purpose of this guide, they shall be referred to as Squad Type A and Squad Type B in this section. It is important to review the attributes when deciding on whether or not a fullback should be retained, or if a prospective signing is suitable. Just because a player has a higher star rating than another doesn't necessarily mean he is a better player for you.
Goalkeepers
This is position doesn't really require different specific consideration. The better the goalkeeper, the better he is for any team regardless of their system. By all means, if you believe that you'll be counter-attacking your opposition, then the attribute of Throwing could represent a bonus if the Quick Throw is your preferred method of distribution. Similarly, if you have a towering presence in the final third Kicking may be seen as a favorable attribute, as you'd surely see to it that your goalkeeper's distribution is set to Long Kick.
Fullbacks
Gone are the days when a fullback was a glorified centreback who happened to be positioned out-wide. However as a defensive manager, you still need to make sure that your full backs offers much more defending that they do going forward. For this reason, a fullback of the Glen Johnson mould would be far from suitable. In particular, the Crossing attribute is but a luxury that you will seldom benefit from. The same goes for very high Acceleration and Pace, as while a reasonable rating in both will greatly help when picking up opposition wingers, anything excessive is a mere bonus which you won't benefit from often. In short, the defensive attributes listed in the player role section should take precedence when trying to decide between two fullbacks of a similar ability.
Centrebacks
Arguably the most obvious consideration is that of how defensively sound your CBs are. I for one have always been a strong advocate of having some sort of split partnership on FM whenever possible, as I believe this to be more stable than two CBs in-line with each other. When deciding on roles, there is a chance to be resourceful and to mask any shortcomings. By simply observing the player role section the manager can make up for a CB who lacks in Concentration (essential attribute for the Central Defender role with all duties) by making sure he plays as a Limited Defender. If he has good Pace, then you can assign the Cover Duty to this role. If he's not blessed with Pace, but has decent Aggression and Bravery, then Limited Defender --> Stopper becomes practical. Either way, your CB would not constantly be level with a partner who's playing as a Central Defender --> Defend. Depending on the attributes, then, this guide recommends any of the following partnerships:
- Central Defender --> Defend + Cental Defender --> Cover
- Central Defender --> Defend + Central Defender --> Stopper
- Central Defender --> Defend + Limited Defender --> Cover
- Central Defender --> Defend + Limited Defender --> Stopper
Therefore, try to have at least two players for each CB slots who are capable of playing. This would represent good squad depth.
Defensive Midfielders
While some defensive systems can make do with CM with a Defend Duty, the vast majority of sides with a defensive style comprise of 1 or 2 DMs. Ideally, your DM(s) ought to be well rounded in each of the recommended player role attributes. If you play a 4-2-3-1 with 2 DMs, it's important that one of them offers something significant to your team's transitional phases and attacks, hence Passing being introduced as a recommended attribute for both of the Defensive Midfielder Roles when awarded a Support Duty. If you don't have a DM who's up to the task of providing good passes, you're better off not using a formation that comprises of 2 players in this position.
Central Midfielders
Your CMs should ideally be suitable for Ball Winning Midfielder role and/or Central Midfielder role(s). In the event of having a CM who is better technically than he is physically, there is a chance of accommodating a Deep Lying Playmaker role, but only if his CM partner's defensive abilities make up for it. The role of Advanced Playmaker is discouraged in most instances. The reason for this is by definition, a player of this role will offer less when defending. Considering the defensive manager should be looking to win the midfield battle, he needs 2 (or 3, depending on the formation) CMs who are ready and willing to commit themselves physically in the middle of the park. If it's a 3 man central midfield and the manager possesses a player who is very good technically, yet still offers something meaningful when defending, an Advanced Playmaker role may be a worthwhile trade-off, usually in the case of trying to break down other teams who aren't showing much ambition themselves.
Wingers
A tricky area of the squad to assess due to the fact that your wide-men need to be able to provide attacking width, as well as help defend the flanks. The Winger and Inside Forward roles should only be used if your players are more suited to the AML and AMR positions, yet aren't able to perform the Defensive Winger role effectively, or your team's Passing Style is Direct.
Attacking Midfielders
Due to the fact that an AM is most useful "in the hole", he tends to contribute precious little to your team's defending, although this may depend on the opposition formation e.g. In a 4-5-1 variant vs another 4-5-1 variant, the AM will track back and have a part to play in the midfield battle. Also, against a team which utilises a DM, he will duly hassle them for the duration of the opposition team's move. For this reason, a system which includes an AM is discouraged. If you must accommodate an AM, try to at least make sure he has good Heading and at least average Tackling.
Strikers
Your lone forward bears much responsibility in leading the line. The roles of Deep Lying Forward, Defensive Forward, or Target Man ought to be strongly considered on first instance. The chosen role should depend on how physical, or technical your striker is. If you are fortunate enough to possess a player who is capable of doing anything and everything upfront, then by all means, play him as a Complete Forward with a Support Duty. If you insist on using 2 strikers, it is recommended that you utilize some sort of big man & small/quick man partnership. i.e. A Poacher or Advanced Forward with an Attack Duty & a Deep Lying Forward or Target Man with a Support Duty.
Squad Type A or Squad Type B?
If you believe your Fullbacks are good at defending, but can at least contribute to transitional phases (this is almost always passing to the nearest CM, relaying it to the DM, or recycling possession to a CB), then they are slightly more suited to a Rigid philosophy [Squad Type A] as opposed to Very Rigid [Squad Type B]. After all, the main difference between the two philosophies is the Wingbacks having a bit more involvement in transitions of play from defense to attack. If your DM(s) is(are) more suited to the Role of Anchorman rather than Defensive Midfielder, he is more suited to Squad Type B. For the wide-men, MLs & MRs are better for Squad Type A, whereas the AML and AMRs are Squad Type B material, unless you are lucky and possess an AML and AMR that can play well with a Defensive Winger role. If the role of Deep Lying Forward or Defensive Forward is more fitting for your striker, he ought to be of a team resembling Squad Type A. A striker playing as a Target Man will be at his best as part of a Squad Type B.
For general considerations, in terms of your passing game, if your squad generally posses at least an average ability to pick out a teammate (decent ratings throughout the team for Passing, Anticipation, Creativity and Teamwork in particular), then this is a Squad Type A trait. If your team aren't capable on the ball, but have a physical presence upfront, they are better off playing it Direct, which represents Squad Type B. If your team is generally good in the air, then this means they can be dangerous in attacking Set Pieces, including Throw Ins (providing you have a player in your starting 11 who possesses a high Long Throws attribute), and are therefore proficient in what is a Squad Type B area.
Formations
Formations with just one striker are recommended. Of course, this is to allow for the benefit of having one extra player defending and supporting in each transition of play. A defensive manager prioritizes packing the midfield above all else. A formation need not be set in stone, although my favourite is a 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 system, a.k.a the pre-set 4-5-1 formation. My back-up formation is typically a 4-2-3-1 variant.
Pitch Dimensions
There are two very different approaches, especially with home fixtures in mind:
Minimum allowed [Squad Type A]
I believe this is beneficial and important for a player who advocates a defensive mindset combined with possession orientated football when going forward. A bigger pitch would not only compromise your intentions to make your side difficult to beat while playing this way, but it would also benefit stronger teams that are able to make better use of any extra space of the pitch than you are.
Maximum allowed [Squad Type B]
I’m of the view that a large pitch should be chosen if the following cases apply:
- My squad is generally poor on the ball to the point of me not feeling comfortable with their ability to retain and recycle possession effectively on a small pitch.
- I have a big Target Man capable of coming out on top, pun very much intended, in physical battles with opposition central defenders. I also have wingers who are quick for the level they’re playing at, or they are unusually good in the air.
- My central defenders possess at least average speed in proportion to the attackers in their division (due to the increased vulnerability of long punts upfield).
On a larger pitch, I would say it’s important to be even more meticulous about maintaining team shape. This is because it is easier for defending players to be pulled out of position, as well as the fact that good players are more comfortable when they have more space and time on the ball. This and passing range are the two main differences when taking into consideration the pitch size.
Match Preparation
This guide endorses getting the most out of match preparation, even if this does exploit flaws in the current system, as exposed in my research on this matter (see http://www.footballm...-broken-be-r281). Needless to say, you can choose to refrain from following this part of the guide if you wish, but I for one consider the current version of Match Preparation to be a case of exploit or be exploited, such is the extent that the system is imbalanced.
So, depending on what 'Type' you consider your squad to be, use 1 tactic through pre-season. This is because, as shown in my Match Preparation research, this is the quickest way for your players to gain a general understanding of instructions within a system, as well as different types of systems. To increase your rate of learning, set your Special Focus Area to None, with at least an Average Workload at the very least. Your "base tactic" throughout pre-season would closely resemble one of the following:
Squad Type A Pre-Season
Philosophy: Rigid
Starting Strategy: Standard
Passing Style: Shorter
Creative Freedom: More Disciplined
Closing Down: Default
Tackling: More Aggressive
Marking: Default
Roaming: Stick To Position
Squad Type B Pre-Season
Philosophy: Very Rigid
Starting Strategy: Standard
Passing Style: More Direct
Creative Freedom: More Disciplined
Closing Down: Stand-Off
Tackling: More Aggressive
Marking: Default
Roaming: Stick To Position
As for the other two tactical slots, there is merit in gauging the strength of your time in order to anticipate which of the following conditions will be applicable in competitive matches. This would also ensure that minimum changes to global instructions are necessary. e.g. If you have a Squad Type B, at least 2/3 of your tactics slots ought to be Very Rigid, while you may decided to be mindful of situations where Rigid would be more useful instead, thus making sure the team is already comfortable with the structure that comes with that setup.
Philosophy
Small pitch:
Home: Rigid – Rigid vs all.
Away: Rigid/Very Rigid – Rigid vs weaker teams/similar strength teams. Very Rigid vs strong teams.
Large pitch:
Home: Rigid/Very Rigid – Rigid vs weaker teams. Very Rigid vs similar/stronger strength teams.
Away: Very Rigid vs all.
The logic? I don’t want to compromise defensive stability in favour of smoother transitional play. As a defensive manager, stability and resilience should take priority. As a result of the methodical build-up play that comes with adopting either a Rigid or Very Rigid philosophy, there is much greater emphasis on retaining team shape than in any of the other philosophies. Therefore, when possession is lost and the opposition aims to hit you on the break, playing with one of these philosophies allows for better defensive positions to deal with the attack.
Passing Style
It is difficult to set general rules and principles here. I go by the rule that initial passing should be short on a small pitch, and more direct on a larger pitch. However, passing is something that one needs to monitor constantly over the course of a match. I don’t believe it is merely a co-incidence that no fewer than 10 of the touchline instructions/shouts alter your team’s passing either as a main change, or a minor one alongside something else. Needless to say, you gain the most insight from what you see (extended highlights always gives you plenty of clues), but the match stats also help a lot.
If playing direct on a larger pitch, 45% passing completion is fine all things considered; it may even be very good if your opposition are themselves playing a short passing game, thus inflating their stat and deflating that of my team’s. However, if you’re trying to execute a short passing game and the stats are going that far against you, it is clear that your team is being outplayed and you are struggling to construct moves.
Alternatively, if passing completion is in excess of 60%, it's the perfect time to consider the Get Ball Forward shout (increase in passing length), as well as Pass Into Space (increase in through ball modifiers) if you either have a pace advantage, or your passing is causing the opposition problems. In a nut shell, if I have plenty of possession yet am not winning the game, the aim is get team to do more with the ball than they are. If a team move of 20+ passes doesn’t come close to creating a chance, it is clear that the passing game is not penetrating enough.
Creative Freedom
Small pitch:
Home: Default/More Disciplined – Default vs weaker/similar strength teams. More Disciplined vs stronger teams.
Away: More Disciplined vs all.
Large pitch:
Home: Default/More Disciplined – Default vs weaker teams. More Disciplined vs similar/stronger strength teams.
Away: More Disciplined vs all.
When playing away, I prefer my team to retain discipline no matter what. At home and on a smaller pitch, I am more open to allowing players some freedom to deviate slightly from tactical instructions since the consequences for doing so seem much less dangerous than on a larger pitch.
Closing Down
Small pitch:
Home: Stand-Off/Default – Default vs similar/stronger strength teams. Stand-Off vs weaker teams.
Away: Stand-Off/Default – Default against weaker/similar strength teams. Stand-Off against stronger teams.
Large pitch:
Home: Stand-Off/Default – Default vs weaker teams. Stand-Off vs similar/stronger strength teams.
Away: Stand-Off vs all.
Conflicting principles here. At home on a small pitch, I actually prefer higher levels of closing down against similar/stronger strength sides (a la’ defending from the front), despite the fact that higher closing down is preferred by most FM players only when attacking, yet this guide is supposed to be concerned more with defending. However, this is to achieve the aim of disrupting the opposition. They will already struggle a little to get their passing game going due to playing away from home, let alone when being restricted further by being closed down quite avidly on a pitch where they already have limited space due to its compact dimensions. In contrast, against weaker teams playing away against me, I prefer to be as inviting as possible with low levels of closing down. This helps entice them forward, which then leaves the space to be exploited that may otherwise be hard to come by.
Away from home, I have the opposite preference. I seek to deny space against weaker-similar strength teams, because they will be attacking as the home team and won’t need inviting like they do when playing on my patch. Then, I give respect to the stronger teams and feel that less closing down / more emphasis on keeping shape is a better strategy when playing them away. After all, this case entails being an underdog going into the lion’s den!
On a larger pitch, I very rarely advocate high levels of closing down regardless of the strength of the opposition. This is due to the ease in which players may be dragged around the pitch, thus creating far more space than if this happens on a small one. Low levels of closing down tend to be very important for a team looking to keep its defensive shape on a large pitch. Only at home against weaker sides am I open to moderate levels of closing down. I do not believe in inviting a weak team forward like on the small pitch. This is purely down to how they are not able to be as compact when parking the bus here, so the space to attack them is much less elusive and I’ve no reason to be counter-attacking for this reason. Therefore, better to hassle them and attempt to get the ball back sooner.
Tackling
Small/Large pitch:
Home: Default/More Aggressive – Default vs weaker teams. More Aggressive vs similar strength-stronger teams.
Away: More Aggressive vs all.
At home, I prefer to invite the weaker teams to make mistakes that I can punish them for, but this aim can be compromised with a physical approach which breaks up play too soon. Against the stronger sides, I like be as physical as possible since I’d rather focus more on keeping them at bay, as opposed to seeking to counter their much more dangerous attacks. Away from home, I feel that aggressive tackling is important whether your team is seeking to deny space, sitting back and being resilient, or trying to play on the counter. After all, the home team will be throwing plenty of players forward. Even if you break up the play early with stern challenges, there is always going to be space to be found on the break.
Marking
Small/Large pitch:
Home: Zonal/Default/Man Marking – Default vs weaker teams. Man Marking vs similar/stronger strength teams.
Away: Man Marking vs all.
I believe man marking to be generally superior defensively, but again, I adjust marking according to my rule of how inviting I want to be. Instead of acknowledging the definitions here, I think of it as “how much space do I want to allow?”. With looser/zonal being the most lenient, and man marking as the most restrictive. If I want to invite a team to attack with a view to hitting them on the break, I feel it’s counter-productive to man mark since this seems to lead to the breaking up of attacks much earlier. Default Marking sets your Fullbacks/Wingbacks, Wingers, Strikers and (usually) one of your Centre Mids to zonal marking, while the rest of the team sticks to man marking.
Crossing
Small/Large pitch:
Home: Float crosses/Drill Crosses – Float Crosses only if attacking, as well as fortunate enough to possess good wingers *and* having a forward who’s very good in the air. Drill Crosses in all other scenarios.
Away: Drill Crosses vs all.
Float crosses allow for emphasis on the quality of crosses if attacking, but why bother if 1) You don’t have a top class winger for your division & 2) Don’t have a strong forward who's very good in the air to get on the end of the cross? Drill crosses can be very effective on the counter, which may be as good as you can hope for. Away from home, I always go for drill crosses since I’m of the opinion that flows better when hitting teams on the break. i.e. Getting it forward and then into the box ASAP, usually to the near-post, in the hope that someone finds the space to get on the end of it even if they aren't necessarily good in the air.
Roaming
Small/Large pitch:
Home: Default/Stick To Position – Default vs weaker/similar strength teams. Stick To Position vs strong teams.
Away: Stick To Position vs all.
I only ever go for a standard freedom to roam at home if I believe that I am able to see much more of the ball and should make more chances, or else the allocation of free roles gives the other team too much space to counter-attack. Against teams who will look to attack me, I much rather players to remain as organized as possible. Away from home, the emphasis is always on players sticking to their instructions.
--- --- ---
So, there you have it. I feel the need to reiterate that the aforementioned are but personal preferences. I feel that they've work very well for me on FM10, and this seems to be continuing on FM11. If you have found this at all helpful or the slightest bit thought provoking, I’m glad. If not, and you have very different views or counter-theories, I'm sure that would make for some good discussion and/or debate. I tried to condense it as much as possible in the hope of preventing it from being a dull wall of text. Thanks for reading!
Edited by Validicus, 08 August 2011 - 06:10 PM.
