retired_Siwash

..or if the thread title didn't illustrate the problem, here's a picture.

Basicly, a lot of the time when the ball is on the wing, my players will position themselves like this and leave the team vulnerable to crosses to the far post (In this particular case #19 scored with an open header. Three of his teammates were closer than the closest Palermo player). My question here is simple: How do I fix it?

Now in this particular case my Width was set to 11, but I've seen more or less the same thing happen with 8 and 16 set, which leads me to believe that if there's a remedy for this then it's not only related to Width. The formation I'm playing here is a 4-2-3-1 (Barrows from the two MCs, 3 AMCs with sarrows from the outer two), team mentality is 8 (DCs have 5), the back four has low closing down (~5) and the rest of the team has ~14. Everyone is on Zonal marking, and the back 2 are on "Tight Marking" for sure, the full backs *might* have been too. It's quite obvious on the picture who the back four are, while #6 and #10 are the MCs.

Basicly, what can I do to prevent this from happening? When playing narrower I notice that I won't commit as many players to the left side, but they'd just be more compact in the centre and wouldn't move any closer to #18, #13, #19 and #8. Closing down wouldn't really matter much would it, other than to make it less likely for the cross to come in? I mean it wouldn't make #2 (Zaccardo) move more to the right. Would tight marking on any of my defenders help?

Grateful for any suggestions. And I do realise that this type of thing does happen IRL too, and I'd accept it in counter-attack situations when my players are out of position, but they're clearly not here and surely players with high positioning, anticipation and concentrations should do better than #4, #2 and #11 do here?

retired_sfried0617

Same problem here.....I have had width on 5 and seen this happen and width on 16 and seen this happen........it's also happened when I played 5 in the back.

I think something is really wrong with the match engine that they don't want to acknowledge.

Now, somebody will come on here and say "take forward runs off for your full-back" but I have tried that too.

Between poor postioning of defeneders and improbable comebacks from the AI I think this version of FM is the poorest one in the last 5 years. Unless, of course, we have to wait for 3 patches to come out.

retired_elpata

Its not a width issue, so you looking for the answer in the wrong place.

The number 3, 5, 10 and 20 all look to be going for the same player. Now if it was me, (im guessing the no3 is the fullback? Id have had him close down a lot further up the pitch around 13 or so. And maybe man mark so he tracks the player back. For one, it would have pressured him and maybe forced him not to even cross the ball, which resulted in you loosing a goal.

Id advise a higher closing down for the other full back too and maybe 1 DC to have a different closing down from the other, to stop them going for same ball as well.

You can also try manmarking, then the players wont get dragged out much either i wouldnt have thought.

Whats the creative freedom on the players? I've never had an issue with players all being 1 sided at all.

retired_thehpsleb

First use width 18, your formation is very compact as it is.
Set both omc L/R to man mark there backs.
Set your backs to man mark there wings - tight.
Your MC dont need Barrows..take em of and set close down on 15-17.
Looks like your mid are not aggressive enough, they need to break down the opponents attack faster - that means less time to bring there players forward on the other side.

retired_elpata

Width 18 will leave him with huge gaps, he will get a lot more problems that he currently does you can tell just by looking at that 1 screenshot. Also how can you tell him to take barrows off the MC's, you don't even know how his tactic works and plays out, so to make assumptions like that is luducris.

Its okay telling him to mark the wingers tight, but by the look sof it they played 3 upfront, so there would be huge space to exploit again if they tight marked.

Btw Lathund, did the AI change to 235 in that match? It looks like they did

retired_thehpsleb

I been playing 6 seasons with 18 width..but yeah hes formation is different so maybe im wrong.
I never understand why the 2 center MC need barrows..they will run back and play defence anyhow..
Anyway; it looks like hes playing to passive and CD need to be higher up the field.

retired_Siwash

Thanks for the help so far. Some answers and clarifications:

The game was a while back, I don't remember all details, but Lazio started with a 4-4-2, and I believe they still played it at the time. It's rare to see them change to 2-3-5 or 4-2-4 in the first half already. #18 and #19 are strikers, #13 and #85 (Behrami) are ML and MR, #24 and #26 are MCs, while #22 and #8 are fullbacks. Looks like it may well still be that 4-4-2, with ML and DL on offensive runs, and a defensive trio sitting back.

Ofcourse I could take the barrows off, I just don't want to. I prefer the defensive stability of having DMCs when not in possession, the three AMCs perform the defensive role that "classic" MCs in for example a 4-4-2 would. Also more pressing doesn't necessarily mean this situation won't happen.

I can see your point with having higher CD on the fullbacks, but from my experience that pulls them out of position more than I'd like, leading to other defensive problems. But I suppose I could give it another try. Man marking is always an option, but it's something I've always been very very reluctant to do, at least with a back four. Seems to me like it's extremely easy to exploit for the opposition, and I've also heard people say that man marking in FM 07 doesn't work properly? And from what I can tell, man marking would be the only thing here that could possibly get #4 and #2 to move where they're needed, i.e the centre/right part of the box. Higher closing down settings might stop the cross, but surely wouldn't move #4 and #2 for the times that it would come in.

Oh, and after thinking some about it I'm 90% sure my fullbacks did have tight marking ticked.

retired_Siwash

Oh, a few things I forgot:

The issue here isn't defense in general. Even with insane pressing, there'll still be times when my opponent gets well into my half, there's nothing to do about that. I also wrote in my first post that this has happened with a much wider tactic.

Also note that this situation doesn't happen all that often, it's just that it ****es me off when it *does* happen. As sometimes it's a tiny winger with 5 jumping and 9 heading who scores like this, while my 17 jumping/17 heading/18 positioning fullbacks who *should* take care of situations like that are nowhere to be seen. I feel like smashing things when it happens.

retired_elpata

If your fullbacks close down too low, you will always conceed from crosses. Having them close down high up usually diesn;t get them dragge dout of position. Especially if u have man marking as it means they will track the man back. This is the set up I use and its rock solid and I stop a lot of crosses being played into the box.

Man marking works fine if you got the patch, don;t be put off by what people say on here. Make your own mind up and try things, don't take someone elses word for it.