Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Asunto: National Team
GROUP C
DATE 1
India vs Australia
Nippon vs Prathet Thai
DATE 2
India vs Nippon
Australia vs Prathet Thai
DATE 3
Prathet Thai vs India
Australia vs Nippon
OFFICIAL TOPIC || Asian Cup || III edition
SEE YOU ON WEEK 10!
Haven't had the chance to watch the game yet due to personal issues (wife & kid got some kind of sickness and don't have even 5 free minutes).
Very bad score, I expected a much better appearance.
I'll get back to you asap.
Very bad score, I expected a much better appearance.
I'll get back to you asap.
I've watched about half the game. So, I'll first say Chile had a better lineup so you were always going to be up against it.
1) Biggest issue was once again, if you decide to play super deep defenders, you can't have huge gaps between them and the midfield. We got crushed by that everytime one of our midfielders got tackled. It doesn't and will never work if the rest of the tactic doesn't support it.
2) Gaps between the 2 outer defenders on each side. Again, don't do this, I've never seen it work. The outside defender is unable to help out if the next defender gets beaten/tackled whatever. Also allows strikers to receive passes through these channels.
3) Defensive throw ins. Yeah, some of these were terrible and allowed them to easily win their throws and go straight on the offense. Again, you have to get this right if you decide to play 5 man defense deep and a 2 striker forward strategy.
4) Striker placement wasn't great either. Fairly predictable striker placement, easily coverable by their defenders and defensive midfielders meaning because they pressed and we sat back, our strikers never had a chance. Strikers need to be played into gaps and having strikers sitting in the same positions pretty much wherever the ball goes (or taking a step to the left/right when it goes left/right) is low percentage.
5) DM placement. I think the DM drifted too far from the defenders and given they played a 2 striker formation instead of 1, basically left the DM as a wasted resource. You'd have been better off playing a back 4 with 2 dm's against their 2 strikers, or play a 1 striker formation with 2dm's and a back 5.
I'll provide a bit more shortly, going to see what Chile has done recently. You may have well been caught out by a change in tactic but if not, this game basically looks like you've rushed the tactic and then forgotten all the refinement/precision required to make it work. Again, could be you hadn't really the time this week (again understandable).
1) Biggest issue was once again, if you decide to play super deep defenders, you can't have huge gaps between them and the midfield. We got crushed by that everytime one of our midfielders got tackled. It doesn't and will never work if the rest of the tactic doesn't support it.
2) Gaps between the 2 outer defenders on each side. Again, don't do this, I've never seen it work. The outside defender is unable to help out if the next defender gets beaten/tackled whatever. Also allows strikers to receive passes through these channels.
3) Defensive throw ins. Yeah, some of these were terrible and allowed them to easily win their throws and go straight on the offense. Again, you have to get this right if you decide to play 5 man defense deep and a 2 striker forward strategy.
4) Striker placement wasn't great either. Fairly predictable striker placement, easily coverable by their defenders and defensive midfielders meaning because they pressed and we sat back, our strikers never had a chance. Strikers need to be played into gaps and having strikers sitting in the same positions pretty much wherever the ball goes (or taking a step to the left/right when it goes left/right) is low percentage.
5) DM placement. I think the DM drifted too far from the defenders and given they played a 2 striker formation instead of 1, basically left the DM as a wasted resource. You'd have been better off playing a back 4 with 2 dm's against their 2 strikers, or play a 1 striker formation with 2dm's and a back 5.
I'll provide a bit more shortly, going to see what Chile has done recently. You may have well been caught out by a change in tactic but if not, this game basically looks like you've rushed the tactic and then forgotten all the refinement/precision required to make it work. Again, could be you hadn't really the time this week (again understandable).
Tried to give you the benefit that you got done by a change of tactic but it looked like a fairly standard tactic from the get go. They've used that tactic for at least the past few weeks.
As a result, tactic was sloppy and you got punished deservedly.
Again, if you didn't have any time this week for a tactic then it's excusable, otherwise there is no excuse. The rest here assumes you had the time.
I'm being blunt but it's coming from years of experience. The basic tactic is realistically probably 20-30% of the work for the week. The refinement of the tactic to set it up (such as striker placements/ striker movements (both horizontally and vertically) / defender placements / throw in set ups, depth between mids and defenders) all of that is where the effort needs to go. You have to win that, especially when you're the weaker team on paper. You can't short cut this.
Any scouting should have revealed how they played, they've done it the past 3 weeks at least. From there, you can take infinite screen shots of key positions and look for a way of breaking that down. You had all the info. Had you done that and they suddenly came up with something unexpected, well hats off to them, but they didn't and it's a missed opportunity. Not saying we'd have won, but I'm sure we could have done better.
So you know they play a 5-2 backline, so they've only got 3 players forward of that? You know they play a winger and you know the side they play it on (you also know they flip tactic at some constant time to mirror the initial tactic). That gives them 2 players in midfield counting their striker. So take control of that midfield and stifle them such that they are forced to pass to their winger, who you have marked perfectly and you get the ball back. There goes half their shots right there. You gave them the midfield despite them only having 1-2 players there.
Why do you play 5 defenders? You play 5 defenders if you are worried about at least 1 wing player being used and you're not willing to gamble on which side they play it.
In this case, you probably had huge confidence they'd play 1 winger and you could easily determine the side and when they flipped. Why not take advantage of that and play 4 defenders?
Striker formation seemed to be regulation, 1 drag to the left of the centre penalty spot, 1 drag to the right of the centre penalty spot and then drag 1 square across in the direction the ball goes left or right. You know their DM's (from scouting) are likely to do the same thing, so why not change it up a bit? What about different lines/runs from different angles? 2 strikers together centrally to make their DM's wasted resources whilst covering for a situation where a ball bobbles because of slipping a tackle? What about 1 striker and 1 winger that goes wide when the ball is on the opposite side to create space?
I'm not saying any of these would have worked, but there needs to be a strategy to break down their tactic and I just can't see any from the tactic you made other than hoping to park the bus and keep the score down. The game is all about space and you need to take advantage of this.
Even midfield looked really flaky because they were so far well advanced of the defensive unit that as soon as they got tackled it was counter attack time with loads of space. Why have them so advanced when you know the opposition has pressed up? Sit them back a bit to give your mids more time on the ball.
I don't care if we win/lose or if we get flogged but I do care when sloppiness becomes a habit. The 5-0 loss doesn't bother me, but a 5-0 loss that looks like the tactic was made in 30min without any careful planning does make me begin to question things.
It's still early, so this can turn around real quickly (most of this stuff should be easy to fix if you know how to use a tactical editor), but as an NT manager, you have to be precise whenever you can. Opposition managers that resort to the same tactic or very similar all the time are exploitable if you look for it.
Better luck next game :)
(editado)
As a result, tactic was sloppy and you got punished deservedly.
Again, if you didn't have any time this week for a tactic then it's excusable, otherwise there is no excuse. The rest here assumes you had the time.
I'm being blunt but it's coming from years of experience. The basic tactic is realistically probably 20-30% of the work for the week. The refinement of the tactic to set it up (such as striker placements/ striker movements (both horizontally and vertically) / defender placements / throw in set ups, depth between mids and defenders) all of that is where the effort needs to go. You have to win that, especially when you're the weaker team on paper. You can't short cut this.
Any scouting should have revealed how they played, they've done it the past 3 weeks at least. From there, you can take infinite screen shots of key positions and look for a way of breaking that down. You had all the info. Had you done that and they suddenly came up with something unexpected, well hats off to them, but they didn't and it's a missed opportunity. Not saying we'd have won, but I'm sure we could have done better.
So you know they play a 5-2 backline, so they've only got 3 players forward of that? You know they play a winger and you know the side they play it on (you also know they flip tactic at some constant time to mirror the initial tactic). That gives them 2 players in midfield counting their striker. So take control of that midfield and stifle them such that they are forced to pass to their winger, who you have marked perfectly and you get the ball back. There goes half their shots right there. You gave them the midfield despite them only having 1-2 players there.
Why do you play 5 defenders? You play 5 defenders if you are worried about at least 1 wing player being used and you're not willing to gamble on which side they play it.
In this case, you probably had huge confidence they'd play 1 winger and you could easily determine the side and when they flipped. Why not take advantage of that and play 4 defenders?
Striker formation seemed to be regulation, 1 drag to the left of the centre penalty spot, 1 drag to the right of the centre penalty spot and then drag 1 square across in the direction the ball goes left or right. You know their DM's (from scouting) are likely to do the same thing, so why not change it up a bit? What about different lines/runs from different angles? 2 strikers together centrally to make their DM's wasted resources whilst covering for a situation where a ball bobbles because of slipping a tackle? What about 1 striker and 1 winger that goes wide when the ball is on the opposite side to create space?
I'm not saying any of these would have worked, but there needs to be a strategy to break down their tactic and I just can't see any from the tactic you made other than hoping to park the bus and keep the score down. The game is all about space and you need to take advantage of this.
Even midfield looked really flaky because they were so far well advanced of the defensive unit that as soon as they got tackled it was counter attack time with loads of space. Why have them so advanced when you know the opposition has pressed up? Sit them back a bit to give your mids more time on the ball.
I don't care if we win/lose or if we get flogged but I do care when sloppiness becomes a habit. The 5-0 loss doesn't bother me, but a 5-0 loss that looks like the tactic was made in 30min without any careful planning does make me begin to question things.
It's still early, so this can turn around real quickly (most of this stuff should be easy to fix if you know how to use a tactical editor), but as an NT manager, you have to be precise whenever you can. Opposition managers that resort to the same tactic or very similar all the time are exploitable if you look for it.
Better luck next game :)
(editado)
Thank you again for the deep analysis of the tactics. Hard to disagree with the mistakes you've pointed out.
No excuses here, it's all on me and my lack of time this week. I didn't spend that much time on tactics I was planning to.
What bothered me the most was the fact our defenders got tackled so many times by the Chile's strikers and send the ball off the park, even though they had other players to pass to. I don't know if it's some kind of a bug but didn't seem to be working fine. Looked like some kind of panic atack here. Chile's defenders didn't lose the ball more than 2-3 times and their defs we're set a lot higher, which normally should force them to lose the ball more often since there was so little space between them and our strikers/mids. Also the mids got confused sometimes and played random balls even they had well set atts to push a def-line cutting pass. I will get to the bottom of it in the next couple of days.
Anyway, I already started making some new tactics for the next game against Italy. Hard to predict what they'll come up with since brokus mixes up tactics a lot and has prepared plenty of them, as far as I know. Gonna be a lottery.
I've prepared a basics of two tactics so far but will work on them by scouting Italy's last games to find any similarities. Any suggestions, besides the one's you already mentioned, are desired and very much welcomed.
No excuses here, it's all on me and my lack of time this week. I didn't spend that much time on tactics I was planning to.
What bothered me the most was the fact our defenders got tackled so many times by the Chile's strikers and send the ball off the park, even though they had other players to pass to. I don't know if it's some kind of a bug but didn't seem to be working fine. Looked like some kind of panic atack here. Chile's defenders didn't lose the ball more than 2-3 times and their defs we're set a lot higher, which normally should force them to lose the ball more often since there was so little space between them and our strikers/mids. Also the mids got confused sometimes and played random balls even they had well set atts to push a def-line cutting pass. I will get to the bottom of it in the next couple of days.
Anyway, I already started making some new tactics for the next game against Italy. Hard to predict what they'll come up with since brokus mixes up tactics a lot and has prepared plenty of them, as far as I know. Gonna be a lottery.
I've prepared a basics of two tactics so far but will work on them by scouting Italy's last games to find any similarities. Any suggestions, besides the one's you already mentioned, are desired and very much welcomed.
Cheers mate. Everything's starting to look fine. It has been a tough week.
Well, didn't expect that to happen. Spend some time on the tactics this week, honestly. Unfortunately, the first one was missed completely but the second one didn't look that bad.
Made an assumption that Italy won't play a winger and gave it very little chance. Couldn't have been more wrong.
I'm very unsatisfied with the defs today. How many more balls can they loose to the opponents strikers or send the ball behind the side lines of the park? Very slow thinking process from the mids, lots of balls lost even they had other players to play to or send a through ball. Strikers couldn't decide: 'Should I take this shot or not, having so much space? Let me think about it in the next few seconds and let the Italy's def take the ball from me like a child. Even I am 3x divine skilled player!'.
Always hard to watch getting beaten up like this but the style today was dramatic. And I think the tactics were a lot better than the last ones, the players looked like they just couldn't fit in.
Made an assumption that Italy won't play a winger and gave it very little chance. Couldn't have been more wrong.
I'm very unsatisfied with the defs today. How many more balls can they loose to the opponents strikers or send the ball behind the side lines of the park? Very slow thinking process from the mids, lots of balls lost even they had other players to play to or send a through ball. Strikers couldn't decide: 'Should I take this shot or not, having so much space? Let me think about it in the next few seconds and let the Italy's def take the ball from me like a child. Even I am 3x divine skilled player!'.
Always hard to watch getting beaten up like this but the style today was dramatic. And I think the tactics were a lot better than the last ones, the players looked like they just couldn't fit in.
Playing 4 defenders against a team like Italy is very risky., knowing that they might play a winger.
And the defenders don`t seem to have too much playmaker, too much time thinking who to pass. He also played well defensivly, he knew exactly where to play his defenders so they will always have an advantage over your strikers.
(editado)
And the defenders don`t seem to have too much playmaker, too much time thinking who to pass. He also played well defensivly, he knew exactly where to play his defenders so they will always have an advantage over your strikers.
(editado)
Yeah it’s risky in this situation. Still I think the bigger issue is you could have restricted their chances more if you blocked up the midfield. Having 2 strikers and 2 wingers and 2dms raises the obvious question. Where were our central midfielders? You can’t afford to give the centre of the field away and you definitely can’t against stronger opposition. I haven’t watched the match but the tactic avg position looks like we gave them the midfield to do whatever they wanted.
The was a tactics swap in the halftime. The one you see is the 2nd tactic and still, I think it worked better than the first one with 4 mids in the centre. There was plenty of space for the half-wingers in the counters as Italy mostly focused on the centre.
They didn't do what they wanted at all, the winger did all job. The other thing I already mentioned is the decision making and the timing - they never lost the ball and reacted faster than our players. Talked to brokus after the game, even he was surprised how well they operated.
(editado)
They didn't do what they wanted at all, the winger did all job. The other thing I already mentioned is the decision making and the timing - they never lost the ball and reacted faster than our players. Talked to brokus after the game, even he was surprised how well they operated.
(editado)
I would not play 4 defenders unless I dont have other option. Even against a weaker team, you can play 5 defenders and still be the more offensive team. This way, you dont leave a lot of spaces and gaps for the strikers.
Also, you could also try the offside advance , when you defend try to pull the defenders low as possible, and then advance suddenly as the ball approaches your box.
Also, you could also try the offside advance , when you defend try to pull the defenders low as possible, and then advance suddenly as the ball approaches your box.
Worth trying with some low paced strikers when they are not that skilled and might not escape the offside trap on time or if they do somehow, there's an option of catching them before they accelerate. Comparing our defenders and their strikers, I cannot see this happen.
Worse case, you will tackle them from the front if they are positioned low :)
I did this with Mexico a few games ago, similar ratings with yours against Italy and the outcome was 3-3, I could have won the game with q bit more luck.
I dont know how your defenders look, how fast they are, but it's worth trying that I think.
A static defence is never too good, especially against some strong strikers and a decent tactic.
I did this with Mexico a few games ago, similar ratings with yours against Italy and the outcome was 3-3, I could have won the game with q bit more luck.
I dont know how your defenders look, how fast they are, but it's worth trying that I think.
A static defence is never too good, especially against some strong strikers and a decent tactic.
Will do that for sure. Cheers for the tips.
Had a different vision this time, placed defs a little higher which prevented us from the long range shots. Defenders were still loosing the ball and gave presents to the strikers. I'm a little worried what would happen if they were placed totally high and lost the ball somewhere between the box and the centre of the park. Would be like a highroad.
Had a different vision this time, placed defs a little higher which prevented us from the long range shots. Defenders were still loosing the ball and gave presents to the strikers. I'm a little worried what would happen if they were placed totally high and lost the ball somewhere between the box and the centre of the park. Would be like a highroad.
Good luck mate :)
Hope you will manage to keep the team in the 4'th pot for the next qualifications.
Hope you will manage to keep the team in the 4'th pot for the next qualifications.