Possession: Makes no sense?!

[terrybecker]

Ok, no problem. Take your time. To be clear - I simply don't want a discussion regarding my game. If I decide I want it - I will open my own thread.

As for formation, it was quite popular in the 80s:

-----FC------FC-----

--------AMC---------

ML----------------MR

---------MCd--------

-------DCa(DMd)-----

DL-----------------DR

---------SW---------

One team I remember succesfully using it was USSR on EURO88. In fact, if USSR first choice DCa was not suspended in the final, we could have never seen the brilliant goal by Van Basten. Another (though with some variation towards today's diamond) was AC Milan in 1989-1990. About the same time I played as AMC in

In this formation MCd and DCa worked together to break attacks through the middle, DL and DR either man-marked opponent FCs (becoming in effect DCs), and ML/MR covered opposition MR/L. In addition, MCd worked as a link between attack and defense, while AMC played as trully free-role playmaker, appearing here and there. Later DCa and SW were transformed into 2 DCs, DL and DR role eventually became to cover flanks (MR/L) and support attack. But with AMC not doing much of a defensive work MCd could not cover the whole midfield. So the ML/R became MCL/MCR, and we have got diamond. However, using diamond requires FBs to play more like WBs, supporting attacks regularly.

That's the only way a team can provide AMC - a key figure in the formation - enough options to create good attacks. If both FBs stay back, the diamond has no width and therefore can be easily shut down.

As for real life 4-4-2 ability to create triangles - I believe that it really depends on players at your disposal and a couple Essiens would do better job than the whole diamond midfield with mediocre players.

yeah if you have colchester united you cant beat essien playing by himself. im talking about players with technical ability and vision. i mean at least thats what the attributes tell me. as i said i dont care about winning. i can lose 20-0 for that matter, i just want to see my team pass the ball and move around like they do in real life. but its impossible to see that. the me cant replicate it.

[terrybecker]

The link between Spain's 4-1-3-2, Brazil's 4-2-3-1 (kind of) and a diamond formation being the need to have at least one fullback pushing past the nominal winger (who tucks inside) to provide attacking width and so leaving space behind which a winger receiving a direct ball can utilise to deadly effect (I'll throw in Barcelona's current 4-1-2-3 into that group of tactics which will be exposed by a direct form of football - much as is found in English football).

Which kind of points to where our tactical appreciation leads to our disagreement

In any case, I definitely agree with the points raised by SFraser and kolobok regarding how it is necessary to have a broader view than technical ability alone when seeking to play in a certain fashion within the game.

again thats a matter of opinion. usa were playing deep defense and quick counter attack. if usa tried going head to head with either brazil or spain wed both know how it would end up. small statured teams have notorious problems against deep defenses. and the only english team that could beat barcelona are in fact chelsea who have the quality to do so. the rest just dont.

but like i said in the begininng the fullbacks pushing up providing width is a common mistake managers playing narrow make against good opposition.

[terrybecker]

well kolobok, i started seeing your matches. i cant watch 3d so i will watch everyithng in 2d. first the everton portsmouth game. first of all you play with wingers, fm is designed to use wingers, the main problems with possesion are very apparent when a formation employs no winger. still that doesnt matter much.

here we go. minute 1:39 rodwell wins the ball from barton. under no pressure, instead of playing a simple short pass to a wide open and 5 yards away from him mavuba, he kicks it out of bounds on the opposite side of the field.

minute 3:27 pompey are making some nice passes but not gaining any ground through middle even though they outnumber your middfield and could esily form triangles around it. this is mainly because hyland is staying 2 feet away from barton and not moving into the open space a little fruther left ahead of him.

i will analyse more when i have some more time.

[SFraser]

in fact this thread shouldnt even concern you since it doesnt apply to you because you like playing with wide players.

If you had actually bothered to read this post you would have noticed that I employ Width and Tempo and other tactical considerations dependant upon the opponent in question as a combined defensive and offensive strategy. In this context the "wide players" I use do not pull wide to the edges of the pitch but provide 3-4 passing options ahead of any defence or midfield ball player inbetween the opponents fullbacks. It is not a wide formation in terms of the width of the pitch covered, it is a wide formation in terms of the width of the dangerous and successful options available ahead of any midfielder or defender.

On top of this my actual widest players, my wingers, are actually wrong footed playmakers that move in from the "wide" positions towards the centre of the pitch when in possession and play behind my remaining front three that are instructed to pick up space between the opponents defenders. Any tactical Width I employ in my formation is simply a means to ensure successful transition from defence to attack prior to taking the play inside when my highest quality players are in possession and outplaying the opponent through the centre.

yeah if you have colchester united you cant beat essien playing by himself. im talking about players with technical ability and vision. i mean at least thats what the attributes tell me. as i said i dont care about winning. i can lose 20-0 for that matter, i just want to see my team pass the ball and move around like they do in real life. but its impossible to see that. the me cant replicate it.

You have already been told about the fundamental importance of Composure when it comes to playing under high pressure. It doesn't matter if it is a Striker slid onto a throughball around the penalty spot, a defender picking up a loose ball near the touch-line under pressure from a winger, or a midfielder instructed to play pretty triangles in a diamond midfield. Football is not just about having the right attributes to play a good pass, execute a good tackle or understand space, it is about having the right mental abilities to apply your technical abilities and football awareness under match conditions.

Infact there are very little of the fundamentals regarding possession that you have not had explained to you at some level, from defensive possession and the need to win the ball back, to the important and un-obvious attributes required to maintain possession, to the tactical considerations of the necessity of width and number of successful options even in a narrow formation. You have chosen to ignore them all in favour of ranting about the ME.

If you wish to play the kind of football you do you will require players comparable in Mental attributes to Fabregas, Xavi and Iniesta who all have near maximum ratings for composure for midfielders. You are going to have to deal with the tendency for the AI to play 4-4-2 with a dropped striker that makes a Central midfield 3, or play a 4-1-4-1 or play a 4-1-2-2-1 which will all deprive your DMC of any potential forward pass under your current 1-2-1 midfield system and then you are going to have to find the right balance of instructions on a game-by-game basis to suit opposition player strengths, pitch conditions, player motivation, and opposition playstyle.

In short the diamond alone will not work for the very reason of the AI's formation choices. You are going to have to come out of your blinkered, tunnel vision approach to tactics and develop the rest of your formation so that it enables the diamond to work.

[kolobok]

well kolobok, i started seeing your matches. i cant watch 3d so i will watch everyithng in 2d. first the everton portsmouth game. first of all you play with wingers, fm is designed to use wingers, the main problems with possesion are very apparent when a formation employs no winger. still that doesnt matter much.

The problem with possession in a formation without wingers has nothing to do with ME or FM design, but that's something we can discuss forever and never agree on, so let's not bring it up.

here we go. minute 1:39 rodwell wins the ball from barton. under no pressure, instead of playing a simple short pass to a wide open and 5 yards away from him mavuba, he kicks it out of bounds on the opposite side of the field.

minute 3:27 pompey are making some nice passes but not gaining any ground through middle even though they outnumber your middfield and could esily form triangles around it. this is mainly because hyland is staying 2 feet away from barton and not moving into the open space a little fruther left ahead of him.

i will analyse more when i have some more time.

I suggest you watch the whole match, marking the moments you want to point out. Then check out pass completion by players (you are going to be surprised - even I was as I thought one of my players kicked the ball nowhere quite often, but it turned out he had only 3 passes incompleted out of 50 attempts). Then we can talk about details. As of now - I don't care why Pompey's players do what they did. Just one thing - pass to #33 = lost ball for them as he has nowhere to go. Mine - in the episode at 1:39 your comments are just... funny. Because my MC should not stay close to an opponent without ball - his settings do not imply it. He would attack that opponent at the moment he was passed to, otherwise (if no pass coming) he is exactly when I want him to be - providing cover as both DCs moved a bit to the left following the episode development. A pass to "open" man Mavuba would be a stupid mistake. I would severely punish any of my players IRL for such move. Simply because Mavuba could have been closed down by 3 Pompey men, had 2 Pompey's forwards behind him and nowhere to go or pass. Chanses 80% that Mavuba would lost the ball one way or another, plus it would be a danger. Leave aside that we don't know which direction each of the players facing. ST is too deep, I agree, but then again it's rather how I set him up than ME fault.

Ok, that's enough. Main point - even these two screenshots show that we read football completely differently (as do Sir Alex and Arsen, btw ). So let's do a simple exercise (unfortunatelly I won't be able to do it before Sunday but anyway). Watch the match and count:

1)Number of times my defs fluffed ball up in a situation they were not under pressure;

2)Number of times my players completed more than 5 passes in a row

4)Number of times my MCs and Defs could not complete more than 3 shortpasses in a row

5)Number of times my players lost the ball under pressure in the middle (as you claim AI pressures too much without problem)

Mark minutes so that we could check discrepancies.

We can also watch the match against Liverpool in the same manner as Pompey is obviously a weaker team.

Then we compare the results of our obsrevations. Because it seems to me that you see what you want to see rather than what's really there (or jump to conclusions too soon), and maybe (though I doubt it ) I imagine something that's not there too.

[terrybecker]

well i'm showing you the wolf, you're showing me the tracks. what does composure have to do with hyland and poulsen not being where they are supposed to be?

you can say its their position attribute, i actually have no idea who hyland is but i know poulsen and i'm sure he has a good positional rating in fm. the positioning of these players is ridiculous even amateurs don't do this.

did you read my analysis of these two situations? send me your pkm i will send you back a hundred analyisis where the me goes wrong.

anyway my midfield has an average composure of 14 which i think is pretty decent.

rodwell has a composure rating of 13, however even my amateur players who if they were rated would have a composure of 4 or something don't do what rodwell did in that occasion.

[terrybecker]

The problem with possession in a formation without wingers has nothing to do with ME or FM design, but that's something we can discuss forever and never agree on, so let's not bring it up.

I suggest you watch the whole match, marking the moments you want to point out. Then check out pass completion by players (you are going to be surprised - even I was as I thought one of my players kicked the ball nowhere quite often, but it turned out he had only 3 passes incompleted out of 50 attempts). Then we can talk about details. As of now - I don't care why Pompey's players do what they did. Just one thing - pass to #33 = lost ball for them as he has nowhere to go. Mine - in the episode at 1:39 your comments are just... funny. Because my MC should not stay close to an opponent without ball - his settings do not imply it. He would attack that opponent at the moment he was passed to, otherwise (if no pass coming) he is exactly when I want him to be - providing cover as both DCs moved a bit to the left following the episode development. A pass to "open" man Mavuba would be a stupid mistake. I would severely punish any of my players IRL for such move. Simply because Mavuba could have been closed down by 3 Pompey men, had 2 Pompey's forwards behind him and nowhere to go or pass. Chanses 80% that Mavuba would lost the ball one way or another, plus it would be a danger. Leave aside that we don't know which direction each of the players facing. ST is too deep, I agree, but then again it's rather how I set him up than ME fault.

Ok, that's enough. Main point - even these two screenshots show that we read football completely differently (as do Sir Alex and Arsen, btw ). So let's do a simple exercise (unfortunatelly I won't be able to do it before Sunday but anyway). Watch the match and count:

1)Number of times my defs fluffed ball up in a situation they were not under pressure;

2)Number of times my players completed more than 5 passes in a row

4)Number of times my players could not complete more than 3 shortpasses in a row

5)Number of times my players lost the ball under pressure in the middle (as you claim AI pressures too much without problem)

Mark minutes so that we could check discrepancies.

We can also watch the match against Liverpool in the same manner as Pompey is obviously a weaker team.

Then we compare the results of our obsrevations. Because it seems to me that you see what you want to see rather than what's really there (or jump to conclusions too soon), and maybe (though I doubt it ) I imagine something that's not there too.

i guess you like to use the kick the ball away instructions, no problem thats your preference. however im sure the pompey manager doesnt want that otherwise he wouldnt be playing that formation. as i pointed out his tactic even though on paper and logistically should have no problem passing through your midfiled arent able to for reasons that only si games know.

i will watch some more of your pkm.

[terrybecker]

i watched a little more of the pompey everton game. pompey had no chance, they were playing without wingers so no possesion for them. whereas the everton liverpool both were holding possesion much easier because of the wingers being employed.

here pompey struggle to keep possesion because they play worse than amateurs.

heres another big problem, the amc dropping too deep when defending

[terrybecker]

for some reason liverpool were playing defensive and really deep in that game. very weird, thats why you had so much posession.

[terrybecker]

in fact i used tactic grabber and copied their tactic. the mentality was all the way defensive. all the way to the left. i think this pkm should not count.

[terrybecker]

same thing with the chelsea tactic, slider was ultra defensive. portsmouth had the slider at defensive but not so much too.

your possesion is only because the opposition is playing ultra defensive against you for some reason.

all your pkms seem not valid to me.

[kolobok]

i guess you like to use the kick the ball away instructions, no problem thats your preference. however im sure the pompey manager doesnt want that otherwise he wouldnt be playing that formation. as i pointed out his tactic even though on paper and logistically should have no problem passing through your midfiled arent able to for reasons that only si games know.

i will watch some more of your pkm.

Ok, I give up. Please don't bother to post your comments about my pkms anymore. They are available for everybody who wants to see them and make his/her own judgement.

Last time - there is no instruction "kick ball away". There is instruction - "don't bring trouble home". In the 1st episode Rodwell would have brought trouble by passing to Mavuba. My junior coach used to spank our as..es with his rubber flip-flop for such stupidity and was absolutely right. What was Mavuba supposed to to with the ball? He has no passing option.

As for AI... When I play IRL I don't care why the opposition players do what they do. All I care about how to defend against their moves and attack their weak zones. Same thing in FM - if I see any sign of trouble I fix the problem. If I see a weak link in AI - I attack there. I play against what I see, not what I think should be there. IRL it's a bit easier to do, but it's not too difficult in FM either. And Pompey manager obviously did not want his players to kick ball away - they were forced to do so 3/4 of the match.

[kolobok]

for some reason liverpool were playing defensive and really deep in that game. very weird, thats why you had so much posession.

Of course they were. I have not lost in EPL for 2.5 seasons. And btw, possession in that game is 50/50. You could have bothered to check final stats.

Now I will hear arguments: you cheated (restarted the game, used editor, what else cheaters do?). My pkms are not valid, I work for SI... Let me just tell you one thing - your football knowledge seem amateur at best. You have heard somwhere that football games won in the middle, understood it too direct and now on the course to prove that anybody but you are wrong. Good luck.

[SFraser]

well i'm showing you the wolf, you're showing me the tracks. what does composure have to do with hyland and poulsen not being where they are supposed to be?

In my game Hyland has an Off-The-Ball of 10, Teamwork 13, Workrate 15 thus he has been pulled inside by the play developing down the left of the Everton flank and lacks the required attributes to exploit offensive space once the ball was won.

anyway my midfield has an average composure of 14 which i think is pretty decent.

My midfield has an average Composure of 16.25 with the lowest at 15 and the highest at 17. Despite playing a midfield four with options spread wide and the formation for any of my players to easilly view any other player and play the ball to him, the Tempo I play at demands that all my midfielders use the HUB instruction. My wingers who have the highest composure (as playmaker/strikers playing wide) will have the HUB removed as I demand speed of execution and as space or time is discovered on the opponents flanks. My central midfield duo have HUB ticked at all times, despite having Anticipation 18, Decisions 19, Creativity 18 and Anticipation 17, Creativity 19, Decisions 16 respectively because they lack composure.

The composure ratings of your midfield quartet would mean that my midfield duo could destroy yours without any tactical tweaking of my basic formation due to their Aggression 19, Bravery 20, Teamwork 19, Workrate 19 and Aggression 17, Bravery 17, Teamwork 19, Workrate 19 if I utilised a high D-Line, high pressing, hard tackling 4-4-2 that is the basis of my formation anyway.

While your midfield would punt the ball into touch when you saw me coming, mine would snap your AMC in half and then hold up the ball and wait for runners while elbowing your 2 CM's out of the way. Then it would be down to Palombo or whatever other inept DM you currently possess to attempt to deal with this player cutting inside into the gap between your Fullback and DMC and onto his stronger foot.

You see while your 2 CMs are attempting to win the ball off of my 19+20 strength, high creativity HUB midfielders, I am pushing up my fullbacks onto your fullbacks and exploiting the gap between your DM and CB with my Winger, with my two strikers and my other winger positioning themselves between your FB+CB, CB+CB, CB+FB while both my fullbacks are forward forcing your Fullbacks to stay wide. It is now four fast, agile, creative and technically brilliant forwards like you cannot imagine against your DM and Centrebacks.

Should you win the ball off me then you better get rid of it because my CM's will be on you like a rash, and with hard tackling combined to their dirtiness and temperament problems it is likely that someone is going to get hurt. Ofcourse with a midfield of Composure 13 and 14 now being chased by 2 fullbacks, 2 CMs and 2 wingers of an average workrate of 18 and an average aggression of 16 and an average dirtiness of 14 I don't have anything more to worry about than what my 6'5" CB is going to do with the ball when he gets it. Probably HUB and play it simple to the keeper while I get back in position.

If you had wingers you could have exploited my fullbacks, but you don't so it's a moot point. I'll just play my normal game of juggernauts through the middle and pace and trickery down the flanks and see if you survive. I am quite sure there are people in this thread that could make a mockery of my tactics, but your blinkered and furious demand to play low composure players in a tight spaces makes me think I would record a significant victory over your side without tweaking a single setting.

[terrybecker]

im not accusing you of anything. if anything this proves that the games is totally unrealsitic and keeps going even further in the wrong direction. after chelsea won the premiership twice in a row do you think benitez and ferguson played ultra defensive against chelsea at stamford bridge?? thats nonsense. so that proves even further this is a major bug that needs to be fixed.

as for playing through the middle vs playing through the wings. i never once said which is better than which. its purely a matter of opinion. im just saying the players dont do what they are being asked to do because the me is based on a 4-4-2 formation. everything else looks and plays awkwardly. especially wingerless formations. thats my constructive criticism of the game.

[terrybecker]

In my game Hyland has an Off-The-Ball of 10, Teamwork 13, Workrate 15 thus he has been pulled inside by the play developing down the left of the Everton flank and lacks the required attributes to exploit offensive space once the ball was won.

My midfield has an average Composure of 16.25 with the lowest at 15 and the highest at 17. Despite playing a midfield four with options spread wide and the formation for any of my players to easilly view any other player and play the ball to him, the Tempo I play at demands that all my midfielders use the HUB instruction. My wingers who have the highest composure (as playmaker/strikers playing wide) will have the HUB removed as I demand speed of execution and as space or time is discovered on the opponents flanks. My central midfield duo have HUB ticked at all times, despite having Anticipation 18, Decisions 19, Creativity 18 and Anticipation 17, Creativity 19, Decisions 16 respectively because they lack composure.

The composure ratings of your midfield quartet would mean that my midfield duo could destroy yours without any tactical tweaking of my basic formation due to their Aggression 19, Bravery 20, Teamwork 19, Workrate 19 and Aggression 17, Bravery 17, Teamwork 19, Workrate 19 if I utilised a high D-Line, high pressing, hard tackling 4-4-2 that is the basis of my formation anyway.

While your midfield would punt the ball into touch when you saw me coming, mine would snap your AMC in half and then hold up the ball and wait for runners while elbowing your 2 CM's out of the way. Then it would be down to Palombo or whatever other inept DM you currently possess to attempt to deal with this player cutting inside into the gap between your Fullback and DMC and onto his stronger foot.

You see while your 2 CMs are attempting to win the ball off of my 19+20 strength, high creativity HUB midfielders, I am pushing up my fullbacks onto your fullbacks and exploiting the gap between your DM and CB with my Winger, with my two strikers and my other winger positioning themselves between your FB+CB, CB+CB, CB+FB while both my fullbacks are forward forcing your Fullbacks to stay wide. It is now four fast, agile, creative and technically brilliant forwards like you cannot imagine against your DM and Centrebacks.

Should you win the ball off me then you better get rid of it because my CM's will be on you like a rash, and with hard tackling combined to their dirtiness and temperament problems it is likely that someone is going to get hurt. Ofcourse with a midfield of Composure 13 and 14 now being chased by 2 fullbacks, 2 CMs and 2 wingers of an average workrate of 18 and an average aggression of 16 and an average dirtiness of 14 I don't have anything more to worry about than what my 6'5" CB is going to do with the ball when he gets it. Probably HUB and play it simple to the keeper while I get back in position.

If you had wingers you could have exploited my fullbacks, but you don't so it's a moot point. I'll just play my normal game of juggernauts through the middle and pace and trickery down the flanks and see if you survive. I am quite sure there are people in this thread that could make a mockery of my tactics, but your blinkered and furious demand to play low composure players in a tight spaces makes me think I would record a significant victory over your side without tweaking a single setting.

im certain you would beat me in this game playing by its rules. however that would be a different story if we were managing actual teams playing by real footballing rules.

[terrybecker]

In my game Hyland has an Off-The-Ball of 10, Teamwork 13, Workrate 15 thus he has been pulled inside by the play developing down the left of the Everton flank and lacks the required attributes to exploit offensive space once the ball was won.

My midfield has an average Composure of 16.25 with the lowest at 15 and the highest at 17. Despite playing a midfield four with options spread wide and the formation for any of my players to easilly view any other player and play the ball to him, the Tempo I play at demands that all my midfielders use the HUB instruction. My wingers who have the highest composure (as playmaker/strikers playing wide) will have the HUB removed as I demand speed of execution and as space or time is discovered on the opponents flanks. My central midfield duo have HUB ticked at all times, despite having Anticipation 18, Decisions 19, Creativity 18 and Anticipation 17, Creativity 19, Decisions 16 respectively because they lack composure.

The composure ratings of your midfield quartet would mean that my midfield duo could destroy yours without any tactical tweaking of my basic formation due to their Aggression 19, Bravery 20, Teamwork 19, Workrate 19 and Aggression 17, Bravery 17, Teamwork 19, Workrate 19 if I utilised a high D-Line, high pressing, hard tackling 4-4-2 that is the basis of my formation anyway.

While your midfield would punt the ball into touch when you saw me coming, mine would snap your AMC in half and then hold up the ball and wait for runners while elbowing your 2 CM's out of the way. Then it would be down to Palombo or whatever other inept DM you currently possess to attempt to deal with this player cutting inside into the gap between your Fullback and DMC and onto his stronger foot.

You see while your 2 CMs are attempting to win the ball off of my 19+20 strength, high creativity HUB midfielders, I am pushing up my fullbacks onto your fullbacks and exploiting the gap between your DM and CB with my Winger, with my two strikers and my other winger positioning themselves between your FB+CB, CB+CB, CB+FB while both my fullbacks are forward forcing your Fullbacks to stay wide. It is now four fast, agile, creative and technically brilliant forwards like you cannot imagine against your DM and Centrebacks.

Should you win the ball off me then you better get rid of it because my CM's will be on you like a rash, and with hard tackling combined to their dirtiness and temperament problems it is likely that someone is going to get hurt. Ofcourse with a midfield of Composure 13 and 14 now being chased by 2 fullbacks, 2 CMs and 2 wingers of an average workrate of 18 and an average aggression of 16 and an average dirtiness of 14 I don't have anything more to worry about than what my 6'5" CB is going to do with the ball when he gets it. Probably HUB and play it simple to the keeper while I get back in position.

If you had wingers you could have exploited my fullbacks, but you don't so it's a moot point. I'll just play my normal game of juggernauts through the middle and pace and trickery down the flanks and see if you survive. I am quite sure there are people in this thread that could make a mockery of my tactics, but your blinkered and furious demand to play low composure players in a tight spaces makes me think I would record a significant victory over your side without tweaking a single setting.

also as i mentioned before an amateur player with average ratings of 5 understands thats the wrong place to be, let alone a proffessional player playing for portsmouth. so this rating war is just a poor excuse for an even poorer match engine.

[terrybecker]

Ok, I give up. Please don't bother to post your comments about my pkms anymore. They are available for everybody who wants to see them and make his/her own judgement.

Last time - there is no instruction "kick ball away". There is instruction - "don't bring trouble home". In the 1st episode Rodwell would have brought trouble by passing to Mavuba. My junior coach used to spank our as..es with his rubber flip-flop for such stupidity and was absolutely right. What was Mavuba supposed to to with the ball? He has no passing option.

As for AI... When I play IRL I don't care why the opposition players do what they do. All I care about how to defend against their moves and attack their weak zones. Same thing in FM - if I see any sign of trouble I fix the problem. If I see a weak link in AI - I attack there. I play against what I see, not what I think should be there. IRL it's a bit easier to do, but it's not too difficult in FM either. And Pompey manager obviously did not want his players to kick ball away - they were forced to do so 3/4 of the match.

mavuba had a wide open arshavin on the right.

[heathxxx]

Just reading through this thread, it's been quite entertaining I must say, but do try to keep it civil everyone. Nobody has said anything untoward yet, so let's keep it that way.

For what it's worth, I'm in the "key player attributes" camp. I believe it's possible to be successful with virtually any tactic as long as you pay attention to key attributes within certain positions and roles, whilst also considering "benchmark" key attributes throughout the squad. These I would say are mostly within the "Physical" and "Mental" attribute fields, though within the "Technique" field, I always believe that technique itself is the most important, as it's the "control" over the other technical abilities.

That said though, I don't believe that because certain formations don't work so well in FM09, it's some grand problem with the ME or the game itself. I believe that it's often a the case that they simply don't work too well against more commonplace "modern" formations, which are reflected quite well in the game and ME.

[kolobok]

mavuba had a wide open arshavin on the right.

By the moment Mavuba would receive the ball (keep in mind: Rodwell just retrived the ball, so his passing may not be too accurate) Hyland (#5) would step back a yard or two, Poulsen would step one yard forward, and player # 18 could step one yard right-forward or a bit backward to intercept the ball. Even assuming Mavuba is in a perfect body position to make one touch pass to Arshavin and receives a perfect pass (to the left foot, no need to change weight to pass), his pass to Arshavin has less than 50% chance to be completed. Now Rodwell is a right-foot player. So to make a perfect pass to Mavuba he would need to turn a bit (time!), or put the ball to left foot (weak one!). The second option is better as the pass seems simple. But it's not natural for him. Finally, he is MCd in this match, meaning his mentality is about 8. So given all this conditions he plays safe. And actually I ma not sure if Mavuba is left-footy, because if not it's even riskier to expect him deliver ball to Arshavin with one touch pass (almost no way to do it with right foot, unless he is positioned facing Arshavin). It's just the beginning of the match, you don't want to do anything risky as your partners may not be in game yet. (Obviously, now I am talking real life, though I would not be surprised if there is such factor in the ME too, because it's logical).

But even in a less complex situation it would still be ok with me what Rodwell did. It's not a practice or friendly game where you simply don't care about the result but want to practice certain moves. During practice session you set the rule and say: "hey, there is no pass for more than 20 yards". Here they have 89 minutes to go; my team is better by mile and the players know it; there will be opportunities created; Portsmouth is going to defend most of the match anyway. If you give them a chance at the beginning and they score, their confidence would go up and who knows...

[Zebedee77]

Oddly enough I've just had a league game against AFC Wimbledon who have decided that 4-1-2-1-2 diamond is the way forward. I had 3 injuries which required substitutes in the first half to go with my 3 goals so I shut up shop in the second and came out a with a comfortable 3-1 win. Played a very standard 4-4-2 and got lots of chances from the wingers exploiting the space behind their fullbacks, while defensively my FCd sat on their DMC, my MCd sat on the AMC and my wingers tucked in as appropriate to deal with whichever of their MCs had the ball. Ended up with my MCa pretty much always free in midfield and able to spray the ball left or right into the corners.

Match engine fault? Nah. Just a poor tactical formation when dealt with correctly. AFC Wimbledon would spank my Bognor 9 times out of 10 if they'd played a 4-4-2 and I'd tried to match them man for man.

[terrybecker]

Oddly enough I've just had a league game against AFC Wimbledon who have decided that 4-1-2-1-2 diamond is the way forward. I had 3 injuries which required substitutes in the first half to go with my 3 goals so I shut up shop in the second and came out a with a comfortable 3-1 win. Played a very standard 4-4-2 and got lots of chances from the wingers exploiting the space behind their fullbacks, while defensively my FCd sat on their DMC, my MCd sat on the AMC and my wingers tucked in as appropriate to deal with whichever of their MCs had the ball. Ended up with my MCa pretty much always free in midfield and able to spray the ball left or right into the corners.

Match engine fault? Nah. Just a poor tactical formation when dealt with correctly. AFC Wimbledon would spank my Bognor 9 times out of 10 if they'd played a 4-4-2 and I'd tried to match them man for man.

you didnt counter anything. its a bad formation in fm. the 4 midfielders when in possesion cant take advantage of being 2 more than your 2 central mids. because of the badly designed me.

[SFraser]

you didnt counter anything. its a bad formation in fm. the 4 midfielders when in possesion cant take advantage of being 2 more than your 2 central mids. because of the badly designed me.

What do you mean he didn't counter anything? He took their forwards and backwards passing options out of the game by dropping a striker deep (like you were already told is a usual AI counter) and by using a defensive CM (another usual AI tactic), then had 2 wingers and his spare midfielder to deal with the 2 CMs of the opponent formation. This required the AI pushing forward fullbacks to offer even equivelant numbers let alone an overloading opportunity, which he exploited when possession was gained, without having to involve his own fullbacks.

The diamond formation is regularly used by the AI but almost never without wingers and with a Striker at its apex rather than an AMC and it is used as a defensive tool, either maintaining possession (Birmingham/Wigan) or to break up attacks and start an overloading counter (Liverpool/Arsenal). In the Arsenal AI system it is usually Van Persie that drops into midfield and Denilson or another solid CM that drops to the DM position. When on the counter the Arsenal MCd runs forward and Fabregas maintains his position, sitting at the position requiring most composure and of greatest control over the possession of the side, the Deep Playmaker Position relative to the FWR of his side.

When looking for a goal the Arsenal AI system has a tendency to form a rather dramatic overloading diamond with Fabregas as a deep playmaker, Adebayor as the CF and 3 players in attack on either flank, wingers+fullback+ either the MCd or the FCd. Conversely if on the wrong side of a beating they will sacrifice an FCd for a CM and play a 4-1-4-1 formation, with the Defensive Midfielder and Fabregas swapping attacking positions to A: provide more outright defensive power and B: to get Fabregas closer to goal. These are all Diamond formations.

The diamond not only works in the ME but is regularly fielded in the Premier League, especially when your opponent is the underdog. The difference between the AI diamond and your diamond is that AI adapts to the tactical necessity of the game in question while you field yours inspite of all tactical and attribute considerations. Yours fails because it is an incredibly poor version that has your DM playmaking, your playmaker attacking and has absolutely no width or movement.

EDIT: In the 9.0.2 patch the AI Chelsea under Scolari had a habit of fielding an enormous 6 man diamond infront of its back four which was incredibly potent through the centre, but had a habit of being weak against a High D-Line due to its lack of pace and all it's play went predictably through the Free Role'd Deco.

Diamond formations work, but you cannot just slap 4 players down in a diamond shape and say "play football". You still have to create space, counter threats, attack weaknesses and provide options no matter if its a 4-4-2 or Chelsea's diamond behemoth. The ME is fine, the problem with the diamond formation is entireally down to you.

[terrybecker]

What do you mean he didn't counter anything? He took their forwards and backwards passing options out of the game by dropping a striker deep (like you were already told is a usual AI counter) and by using a defensive CM (another usual AI tactic), then had 2 wingers and his spare midfielder to deal with the 2 CMs of the opponent formation. This required the AI pushing forward fullbacks to offer even equivelant numbers let alone an overloading opportunity, which he exploited when possession was gained, without having to involve his own fullbacks.

The diamond formation is regularly used by the AI but almost never without wingers and with a Striker at its apex rather than an AMC and it is used as a defensive tool, either maintaining possession (Birmingham/Wigan) or to break up attacks and start an overloading counter (Liverpool/Arsenal). In the Arsenal AI system it is usually Van Persie that drops into midfield and Denilson or another solid CM that drops to the DM position. When on the counter the Arsenal MCd runs forward and Fabregas maintains his position, sitting at the position requiring most composure and of greatest control over the possession of the side, the Deep Playmaker Position relative to the FWR of his side.

When looking for a goal the Arsenal AI system has a tendency to form a rather dramatic overloading diamond with Fabregas as a deep playmaker, Adebayor as the CF and 3 players in attack on either flank, wingers+fullback+ either the MCd or the FCd. Conversely if on the wrong side of a beating they will sacrifice an FCd for a CM and play a 4-1-4-1 formation, with the Defensive Midfielder and Fabregas swapping attacking positions to A: provide more outright defensive power and B: to get Fabregas closer to goal. These are all Diamond formations.

The diamond not only works in the ME but is regularly fielded in the Premier League, especially when your opponent is the underdog. The difference between the AI diamond and your diamond is that AI adapts to the tactical necessity of the game in question while you field yours inspite of all tactical and attribute considerations. Yours fails because it an incredibly poor version that has your DM playmaking, your playmaker attacking and has absolutely no width or movement.

EDIT: In the 9.0.2 patch the AI Chelsea under Scolari had a habit of fielding an enormous 6 man diamond infront of its back four which was incredibly potent through the centre, but had a habit of being weak against a High D-Line due to its lack of pace and all it's play went predictably through the Free Role'd Deco.

no movement because of the poor me. like i pointed out above, in the portsmouth everton game. in real life of course its a different story.

[kolobok]

you didnt counter anything. its a bad formation in fm. the 4 midfielders when in possesion cant take advantage of being 2 more than your 2 central mids. because of the badly designed me.

Can you name one RL team that successfully plays without wingers? I mean today, not in history. And I mean constantly, not ocasionally.

[SFraser]

no movement because of the poor me. like i pointed out above, in the portsmouth everton game. in real life of course its a different story.

You pointed out an MC with Off-The-Ball 10 playing away from Home with 3 men ahead of him and 6 defenders, with an opponent winger 1 on 1 with his team-mate fullback on the side he is supposed to be covering. Not only is he rubbish at taking up space but there is no counter-attack opportunity and he has left his position unmarked.

Now either his team have just won possession and he cannot see the run, nor is the counter-attack triggered, or his team have had possession for a while and he has been forced inside with the ball and is therefore playing a low mentality possession defence. Obviously he is not in the ideal position, but then he is a rather rubbish player and that is what you get.

The Wolf that you are ignoring this time around is that diamonds are played and function perfectly well in the current ME, but you can't construct one.

[ironiman]

Can you name one RL team that successfully plays without wingers? I mean today, not in history. And I mean constantly, not ocasionally.

Spain :o

10 character

[Zebedee77]

Spain :o

10 character

They play one 'true' winger though (left side) with the winger on the right tucking in during possession so the right fullback can get forward to overload the defence. Out of possession, the right 'winger' is meant to move back out wide to aid and cover the right fullback. The flaws in the system were demonstrated against the USA when the USA's left winger (which they alternated in terms of the actual player) sat on the half-way line waiting for the direct ball which would free him (in part caused by the Spanish right 'winger' having no idea how to play the role and which eventually saw him substituted in favour of a true touchline hugging one).

----

@terrybecker - Match engine issues or tactical ones? My money is on the latter.

[terrybecker]

You pointed out an MC with Off-The-Ball 10 playing away from Home with 3 men ahead of him and 6 defenders, with an opponent winger 1 on 1 with his team-mate fullback on the side he is supposed to be covering. Not only is he rubbish at taking up space but there is no counter-attack opportunity and he has left his position unmarked.

Now either his team have just won possession and he cannot see the run, nor is the counter-attack triggered, or his team have had possession for a while and he has been forced inside with the ball and is therefore playing a low mentality possession defence. Obviously he is not in the ideal position, but then he is a rather rubbish player and that is what you get.

The Wolf that you are ignoring this time around is that diamonds are played and function perfectly well in the current ME, but you can't construct one.

portsmouth were being managed by the ai, or tony adams or something like that not me. anyway if you still are denying that that situation was due to any other factor than bad me than we shouldnt continue this discussion further.

[terrybecker]

italy won the world cup without any wingers. ac milan have won 2 champions league, an italian championship and some other trophies in the span of 8 years without any wingers. doesnt seem like such a bad formation to me.

these are the real life results of wingerless tactics.

[Zebedee77]

italy won the world cup without any wingers. ac milan have won 2 champions league, an italian championship and some other trophies in the span of 8 years without any wingers. doesnt seem like such a bad formation to me.

these are the real life results of wingerless tactics.

AC Milan played a 4-3-2-1 in defence under Ancelotti. In attack, one of the AMCs (usually the left) drifts wide and takes up the winger's position and one of the DMCs (usually the right) drifta wide and takes up the other winger's position - interestingly they also used the exact same players to play a genuine 4-4-1-1 too. Which is no surprise given Sacchi's influence upon Ancelotti moderated by the need to play Pirlo as a deep-lying play maker. Italy won the world cup with that same kind of lopsided 4-3-2-1/4-4-1-1 formation. This season Milan were taken apart by an Inter team which played a midfield diamond with genuine width. Italy struggled in the Confed cup against teams which also played with genuine width and who kept eleven players on the pitch. Ye olde Christmas tree ftw!

edit: currently the only way I've found to get this sort of formation working is to employ free roles on players who are rated in two or more positions (eg a M RC or an AM LC). Hopefully, the hints of new player instructions for FM10 which will effect lateral movement prove to be true and will make things a little easier to influence tactically.

[kolobok]

italy won the world cup without any wingers. ac milan have won 2 champions league, an italian championship and some other trophies in the span of 8 years without any wingers. doesnt seem like such a bad formation to me.

these are the real life results of wingerless tactics.

So Italy and Milan, huh? No wingers. Ok (though it's not 100% true), but you are trying to play it constantly in England, where every team will attack on flanks. And of course it's bad ME to blame...

[terrybecker]

AC Milan played a 4-3-2-1 in defence under Ancelotti. In attack, one of the AMCs (usually the left) drifts wide and takes up the winger's position and one of the DMCs (usually the right) drifta wide and takes up the other winger's position - interestingly they also used the exact same players to play a genuine 4-4-1-1 too. Which is no surprise given Sacchi's influence upon Ancelotti moderated by the need to play Pirlo as a deep-lying play maker. Italy won the world cup with that same kind of lopsided 4-3-2-1/4-4-1-1 formation. This season Milan were taken apart by an Inter team which played a midfield diamond with genuine width. Italy struggled in the Confed cup against teams which also played with genuine width and who kept eleven players on the pitch. Ye olde Christmas tree ftw!

edit: currently the only way I've found to get this sort of formation working is to employ free roles on players who are rated in two or more positions (eg a M RC or an AM LC). Hopefully, the hints of new player instructions for FM10 which will effect lateral movement prove to be true and will make things a little easier to influence tactically.

the amc drifting wide is down to the free role box being ticked , is it not? well i do tick it. so what, milan lost this year. you wanted proof the formation works, here it is champions league and world cup.

[terrybecker]

So Italy and Milan, huh? No wingers. Ok (though it's not 100% true), but you are trying to play it constantly in England, where every team will attack on flanks. And of course it's bad ME to blame...

thats why it should have even more success in england. as an example, milan has outplayed man u who are the gold standard of wing play 4 times in the champions league home and away, thanks to the narrow formation. and many other clubs that play with wingers. same thing with italy.

it should work in england especially with lower quality teams as they dont drop deep and defend, but stay rather open, even though the players are of lower quality.

[Zebedee77]

the amc drifting wide is down to the free role box being ticked , is it not? well i do tick it. so what, milan lost this year. you wanted proof the formation works, here it is champions league and world cup.

I know 4-3-2-1 with flexible players able to drift wide has worked in the fairly recent past. You seem to have confused me with someone else. I was just pointing out that pretending AC Milan and Italy did not have wingers was a half-truth, and that neither are doing particularly well with the formation now teams have analysed its weaknesses.

My amusement was generated by your assertion that a 4-1-2-1-2 narrow diamond would be reintroduced to the modern game. Now if you could find me a team which has prospered with that formation in the past few seasons (other than Shakhtar domestically) I'd be interested

[Beardeye]

This is what is known as a Hard Pressing Game in defence and a Quick One Touch Passing and Movement offensive game through the heart of the midfield. I have countered their possession style of football by clogging the midfield and pressing hard, and have adapted my attacking play to exploit the lack of width and close proximity of my players with a superior tempo. They have been completely outplayed in every single area.

SFraser- as a newbie struggling with tactics (especially away from home), this is a fascinating insight into how to adapt your tactics to counter opposition pitch size, formation and style of play. It is obviously simple and logical for you, but not so for me!

Have you got any and/or are you so kind as to make more similar posts for other scouting reports. I.e your recommended set up for long pitches, wide pitches, teams who look to draw the opposition onto them before countering (this is the most common one i face) etc. Obviously I appreciate that this would be a lot of work for you, but believe me what ever you would be willing to post would be invaluable!

Judging from your other posts in this thread player attributes, physical and mental, are important to make the tactic successful, but getting the tactical set up right is at least a start!

Happy for you to PM if you dont want to post a reply here.

[Wayne\'o]

Can you name one RL team that successfully plays without wingers? I mean today, not in history. And I mean constantly, not ocasionally.

in modern day football full baks are wingers, or they have to get forward alot. alot of teams tend to play 1 upfront and drop off 1 FC and the wide midfeilders such as Ronaldo, Kyte etc drift infield and allow the full backs to bomb down flanks..

but with the original post, i have the same problem, possesion doesnt win me any thing, and some games that i have less possesion i actuallly see more attacking highlights in my favour, when i have like 60% possesion all i tend to see is the AI team having shots on my goal.. and to this day i still dont know what needs to be changed to put it right lol.

[SFraser]

I know 4-3-2-1 with flexible players able to drift wide has worked in the fairly recent past. You seem to have confused me with someone else. I was just pointing out that pretending AC Milan and Italy did not have wingers was a half-truth, and that neither are doing particularly well with the formation now teams have analysed its weaknesses.

Was it not Seedorf and Gattuso playing either side of Kaka with the fullbacks in wide support that provided the rather ruthless potency of that era of Milan football? I seem to remember a few wild slashes of the football from the boot of that frenetic Italian from just inside the corner of the box on several occasions.

The "lack of width" was certainly very superficial if I remember correctly with the midfielders having a tendency to hem in defences with power either side of intelligence in depth, flanked again by the typical kind of intelligence the Italians seems to love at fullback.

but with the original post' date=' i have the same problem, possesion doesnt win me any thing, and some games that i have less possesion i actuallly see more attacking highlights in my favour, when i have like 60% possesion all i tend to see is the AI team having shots on my goal.. and to this day i still dont know what needs to be changed to put it right lol.[/quote']

You should not equate a lack of possession to anything other than a lack of possession. Having more or less possession on its own means nothing in a statistical context other than a lack of possession. It does not mean you offence is ineffective, it does not mean you defence is ineffective, it does not mean the opposition are dominating you, it does not mean you are being defeated or that you are winning.

Lack of possession is a symptom of a particular match context that may or not be a problem with your tactical approach and may or not beyond your ability to correct, indeed it may or not be relevant to your style of play.

[Wayne\'o]

Lack of possession is a symptom of a particular match context that may or not be a problem with your tactical approach and may or not beyond your ability to correct, indeed it may or not be relevant to your style of play.

well im not really sure what to look at to even know what needs changing, i play around with, tempo, passing width and other thing's, but apart from i see the AI putting me under preasure, i dont really know what to do, how do i work out?

[Zebedee77]

Was it not Seedorf and Gattuso playing either side of Kaka with the fullbacks in wide support that provided the rather ruthless potency of that era of Milan football? I seem to remember a few wild slashes of the football from the boot of that frenetic Italian from just inside the corner of the box on several occasions.

The "lack of width" was certainly very superficial if I remember correctly with the midfielders having a tendency to hem in defences with power either side of intelligence in depth, flanked again by the typical kind of intelligence the Italians seems to love at fullback.

Seedorf and Kaka was a common partnership Ancelotti used in the 'AMC' positions, with Seedorf drifting wide left and Kaka holding a more central position behind Inzaghi (just off Inzaghi's right shoulder positionally really). Ambrosini, Pirlo and Gattuso were the usual DMC line, with Gattuso drifting wide right. When they won the 2007 CL, they actually played more of a 4-4-1-1 than a 4-3-2-1 (possibly as a result of the second-half of 2005) but the difference in AC Milan's case is really more a matter of notation than actual function. Obviously Seedorf isn't a natural left winger, but then Ancelotti encouraged Jankoluvski to get up from fullback to help rectify this deficiency. Gattuso not being a natural winger was also mitigated by Oddo being a fairly useful wingback of a fullback if that makes sense. Obviously, Beckham slotted perfectly into the system but this season Milan have lacked that bite and energy Gattuso provided further up the pitch when playing in that 'wide' role.

[deejay10]

Ive been reading this thread with some interest, and I have a few thoughts to add, having spent most of my tactic constructing/tweaking time, to work out the best way to dominate possesion and use it purposely.

I find that my CB's or FB's punt the ball up the pitch aimlessly way TOO MUCH, often towards the small, pacy forward, while under little or no pressure. All of my back 3 or back 4, often have very low pass completion rates, in whatever formation I choose to use.

What I'm most interested in, is how are the tactics gurus here, building tactics and team instructions, which have high rates of ball retention, use in a PURPOSEFUL way, without lots of pointless passes amongst the back four ? How do I get my defenders to build an attack from the back, finding central midfielders in space, and move the ball forward to build an attack. I'm tired of game after game of constant tweaking, where my assistant manager is telling me how bad my team's passing has been, "we're misplacing too many long passes", "we're misplacing too many short passes", and I look at the player stats to see all my defenders having low pass completion stats.

All this in a game where I am in December, in the first season with Sampdoria, sitting 5 points clear at the top of Serie A, and unbeaten all season, except for an Italian cup game where I lost on penalties!

Can any of the tactics gurus please post up screenshots of the settings they generally have their back four and defensive midfielders on, where they have 80%+ pass completion rates, and keep the midfield constantly supplied with the ball ?

[SFraser]

Ive been reading this thread with some interest, and I have a few thoughts to add, having spent most of my tactic constructing/tweaking time, to work out the best way to dominate possesion and use it purposely.

I find that my CB's or FB's punt the ball up the pitch aimlessly way TOO MUCH, often towards the small, pacy forward, while under little or no pressure. All of my back 3 or back 4, often have very low pass completion rates, in whatever formation I choose to use.

What I'm most interested in, is how are the tactics gurus here, building tactics and team instructions, which have high rates of ball retention, use in a PURPOSEFUL way, without lots of pointless passes amongst the back four ? How do I get my defenders to build an attack from the back, finding central midfielders in space, and move the ball forward to build an attack. I'm tired of game after game of constant tweaking, where my assistant manager is telling me how bad my team's passing has been, "we're misplacing too many long passes", "we're misplacing too many short passes", and I look at the player stats to see all my defenders having low pass completion stats.

All this in a game where I am in December, in the first season with Sampdoria, sitting 5 points clear at the top of Serie A, and unbeaten all season, except for an Italian cup game where I lost on penalties!

Can any of the tactics gurus please post up screenshots of the settings they generally have their back four and defensive midfielders on, where they have 80%+ pass completion rates, and keep the midfield constantly supplied with the ball ?

Quite often the answer is staring you in the face. What instruction could possible and immediately counter the tendency to clear the ball up field at the first possible opportunity? The answer to that question in that raw and hypothetical context is Hold Up Ball. It definately has its draw backs but in terms of sheer stability and possession retention from the back line there is very little more effective than HUB.

As a Manchester United fan I have an understandable tendency to refer to the playstyle of Manchester United, but as a team many people can watch on a relatively regular basis it is a great example. Is the passing style of van der Sar and Ferdinand and Vidic a short passing style? They recycle possession between themselves on an incredibly regular basis yet at the same time are prone to looking for and attempting incredibly direct passes. How many times does Ferdinand look to play the ball to Vidic and how many time does Ferdinand look to ignore Vidic and also ignore the entirety ofthe opponents midfield with a direct ball to a deep dropping front player?

HUB is fundamental to any team that wishes to employ a distinction between pace and composure without interfering with tempo and timewasting.

[deejay10]

When using the HUB ball option (how many of your backline do you give it to ? just the CB's for example ?), what characteristics do you notice in the distribution and ball retention of the team as a whole. Are your defenders picking out better passes, or dwelling on the ball too long, allowing them to be pressured, and passing options quickly marked. Would this style of play require high decisions and composure stats across the back line ?

We can't all have centre backs of the quality of Vidic and Ferdinand! LOL

[isuckatfm]

deejay10

how low is low? Mine are around 72 to 76% give or take. The thing with the hoofing is that it is really hard to say. I've seen a FB do the two opposites in similar situations with identical settings so I've never looked for 100% bhaviour, just an overall general behaviour. For example I have Steven Taylor and David Luiz. They have identical settings yet Taylor is generlly more prone to hoofing even when he has a nice simple pass on.

Then there's the question of what the game considers 'risky'. An anecdotal observation and other settings come into it, but when your team is defending deep the riskier (high mentality) pass might be the short option to a team mate who hasn't collapsed into the box (an AM outlet or dropped off striker). But in possession further up the pitch the 'riskier' pass might be what appears to be a hoof: a long ball trying to feed an advanced striker or winger.

I would keep an eye here and see if kolobok answers as in the Portsmouth pkm he posted his defenders rarely resorted to hoofing. Part of that might have been his 3 MCs always showing and open because Portsmouth were sitting off. or because his FBs weren't pushing on too aggressively. Or it could just be his specific defender settings. All I know is his defenders in that pkm were far more measured in their decisions compard to mine, but I'm in a Keegan phase at the moment where it's balls to the wall attacking and the sitting MC tends to be the only viable outlet at times. I accept that for what I gain in overloading the opposition when attacks to build (usually dependent on the CB managing to hit a longer range pass to the FB on the flank specially when an opposition striker drops off and blocks the pssing lan to the holding MC).

Is it in anyway possible that you are focusig on this negative too much which is perhaps skewing your perception of how often it is occuring? Just a thought and not meant in an offensive manner

[deejay10]

isuckatfm...maybe I am focusing on the issue too keenly, I just hate possesion being wasted. Most of the goals I concede come from reckless passes where my team is then out of position to defend the counter attack, because we gifted possesion to the opposition. Iv found some tweaks that have improved things, such as putting my wing backs on mixed forward runs, and increasing the CF and passing of 2 of the defenders. Im currently playing a 5-3-2 with wingbacks and 3 CB's. The pass completion rates for the 3 CB's are 72%, 72% and 67%.

I think im going to try and develop a system where one defender brings the ball out of defence, and supplies the wing backs and switches the play, sort of like a deeper lying playmaker.

One of the other issues with how I'm losing possession most often, is smaller creative players, further up the pitch, being easily tackled, and muscled off the ball, or passes into the feet of my strikers being easily read and intercepted, and hoofed clear by the opposition defenders.

And yet despite these issues, I'm still unbeated with my Sampdoria side, halfway through the first season! I just wish we could play better football more often, instead of only in patches during games.