Psychology in FM

[ZentSPB]

Noticing a recent influx in topics about team talks and player interaction, I decided to make my contribution to the ongoing discussion of this aspect of the game.

First of all, what are 'team talks'? In real life, this term denotes a period of time during which the manager has an opportunity to exert direct influence over his team, both tactically and psychologically. During a game the manager is restricted to more passive role; he observes the mechanism of the football match without actively contributing to it. During halftime, however, he has a chance to share his observations with his players. Simply put, the manager provides players with external feedback on the game as a whole and implement tactical alterations if such be necessary.

In FM, this is represented by advanced tactics and team talk screens. The former allows us to make tactical corrections, and the latter gives us a chance to interact with the players' psychology. The problem here is that, apart from the actual opportunity to talk to the players, there is nothing unique or special about the half-time period. The advanced tactics screen is available all throughout the match, and we are able to make complex tactical changes without having to wait for the half-time. The importance of the half-time is therefore severely diminishes.

So, in truth the only significant aspect of half-time is player interaction. The tone system gave us a promise of depth in this area. However, as things stand, this important aspect of football, feels very arcade-like and superficial in FM.

Let us look at a real life example. The game is Montenegro vs England. After an early goal and a dominant first-half display, England look confident. Roy Hodgson, being of cautious disposition, probably expressed his satisfaction and also warned of complacency. FM allows virtual Hodgson to do the same. So far so good. But here's a question: considering England's subsequent second-half lapse, was it red or green? In FM, when we interact with players, their reactions are represented by red (negative) and green (positive) and often neither. In my view, this feature makes team talks into a roulette; the FM player always looks for green and tries to avoid red. Because of this system, the team talks in FM are often driven by the "what if it's red" concern. Did Hodgson in real life have this pressure? He probably was concerned with stressing the danger of losing focus, but the fear that his talk may cause a moral penalty was not an issue. The current setup in FM, fails to capture the fact that managers are omniscient psychologists, and cannot know how the player is reacting unless it's quite obvious.

Moreover, players in real life have self-awareness and mental autonomy. Here's what Gerrard said after the Montenegro game:

"We stopped playing after the break for 20 or 30 minutes and, away from home, you just can't afford to do that. We stopped passing the ball, and that's when we lost control, and I think they deserved the equaliser."

FM currently does not do a good job of simulating this. We can praise or criticise players in various tones, but it all feels disconnected and detached, and lacking proper grounding. Most players know if they are playing badly, and the job of the manager is not to speak the obvious but to produce a change in the mentality of a player, whether through tactics or inspiration. Currently FM does not fully simulate this, as we are forced to focus on telling the players what they want hear, rather then what is best for them. Sometimes, it can be good if a player feels agitated by a team talk, or even is upset by what has been said. It should not be a simplistic green or red.

[hashassin]

thing is, not always green means good, like not always red means bad... sometimes we can praise them too much (green) which will have negative effect on the game... sometimes, if you anger player (red), he may pay better, depending on personality...

[Jean-Luc]

thing is, not always green means good, like not always red means bad... sometimes we can praise them too much (green) which will have negative effect on the game... sometimes, if you anger player (red), he may pay better, depending on personality...

Is that really so?

And if yes, maybe they should change the colours. Green and red are quite easily understood as "good" and "bad", maybe they should make it blue and Yellow, or they should introduce a third colour to make it less two-dimensional.

[Sikker]

Is that really so?

And if yes, maybe they should change the colours. Green and red are quite easily understood as "good" and "bad", maybe they should make it blue and Yellow, or they should introduce a third colour to make it less two-dimensional.

Is being relaxed always good? Being relaxed, though, is often considered with the colour green.

Vice versa:

Is being aggressive/angry always bad? Being aggressive/angry, though, is often considered with the colour red.

[RocheBag]

My team talks are almost always red, and that's the way I want it. I'm running a football club not a spa resort. In winning 2-0 at half I'm most definitely telling them not to get complacent, and most of them are going to be angry. I'm glad they're angry, they should be

[achilles-the-victorious]

I have logged team talks for something like my last 3.75 seasons. Top of the league currently, and Champions last two years, once runners up on 95 points (lost on vicious tie break).

Let me tell you what I found. Not having a pre OR post-match team talk has done wonders for my team. I went from 95 points in a 38 game season to 101, and 103 in the next two seasons.

So it has avoided (or postponed) the inevitable loss that comes after a couple of good wins.

I will sometimes skip the team talk but tell 3 or 4 players I have faith, no pressure, or the odd time, I expect a performance. My squad personality varies from Highly Determined to Highly Professional.

[themadsheep2001]

I have logged team talks for something like my last 3.75 seasons. Top of the league currently, and Champions last two years, once runners up on 95 points (lost on vicious tie break).

Let me tell you what I found. Not having a pre OR post-match team talk has done wonders for my team. I went from 95 points in a 38 game season to 101, and 103 in the next two seasons.

So it has avoided (or postponed) the inevitable loss that comes after a couple of good wins.

I will sometimes skip the team talk but tell 3 or 4 players I have faith, no pressure, or the odd time, I expect a performance. My squad personality varies from Highly Determined to Highly Professional.

Interesting. Personally the pre match talk is typically of little importance to me, its the half time and post match ones that I focus on, especially the post match, as they set the mood for the next game.

Like many other aspects of the game, I think people would find things a lot simpler if they stopped thinking about everything in absolutes.

[mrdorf]

I've given team talks to my Assistant Manager as he has 20 in motivation and Man-Management; I've noticed he handles that aspect of the game very well. I think I have a squad that doesn't handle pressure well and my expectations maybe a bit too much for them; therefore leaving it to him has made a world of difference.

[soccer.joel]

Is being relaxed always good? Being relaxed, though, is often considered with the colour green.

Vice versa:

Is being aggressive/angry always bad? Being aggressive/angry, though, is often considered with the colour red.

Relaxed is good because it means they aren't nervous. I get good results when my players are relaxed usually

[soccer.joel]

My team talks are almost always red, and that's the way I want it. I'm running a football club not a spa resort. In winning 2-0 at half I'm most definitely telling them not to get complacent, and most of them are going to be angry. I'm glad they're angry, they should be

Interesting way of looking at it

[Herbert Fandel]

My team talks are almost always red, and that's the way I want it. I'm running a football club not a spa resort. In winning 2-0 at half I'm most definitely telling them not to get complacent, and most of them are going to be angry. I'm glad they're angry, they should be

Does this work for you?

Some of the green team talks are 'angry'.... but good kinds of angry.

The red ones are often bad kinds of angry, e.g. confused and demotivated.

If it works it works I guess, but I don't and won't be doing it like that, as I thing you are wrong (in theory).

Of course the game doesn't just run on team talks, so you may still sometimes win with red ones, perhaps the source of your confusion

[Sikker]

Relaxed is good because it means they aren't nervous. I get good results when my players are relaxed usually

Well, to my experience being relaxed is often good. But it can also have the negative effect that the player doesn't fight hard enough or thinking the game is already won.

[vlobben]

I always go for "green" reactions. My reasoning is that if SIgames intended "red" reactions to be positive in specific scenarios, they wouldn't have color coded it traffic light style.

[Koki]

Let me tell you what I found. Not having a pre OR post-match team talk has done wonders for my team.

Just won the league after I used this for the 5 last matches (15 points). Might be too early to conclude something but right now I just want to say thank you!

[pigfacemonkeyman]

Just won the league after I used this for the 5 last matches (15 points). Might be too early to conclude something but right now I just want to say thank you!

All that's needed now is a "No One Attends" option for Press Conferences and we have "Semi-Skimmed FM".

[BenArsenal]

My team talks are almost always red, and that's the way I want it. I'm running a football club not a spa resort. In winning 2-0 at half I'm most definitely telling them not to get complacent, and most of them are going to be angry. I'm glad they're angry, they should be

You'll soon have a room full of angry young men, and a riot on your hands...

But in all seriousness, I don't see how it can work every time. If you get a fairly rebellious character, all he'll do is go against you and be complacent. The "Don't Tell Me What To Do" type.

[hursty2]

If I'm 2-0 up at half time, I'll just start the second half. Always.

[eple]

I think it matters a lot what club you are managing, what type of player mentalities you have and the game's opinion of your team so to speak (favorites, underdog, etc). Achilles, I believe, is managing Inter quite a few seasons in (right?). He has an excellent squad with top mentalities. He is expected to win I guess all games except perhaps the biggest rival matches. Continuously applying assertive talks would lead to players feeling pressured and an inevitable under-performance at some point, whereas praise and such would lead to complacency. Saying nothing might very well be the best option in that scenario, because the players are highly motivated by default, as they are determined, professional and ambitious.

I was Inter and went something like 80 games unbeaten in the league, but I used a mixture of talks to pop the complacency- and pressure-balloons, if I can speak in such terms. In example being delighted after a win would be followed up with an assertive "expect to win", and being angry after a scape win or draw would be followed up with encouragement and faith.

Right now I'm managing Crewe in the PL. My squad is mostly championship quality and very young except from a few old horses, like a soon to be 37 year old Frank Lampard. I'm expected to lose close to every game, yet in February my team is placed comfortably in 5th place, having won close to half my away games and beaten teams like Chelsea and Arsenal.

In almost every game I have told my players to relax and play with no pressure, while also telling them I have faith. If I did that at Inter I would surely loose. If I told them nothing I think they would feel pressured by over-performing, fans expectations and the like. In other words I would say it's very dependent upon the situation you find yourself in, and thus there is no absolute truths to the system.

[RocheBag]

Does this work for you?

Some of the green team talks are 'angry'.... but good kinds of angry.

The red ones are often bad kinds of angry, e.g. confused and demotivated.

If it works it works I guess, but I don't and won't be doing it like that, as I thing you are wrong (in theory).

Of course the game doesn't just run on team talks, so you may still sometimes win with red ones, perhaps the source of your confusion

It does work for me. When I have a big lead and I praise the players, I nearly always go on to concede a second half goal. When I tell them not to get complacent and they get angry, I see them play hard and more often than not we go on to add a goal or two more to put the game well out of reach.

When my team is happy or relaxed I see stupid mistakes that end up costing us. The two reactions I'm looking for are either fired-up or angry.

[RocheBag]

You'll soon have a room full of angry young men, and a riot on your hands...

But in all seriousness, I don't see how it can work every time. If you get a fairly rebellious character, all he'll do is go against you and be complacent. The "Don't Tell Me What To Do" type.

I don't, and won't have such players in my team. Some players don't like it, and they find themselves sold or released, or put on the bench until they stop whining.

[Sikker]

I have logged team talks for something like my last 3.75 seasons. Top of the league currently, and Champions last two years, once runners up on 95 points (lost on vicious tie break).

Let me tell you what I found. Not having a pre OR post-match team talk has done wonders for my team. I went from 95 points in a 38 game season to 101, and 103 in the next two seasons.

So it has avoided (or postponed) the inevitable loss that comes after a couple of good wins.

I will sometimes skip the team talk but tell 3 or 4 players I have faith, no pressure, or the odd time, I expect a performance. My squad personality varies from Highly Determined to Highly Professional.

Best advice ever on this community. Go home wwfan

Seriously it almost feels like cheating. I'm in my 4th season. Before: 8 games played - 3 won, 2 draws, 3 defeats, for-against: 9-6. After: 7 games all won, for-against: 22-1.

I know this doesn't count as statistical evidence, but I sure can see the difference in game.

Now I just need a way to cut down on the crazy amount of woodwork. 2-3 woodwork a game by my team is just too much (yeah, I know it sounds great, you dirty reader, but it really isn't...).

[Koki]

32 matches unbeaten in the league since I tried that team talk advice. I have one of the best teams but still... simply amazing!

[themadsheep2001]

32 matches unbeaten in the league since I tried that team talk advice. I have one of the best teams but still... simply amazing!

Not sure its that simple. I'm unbeaten in every game this season, with a maximum of 10 games to go, and I use a post game team talk every time. Most likely, team talks are simply not as "overpowered" as people often make out.

[RocheBag]

Yeah that seems a little strange to me. Usually a few times per season I'll start the match without doing a team talk by accident and I usually perform pretty poorly in those games

[ZentSPB]

In my view, consistently refraining from team talks should result in "Doesn't communicate to players" or "Poor Motivator" traits for the manager which should have negative impact on squad harmony.

[Koki]

Of course it is not as simple as only doing the half-time talk and your tactic and quality of players don't matter anymore. As I said, I have a pretty strong squad and I think I have quite a solid tactic. Furthermore, one season is of course not enough to be statistical evidence. But the curious thing is, that usually all my pre- and post-match team talks showed green all over. And I don't mean the players were "relaxed" but "fired up". It's just strange that things go better now that I do less. But we'll see how that goes once other users have finished some seasons with this "approach".