HT team-talk - "Pleased" = death penalty for second half?

[Diegas]

OMGGG, my last match I was up 3-0 half time away, went with nothing as usual as I dont want my performance to drop. Then somehow they came back to 3-3. So ****ed and I have no idea how this didn't work out.

Of course, team-talk works both ways. AI managers uses them too. And that aspect is out of our control.

[AXERTYRE]

So what should I say now?

[Rickooko]

Why are you pleased? You have not won yet.

Second that.

No matter how many goals i am leading at the first half, i will always use "Dont expect your performance drop" or "Dont get complacent" as global team talk, use "please" or "delighted" on a few individuals while i see fit, use "disappoint" or "angry" for somebody who show "gettting complacent" or with low ratings.

It works like a charm!

[Tejaswi]

That is another thing that bugs me. Why in the world does 'Have faith' work for a player with 8.0+?

If anything, it should work better on good players playing poorly, as in, I have faith in you that you can turn this around.

In that sense, how would you actually motivate a good player playing poorly without a harsh team-talk? Surely a bad patch can't be improved IRL by being harsh on the player? Pleased/thrilled/none is out, have faith is out, We can win this/You can win this is too general, Disappointed/Angry is too harsh..

[drambuie2]

That is another thing that bugs me. Why in the world does 'Have faith' work for a player with 8.0+?

Excellent point - surely he knows he's playing a good game and doesn't need to be told you believe in him. Some of the options/combos seem the opposite to what I interpret them to mean. Ther should be a 'keep playing that way but be careful' option - don't let perfiomance drop doesn't seem to have that effect.The ones I chuckle at most are when they get the reaction of 'confused, angry' - you should get a reaction to the team talk within half time from those players, not after the game. Surely you would see if what you said impressed/didn't impress a player - therefore you could then say 'ok he is not going to buck his ideas up - looks angry with me, so i'll defo sub him now rather than see how it goes'.

I think there are definitely links between player attitudes/mentalities and certain talks - ie. as Liverpool Torres was doing nothing for me - more often than not an 'angry' at half time seemed to buck his ideas up big time and again more often than not he would score or at least get a hatful of chances. With other players though one particular option has little or no impact.

Generally i think team talks are an important part of the game and reflect somewhat the realities of the difference of top level management - ie motivation, but are badly implemented in part or just don't make sense a lot of the time!

[lam]

I have not read this whole post so please excuse me if this has been posted already.

I am finding success in just talking to some of the players. As an example; if you have had a good first half and the team are around the high 6's or low 7's but you have three players that are high 7's, then just tell those three players that you are pleased and leave the rest.

This also seems to work extreamly well with fulltime talks too. You know how when you talk to the whole team you barely get a response, something like they were not really listening. Well.... again, if you leave most of them along and just congratulate the top performers, the others wont respond (they wouldnt have anyway) but the key players generally respond very well.

LAM

[Diegas]

Thats an interesting idea, lam. This gave me just another question: could same individual TT generate more response than same team TT?

[lam]

I believe that individual talks are more powerfull than team ones. You can see this for your own eyes. When your team has performed well tell them all that you are 'pleased', then select two players that performed very well and tell them the same, but individually.

If you then go to your assistant managers advice (bottom left on squad screen) and ask for teamtalk feedback, you should then see the responses. (filer various sections of the game in the top right).

I would personalise all talks though.

LAM

[podge_uk_2001]

I would say to make sure you look at your players Motivation as well. Home/Away Team Stats, "View" in the top right corner, and switch it to motivation. People "playing with confidence" don't need much of a gee up, and your team talk can be more lenient for them. But see someone playing something lower than a 7 and "looking complacent"? I don't let them get away with that. Lower than 6.5 and "looking complacent"? Hairdryers for you my friend!

I think you have to tailor your team talk to individual players, but not too much. I try to avoid saying something individual to more than 3 players, otherwise you're risking the message of your whole team talk getting lost.

[matthew56]

In 9.1 and 9.2 I found pleased or anything like that was an automatic "stop playing and let them score 3". In 9.3 team talks seem to be different. I almost always now follow this pattern:

Before match:

Normal = For the fans

Against top 4 = Wish luck

Half time:

Losing at home = for the fans or 'want to see more' if against teams at bottom of the league or playing really badly

Losing away = encourage (if available) plus 'have faith' for the lowest rated players

Drawing or winning = encourage (if available) plus 'pleased' for the top 2-3 players, or anyone who's on low morale but played ok

Full time:

Won = pleased plus 'fantastic/delighted' for couple of top players if 7.5+

Draw = pleased or sympathise

Loss = sympathise or good effort

That system seems to be working well for me at the moment, keeping morale up and not having anyone demotivated by the talks. Frequently seeing people motivated and fired up. Of course, what works for my players in my specific situation (Hull in relegation battle) might not work for anyone else. With a team expected to lose, encouraging seems to work. If I was playing as Man Utd it might be different.

uk chris if int ht team talk there is no encoruage what you must choose? and you judge normal team by odds or by position - forg eg woking are 7th but odds vs them are 7-1

[ZdlR]

Not only do you have to take into account the context of the match, but also a players longterm relationship with you, and most importantly the relationship between his short term form and your recent methods of interacting with him. The first point is important in evaluating the reaction you desire, the second point determines the leeway you have with regards to severity and the third point is critical in linking match performances, post and pre match interaction and teamtalks across multiple matches into a consistent run of results, performances, expectations and responses.

This is very interesting and not something that had previously occured to me. I'm a bit too mechanical with my team talks and follow a pattern that takes into account just morale and rating - which is standard I would guess as that's the data readily available on the screen. However, as with most things in FM, there is the potential to delve deeper and integrate further variables into the equation.

So, as examples, you need to reign in harsh talks for players who struggle to motivate themselves to play for you, lest they grow to resent you? Ask a good performer in a previous game to pick up where he left off, if he has enough morale to cope with it? Give an earful to the high determination defensive stalwart who has been a shining ever-present, but is currently having a rare shocker to minnows because he 'looks complacent'?

I also like the theory of being constructively critical at half time. This is a nice contrast to post match where the emphasis is on being sympathetic in defeat and generous with praise in order to keep morale high.

The pattern for each team talk could roughly be:

Pre-Match: Engender a belief in the squad that they will perform in this game. This means building expectation against lowly opposition where motivation might be lacking, calming nerves in crunch tie, teasing out consistency from previously good performers.

Half-Time: Regardless of the scoreline, inspire good performers to continue in the same vein, provide criticism where it is warranted and encourage average performers to push on and have a better second half.

Post-Match: Give credit where it is due, minimise the impact of poor performances and recoup any lost morale.

[matthew56]

STFC WILL RULE AGAIN can you pls help me to make team talks good

[MaCeR]

Losing by 2 goals - Disappointing

Losing by 3 goals or more - I want to see more from you

I would swap the two

losing by 2 goals - I want see more

losing with more than 2 goals - Angry

Because I feel ´angry´ is more "negative" than ´I want to see more from you´.

[SFraser]

This is very interesting and not something that had previously occured to me. I'm a bit too mechanical with my team talks and follow a pattern that takes into account just morale and rating - which is standard I would guess as that's the data readily available on the screen. However, as with most things in FM, there is the potential to delve deeper and integrate further variables into the equation.

I completely agree with this. I think that teamtalks and morale/motivation are far deeper systems than is presented in this thread, albeit nowhere near the tactical system in complexity.

Motivation alone is equal in power to tactics when it comes to results and performances; or atleast once you have a balanced, gelled and organised tactic is often the difference between winning and losing X match. I have seen for myself that motivation levels alone can be the difference between as much as 5 goals in certain games, although multiple other factors produce that situation where motivation can have such a dramatic effect.

So, as examples, you need to reign in harsh talks for players who struggle to motivate themselves to play for you, lest they grow to resent you? Ask a good performer in a previous game to pick up where he left off, if he has enough morale to cope with it? Give an earful to the high determination defensive stalwart who has been a shining ever-present, but is currently having a rare shocker to minnows because he 'looks complacent'?

Precisely, and then you factor in long term trends, relationships between manager and player, player and team mates, factor in the challenge faced by players and your judgement of the fairness and difficulty of that challenge. There are many variables involved in computing precise responses, and there is atleast a 3 game period of interaction, performances and results taken into account to determine motivation levels and responses. This can be most easilly observed at the start of a season, where the number of nervous and complacent players is often at its highest, as well as observing teamtalk options that only occur when specific situations in the previous match are met.

It is not the deepest system in the game, but it goes far beyond a simple one off means of interaction.

I also like the theory of being constructively critical at half time. This is a nice contrast to post match where the emphasis is on being sympathetic in defeat and generous with praise in order to keep morale high.

Again you have it spot on, although constructive criticism is not always about telling players what they want to hear, but about telling players whatever makes them perform. My captain is my favourite target for what the rest of my squad would consider "unfair abuse" at half time, because A: he responds, B: the rest of the team like and respect him and are highly influenced by his performances and C: he has me listed as favoured personell and I am quick to praise him and inform him and the world he is the best player in my side, while he remains the best player in my side. You could call it a working relationship of exploitative honesty, but perhaps I am looking too deeply for subtlety that does not exist.

The pattern for each team talk could roughly be:

Pre-Match: Engender a belief in the squad that they will perform in this game. This means building expectation against lowly opposition where motivation might be lacking, calming nerves in crunch tie, teasing out consistency from previously good performers.

Half-Time: Regardless of the scoreline, inspire good performers to continue in the same vein, provide criticism where it is warranted and encourage average performers to push on and have a better second half.

Post-Match: Give credit where it is due, minimise the impact of poor performances and recoup any lost morale.

You have it spot on, but always remember that half time is crunch time and no matter the scoreline half time demands improvement. No matter what you say at half time, you can make it up at full time, but you cannot win a game you have lost after 90 minutes.

[DJJOEYT]

i usually just get ass man to do the dirty work

[matthew56]

can somone please tell me whihc is the best team talks taht you have used please?

[TheBetterHalf]

can somone please tell me whihc is the best team talks taht you have used please?

But this is what people are doing in this thread and in the other threadsv that I and others already have provided you links to.

[matthew56]

but i would like some points

for eg pre match and favourite - they can win

and which team talks are th best because veryone has a different perspection

[TheBetterHalf]

but i would like some points

for eg pre match and favourite - they can win

and which team talks are th best because veryone has a different perspection

That's because people play with different teams and different players under different circumstances. Once again, have a look at Sfrasers posts and the discussions he is having

[matthew56]

if i have a determined player and i say dissapointed he will react well in second half?

[TheBetterHalf]

if i have a determined player and i say dissapointed he will react well in second half?

How has he performed, goals, assist, etc. What rating did he have in half time (and what was your prematch team talk)

[vasilli07]

if i have a determined player and i say dissapointed he will react well in second half?

Not everytime....I have Robbie Keane who has 'resolute' but only at times when i use disappointed, then he will perform. So use disappointed sparingly.

[matthew56]

is there any attributes which the player doesnt affect him in team talk?

[ZdlR]

I just played a relatively straightforward game at home. I told the squad I expected a victory - only one exception was a low morale defender who I told I had faith in him. I was up at half time, dominated the game, and they had had no shots at all. Still, only had 6.8 on average bar the two scorers who had broken the 7.0 barrier.

I told the squad I was disappointed, that I had faith in the low morale defender, again, and that I was pleased with the two scorers - they were good goals and difficult chances, probably shouldn't change my opinion but I'm a bit soft!

Anyway, second half starts and opposition come flying out. I reckon they shaded the 2nd half overall and had clearly been given the hairdrier for rolling over in the first half. I didn't score any more but the rest of the squad had broken the 7.0 barrier so we'd been made to work for it. I assume a more positive half time talk would have resulted in one concession at least.

I told them it was a good result in the end, which it was. Everyone after the game who had started it gained 'superb' morale. I think I'll stick with this system for now.

[milamber]

I drew 1-1 with Middlesborough against Real Madrid in the 1st Leg of the CL Knockout Round.

2nd Leg we were 3-0 up at Half-Time. I said "Pleased" because we were kicking ass and everyone was performing well. By 90 minutes it was 3-3 and we getting hammered. Another 5 minutes on the clock and we probably would have lost the tie!

[GersFan]

I personally hate team talks and I hate media conferences. It's just a case of trying to get through the tedious nature of them whilst causing minimum harm.

Ask a football fan about short or long passing, deep or high defensive line, 4-5-1 or 4-4-2.....and we could all use our own football knowledge away from the 'game world' to come up with very similar thoughts.

But when a game attempts to replicate the interactions that a manager has with players......then we're getting into murky waters for me. You really have to be able to mind read what SI are looking for, as opposed to being able to base your choices on football knowledge.

A part of the game which I find tedious and unnecessary. I can appreciate the attempt to make the game that little bit deeper and replicate the relations a manager has with players/media......but it's simply been too much of a grey area up to this point to make it seem like a part of the game that rewards your knowledge of football. It just feels merely like a part of the game that rewards the time you spend browsing forums.

[milamber]

I drew 1-1 with Middlesborough against Real Madrid in the 1st Leg of the CL Knockout Round.

2nd Leg we were 3-0 up at Half-Time. I said "Pleased" because we were kicking ass and everyone was performing well. By 90 minutes it was 3-3 and we getting hammered. Another 5 minutes on the clock and we probably would have lost the tie!

The next round I played Barcelona. We lost the first leg 3-2 and in the second leg at HT we were 2-0 up. So I said nothing this time and we won 3-1 to take the tie. Big difference!

[Kandinsky]

There is no universal team talks. It depends on:

1 - Result.

2 - Performance of the team (check game stats)

3 - Player morale.

4 - Player personality.

5 - Your tactical choice.

6 - Pre-Match conferences.

Examples:

- You must pay atention to what kind of message does your squad reacts better. Confident or cautious?

- The team is wining 2-0, but it's underperforming, I can't say I'm pleased with their performance.

- But if the team is winning and performing, I'll say I'm pleased and apply a more countering style.

- If a player is underperforming, you must check his character. Should he be "punished" or encouraged? Which way will he react better?

- Your tactic might be a bad choice for that kind of oponent/pitch/weather conditions. In that case they are following your instructions, but those are not adequate. You can't really be to rash with them.

[SGartz]

Team talks work like paper scissors stones with the AI's team talk, everyone knows that.

Think about it...