Playing Players Out Of Position

I just put "Marius Niculae" who is only a striker in RM as i didnt have any players to play there (as they were all injured like usual) as he is marked red in that area, anyway i played the game, we won 4-0, he got all four goals and a rating of 9.2!

I have carried on playing him there and hes playing fantastic!

Does anyone else play anyone out of position?

What were the results?

Do you only do it as a last resource?

I sometimes do if the player has the appropriate attributes. For example, if I'm short on wingers, I put an attacking full back there instead. They seem to perform OK. If I'm doing it long term, then obviously I'll retrain, but for short term covering, players can do a decent enough job in positions they supposedly have no aptitude for.

Steven Davis at right mid - outstanding.

He always scores by dribbling to the corner flag, then down the base line towards the goal before rifling in to the top corner

As England manager (on FM08) at the world cup, both my RBs were injured two games in. Played Gerrard there and he did a sterling job. Better than the CB I tried, who was rated 4 at half-time, hence the change. Lost in the semis when my right back came back in :-(

The tactics screen tells you if the player is accomplished, okay or terrible out of position. If he's accomplished or one lower I'll use him if needs be; once he 'turns orange' he's unlikely to play well.

The tactics screen tells you if the player is accomplished, okay or terrible out of position. If he's accomplished or one lower I'll use him if needs be; once he 'turns orange' he's unlikely to play well.

I diasgree with this. I've played players in positions they've no skill at all at, and they've done OK, providing they're got the right stats. Generally, it seems to be best if they're adept in a similar position - for example, a fullback playing as a winger, or a left winger playing on the right, or a DC playing as DM.

I'm not saying they're going to be as good as a natural, but if needs must, then you can get by with "red" players.

I usually play pacey wingers as strikers if im short up front and the only striker i have available is slow, tends to work for me when its needed.

Also it's a common secret that you can use a DC as a target man, if you desperately need someone up front to win a header or two.

this is something that ive been wanting to ask for awhile;

If a player has say, 20 MC and 15 AMC for his position ratings, just how much difference will it make in terms of attributes and how he plays?

If he has all the right attributes for an AMC, will he play just as well playing there?

Is the game soley based on attributes to determine whether a player plays well in a given position or it there a dramatic difference in his performance if he has a lower position rating??

this is something that ive been wanting to ask for awhile;

If a player has say, 20 MC and 15 AMC for his position ratings, just how much difference will it make in terms of attributes and how he plays?

If he has all the right attributes for an AMC, will he play just as well playing there?

In theory he should be 75% effective at AMC compared to MC. It wiuld be interesting to see if anyone has done a controlled test - e.g. playing a year and looking at a player's average stats, then using the editor to change the positional rating and playing him a year and compare the stats.

Also it's a common secret that you can use a DC as a target man, if you desperately need someone up front to win a header or two.

I had a DMC, MC who was rather good as a fill-in target man. Only used him there a few times, due to injuries. But he always performed very well and even scored a few. I remember once he came on as a sub and I played him up front for the last 20-25 mins and he scored twice to win the game. (Score was 1-1 when he came on, finished 3-1)