Slow/Short vs. Fast/Direct

Slow Tempo with Short Passing

and

Fast Tempo with Direct Passing

Which one works better against weak game and does it mean the other works better against strong team?

What kind of team should I use either style for?

I'm playing as Arsenal in 4-5-1 formation, with Cesc the playmaker.

It really depends on how the opposition are playing. Personally I find that when playing an attacking team, it's best to use a quick tempo to try and exploit the spaces they are likely to leave, whilst against a defensive/counter attacking team, it's best to play at a slow tempo so as not leave yourself exposed.

As for passing, I'm not a fan of direct passing other then perhaps for my centre backs, or if my only hope is to boot the ball up to a target man. Short or mixed is the best IMO. Also, you should have a look in the Tactics and TRaining forum as you'll probably get a much more in depth answer in there.

Slow will produce better scoring chances. I also go more for direct passing letting my left and right midfielders push up and cross into the box.

Fast Tempo & Short passing.

works everywhere for my arsenal team apart from wembley, where direct & slow works. depends how much width/how many passers or dribblers you have.

I agree with Klimowicz, a Fast tempo and short passing seems to work very well (particularly with arsenal).

Although I have found short passing and slow tempo gives works well too (providing much more possesion).

I also agree with Bongo-Bongo in that direct passing is not very good as it relies on a good target man and doesnt utilise the midfield particularly well IMO.

I suppose it really depends on what type of players you have available and what type of style of play you wish to develop