F R/L/C - Should they come back?

I'm a bit of a perfectionist, so i tend to take extra time on details and this is one of them, so bare with me. And if it's been brought up I apologize.

This comes from one little detail that just gets to me - the striker who can play on the wings (AM L,F C i.e. that, in the old days, would be described as a F L/C). Now, my point is not just a visual one, although I hate seeing a AM L/R, F C instead of F R/L/C; my point is that a F R/L/C can only play up front (let it be a 4-3-3 or a 4-2-4) and can't be transformed into a midfielder at any time - and usually when you get a AM L/R, F C, he can play in 5 positions istead of 3.

FC Porto plays in a 4-3-3 (4 defenders, 1 DM, 2 CM, 1 LAM, 1 RAM and 1 ST) but the AMs are Forwards adapted to these positions, so they would be F R/C and F L/C and could only operate in the wings or center, but instead, and in order for them to play in their position, they are going to be AM L, F C and that will give them the abbility to play in midfield, wich they don't in real life. Neither they know how.

I know its just details, but that's what this game is about...

Cheers.

Being an AML/FC does not give them the ability to play in midfield automatically but some players obviously can.

An AML/FC can play AML or ST not ML, MC or AMC so I don't really see the issue.

I totally see your point.

A single line on the pitch (for example you call Makalele a DM because he only plays on that line just infront of the defence) should be allocated for this position. F R/L/C seems as good as any, as long as this isn't confused with the older understanding of Bergkamp being your FC and Shearer being your SC.

Labelling these players as AMs allows them too much flexibility when most of the time they don't actually possess the positional sense (Babel & Kuyt spring to mind).

I've just checked on the tactics screen and it seems positions I would call FL or FR get called ST in FM10 although the roles on offer are the same as an AML/AMR.

So I would agree these positions should be called FL/FR but otherwise it looks fine to me.

I think there should be a definition between AML/AMR & Winger's TBH, because granted for instance Gerrard Can play out wide in an AML/R Position but i would surely not call him a Winger, infact comparably to a player such as Lennon/Nani/Giggs Etc who are true wingers they play a far different game than people such as Gerrard etc who occassionaly occupy the wider positions

Exactly, thanks for the help!...

Babbel, Lennon, Giggs, Kuyt, Forward players. Gerrard, Lampard, modric, bentley, Attacking Midfielders.

By the way, I remembered this thanks to Gordon Durie (F LC for those who can`t remember...) on ESPN classic. Ronny Rosenthal, Uwe Rosler... ah, the classics....

I think there should be a definition between AML/AMR & Winger's TBH, because granted for instance Gerrard Can play out wide in an AML/R Position but i would surely not call him a Winger, infact comparably to a player such as Lennon/Nani/Giggs Etc who are true wingers they play a far different game than people such as Gerrard etc who occassionaly occupy the wider positions

If you did that, you'd need to seperate out players like Pirlo from players like Essien, fast strikers from strong strikers, intelligent defenders from lumps...

Gerrard may not be a winger, but he can play on the wing as an advanced playmaker or inside forward (in FM terms). Lennon plays as a pure winger.

I can't think of a single real life player who I would describe as a FL/R. I'd call them all strikers who can play as AML or AMR.

Sorry SCIAG, but I don't agree with you.

Kuyt and Babbel, for example, are Forwards that were moved to the wings. In my point of view, they are F R/L/C, as they can play on both wings and up-front. If the positioning stays the same, they can play in 5 different positions (left or right midfielders too).

My point is, a lot of managers tend to move forwards to the wings, due to particularities - may it be speed, height, weight, strength, whatever the reasons. The very big majority of these players can only play in 2 different positions: up-front (Forward) or the Wings, so, they are only good for a few kind of tactics - defensive 4-3-3 (with 2 wingers and a striker), 4-2-4 (forward L/R and strikers), 4-2-3-1 with wingers, the sort of tactics that only uses wingers. It's a bit annoying seeing them in a flat 4-4-2 as a left or right midfielder, mainly because they aren't.

As for Pirlo, Essien or Makelele for that matter, they play in the same position. And fat strikers or skinny strikers are stikers nontheless, as are smart or dumb defenders. They have their positioning. These guys don't.

If you did that, you'd need to seperate out players like Pirlo from players like Essien, fast strikers from strong strikers, intelligent defenders from lumps...

Gerrard may not be a winger, but he can play on the wing as an advanced playmaker or inside forward (in FM terms). Lennon plays as a pure winger.

I can't think of a single real life player who I would describe as a FL/R. I'd call them all strikers who can play as AML or AMR.

sorry mate but thats not right. those players play the same POSITION but different ROLES, whereas Left Forward is not just a seperate role but a whole different position to Left Atticking Midfeild (which to my mind is again different from Left Winger, but whatever). See a Left Forward is someone like Thierry Henry or Nicolas Anelka who are strikers by trade but patrol the channels to pick up the ball before cutting inside to shoot or they attack the far post when the ball is over the opposite wing and they have the capacity to play through the middle and link play with out and out strikers. Left Attacking midfeilders are players like Ronaldinho or Kaka' who are mainly central attacking midfeilders but drift left to get hold of the ball for long strikes at goal or to overload that side of the defence and make space at the far post. (to further differentiate, Left Wingers are players like Giggs who attack players with the ball go to the byline and get the ball into the target man/target men)

true, many players can play all three of these positions but they are still seperate, the first position (LF) is focused on the box and the very small area of left wing near the eighteen yard line. the second position (AML) is focused on the area outside the left half of the box and the third (LW) covers the area down the side of the box, see?

For my part i'd like to see more positions and more roles to give formations and tactics more flexibility and fluidity.

also it could be important to give players in other areas positions which point out which side of centre they play. Look at John Terry's performance against Germany when he played on the right side of the centre-back partnership to see how important stuff like that is.

Sorry SCIAG, but I don't agree with you.

Kuyt and Babbel, for example, are Forwards that were moved to the wings. In my point of view, they are F R/L/C, as they can play on both wings and up-front. If the positioning stays the same, they can play in 5 different positions (left or right midfielders too).

My point is, a lot of managers tend to move forwards to the wings, due to particularities - may it be speed, height, weight, strength, whatever the reasons. The very big majority of these players can only play in 2 different positions: up-front (Forward) or the Wings, so, they are only good for a few kind of tactics - defensive 4-3-3 (with 2 wingers and a striker), 4-2-4 (forward L/R and strikers), 4-2-3-1 with wingers, the sort of tactics that only uses wingers. It's a bit annoying seeing them in a flat 4-4-2 as a left or right midfielder, mainly because they aren't.

As for Pirlo, Essien or Makelele for that matter, they play in the same position. And fat strikers or skinny strikers are stikers nontheless, as are smart or dumb defenders. They have their positioning. These guys don't.

There again, you've basically described the difference between AML and ML. In turn, what is the difference between AML and FL?

I do agree that someone with AML/AMR and ST as their positions should not be automatically given ML/R as an accomplished position, like pure AMLs and AMRs are. "Unconvincing" would probably be a better description for someone like Babel as a ML.

sorry mate but thats not right. those players play the same POSITION but different ROLES, whereas Left Forward is not just a seperate role but a whole different position to Left Atticking Midfeild (which to my mind is again different from Left Winger, but whatever). See a Left Forward is someone like Thierry Henry or Nicolas Anelka who are strikers by trade but patrol the channels to pick up the ball before cutting inside to shoot or they attack the far post when the ball is over the opposite wing and they have the capacity to play through the middle and link play with out and out strikers. Left Attacking midfeilders are players like Ronaldinho or Kaka' who are mainly central attacking midfeilders but drift left to get hold of the ball for long strikes at goal or to overload that side of the defence and make space at the far post. (to further differentiate, Left Wingers are players like Giggs who attack players with the ball go to the byline and get the ball into the target man/target men)

true, many players can play all three of these positions but they are still seperate, the first position (LF) is focused on the box and the very small area of left wing near the eighteen yard line. the second position (AML) is focused on the area outside the left half of the box and the third (LW) covers the area down the side of the box, see?

For my part i'd like to see more positions and more roles to give formations and tactics more flexibility and fluidity.

also it could be important to give players in other areas positions which point out which side of centre they play. Look at John Terry's performance against Germany when he played on the right side of the centre-back partnership to see how important stuff like that is.

Anelka has AMR and FC in his positions- does that not indicate that he could play as a FR in game?

The FR position still exists, and if you position a player there, he is given a wide player's instructions but he is treated as a striker.

Your description of Left Attacking Midfielder is the game's "AMC with "move into channels" as wide play instruction". Your description of Left forward is much the same, but with a striker in there. Those are all roles, not positions. A deep lying forward drops deeper than an advanced forward, but he's still a striker.

The majority of centre backs are capable on both sides and are only positioned on one side for tactical reasons. John Terry played on Carvalho's right a few times for Chelsea and played as well as ever, and he played with Upson multiple times in qualifying, but of course no one remembers that, they just remember the time he messed up. He didn't mess up because he was on the right, he messed up because he didn't have Carvalho or Ferdinand to guide him and his confidence was shattered after failing to stage a coup.

I thnik that its easy to see the difference between an Attacking Midfielder and a Left Forward, but it's better to compare players then.

I went to the editor and searched for AM R (20 out of 20) with CA at least 150 and had 19 players as a result.

Benayoun, Bystrov, Camoranesi, Cazorla, J Cole, C Ronaldo, Farfan, Feindouno, Galletti, Govou, Joaquin, Lennon, Marchionni, Maxi Rodriguez, Messi, J Navas, Quaresma, S Sabrosa, A Valencia were the results. ALL of them can play in midfield. Farfan, Feindouno and Maxi Rodriguez were the only ones addaptable to be Forwards too.

In real life, Ronaldo, Feindouno, Galletti, Govou, Joaquin, Lennon, Messi, Navas, Quaresma and Sabrosa are wingers, not Attacking Midfielders. They play in specific tactics and function in specific positions - They do not work in a 4-4-2 flat, they work in a 4-4-2 with wingers.

Now, you could say that attacking midfielders work there too. Sure. But in real life, if Liverpool is playing with Babbel, Kuyt, Ngog and Torres, they are playing with 4 forwards, 4 players who work the game (and the tactics) in different ways. If I were to play against Liverpool with that tactic and those players I would immediatly know that they don't do well with having to defend, they don't do well with other teams passing the ball around and making them chase it, because they're not the type of players to do that. They need posession, to be the majority of the game attacking with the ball.

As it is now, Messi can play in any place of the midfield, may it be Left midfield or center midfield, when in fact he can't.

So, what's the difference bettween an Attacking Midfielder and a Winger?

Let's presume that you play in a 4-2-3-1 (with wingers) and you wanted a player that attacked the line and crossed the ball on on the left side, but could also defend (so you buy Bale) and you wanted Messi on the right carrying the ball, shooting it, attacking the defenders and opening spaces for other players (let's say daniel alves) to move up and cross if possible. Now imagine that it works in a very specific game and you want to defend the result, by moving to a 4-5-1 (with a flat midfield) in order to defend and keep that win. In-game, you only needed to revert to the tactic with the players at hand, sice the Attacking Midfielder (Bale in this case) can operate in Midfield and Messi (AM R/L/C) can also. But if you had Messi only as a Forward in-game, you had to make a sub... thus leaving you with the question. Should I sub the best player in the world and change the tactic, or leave him on, as a Winger and arrange the tactic as I possible, or do nothing at all?...

It's not only the things that a player does in field, it's also where you can put him that counts.

may be in a player's profile it could say what type of striker or player he is, ie: tall targert striker, Wing forward or somthing.

Since the dots represent positional knowledge and pretty much nobody uses proper, old-fashioned inside-forwards any more, it makes sense to not use them.

I don't see what's wrong with "AM L, F C" personally - to me, it represents a player who can play at either left-wing or forward. Converted or not it doesn't matter - in some ways, the attributes will tell the story (weak crossing, unusually good shooting, etc.).

I think the introduction of "Primary, Secondary and Tertiary" positions has helped this though. Natural positions can be FC, but with an ability to play on the wings (i.e. Kuyt,). Natural Wingers who can play up front are RARE.....I can think of maybe Walcott, and perhaps Babbel, but both of these could be contested as FC's who can play on the wing. For me, it's fine how it is as long as the Natural position is correct and the correct amount of "can play in" positions is implemented.

The "left winger" position is AML. The "left midfielder" position is ML. There is no need to add FL as a specific position on top of that, though you can put players there. Every distinction so far has been related to the difference between AML and ML, not FL and AML.

@ doc_

I really don't see your point, do you even play the game?

You want a left winger, put him at AML with a winger role.

You want an inside forward (FL), put him at AML with an inside forward role.

You want a playmaker, put him at AML with an advanced playmaker role.

All three occupy the same area on the field but play totally differently thats why we have roles.

You have to read what Doc says; He believes the current system with aml/amr/amc opens up to the posibility of giving certain players positional responsabilities they would in real life not fulfill. Its not about twisting the position tactic to get the aml/amr/amc the position YOU want them to have, its the fact you can play a player who does NOT fit into a defensive am role (eg. mr) far too easy. As it is now, Wayne Rooney can easily be given a lm role, Anelka, on the right midfield (with defensive tasks he would handle very well). The OLD type, fl, fr, fc, would not open up for the more backdrawn use of these players mentioned, as possible today. A FL/FC (Rooney), would have a red dot when playing ML, it would just not be his position, and he would have a hard time retraining there (same with eg. CR), but since they removed the fl/fr/fc positions, these prior very specifically positioned players, are now much more versatile than what they are IRL. If YOU had played the old FM versions, YOU would have known.

Edit Rooney may have been a bad example, as I imagine he certainly COULD play about everywhere on the field. On the other hand, a Kuyt, or a Joe Cole, could NOT.

Kuyt's a pretty good example of someone who could, to be honest.

But AML is exactly the same as that, and even ML doesn't necessarily indicate defensive prowess. What anyone advocating specialist FL/FRs is failing to understand is that AML/R is the position they are describing anyway.

Considering that people usually tend to agree with those who share their point of views (and considering that both parties of this discussion won't change their minds in a future time lol), I'll give you a different question then - since there is no visual difference in-game bettween a lateral AM and a Winger (that is, they have 20 in the Wingers department but go by the name of AM, since they immediately get an accomplished level at being a lateral midfilelder), shouldn't there be a different type of name for a Forward that Plays on the wings, since these are different positions?

Shouldn't a player that's a natural Forward and an accomplished Winger be a F L/C or F R/C or F/R/L/C? After all, he can only play in 2 or 3 positions upfield, not as a lateral midfield.

Considering that people usually tend to agree with those who share their point of views (and considering that both parties of this discussion won't change their minds in a future time lol), I'll give you a different question then - since there is no visual difference in-game bettween a lateral AM and a Winger (that is, they have 20 in the Wingers department but go by the name of AM, since they immediately get an accomplished level at being a lateral midfilelder), shouldn't there be a different type of name for a Forward that Plays on the wings, since these are different positions?

Shouldn't a player that's a natural Forward and an accomplished Winger be a F L/C or F R/C or F/R/L/C? After all, he can only play in 2 or 3 positions upfield, not as a lateral midfield.

Taking the first section of the above, I have to say I've often wondered why an AML, who, within their Personal details is described as a Winger, wouldn't be called as such in his position. AML Wingers for me should be called WL, and Attacking Midfielders who drift to the left or start from the left (A-la Gerrard for England, Lampard some seasons ago, Deco 2 seasons ago etc..) should be AML.

We do it with Defensive players in FM.. Full back = DL/DR, Wing Back = WBR/WBL

Hi Neil, thanks for the answer, it's great to know that it's been taken into consideration.

The problem with the game is that if you get Kuyt being an AM R/ST, he can play in 3 positions; if he were a F R/C, he could only play in 2 positions. Grant you that Kuyt can play in every position he wants (never gives up player), but if you want him to play in those positions, you should edit him that way. If you edit someome as a Natural Winger and Striker (and just that) he'll appear (ingame) as an accomplished midfielder besides the other natural positions.

Nontheless it's great to hear that its been considered so thanks again.

Hi Neil, thanks for the answer, it's great to know that it's been taken into consideration.

The problem with the game is that if you get Kuyt being an AM R/ST, he can play in 3 positions; if he were a F R/C, he could only play in 2 positions. Grant you that Kuyt can play in every position he wants (never gives up player), but if you want him to play in those positions, you should edit him that way. If you edit someome as a Natural Winger and Striker (and just that) he'll appear (ingame) as an accomplished midfielder besides the other natural positions.

Nontheless it's great to hear that its been considered so thanks again.

This is where you've lost me.

If Kuyt is a AMR/ST he can play AMR & ST - Whats the 3rd position you are referring to?

Right midfield. If you tell the computer that he can play on the wings, it will ALWAYS make him an accomplished midfielder.

Let's say you edit a player who plays as a Forward to play on the right wing (Right Attacking Midfielder), so you give him 20 on both and 1 on the rest, so that the adaptability he might have doesn't give him another position you don't want. When you start a new game, he'll be what you want (natural Forward and Winger) AND an accomplished normal right midfielder, even thought you edited him not to be.

Right midfield. If you tell the computer that he can play on the wings, it will ALWAYS make him an accomplished midfielder.

Let's say you edit a player who plays as a Forward to play on the right wing (Right Attacking Midfielder), so you give him 20 on both and 1 on the rest, so that the adaptability he might have doesn't give him another position you don't want. When you start a new game, he'll be what you want (natural Forward and Winger) AND an accomplished normal right midfielder, even thought you edited him not to be.

Well I agree thats wrong but for newgens/real players I've seen plenty of examples of players able to play AML/AMR without having any positional ability at ML/MR.

so were saying that currently anyone trained in a AMR/AML position automatically is defensively disciplined tactically? when really an advanced winger or FR/FL players is vulnerable or "loose" defensively? or even just doesnt track back much?

I think the "automatically becomes a ML" thing should be changed, so that that only happens if the player doesn't have ST as one of his positions, or it happens to a lower level (maybe 10/20 rather than the 15-19/20 it currently is).

That's basically it, Golaxi. If a player doesn't have good defending stats but is an accomplished side midfileder, he might still play in that position. As it is now, a Foward with 20 in ST and 19 in winger - 0 on all the rest - will also be an accomplished side midfielder (between 15 and 19) in accordance with the wing he's good at, so he can play in a flat 4-4-2. Even if the stats aren't the right ones for that position (to put him in a flat 4-4-2 is a managers choice afterwards).

Tottally agree with you SCIAG. While there are no significant changes with the tactics (that is, the positioning remains static while arranging it) I think that that would be the best way to do it.

If the player is just a Winger, he would automatically become an accomplished side midfielder (i.e. AM R, AM L, AM R/L); if he's a foward and a winger, he wouldn't (i.e. F R/C, F L/C, F R/L/C).