I really dont understand the passing style setting in FM.

What is the differences between Short and Direct?

If I wanted to play like Arsenal, i mean the style, which passing style should I choose for the midfielders?

Please help.

Short passing is short whilst direct passing is long. Midfielders normally have short - normal passing

Massive generalisation below:

Short:

Better for possessional play

Generally played on the floor

Generally played to feet

Takes more passes to reach the goal

Direct:

Better for attacking play

Generally played in the air

Takes a short amount of passes to reach goal.

Its worth noting weather conditions if you play anything outside of mixed passing.

If you do not understand, I would highly suggest you start all games with mixed (in the middle) and then respond to the assistant mangers advice (dont take him to literally, if he says play shorter, thenlower it by 1 click at a time, do nto go to the extreams).

Its actualy best to not really think of them as short or long passes. Its more of a case of build up play or direct play or in other terms 'lets hold on to it' and 'lets get it up there asap'.

Short passing is short whilst direct passing is long. Midfielders normally have short - normal passing

Direct passing is not necessary long. Direct = directly from defense to midfield to forwards. T

Excuse me, which one is the correct description?

I really want to figure it out.

Direct passing is not necessary long. Direct = directly from defense to midfield to forwards. T

I think this most accuratly describes direct passing as for example if you put it to long passing rather than direct it will skip a field like DC directly to SC but with direct he will play a pass to an MC more than likely

I think this most accuratly describes direct passing as for example if you put it to long passing rather than direct it will skip a field like DC directly to SC but with direct he will play a pass to an MC more than likely

The most important part is what it actually means in FM.

Short = pass to closest player in most cases, often across the field or even back. Does not require great passing attributes, but does require very compact team, preferably well gelled, with good teamwork stats. May cause a problem when playing against superior team that closes down a lot as some players will lose ball way too often.

Direct = deliver ball to attack quickly. The key word here is deliver rather than just puff it up and hope that your player may pick it up. Usually with this system you will see more vertical passes (e.g. DC->MC->ST rather than DC->FB->MCd->ML->MCa->ST). The system requires defense players with better passing and decision stats. Suits better for counter attacking system. A problem I often find is if a player does not see a good passing option upfront, he will often dwell on the ball rather than make a simple pass across the pitch (e.g. FB -> DC). Hence lots of forward runs won't do any good. Ideally, I would want my defensive players to deliver ball to wingers, who would run with the ball and either cut in or drop ball back from byline to MCwho would arrive late to the area. Maybe at some point I will try to implement it.

Long = defs would hit the ball up, mostly aiming to put it over opposition heads, hoping that either your pacey player will beat opposition players for the ball and get one-on-one, or your TM would pick the ball up and hold it till other players support him. Obviously, most of such long balls will be retreived by opposition defs, so it's really something you may want to use ocasionally, but not as a system.

Keep in mind - neither of the settings implies specific type passing only. I use short passing, yet quite often I see nice 20-25 yard passes upfront. Also, even if you put ST on long ball passing, it does not mean he will try to find someone to pass behind the goal

The most important part is what it actually means in FM.

Short = pass to closest player in most cases, often across the field or even back. Does not require great passing attributes, but does require very compact team, preferably well gelled, with good teamwork stats. May cause a problem when playing against superior team that closes down a lot as some players will lose ball way too often.

Direct = deliver ball to attack quickly. The key word here is deliver rather than just puff it up and hope that your player may pick it up. Usually with this system you will see more vertical passes (e.g. DC->MC->ST rather than DC->FB->MCd->ML->MCa->ST). The system requires defense players with better passing and decision stats. Suits better for counter attacking system. A problem I often find is if a player does not see a good passing option upfront, he will often dwell on the ball rather than make a simple pass across the pitch (e.g. FB -> DC). Hence lots of forward runs won't do any good. Ideally, I would want my defensive players to deliver ball to wingers, who would run with the ball and either cut in or drop ball back from byline to MCwho would arrive late to the area. Maybe at some point I will try to implement it.

Long = defs would hit the ball up, mostly aiming to put it over opposition heads, hoping that either your pacey player will beat opposition players for the ball and get one-on-one, or your TM would pick the ball up and hold it till other players support him. Obviously, most of such long balls will be retreived by opposition defs, so it's really something you may want to use ocasionally, but not as a system.

Keep in mind - neither of the settings implies specific type passing only. I use short passing, yet quite often I see nice 20-25 yard passes upfront. Also, even if you put ST on long ball passing, it does not mean he will try to find someone to pass behind the goal

How about Mix?

How about Mix?

Think of it this way. The slider goes from 1(short) to 20(long). So every notch makes a player with the ball to seek someone more upfield rather than nearby. Hence we start roughly from "pass to closest teammate no matter what" and graually come to "pass to the most advanced teammate". Now your tempo, creative freedom, width, defensive line, mentality etc. will dictate whether you will be able to get to the goal at all or you def will pass to each other or they will pass to opposition GK only.

Think of it this way. The slider goes from 1(short) to 20(long). So every notch makes a player with the ball to seek someone more upfield rather than nearby. Hence we start roughly from "pass to closest teammate no matter what" and graually come to "pass to the most advanced teammate". Now your tempo, creative freedom, width, defensive line, mentality etc. will dictate whether you will be able to get to the goal at all or you def will pass to each other or they will pass to opposition GK only.

Could you please explain how Tempo, Width and D-line dictate whether you will be able to get to the goal etc..?

Tempo: Two schools of thought here (well for me there is). One is the pace at which you play the game, the other is the pace at which the ball is passed around during a play (I dont mean whilst its in play, but an actual play - such as American Football).

Width: How much of the pitch width and where your players line up (width) on the pitch. A wide pitch will see your players closer to the sidelines and therefore creating more space/gaps in midfield.

Defence Line: Two schools of thought here too. One is where your back four (or whatever) positions themselves and then the mentalities of the remainder of the team work from the defence. The other is simply where your back four line up with no impact on the remainder of the team (I beleive its the first school of thought).

I think what Kolobok was saying was that simply choosing the most direct passing style will not get you to the goal, there are many other factors involved.

Creative freedom, for example, will allow your players a little give in your instructions, therefore its favourable if you are being very specific about what you want them to do. Its this setting that allows them to ingnore your instructions and do what they think best.

Playing a high tempo short passing game requires lots of skills, namely passing, first touch, decisions, off the ball and so on and so on. Whereas a slower tempo makes things easier, the players have time, but equally so, can be closed down easier too!

I now think of the Defence line as simply where my players will start to line up on the pitch from the back to the front. If I want to continually pressure the opposition and they do not have many pace men, then I will choose a high Defence Line. If I want to play a more cautious or counter attacking game, then I may choose a normal or low defence line. I normaly set up with a DL around 14 and adjust it purely on the abilities, namely pace and anticipation, of the opposition.

The above settings indirectly affect your ability to get to the Defence Line as you are easily capable of getting there with the long ball regardless of the above settings. The settings dictate the style in which you get there. Do you want to pressure the opposition with most of your team, passing around their box until a suitable opening happens, or do you want to punt the ball upfield to your strikers that have ungodly pace, thereby ripping open the defence but being completly isolated. Do you want to catch teams on the counter or have slow build up play.

Your choices are governed by your naturaly tendencies but also the quality of the teams. Just try playing a slow creative passing game against Man U when you are Hull and see what happens.

LAM

How about Mix?

I view mixed passing as a ratio. I think there's 6 mixed settings, 3 which favour shorter passing at varying degrees and 3 which favour direct passing at varying degrees. Note that, because there's no middle setting with mixed passing, you are forced to instruct the player to favour one type of passing slightly more than another.

However, mixed passing is a very different animal to short and direct (and long). With mixed passing, you may be setting a preference ratio for your player, but it will be him that is going to select which pass to execute. I view mixed passing as the ideal setting because it is unpredictable as well as encompassing all the options, which is pretty much the whole point of football. While it is possible to play in a rigid, well-defined way - think Arsenal's quick, short passing or Wimbledon's long ball - I prefer to leave most of the options to my players. Here's some passing assumptions that I operate with:

-Short passing doesn't require particularly great passing accuracy (passing stat, technique). This is 'short, simple' passing: to feet, safe but not incisive or game-changing.

-Short passing can be devastating. A team that patiently builds up play by tick-tocking the ball and moving up the pitch will be hard to close down and hard to mark: their pass-and-move will be very difficult to defend against. This requires composure, technique, off the ball, first touch, passing accuracy and stamina.

-Direct passing is forward passing. Note that this doesn't imply a change in passing length. A direct pass can be short, it is just more likely to be forward. A direct pass is more likely to be incisive or defence-splitting, especially if it is also a through ball which cuts out an opposition defender. Direct passing needs added passing accuracy, and technique can improve the pass' deadliness. Before the player passes, he needs to spot the pass and this requires creativity and decisions.

-Mentality affects all passing, but especially mixed. A player who is defensively minded (anything below the midpoint on the mentality slider) will be looking to minimise the risk of his decisions. If he is also set to short passing, he will be aiming for nothing more ambitious than to maintain possession. In the match engine, short passing on most defenders will result in a lot of sideways passes and backpasses to the keeper. Extending this, if your keeper is also set to hump balls up to your big striker to try to win, you'll likely see a lot of poor possession / passing stats. The scenario I remember all too well was that the defenders would pass it between themselves, look a bit indecisive and pass it back to the keeper who would hump it long. This was symptomatic of a number of problems: defenders with a pretty defensive mentality (8 down) and short passing, plus a keeper with long passing or distribution of long kick - possibly even just a keeper with defensive mentality who panicked and smashed it clear to be 'safe'.

Moving on to direct passing. A player with direct passing but a defensive mentality will still look to pass forward, providing they have options. Direct passing is prescriptive, just like short passing - you are being quite specific with how direct or short you want their passes to be. If you set someone to direct passing but their directness doesn't provide them with forward options, they will likely revert to a decision, which is probably not what you want as this could involve a hopeful punt or a sideways/backwards pass.

Finally, mixed passing and mentality. Mixed passing is extremely dependent on mentality, which stands to reason. You are merely requesting a ratio of short/direct passing or, perhaps, a tendency to prefer one type of pass to another. This is exemplified by taking the extremes of the option: the first and last notch of mixed passing. The first notch is an instruction to err on the side of short passing, but allows scope to pass directly should they feel it is necessary, which one they choose in a given situation is dependent on their decisions, creativity, passing ability, technique, motivation and myriad other variables. Last notch requests that they prefer to pass forward, but does not limit them to doing so - they are allowed to recycle possession if they feel it is pertinent to a situation.

I prefer mixed passing throughout my squad, with my defenders on low mixed (but with no less than 9 mentality) and my more creative players on highest mixed with a supporting mentality (last notch of normal, which is 14, I think) and some creative freedom. Passing, like almost all instructions, are open to interpretation, but these assumptions have worked for me.

Just as a corollary to all of this speculation, I'd like to comment on TT&F. Now, don't get me wrong, TT&F has helped me get to where I am today, but, for me, it short-circuited my route to understanding the game. I still don't fully comprehend every option available in the game, and I can't even claim to have had any degree of success beyond the expected. However, my teams do, generally, play good football. At the moment I'm mid-table with Newcastle and, while we're not exactly setting the league alight, when we win, we do it in style.

With that caveat out of the way, my appraisal of TT&F. The theory behind it is brilliant but I feel that the implementation, especially in the sets that were given out, is a little bit FM 2008. I used to play Tactic Set Russian Roulette which manifests itself as concentrating on choosing which style of play to choose for the next game: defensive, counter, balanced, control, attack, and hoping for the best. As I found out, playing a defensive tactic away to Arsenal will not elicit the same result as playing a cautious, possession-oriented but incisive tactic. The former, from TT&F's set, generally saw me keep them out until around the 70th minute before inevitably slumping to a defeat. With the latter I won comfortably 3v0 and went on to beat Chelsea and Liverpool at home 3v1 and 3v0, respectively, with the same tactic. There's no replacement for a good understanding and rational reasoning of what options you are using for a game. Conversely, my own tactic creation has seen me squander a 1v0 lead away to Hull to lose 3v1, a 2v0 lead away to Fulham to lose 3v2, and innumerable other red-faced results. I suspect using the TT&F attacking tactic would have given me better results in those situations, but I'm a stubborn sort.

Could you please explain how Tempo, Width and D-line dictate whether you will be able to get to the goal etc..?

lam and ZdlR provided some theory. I will add a couple examples. But first of all, I want to emphasize how I understand terms.

Passing. Short passing does not imply pass no more than 3 (4,5) yards. It means pass to closest player is preferable. Direct does not mean pass more than 10-15 yards, but simply means pass forward is preferable over cross field ball movement. Long passing simply means that a deep player (usually def) should seek someone upfield.

Tempo. I treat it as time allowed to a player to make a decision when with the ball. Quickest tempo implies that player should make a decisioin immediately once he got a pass. Whether he decides to dribble, pass, take a shot etc. depends on his position on the pitch at any given moment, his instructions (creative freedom, RWB, cross ball, long shots), his decision and creativity stats, mentality and options he has. Quick example. Under quick tempo a lonely ST with attacking mentality who got the long ball on the edge of the area is very likely to take a shot immediatelly even if his long shot set to rarely: he does not have support atm, most likely he got the ball with his back towards the goal, so it takes time to turn around and start dribble, he is not allowed to spend much time and he is focused on attack (mentality). As a result, he considers a long shot as the best option.

Defensive line. A bit tricky to explain. To me it's how deep on the pitch your team aims to retreive the ball. That is high defensive line implies that you want to get the ball back as soon as possible, preferably before the opponent come across the center. Deep defensive line implies you want opponent to come deep to your half, leaving space behind. That's why defensive line is closely related to closing down setting - the higher DL the more closing down for upfront players as a general rule. The idea is to force opposition to give up ball. With no closing down upfront AI's players would have time to deliver a good long ball over head of your defs and exploit space behind them.

Width. Pretty much self explanatory - a horizontal distance between wide players.

Let's start with "wrong" set up. Say you play very deep defensive line. It generally implies that you aim to retrieve the ball from opposition closer to your area if not within the area. You succeed and now need to start your own attack. If you play narrow short passing slow tempo with low creative freedom and all players are on RWB rarely (crazy, I know, but it's just illustration), your chances to exploit the space you have created by using deep def line are low. Because your players will just follow your instruction and pass the ball to the closest player. Plus, since the whole point of using deep defensive line is to pull forward as many opposition players as possible, those AI players will put pressure on you and have a good chance to get the ball back. Adding RWB to some players give them one option to utilize the space. Adding width and RWB for wingers may help you build up quick attack by exploiting additional space. Increasing tempo would require your players make decisions faster, which may help as they won't dwell on the ball but may cause some problem as they could pass the ball less accurately. Making passing more direct will increase your chances since even not perfect pass can be picked up by your player since there are only a few opponents to cover for AI. Mentality also play an important role here as players with more attacking mentality will try to make more risky passes, and, given the space, it can be rewarding if they succeed. Hence, you can fix the "wrong" set up by altering several things, but not necessary all of them. Which one(s) will work depends on your players' attributes.

Another "wrong" set up. All your players except DCs are asked to run forward often. DCs have very low mentality, time wasting is above average and tempo is slow. You GK picks up ball and drops it DC. Everybody but your DCs run forward and your DCs stay there and... Well depends on passing. Short - and they exchange ball with each other and GK, and GK finally kicks it upfield. Direct - and DC dwells on the ball untill either AI pressures him or he sees an option to pass upfield without much risk (because of mentality), that is even if the ball is intercepted, there is lower chance that AI breaks through. Again, not a pleasant picture, especially given that under low tempo condition the AI hs enough time to regroup and cover space.

-----------------------

Disclaimer: by "wrong" I mean that it seems inconsistent to me.

ZdlR and kolobok provides some really good insights about passing systems here, good posts.

2 contradicting views here.

One views direct to be longer distance pass, while the other view direct to be more attacking.

Can anyone clear it up further?

2 contradicting views here.

One views direct to be longer distance pass, while the other view direct to be more attacking.

Can anyone clear it up further?

Mentality is to do with the "attackingness" off the pass rather than the passing setting themselves

It's not more attacking or defensive. It's basically how directly you want the ball to move from your defs to your attackers. Think Arsenal and MU in real life. Both teams play attacking football. Generally Arsenal prefers to deliver the ball from Toure to Adebayor using quite a few quick passes. In most cases at least 6 players are involved in that delivery process. They would not mind exchanging a few passes in the middle to prepare attack. MU would do it in 3-4 passes (direct passing) (DC -> MC -> Winger - > ???) the last questions mean that if a ST is not in a good position than pass would go to MC or even back to defs. However, the ball would be already close to opposition area, and MCs in this case would represent the second attacking wave. But at the initial stage neither MC nor Winger nor DC would not move the ball like this (DC->FB->MC1->MC2->Winger1->MC2->etc.). Of course it's generalization but any football tactic implies only general instructions. It's not chess, where most of the moves are the only moves (at lest at the top level).

2 contradicting views here.

One views direct to be longer distance pass, while the other view direct to be more attacking.

Can anyone clear it up further?

Based solely on observation:-

Holding tempo/time wasting/mentality (ballcarrier and all other players re positioning alongside forward runs) constant, within the context of attributes, direct passing equals more attacking basically because players look for your lower limit first. Players set to shorter ranges are more likely to dwell on the ball and end up hoofing it due to pressure or choosing to run with it if you have that set to mixed/often if they have no other option.

Hence a more direct setting will generally get the ball up the pitch quicker and in the broadest sense of the word, will be more attacking.

What I am 99.9% certain of is that as stated by others, the passing slider in of itself is coded as a range. From a programming logic perspective I can't see it being any other way but as kolobok stated the range is relative not absolute.

Damn the underline/bolding on this is annoying to use

EDIT: kolobok beat me to it .

... From a programming logic perspective I can't see it being any other way

It might have some logic related to direction , though I am pretty sure you are 99.9% right.

kolobok beat me to it .

That's because "the underline/bolding on this is annoying to use" and yet you are using it

Right now my problem is getting out the effectiveness of my 2 strikers.

They have to contest 20+ headers each match and I feel this is a tad too much. They are performing well, with Fraizer Campbell averaging 1 goal per game. However, there are games where if they don't score, their rating will drop to 5+, due to them losing out too many headers.

So, I want my passes to be attacking, yet on the ground. However, I can't seem to be able to get it out from the passing slider.

The problem start with my defenders and GK distribution. If i set their passing to short, they end up passing to each other and then hoofing it up when under pressure. If I set it to direct, they will also hoof it up!

I have set my mentality to global to try to eliminate 1 factor, so I can concentrate fully on the passing

Any ideas how?

It might have some logic related to direction , though I am pretty sure you are 99.9% right.

I always thought of mentality/passing style as being entangled, more so with 09 where decent players seem to be more likely to go for the better option ( e.g. defensive MC distribution is much improved in my opinion in terms of picking out an open winger instead of ignoring him due to mentality).

When I say range though I meant it in the same terms as you with respect to influencing the direction of the pass due to locations of the 'shortest' option. Then mentality gets thrown in the mix aswell.

So hypothetically speaking given two players closest and equidistant from the ballcarrier set to passing 1, mentality will kick in to influence the 'who to pass to' decision. Then throw in decisions, creativity, creative freedom, morale, location of opposition players etc. etc. and your brain melts

Given your background I'd be interested to hear if your view of it differs

lyw_85

The difficulty with your question is it is all relative to how the opposition is set up. But your issue is not just about passing style but the availability of options and spacing from the opposition. If you want to throw up a pkm and a list of times in the match (e.g. 10:20 FB hoofs clear) I'll take a look on the off chance I can help.

What I will say is the passing amongst themselves is sometimes out of your control due to the influence of the preferred foot, recognition of space before receiving a pass and consequential first touch (alongside how heavily the opposition is pressing).

...

The problem start with my defenders and GK distribution. If i set their passing to short, they end up passing to each other and then hoofing it up when under pressure. If I set it to direct, they will also hoof it up!

...

I am not sure we have enough information, but let's start from what we have.

Passing = short and defs pass to each other until opposition closes them down. Why? To me it's essential to assume that they simply don't see an appropriate passing option higher on pitch. Again why? Maybe midfielders move too high up? Remember, short passing = pass to the nearest player. It could be that your def line is too deep or mentality of defs is low (you mention you set it global, but where?), or wingers and MCs are asked to run forward often, or a combination. Finally, if you have counter-attack ticked, your defs may be trying to pull opposition out of their half, but still don't find option to pass. Time wasting and tempo are also important.

IIf you want to throw up a pkm and a list of times in the match (e.g. 10:20 FB hoofs clear) I'll take a look on the off chance I can help.

What I will say is the passing amongst themselves is sometimes out of your control due to the influence of the preferred foot, recognition of space before receiving a pass and consequential first touch (alongside how heavily the opposition is pressing).

http://www.zshare.net/download/60372628c771ddf0/

Here you go isuckatfm, thanks for the help.

I have also noticed this, as there are matches where my strikers have lesser header to contest and I run riot through the defence. What I'm trying to do is get the same effect more often.

I am not sure we have enough information, but let's start from what we have.

Passing = short and defs pass to each other until opposition closes them down. Why? To me it's essential to assume that they simply don't see an appropriate passing option higher on pitch. Again why? Maybe midfielders move too high up? Remember, short passing = pass to the nearest player. It could be that your def line is too deep or mentality of defs is low (you mention you set it global, but where?), or wingers and MCs are asked to run forward often, or a combination. Finally, if you have counter-attack ticked, your defs may be trying to pull opposition out of their half, but still don't find option to pass. Time wasting and tempo are also important.

There are so many variables that I don't know what to change, what effects what and how etc.

It's getting abit too complicated.

Take a look at my tactic and see where I'm going wrong.

http://www.zshare.net/download/60372785f1fa0763/

Thanks Kobolok.

I always thought of mentality/passing style as being entangled, more so with 09 where decent players seem to be more likely to go for the better option ( e.g. defensive MC distribution is much improved in my opinion in terms of picking out an open winger instead of ignoring him due to mentality).

When I say range though I meant it in the same terms as you with respect to influencing the direction of the pass due to locations of the 'shortest' option. Then mentality gets thrown in the mix aswell.

So hypothetically speaking given two players closest and equidistant from the ballcarrier set to passing 1, mentality will kick in to influence the 'who to pass to' decision. Then throw in decisions, creativity, creative freedom, morale, location of opposition players etc. etc. and your brain melts

Given your background I'd be interested to hear if your view of it differs

I agree, mentality has a lot to do with passing decision as well as player's attributes. I could fantasize even further, though not sure if all factors are considered. Say a DC can pass to 2 MCs, who are equally close. But from a given position of DC he would need to use right foot to pass the ball to one MC and better use left foot (or slightly change position and use right foot) to pass to the other MC. I guess preffered foot will determine the direction as much as other attributes. If the DC knows his teammates well enough there would be another factor - what foot the MC would have to use to pick up the pass. For example, I used to play with a teammate, whose left foot is just walking device, thoug he was Maradona with his right foot:D. So I would never pass the ball to him if I was not sure he would get it to the right foot or at least has enough time to put the ball there.

Btw, whilst I was writing the above, I thought that maybe prefered foot plays a very important role. If the right-side DC has 'right only' and gets the ball from the other DC, the right FB is not an immediate passing option for him as he would need to change body position (spend a second or more) to pass the ball there. Hmm... I remember a year or so ago Advocaat said that he was looking for left footed DC specifically. Hell, maybe FM takes it into account as well.

http://www.zshare.net/download/60372628c771ddf0/

Here you go isuckatfm, thanks for the help.

I have also noticed this, as there are matches where my strikers have lesser header to contest and I run riot through the defence. What I'm trying to do is get the same effect more often.

There are so many variables that I don't know what to change, what effects what and how etc.

It's getting abit too complicated.

Take a look at my tactic and see where I'm going wrong.

http://www.zshare.net/download/60372785f1fa0763/

Thanks Kobolok.

I will take a look on the weekend. Could you also drop a screenshot with your best 11? Just want to see who is supposed to play which role.

My team is Derby

GK - Carrizo

DR - Micah Richards

DL - Gareth Bale

DC - Steven Taylor

DC - Mark Beevers

MR - Sofiane Feghouli

ML - Nicky Sharpe (Regen from my youth team)

MC - Moussa Sissoko

MC - Jack Wilshere

FC - Fraizer Campbell

FC - Daniel Sturridge

Don't underestimate Campbell and Sturridge, they are lightning quick and so good finishers. Campbell is average 1 goal per game so far while Sturridge complements Campbell very well.

I agree, mentality has a lot to do with passing decision as well as player's attributes. I could fantasize even further, though not sure if all factors are considered. Say a DC can pass to 2 MCs, who are equally close. But from a given position of DC he would need to use right foot to pass the ball to one MC and better use left foot (or slightly change position and use right foot) to pass to the other MC. I guess preffered foot will determine the direction as much as other attributes. If the DC knows his teammates well enough there would be another factor - what foot the MC would have to use to pick up the pass. For example, I used to play with a teammate, whose left foot is just walking device, thoug he was Maradona with his right foot . So I would never pass the ball to him if I was not sure he would get it to the right foot or at least has enough time to put the ball there

Btw, whilst I was writing the above, I thought that maybe prefered foot plays a very important role. If the right-side DC has 'right only' and gets the ball from the other DC, the right FB is not an immediate passing option for him as he would need to change body position (spend a second or more) to pass the ball there. Hmm... I remember a year or so ago Advocaat said that he was looking for left footed DC specifically. Hell, maybe FM takes it into account as well.

Interesting about the weaker foot idea and passing aim. Not something I've noticed in game but then again the 3D is stuttery and terrible looking on my machine. Something for future sophistication perhaps. But I have definitely noticed a bias with respect to passing direction and weaker foot (as well as initial dribbling trajectory).

That does happen in FM with regards to body shape particularly if the DC is under pressure he'll often just knock it right back to the player he received from or take a touch back towards the direction he received it from or back towards the keeper. It was one of my personal gripes in earlier builds of the 09 match engine as players didn't open up their bodies consistently enough when time/space was available. Definitely been improved since the first version I saw.

http://www.zshare.net/download/60372628c771ddf0/

Here you go isuckatfm, thanks for the help.

I have also noticed this, as there are matches where my strikers have lesser header to contest and I run riot through the defence. What I'm trying to do is get the same effect more often.

Based purely on observation my own, possibly flawed analysis

- GK distribution and hoofing/striker header volumes. If I want to keep short I prefer defender collect with a FB specified (composure, first touch, passing being important, dribbling under certain ‘get out of jail’ situations). A reasonable weaker foot might also be of benefit

- strikers as an outlet in 442

• 442 wingers drop back deep even with high mentality, FWR Often
  
• Strikers mentality too high => gap opens up
  
• Opposition holding midfielder blocks passing lanes in said gap => strikers less viable as a to feet option
  
• Defenders hoof clear
  
• Lower mentality or specific man mark loose to get in front of or wide of the holding midfielder
  
• Alternatively given Chelsea weren’t exactly going gung ho you might have used your directly opposite MC to loose mark specifically their holding MC
  
• Lowering mentality etc will impact on attacking plays so it’s ultimately up to you to make the choice
  

Bear in mind hoofing can just be a consequence of the scenario and how much pressure the player is under. Maybe high mentality or creative freedom contributes to hoofing as they try a ‘riskier’ pass but I say maybe as I’ve never been 100% convinced of this. In the main play though, their distribution and available options was largely good as far as I could see. It was only when clearing from deeper areas with the two banks of four collapsed onto each other that the hoofing became more consistent.

I haven’t looked in great detail re comparison screenshots but on initial viewing it did seem as if they dropped their defensive line after you went 3-0 up. I say this because it seemed like your high mentality front 4 seemed to be able to pick up possession with less harassment from their back four than up to that point, in areas closer to their box. You were able to transition play more easily by linking into your strikers, the deeper line meant narrower FBs and more space for your wingers and overall possession swung dramatically in your direction.

Intriguingly enough Chelsea seemed to go opposite as neither of their strikers dropped off anymore (except for set pieces and the after effects) which had the same effect on them as it did on you with respect to keeping possession. Though it might not have been tactics but Balotelli coming off injured and his workrate/teamwork.

But having said all that the actual head stats didn’t really relate to what I thought I observed with the strikers having more in the second half. Maybe more possession, more crosses but tbh I’m not going to go through it with a fine tooth comb. That’s my basic analysis in terms of linking with the strikers so you can decide for yourself if you agree or not

so what kind of passing does Manchester United use irl?

isuckatfm:

Sorry I don't get you!

Do you mean that I shouldn't care so much about the heading stats as the play seemed fine?

Or I should follow the points that u gave above?

so what kind of passing does Manchester United use irl?

I'd say the play fairly direct, they look to break quickly (high tempo) and get the ball to the frontline as soon as possible. Although sometimes they have a patient build with short passes and a slower tempo. It all depends on the scenario, and level of opposition and how they're playing.

isuckatfm:

Sorry I don't get you!

Do you mean that I shouldn't care so much about the heading stats as the play seemed fine?

Or I should follow the points that u gave above?

Basically your complaint was defenders hoofing long and your strikers competing for headers. What I saw was when you broke up their attacks early your defenders were more likely to have shorter, easier option, and by and large they made the pass instead of hoofing. But in a 442 when the opposition attack gets deeper the 4 midfielders will tend to collapse onto the back 4 to defend.

This happens even with max mentality. So if you have both strikers on a high enough mentality that they don't drop off, the outlet clearance is generally going to be long or in certain scenarios back to the keeper. If you drop a striker off spacing him sufficiently from the opposition backline he becomes a more viable option, and in my experience it is more likely a clearing ball will come towards his feet (purely anecdotal so if anyone reading this has a different experience fair enough).

A few screenshot examples of when your players hoofed it with the black line showing where the defender hit it, and the effect of a lower mentality on the strikers shown with the white arrows.

/continued next post

/continued

As I said a lower mentality affects your attacking play, and with high mentalities you're looking for quick long balls over the top. For me that just wasn't happening in the first half.

As mentioned this will depend on how the holding MC for the opposition is positioned. But for your pkm dropping them down would have created more space to aim for to the sides of their holding midfielder like this screenshot.

How the strikers position themselves can vary depending on how the scenario plays out, but in my experience this concept holds as a generality.

With regards to heading stats I was specifically looking at those in relation to hoofs in the 2D. I only looked at the stats after. There was no link but I saw a decrease in hoofing, increased link up passes to the strikers in the 2nd half, especially after your 3rd goal when possession swung from 57-43 in Chelsea's favour to 50-50 at full time). Unless I was to watch in detail writing down every moment your strikers challenged for a header, I can't say definitively but because there was a decrease in what I was looking at I assumed their header stats increasing had more to do with crosses/set pieces rather than challenging for hoofed balls.

Hope that clears it up.

Ultimately it’s up to you to decide

Omg thats a very thorough explanation. One which I didn't expect to get.

Ok, I'm going to reduce my strikers mentality and see if that helps. Thanks.

lyw_85

I looked at your tactic. It seems quite solid overall. isuckatfm provided some ideas how to improve your tactic further and I have a couple more.

First, check out if un-ticking counter-attack box would reduce hoofing. Because it could be that your defs simply trying to draw opposition and start counter, but all they achieve is a couple opposition players pressuring them.

Second, you may also want to reduce FB's forward runs to mixed. Because if they are already gone forward whilst a DC is still with the ball, the DCs don't have many passing options.

As for lost headers I have noticed that your FBs and Wingers in somewhat mimic each other. In particular they all asked to cross often, and given that your FBs are asked to FWR often there is not much of a difference whether they asked to cross from byline (WGs) or mixed (FBs). Basically there are many ways to set it up. Personally I would ask FBs to cross often from byline but FWR mixed, while wingers cross mixed and not specify where from (keep it mixed as well). What would happen is that FBs would support attacks and overlap wingers, resulting in wingers cutting in more often. Most importantly, here and there you would get one or maybe even two extra players in the area, increasing chances to score if not directly from cross then on a rebound.

Good luck!

First, check out if un-ticking counter-attack box would reduce hoofing. Because it could be that your defs simply trying to draw opposition and start counter, but all they achieve is a couple opposition players pressuring them.

That would be the first thing I'd look at. Counter-attack isn't pretty in 09, for me at least.