The Benefits of Getting The Ball Forward

[furiousuk]

Introduction

There's been a few threads about passing length and how it translates into the ME but there are still a lot of misconceptions about how this tactical instruction actually works. Getting the passing length right (in conjunction with other tactical instructions) is crucial if you are trying to develop a nice balance between conservatism and chance creation. I haven't started a thread in a while but I've been planning to talk about passing length for quite some time and want to try and explain why I feel that technical teams actually benefit more from shouting 'Get The Ball Forward' and that the shout is definitely not the consign of managers who want to recreate 80's/90's Wimbledon. I'll provide a couple of examples too and try to stick on topic!

Getting The Ball Forward

This shout simply increases the passing length but there is nothing simple about how it can drastically affect how your team will perform on the pitch. There seems to be a common misconception that increasing your passing length will result in your team aiming for the long ball at every opportunity but the truth is that this just isn't how the instruction works. Passing length effectively restricts or allows the player to play passes over a certain distance, it does not directly encourage either a short or long ball to be played, the choice of pass is mostly down to the player. A quick example is probably in order to reinforce this assertion:

1: The ball is played forward from Kelava to the open player, Sandro.

2: Most settings at this stage of the game are pretty neutral so width & depth are average, mentality is standard and my formation is evenly matched with that of Man Utd. If I had instructed a short passing length then Sandro would be left just the purple passes (possibly also a conservative ball to 9, although 9 has already started to make a run so maybe not). If I was also playing with a very high mentality then Sandro would be (tactically) unwilling to play those conservative shorter passes which would leave him in a quandry, when this happens in FM the player often delays on the ball and is tackled. As it is, Sandro has a pretty average mentality meaning that he is free to play those shorter passes but his passing length is also instructed to be long which means that he is tactically free to play a longer pass if he can see it. He can still play those conservative short passes if he wants, I haven't encouraged him to play the long ball but I haven't restricted him either. Sandro has good vision and he sees the run of 9, he also has good technicals so he knows he can make a good stab at playing the long ball, his incredible decision making then says that a long ball into space is the best option and he executes it perfectly and creates a decent chance for my side.

Balance

In the above example there is nothing wrong with Sandro playing the conservative short pass, nothing wrong at all and if I was 1-0 up then I'd probably prefer he does that most of the time but the scoreline is 0-0 and the teams and formations are evenly matched. It would take something special to unlock the solid Man Utd defence so it was time to just let my creators play which is exactly what increasing the passing length does. It does not encourage long balls forward, it simply allows them and understanding this concept is, for me at least, crucial in creating a balance between creating good chances and not giving the ball away needlessly.

Poor players, or players with poor vision or poor technique, wouldn't be able to see or execute the pass which Sandro made above (or the other players in the following examples) and so playing with a low to average mentality and a long passing length simply increases the chances that poorer players will make a poor decision. With superb players (like Sandro) I want them to be free to use their immense vision and technique to the fullest. I want them to make the decision whether to play it safe or whether to try something spectacular. I want them to be free to exploit their flair.

A Short Passing Length Decreases Options, a Longer Passing Length Increases Them

This mantra forms a big part of how I approach games now that my team and squad are excellent and that I am normally the favourite. If I'm facing a stingy and stoic defence I want my most creative players to be free to choose the best option. By restricting the passing length I would simply be restricting the options available to my most talented players which is probably not going to cut it. Once I've gone a goal or 2 up I might restrict passing length in order to control the ball but I wouldn't do it to 'unlock' a defence.

I've tried to keep this post short and to the point but I think a few examples are necessary to garner a bit more interest and hopefully encourage some comments about passing length and how it fits with other instructions.

[furiousuk]

vs Burnley - The Young Pretender Shines

1: Phil Jones has received the ball from his defensive partner and has a bit of time to pick a pass. I've increased the passing length so most of the pitch is a viable option for Jones, but he's a good ball-player, he lacks a little in technique but has the mentals to not stretch himself. He's free to hoof the long ball up to my attackers if he wants (he won't, partly because he's a good decision maker but partly because he is playing with a modest mentality so tactically there is no pressure for him to play it immediately forward, plus, he has many other options) but there is a far better option, which he takes, to play it to my young Brazilian starlet who is desperately trying to make a name for himself.

2: When Diego Costa receives the ball he has space, he dithers a little but he's young and doesn't fully realise how quickly the opposition will close him down at this level. Still, he has loads of options. The purple lines denote his short passing options. With a short passing length these would be the only options tactically available to him, of which the pass to AMR is extremely risky and only the pass to 10 advances the move. The red passes show his long passing options, all of which are very aggressive and very demanding. I'm playing with a standard or counter mentality so I've put no pressure on him to play an aggressive pass, it's up to how much he backs his ability to play the killer ball.

3: Fortunately Diego Costa has pretty impressive technical abilities and he does back himself. The 40 yard pass to Hulk is pinpoint, something Beckham or Xabi Alonso would be proud of.

4: Hulk has options when he receives the ball, he could cross early, or dribble to the byline and cross, or, as the pass was so incredibly accurate, he can unleash his leg peg towards the opposite top corner. From memory he slams it into the top corner. An incredible goal that simply could not of been scored without allowing my players to play longer passes.

[furiousuk]

vs Everton - Pulling The Trigger

This is a slightly longer example but the pass that destroys the opposition here is simply spectacular.

1: Everton are playing a pretty powerful 41212 vs my 451/433 and have just been repelled. Hulk is sniffing a counter.

2: As Bangoura (my FC) receives the ball he realises that actually a counter probably isn't on, particularly as the Everton team is incredibly hard working and have recovered some defensive position pretty well. He plays the ball conservatively back to Sandro (8) but had very few other options.

3: This is where it gets more interesting. Sandro has options but, again, the shorter ones tend to be conservative and won't directly make a chance for quite some time. The 'Get The Ball Forward' shout doesn't encourage him to play the long ball forward but it allows it, Sandro is a good decision maker though and decides his best option is a short ball, no Wimbledon stuff here thank you, my winger hasn't yet got the step on his marker.

4: When Old receives the ball he is actually under a fair amount of pressure from the Everton MCr. Mentally he's very strong and he has decent technique. The option he chooses though is simply hollywood. A sublime left foot ball forward into the path of the winger, who now has the step on his marker. Inspiring, incredible. Unshackled! From a player with a flair of 6!!

5: Luiz gets a yard on his marker and the ball is positioned beautifully for him to take it without breaking stride.

6: As the pass was so amazingly perfect he doesn't have to slow down, his technique and dribbling ability allows him to continue at nearly full speed and the defence can't catch. I think this one ended in a goal too and, again, wouldn't be possible without an unrestricted passing length.

Embrace the longer ball - stop restricting your most talented players, let them play, let them leave you in awe of their FM incredibleness!

[DMN (YCFC)]

Very good post.

I try to always have at least one player with a longer range of passing in my side. Normally a DLP who wil sit back slightly. So that the play does not become routine or boring. I've also found having a player with "dictates tempo" very good for this.

[R0ca]

Excellent post on Passing I must say.

I Can't remember seeing many posts on passing length so this make this one even better.

btw furious which version of FM are you playing?

[däkkä]

Does mixed (10) restrict a player from playing a long ball? Limited defenders have more direct passing than ball-playing defenders. Does this mean limited defenders are allowed more options but not encouraged to play a long ball?

Passing instruction has two attributes I believe: encouraged/stressed passing length and passing direction. Maybe you could say direct passing allows more options but I'm skeptical about that. Tempo, mentality, TTB, CF and mental attributes affect the decision-making as well so it's not that straightforward.

[NakS]

Very good post Furiousk, as soon as I noticed you have started a thread, I was thinking "Well, sit back and get some coffee now!". I don't post often but I am a very regular reader in here. About this thread, your illustrations are very telling actually, especially the fact that you used one color for each kind of passing options, it illustrates your point in a very efficient way, examples are good as well. I kind of agree and disagree at the same time, so let me explain how I see the passing slider to hopefully bring a nice FM Discussion.

First, about your mantra: A Short Passing Length Decreases Options, a Longer Passing Length Increases Them. If I understand you well, it means the player has a vision (creativity) and, within this vision, the more you go direct the more you are extending the passing range. Amongst this passing range, he can pick up a pass, so you are not restricting his passing options. The shortest the passing range, the more restrict are his passing options.

My mantra would be: A Short Passing Length Decreases Options, a Longer Passing Length Decreases Them As Well. A Medium Passing Length Gives You The More Options. Here is my thinking behind this. I don't see the passing slider as a restricted area, restricting actually which kind of passes the player could pick. In others words, I don't think the passing slider restrict his "vision", i.e. the passing options he can choose amongst. I think the passing slider is more of a tendency slider. For example, when you go very short, something like 3 for the discussion sake, then your player is very likely to pick the short options if there is one available and in line with his mentality setting like you said (dwells on ball and get tackle). If you go short-mixed, 7 for example then the probability of your player picking a very short pass is not as important as in the previous case. When you go medium, 10 the the player has no passing bias whatsoever, he doesn't favor the short or the the direct option, he can do both as he see fit. This is the point of the passing slider where you are not restricting him at all, not directions regarding passing style. Just "mixed" or "as you see fit". Then, the more you are going direct, the more the player is likely to pick a direct pass.

In more mathematical term, the passing slider would be like a "ratio" you are adjusting between direct and short pass, 10 meaning you are 50-50 and you have no preferences, 5 would be 75-25 so the player will most of the time try to pick the short one if possible, 15 would be 25-75 and the player would try to go for the direct options if available.

Secondly, I am a bit surprised you didn't talk more about creative freedom. Because, in my opinion this goes hand in hand with the passing - mentality combo, making it a trio. It has a huge impact on which pass he is going to play. I see the creative freedom slider when it comes to passing like a restricting tool. Let's say the player has full vision (20 creativity) and high flair (15), passing is direct (15), mentality is average (10) but his creative freedom is 1 (unlikely but for the example sake). I don't think he will try the direct through ball like the one to Ruiz to run onto. He has seen the option (creativity 20), he has the desire to go for it because of his flair but he is restricted by creative freedom, so it's just like if he has not seen that through ball at all, it's too flamboyant for him even if it is within his "risk zone" according to his mentality. He still has his 20 vision, but his "used vision" is very restricted by creative freedom.

Your example with Old (Flair 6) is intriguing me and sort of contradict the above point regarding creative freedom, the fact that a player like him pull the trigger like this is impressive, what kind of creative freedom has he?

So my usual combo with my most talented players, say a creative deep lying playmaker like Sandro or top-class DLPM is medium mentality (I use "counter" a lot like you), full creative freedom not to restrict him and medium passing range not to bias him toward some options fathers than others. Basically I am relying on his decision making, but I do use a more direct passing range when I want my players to make incisive passes and I go medium-direct, something like 15 to greater effect in offensives positions, something in the line of the 75-25 ratio. But as I said, I think the non-restrictive pick is rather 10, like playmakers, trequartista, etc..

[Agi_]

Very nice post.

If instead of a top league team, with gifted guys like Sandro and Hulk you had a bunch of hard working, defensively sound but tecnically dumb players like the one i'm managing, a newcomer in top league without the budget and reputation to attract star players, what would you do? Long passes to hope for a lucky break or short passes to have less mistakes and more possession that means less time for the opponent to attack.

I'm using a defensive, high defence, high pressing tactics; it worked wonders in second division, and in fact i got promoted, but now, even if it's still defensively good against all but the top league teams, i'm having many problems to get good breaks not to speak of any other kind of attack.

[furiousuk]

Does mixed (10) restrict a player from playing a long ball? Limited defenders have more direct passing than ball-playing defenders. Does this mean limited defenders are allowed more options but not encouraged to play a long ball?

Passing instruction has two attributes I believe: encouraged/stressed passing length and passing direction. Maybe you could say direct passing allows more options but I'm skeptical about that. Tempo, mentality, TTB, CF and mental attributes affect the decision-making as well so it's not that straightforward.

You see I'd say that a mixed passing length does restrict them from playing the long ball. I see it as meaning that your players are free to play medium and short lengthed passes but restricted from playing longer passes - this is not to say they won't ever play longer passes just that your tactical instruction says 'don't do it much at all'. If you've given them high creative freedom then they'll be more likely to play longer passes again as they will be more likely to ignore your instructions and use their own opinion on whats best.

I don't see the passing slider as emphasising any passing length, not directly anyway. I think it is purely a restrictive measure. If things were absolute then a passing length of 10 might mean you can only play passes 20 yards (medium length) or shorter, a passing length of 15 means you can play 40 yards (long) or shorter but don't play it any longer whilst a passing length of 20 means you can play passes 100 yards or shorter (so any pass goes). I don't see a passing length of 10 as saying 'play most of your passes around 20 yards in length'.

As for direction, I see direction more dictated by the mentality you've chosen, a point I made very poorly in the OP. Players with high mentality want to move the ball forward more quickly as a forwards pass is generally (although not always) the most aggressive one. A longer passing length but modest mentality might mean that they spray the ball out to the flanks, or laterally to a supporting full-back whereas a longer passing length and aggressive mentality would mean the player primary looks to play a long ball forward.

As you say, there are many many variables involved in pass selection so it's hard to be definitive. I play with a high creative freedom with mentally strong players who generally make good/successful decisions so I can only really make judgements based on trends I see with my tactical decisions rather than definitive results of tactical changes.

Your example with Old (Flair 6) is intriguing me and sort of contradict the above point regarding creative freedom, the fact that a player like him pull the trigger like this is impressive, what kind of creative freedom has he?

To make things even better, he has the PPM 'Plays short simple passes'!!! His technique is a modest 14 too (although passing is 17). There are 2 things that I feel allow him to play passes like this (bare in mind these passes are rare for him). The first is his immense mental ability (decisions 19, creativity 17, anticipation 17 also helps here I think as he predicts the run), he can see the pass, he can't always complete it particularly well but he'll only play it when he thinks he can do it. He's not a true playmaker so he normally plays as a defensive DM, here, he is at Adv.PM MC where his instructions are less restrictive. The 2nd reason he plays it, is very high creative freedom. He's free to play the pass he feels is best. A longer passing length ensures that he really is free to play it (although even with shorter passing the high CF may have resulted in him playing it anyway).

I like your ratio theory and that could well have plenty of weight but the way I see it is that the passing slider is wholly a restrictive slider, I elaborated on that above. The true number of options (off the ball, work rate, teamwork, anticipation of other players linked with width, depth, free role, CF settings) & the ability of the player to see those options (various vision attributes, CF settings) all impact on the actual passing you see in the match which is why it's difficult to pinpoint the effects.

Although passes of these calibre are rare, my players tend to not even attempt them when I have my usual default passing length or 'retain possession' shout, even though my attackers are still making exploratory runs like those shown. They do try them though if I increase the passing length and I don't see any aimless hoofs up field unless it's a rushed clearance or the opposition put my defenders under pressure.

Under pressure defenders who panic and launch the ball up field has very little to do with passing length, they'll tend to do this when they can't make a different decision quick enough as a safety measure. Players higher up the field tend to do the dreaded 'spinny-move-of-doom' before getting tackled when they run out of options like this.

Very nice post.

If instead of a top league team, with gifted guys like Sandro and Hulk you had a bunch of hard working, defensively sound but tecnically dumb players like the one i'm managing, a newcomer in top league without the budget and reputation to attract star players, what would you do? Long passes to hope for a lucky break or short passes to have less mistakes and more possession that means less time for the opponent to attack.

I'm using a defensive, high defence, high pressing tactics; it worked wonders in second division, and in fact i got promoted, but now, even if it's still defensively good against all but the top league teams, i'm having many problems to get good breaks not to speak of any other kind of attack.

I fought to get Southampton up the leagues and gained promotion at the first time of asking from the Championship, which was nice but left me woefully under-prepared for the Premiership. In order to combat the odds I faced then I had to concede that I wouldn't create many chances. I rarely used Get The Ball Forward because I didn't want to risk wasting the limited possession I got and I didn't have the players to play totally 'unshackled'. Giving them to freedom to play long balls whenever they wanted would of lost the ball too often, similarly, they didn't really have the technical ability to play a short game so I left passing at default most of the time and controlled how far they'd pass the ball by shrinking (play narrow & push up) or enlarging (wider, deeper) the play area. In fact, a usual tactic would be to play counter, narrow & deep - this ups the passing length for defenders to allow them to play it long whilst making yourself very defensively solid, particularly with a DM operating between the lines.

[furiousuk]

Excellent post on Passing I must say.

I Can't remember seeing many posts on passing length so this make this one even better.

btw furious which version of FM are you playing?

This is all on FM11, I'm still pretty enthusiastic with this save so will probably miss FM12 altogether but I think the ME is pretty unchanged.

[R0ca]

Good! I'm still playing 11... I just couldn't get into 12

[Cleon]

A great post and another worth read

[däkkä]

You see I'd say that a mixed passing length does restrict them from playing the long ball. I see it as meaning that your players are free to play medium and short lengthed passes but restricted from playing longer passes - this is not to say they won't ever play longer passes just that your tactical instruction says 'don't do it much at all'.

You're contradicting yourself. You say it restricts the player from playing a long ball and in the next sentence you're saying it doesn't. It's a tendency modifier.

I don't see the passing slider as emphasising any passing length, not directly anyway. I think it is purely a restrictive measure. If things were absolute then a passing length of 10 might mean you can only play passes 20 yards (medium length) or shorter, a passing length of 15 means you can play 40 yards (long) or shorter but don't play it any longer whilst a passing length of 20 means you can play passes 100 yards or shorter (so any pass goes). I don't see a passing length of 10 as saying 'play most of your passes around 20 yards in length'.

But you are saying it is (near) absolute. You say mixed passing tells the player not to play long balls. What I am saying is that it only changes the emphasis between short and long passes always allowing the same amount of options. Possibly if the player has little time on the ball he can only see the options that are prioritized but with better mental attributes and more time he can see all the options available.

The TC gives some of the most direct passing instructions to players that simply aren't expected to have the mental attributes to make right decisions if allowed many options. I really don't see why a poacher or limited defender should be allowed more passing options than a trequartista or a ball-playing defender. I don't know why you left that part unanswered. Why would TC give a mentally and technically limited player such as limited defender more options than a quality centre-back with vision and good passing skills? All the TC tells the limited defender is to play the ball forward (since longer passing affects direction) and primarily look for longer options (no fancy short passes unless given more time to assess the danger). It is a great example how direct passing restricts a player's passing instead of allowing him more freedom.

[Cleon]

But you are saying it is (near) absolute. You say mixed passing tells the player not to play long balls. What I am saying is that it only changes the emphasis between short and long passes always allowing the same amount of options. Possibly if the player has little time on the ball he can only see the options that are prioritized but with better mental attributes and more time he can see all the options available.

That is true. The amount of options a player can see is down to his creativity and not the actual setting of the passing slider. Now the option he chooses depends on his passing instruction, decisions attribute (flair too if he's wanting to do a complicated pass) and composure if he's been closed down. For example if he has low composure he might see a better option but not use it due to been rushed in his decision making (composure) and choose the wrong option because he became flustered.

[furiousuk]

You see I'd say that a mixed passing length does restrict them from playing the long ball. I see it as meaning that your players are free to play medium and short lengthed passes but restricted from playing longer passes - this is not to say they won't ever play longer passes just that your tactical instruction says 'don't do it much at all'.

You're contradicting yourself. You say it restricts the player from playing a long ball and in the next sentence you're saying it doesn't. It's a tendency modifier.

No, the first sentence says it is a restrictive measure, the second sentence also says that they are restricted from playing longer balls. My long passes do increase when I play 'Get The Ball Forward' which means that my percentage of passes moves more towards longer passes but its not a tendency, it's just that with shorter passing set I play less long passes so my percentage goes towards shorter!!

But you are saying it is (near) absolute. You say mixed passing tells the player not to play long balls. What I am saying is that it only changes the emphasis between short and long passes always allowing the same amount of options. Possibly if the player has little time on the ball he can only see the options that are prioritized but with better mental attributes and more time he can see all the options available.

I'm just saying that from my experience I'll rarely see an attempted long ball if I don't set longer passing. It does happen (mainly because I use a lot of creative freedom and often drop deeper which elongates the pitch meaning there are more viable long options) but it happens more frequently with long passing set. Even with long passing set my team will still play short passes when its on.

I'll often use 'Get Ball Forward', 'Drop Deep' and 'Play Narrow' if I want to play a counter-type game. This combo of shouts is primarily designed so that my players can play long balls over the top (as seen in the examples) by allowing long balls and creating space by dropping deeper. However, when the play becomes constricted (such as at either end of the pitch, particularly if I'm piling on attacking pressure) my team will be quite narrow and even with the long passing instruction they'll play lovely short pass-and-move stuff in an effort to create an opening. Long passes out wide or pushed through gaps that don't exist are still viable options but my team aren't encouraged to play it by long passes, they could if they wanted to but they are equally NOT discouraged from playing the more sensible short balls.

I really don't see why a poacher or limited defender should be allowed more passing options than a trequartista or a ball-playing defender. I don't know why you left that part unanswered.

Sorry, didn't intentionally leave that out. I didn't know that the different roles selected drastically different passing lengths, I thought passing length was more affected by strategy (and possibly philosophy) and shouts. By giving those players longer passing length the TC is allowing them to play longer passes, if the choice for a limited defender is squeezing a shorter pass to a half-marked midfielder or playing a speculative ball up towards the TGM then the safest pass is to hoof it long - that way if you lose the ball it's in a less dangerous area of the pitch. If the limited defender had shorter passing set then he'd be restricted from playing the long ball so he'd have to try and play the more dangerous short ball which isn't the right option given the skill level of the limited defender.

[däkkä]

I'm sure you know 'Get ball forward' increases both passing range and tempo. I think the latter is crucial here. Mentality and passing range (amongst other things) determine which passing options the player considers first and high tempo means he is likely to pick one of those options. With slower tempo he has time to consider secondary options as well. This would explain why you see such a vaist increase in direct passes when you play this way. Actually it is very logical for the Flair 6 player to play the ball forward when he is under pressure, encouraged to play the ball forward and not allowed time to consider other options. He isn't trying to be creative or unpredictable but simply following your instructions. High tempo and direct passing means he'll look to get the ball forward. The shout has a very descriptive name

But again, it doesn't seem logical to me that TC would restrict a ball-playing defender more than a limited defender. The difference isn't all that drastic but even still there is no reason for a limited defender to be less restricted in his passing compared to a ball-playing centre-back. And if I haven't completely missed the point, you're arguing that increased passing length doesn't make the limited defender more inclined to play a long ball. Like you said the limited defender needs to able to play the long ball but surely a ball-playing defender should be as well. He has the mental capability to see advanced players well and technique to pull the pass off. There is absolutely no reason to tell a limited defender to play a more expansive passing game. NakS hit the nail in the head when he said "A Short Passing Length Decreases Options, a Longer Passing Length Decreases Them As Well" although I would argue that neither does actually decrease them but simply encourages one type over the other.

For this reason I think the ME actually handles passing range as a tendency modifier or prioritizes different passing options for the player. Good players (playmaker roles, mixed passing) can be allowed to make the decision independently - as if all the passing options are primary passing options - but lesser players really need this prioritizing (ball-winner, limited defender).

In the end it doesn't even matter what the technicalities behind the player "thought process" are because the end result you get from your shout combo is a more direct approach that is much more likely to see those long balls played which after all this speculation is all that matters. Trying to figure out how the ME 'thinks' is thought-provoking and well, fun, but it isn't necessary when we have the TC and touchline instructions in our disposal.

[Cleon]

But again, it doesn't seem logical to me that TC would restrict a ball-playing defender more than a limited defender. The difference isn't all that drastic but even still there is no reason for a limited defender to be less restricted in his passing compared to a ball-playing centre-back

The reason why the limited defender has a high direct passing instruction is so when he wins the ball backs he looks to clear it straight away rather than dwell on the ball and expose his weaknesses. The ball playing defender isn't restricted either, hes just encouraged to 'decide' what type of pass to do depending on the circumstances.

[däkkä]

The reason why the limited defender has a high direct passing instruction is so when he wins the ball backs he looks to clear it straight away rather than dwell on the ball and expose his weaknesses. The ball playing defender isn't restricted either, hes just encouraged to 'decide' what type of pass to do depending on the circumstances.

Exactly. This is what I mean. I'm just saying that by furiousuk's definition of the passing slider, limited defender is the player that is encouraged to use his own head.

[furiousuk]

From the online manual:

Passing Style

Passing style is fairly simple – this dictates the range of passing your team will adopt. The slider ranges from Short to Long and the notches in between will gradually ask your team to play a more expansive passing game.

What's the difference between a long hoof up-field and a controlled long ball over the top? Technique and vision. Limited defenders have neither so their long passes will be more aimless (because they can't see the pass) and more inaccurate (because they lack technique). Ball-playing defenders have these attributes so their long passes will be more appropriately timed (due to vision) and better executed (due to technique). In theory there is less opportunity for a well-timed long through ball from a defender so the BPD will end up playing shorter passes (on average) than the LD whose lack of technique leads to longer hoofs.

My low flair player may have played a panicked ball forward (he was certainly under a bit of pressure) but he had outlets either side of him (FBs, particularly the left FB and possibly the AML) which were far easier to see and execute and his long ball forward was pinpoint (it certainly wasn't a hopeful speculator, he picked the run of the AMR and placed it in front of him). Everton have actually scrambled to a good defensive position, they are a little high up the pitch but that makes sense as they have just been attacking and in any case they have enough bodies to deal with all but the luckiest of hopeful balls forward. If longer passing encourages long passes then why didn't Sandro play the 50/50 ball forward earlier, he's just about got the technique for it and he's certainly got the vision but I'd argue he didn't because the longer passing range didn't emphasise the longer pass so he was free to choose the shorter pass, a decision I agree with.

Of course this is at the heart of the matter, his decision-making (coupled with high CF) led to his decision and he may have made this decision even with wildly different instructions. I think the modest mentality is crucial here also though and am pretty sure that with a high mentality he would of played the 50/50 long ball earlier, in fact, with a high mentality he may have played it even with an average passing length instruction. That's not to say that mentality over-rides passing length or anything like that, just that they work in conjunction (and with other variables as mentioned).

This is mainly why my attacking play is far worse if I use the attacking strategy but I digress and I'm trying to keep focussed!!

[däkkä]

From the online manual:

Limited defenders have neither so their long passes will be more aimless (because they can't see the pass) and more inaccurate (because they lack technique). Ball-playing defenders have these attributes so their long passes will be more appropriately timed (due to vision) and better executed (due to technique).

See that's the problem with your theory. You aren't allowing long passes for the ball-playing defenders. Only the keep-it-simple centre-backs would be allowed to play an expansive passing game if your theory was right. You can't chalk it up to Creative Freedom either since (if memory serves) normal centre-back and limited defender have the same CF but normal centre-backs actually are - in your opinion - more restricted due to their shorter passing range. And quoting the manual as a bit like quoting the Bible and reading into it word by word. Pardon the reference.

My low flair player may have played a panicked ball forward (he was certainly under a bit of pressure) but he had outlets either side of him (FBs, particularly the left FB and possibly the AML) which were far easier to see and execute and his long ball forward was pinpoint (it certainly wasn't a hopeful speculator, he picked the run of the AMR and placed it in front of him).

I'm not saying he necessarily panicked but the thing is that he isn't told to look for those sideways passes. They are very much secondary options for a player told play it direct and quick. He has little time on the ball and the direct option is emphasized for him. Therein lies the beauty of mixed (10). With mixed (10) a capable player will try to assess all his options. If he isn't talented enough he will fail, but an elite player will have the skills to assess all his options even under intense pressure. If told to play too quick, even him will fail to assess all the options. If told to play short or direct, he can't fully take advantage of his game-reading abilities since the manager has already affected his decision-making process.

If longer passing encourages long passes then why didn't Sandro play the 50/50 ball forward earlier, he's just about got the technique for it and he's certainly got the vision but I'd argue he didn't because the longer passing range didn't emphasise the longer pass so he was free to choose the shorter pass, a decision I agree with.

Sandro had time on the ball and the forward was in a worse position than he was for Old.

In all your examples, the player who plays the direct ball is under pressure. It might be a coincidence and a few pictures isn't solid proof anyway. But just for the point's sake:

1st pic: Kelava (no pressure) passes short, Sandro (under pressure) passes direct.

2nd pic: Jones (no pressure) passes short, Diego Costa (flair player, under pressure) passes direct.

3rd pic: Bangoura (no primary options) passes short, Sandro (no pressure) passes short, Old (under pressure) passes direct.

Again this supports my theory of prioritizing passing options and high tempo that allows them less time to assess secondary options. To elaborate: it is not passing range that is restricting the players but it is time they have that restricts passing options (and decisions in general). And when the time a player has is restricted, he acts on "instinct". Well in FM instinct being a combination of a few mentals and tactical instructions.

Simply because players are allowed to play long or short passes with direct passing doesn't mean that they would only be allowed to play short with short passing. There is a correlation between direct forward passes + high tempo and direct passing game, of course there is. This is because the players have less time and their primary passing option is to play the ball forward. But that remark isn't enough to conclude that short passing is restricting and negative and direct passing is allowing and positive.

it was time to just let my creators play which is exactly what increasing the passing length does. It does not encourage long balls forward, it simply allows them

With superb players (like Sandro) I want them to be free to use their immense vision and technique to the fullest. I want them to make the decision whether to play it safe or whether to try something spectacular. I want them to be free to exploit their flair.

Let me get this straight. For midfield creators increasing passing length allows them to express themselves and gives them more options.

On the other hand you want to say that for limited defenders it encourages the long ball forward and tells them not to play short fancy passes.

So to your midfielder you're saying: "Yeah, you can play it short too" and to the limited defender you're telling the different thing with the same instruction: "Hells no, just hoof it up". And if you had Piqué next to the limited defender, you'd ask him NOT TO play long balls. You'd seriously restrict a ball-playing defender from playing direct passes whilst allowing them to a limited defender and a midfield creator alike? Or are you actually claiming that the passing slider has no effect for the centre-back and it's all about their skill set?

Sounds well contradictory.

[dz47]

I’m at work so don’t have time for a proper contribution right now, but I’ll just chip in to this debate quickly (and it’s a great debate too, I think). This is the way I see the ‘problem’ dakka highlights. As a defender, I see two basic and contrasting approaches.

The first is how I was (unfortunately) taught to play as a kid – don’t "muck around with it in defence", just get it forward to the players who know what they are doing. Today, as a junior coach, we encourage defenders to ‘play the ball out of defence’, which means back your teachnique and decisions to be able to play controlled passes to move from defence, to transition, to attack. In terms of FM, the limited defender is told to ‘not muck around’ and to ‘get the ball forward’ (hence direct passing length) – he is the kind of player that does not have the technique and mentality (particularly creativity, decisions etc) to be able to play a more varied game. On the other hand, the ball playing defender does have the technique and mentality to be trusted with ‘playing it out from the back’. Therefore he has mixed passing and more creative freedom (if memory serves), giving the option to play more possession oriented passes to team mates. He may still ‘hoof it’ when under extreme pressure, and he may still play a long pass forward.

To me the crucial difference here (and as illustrated by furiousuk) is the intent; the limited defender is just trying to ‘hoof it’ when he plays direct passes (hence these are unlikely to be accurate passes to an advanced team mate); whereas the ball playing defender is actually purposefully playing a ‘through ball’; it is more of a measured, considered pass played accurately to a teammate or intelligently into space”. So I think as well as the actual slider set up that the TC provides to these roles (limited and ball playing), you also have to consider the ‘ideal’ type of player that SI would envisage playing this role.

[däkkä]

You completely missed my point though. What you're saying is exactly how I think and how the TC thinks it. Under the surface though, I think that the more direct passing the limited defender has prioritizes long options instead of allowing them (allowing them is what furiousuk's claims). When he doesn't have time to think, he'll do a long ball. A ball-playing defender is encouraged to weigh short and long options alike which demands more of the player. My ideas aren't contradicting the TC in any way.

So with centre-backs (and all players I believe) mixed passing actually demands more of the players because the player has more options to consider but this is totally contrary to furiousuk's claims. He says that long passing is the most demanding for the player mentally which is -by looking at all the roles in TC- simply put false.

[furiousuk]

You make a good point about tempo being directly linked to a direct passing game and there's no doubt that my team are playing fairly direct in all of the examples - the wingers are inside forwards looking to attack, the FC has a free role but is also looking to attack more than support, the passing length is long and tempo is slightly quicker than average - but, my mentality is (probably) standard at highest in all of the examples which means that there is no tactical pressure on a player to play the ball immediately forward. To me this means that the longer lateral passes are just as valid options as the long forward passes - the only difference is that the long forward pass is far more rewarding (but also riskier of course). It's then that the decision-making picks the riskier option because they believe they can pull it off - the tactical instructions might help shape what a player considers in their decision making process (and weightings for each option) but once those options are there I think it's pretty firmly up to the player (in this case a high CF will 'average' out the weightings somewhat which means that the player is then freer to disregard your instructions, he isn't really disregarding them he's just freer to choose one that maybe doesn't quite fit in with your tactical instructions)

On the other hand you want to say that for limited defenders it encourages the long ball forward and tells them not to play short fancy passes.

That's exactly what I'm not saying - long passing doesn't encourage the long ball, it allows them to play it. A limited defender is just as free to play short passes and I'm sure that with a modest tempo and low mentality they would do just that and play the ball to their partner. If their partner is a BPD his vision might then encourage him to play a riskier ball forward, even though his passing length is slightly lower than the LD.

I've never played with a LD so I can't be exactly sure how they play but I've read a number of threads on people who have tried and failed to recreate Wimbledon or Watford from the 80s/90s in the ME - for me this is largely due to the fact that you can't directly encourage long balls forward. The 'Play Ball To Head of Targetman' helps (I imagine, I've never used it) but aside from that you'd have to increase your passing length (to allow long balls), increase tempo (to encourage early balls forward) and increase mentality (again, to encourage early balls forward as moving the ball forward is usually more aggressive than backwards or lateral). Long ball football is fairly attacking in essence but the mentality slider affects so much in FM that it changes how the team operates and then they don't look like a typical long ball team anymore (apparently, this is mostly 2nd hand info and I can't validate sources but it seems reasonable and logical).

The other thing that further muddies the water is that a 'clearance' is totally different and (in my opinion) separate from the passing slider. A clearance is long hoof forward which is caused by pressure, panic or sensible percentage play (i.e. get the ball to a less dangerous area of the pitch). An LD, with less vision and possibly less options, will 'clear' the ball far more often than his ball-playing partner - either because he doesn't see the options or because his decision-making process advises him this is a good idea (which it might well be).

Doesn't a limited defender play any short passes? I'd think he'd play plenty of short passes to an open team-mate (particularly against lone-striker formations) as that would be a better pass for the team than a hoof up field (unless high mentality and high tempo tells him that a hoof is more beneficial to the team way of playing).

In all your examples, the player who plays the direct ball is under pressure. It might be a coincidence and a few pictures isn't solid proof anyway.

This is a good point I think but in each example the ball-player had easier options to keep the ball. They had a modest mentality so those options are perfectly viable and keeping the ball is more important than a true 50/50 ball forward (this would be different with a higher mentality). Also, only the first example where Sandro plays the ball forward is the pass speculative, the other 2 examples were absolutely pinpoint and would not of resulted in a chance if they weren't (this could, of course, been down to luck but if you attempt it and complete it, is it luck or skill? Hmm...the more I practise the luckier I get!). If they had had no other options (even Sandro has shorter, more conservative options and Man Utd are marking very well) or I had been playing an 'attacking' strategy then it would make more sense that they have played speculative balls forward but I believe these passes were very much part of their decision-making process and that they would of been far less inclined to play them with a shorter passing instruction.

I also agree with you that quoting the manual is frought with danger which is why I hadn't considered it before writing the post!

[davehanson]

I read through this thread last night, and must admit I was a little amazed - and confused to a certain extent, by what I had read. I guess like most people who play the game, or indeed watch football, the definition of what short, mixed and long passing means is fairly obvious, or at least it should be.

What furiousuk (and it is a great write up by the way - full credit for that) is saying is that by selecting long passing players will choose to play a long passing game. They can also play short passes, but it gives them the option to play long passes if they are on.

I have to say that I agree with dakka on this subject. I think that the online manual is badly worded in this respect. I play FM at a lot of different levels, from non-league to premiership, and perhaps the way that top players in the premiership play the game is different to how lesser players will play the game. By that I mean, in the example(s) that furiosuk gave in his opening few posts, it is obvious he is using a top premiership club, typified by the players he is using (Hulk, Sandro, Douglas Costa et al). Look at the passing options each player has - loads of options for the man on the ball. In each case that has been highlighted the player on the ball has 3 or 4 good passing options. When you combine these options with the players ability (passing, technique, creativity etc), his PPM's (if he has any - ie tried killer balls) and his other settings (creative freedom & mentality specifically) this leads to the player trying a 'hollywood' pass. Because of his ability, the ability of his team mates to find space and the strength of the opposition it appears that long passing increases the range of options open to a player when in reality all it is, is a long passing game with the players other instructions taken into account.

Now, if you try the same system at a much lower level - Luton Town for example, you will find a totally different outcome. Players at that level can't perform as you are suggesting, so the result is to just hoof the ball 40 yards up the pitch. Why? Well, their abilities won't allow them to 'see' other options open to them, and even if they do see such options they do not have the ability to perform them. I will use furiousuk's Everton example in post 3. If Luton's equivelent Sandro (figure 3) received that ball in that area with the same set of 'long ball' instructions Sandro has got now what would happen? The ball would simply be played long, over the top, in the hope that the number 10 might be able to outrun the defender. Why would he do that? Well for a start the other options (Luiz 21 specifically) would not be there for him as his team mates do not posses the kind of off the ball, anticipation, decision attributes that they do at the top end. Therefore a lower level Luiz would never have made that run. Even by some miracle they did make a similar run, is the lower level Sandro able to make such a pass? No, probably not.

Long pass, in my opinion means just that, long pass. Get the ball forward shout increases the tempo and passing range, and makes players play a more direct, forward passing game. What makes it successful is, 1. the ability of the player on the ball to produce a decent long pass, and 2. the ability of his teammates to find space to make those hollywood balls successful.

[furiousuk]

That's a great post Dave, fantastic points (dakka makes good points too I should stress!).

I completely agree that at the lower levels players won't have the options (even if they could see them) that my players have. I am indeed a very top club and have worked hard to get a system where my players have plenty of options (my team is packed with anticipation and off the ball in those games, mainly because I was against weaker opposition who were playing tight, even Man Utd will be cautious against me). Certainly I would not of been able to play this way in the lower leagues.

You make a great point that my players simply have more options than League 1 players. The reason I don't see hoofs forward (not very often anyway!) is, as you say, because my players almost always have a better option. Players at a lower level will play those semi-aimless balls more often simply because they won't have, or won't see, or can't perform, those shorter, more intricate passes.

My style is probably closest to Mourinho's Chelsea of yesteryear (formationally and philosophically it's pretty similar - a battering ram style of play with incredibly physical and mentally strong players rather than players with an abundance of technical ability). Whilst this is a fairly direct style of play I will, on plenty of occasions, play totally different. I'll get my technical visionaries on, I'll get my hard-working awesome-off-the-ball forwards on and I'll push up, play wider (to increase gaps), increase through balls and shorten the passing length (sometimes even to short passing - maybe notch 5/6). When I do this my players aren't just encouraged to play shorter balls, I feel they are actively restricted from playing longer balls and they tend not to. I'll still see the odd longer pass (due to high CF) but I often lose the ball with this style of play because my players aren't willing to spray the ball out to a supporting FB, something that will keep me the ball when nothing else is on. I'll also still see long balls forward from my defenders, but these are clearances and these are different (my team isn't particularly good in the air and even if my FC wins the header there isn't anyone to collect the knockdown anyway!).

I can completely understand that, functionally, the slider actually produces a different result for lower league teams. It still works in the same way (whether that is as a restrictive measure or a tendency modifier) but you'll see different results.

Something I hid in the OP (should of made this more visible) is that I feel a technical side benefits more than a poorer side from increasing the passing length. As you've mentioned (far better than I did I should add!) a good, technical side will still produce many options for a player whereas a poorer side won't produce so many options and they'll end up playing the long ball more. This isn't to say that you've encouraged the long ball, just that it's the most viable option for players outside the top flight in many cases.

Surely if it was a tendency modifier I'd see balls like this with an average passing length as players would be free to choose? I normally play games with the passing length at default and don't see these types of passes attempted as often. Conversely, I don't see aimless long balls with a longer passing length which leads me to believe that I haven't encouraged long balls just by raising passing length instruction.

[davehanson]

Surely if it was a tendency modifier I'd see balls like this with an average passing length as players would be free to choose? I normally play games with the passing length at default and don't see these types of passes attempted as often. Conversely, I don't see aimless long balls with a longer passing length which leads me to believe that I haven't encouraged long balls just by raising passing length instruction.

But you won't see them as often. It is mixed passing, which obviously varies from 1 click above short, to 1 click below direct. Now saying it is left smack bang in the middle, it means that the player (imo) is encouraged to play all types of passes, whatever he feels is the right ball at the time, whether that be short, long, direct or whatever. So, his passes will be exactly that - mixed. There won't be as many long passes.

If he is set to play short passes, you will see predominantly short passes from the player. Obviously, occasionally, you will see a long pass - due to various factors (clearances etc). If you instruct a player to play a long passing game then you will see more long passes than you would do with a short passing game.

And, you are not seeing aimless long balls due to the factors I mentioned before. Your players are good enough on the ball, and good enough off the ball to make your team successful using a long(er) passing game.

I believe that there is a big difference between a long-ball game and a long-passing game. I know it may seem daft, but to me a long-ball game is typified by the Wimbeldon team(s) of the late 80's and early 90's, pumping the ball forward to the likes of John Fashanu and later John Hartson. Their players didn't have the technical ability to create space and play intricate football. They used a big target man to hoof the ball up to and work off him via his flick-on's etc.

I am a United fan and I would say we use quite a long passing game. It certainly isn't short like Barcelona or Arsenal try to play. The difference between us and Wimbledon is the quality of the players. We don't hoof the ball up to a target man. Players like Rooney, Nani, Valencia etc are clever enough players to pull wide, pull into space, and we then have people like Scholes & Carrick who are good enough to not only spot these runs, but good enough to execute a pass, sometimes under pressure.

Chelsea were the same under Mourinho. They had a focal point in Drogba, but at their best with Robben & Joe Cole able to drift into areas where they were hard to mark, people like Lampard were able to successfully ping long passes to them.

[jaycar]

Another quality read Furious

[furiousuk]

Yeah, it's quite hard to draw a line under the specifics but I think we're basically saying the same thing - that a good team employing long passing instructions will not suddenly attempt to play the long ball game. But maybe a lesser team under the same conditions would (due to other factors that have been discussed) - the long ball game is notoriously difficult (if not impossible fully) to implement in FM, I'd argue that's because a long passing instruction does NOT encourage longer passes.

I think this all highlights the importance of player selection which is a testament to the game - that players can vary so differently given the same instructions, just as they would do in real life, but I'm digressing a little.

I think the common misconception is that increasing the passing slider will automatically mean your team starts playing long ball stuff. I'd still argue that if you combined long passing instructions with 'play narrower', 'push higher up' and 'pass to feet' you wouldn't see many longer passes at all, particularly if you're also on a small pitch with good players.

Another quality read Furious

Thanks

[spur80]

A very good and interesting thread

I assume we have two types of concepts when we are discussing passing: Ability and tactical instruction.

The players ability: passing, technique, creativity, flair, decision, team work are some of the attributes which comes into play when a player is passing the ball. There are also the PPM's.

I would assume that it's the players ability which decide the amount of passing option. It had been covered in previous post, that vision (creativity) is the players ability to see

his team mates, so it doesn't make sense if you can have a tactical instruction which can dictate which team mates he can see or not.

I would assume that it's the tactical instruction, which determines which of these options the player should choose. I believe the key-word is 'instruction', so you tell the player

which option the player should take or not.

I think there is several tactical instruction, which affects the passing.

a) mentality

b) creative freedom

c) passing

d) through balls

e) tempo

f) time wasting

g) counter attack

h) focus passing

i) play maker option

j) target man option

k) crossing

There is a lot of types of instructions, but intuitively I would say the difference between short-passing and long-passing game is the decision-making of the player affected by the tactical instructions. E.g. I'm more inclined to say the passing-slider is

a decision modifier, telling the player to make short or long passes.

At last I will throw this idea into the discussion: We could assume that the ME categorize or assess each passing option a player has into a decision-making process. E.g. some passing options are hard to execute, some are passing options are marked, some passing options could lead to a goal, some passing options are the play maker etc.

This could lead to interesting questions like what kind of passing decisions would be likely if a player had a short passing instruction with through ball often with low mentality and creative freedom? Just a thought :-)

[Cleon]

I would assume that it's the players ability which decide the amount of passing option. It had been covered in previous post, that vision (creativity) is the players ability to see

his team mates, so it doesn't make sense if you can have a tactical instruction which can dictate which team mates he can see or not.

Creativity is not his ability to see his teammates (that's teamwork), creativity is the ability to see what options are available rather than which player is available.

I would assume that it's the tactical instruction, which determines which of these options the player should choose. I believe the key-word is 'instruction', so you tell the player

which option the player should take or not.

The instructions tell the player to try it 'more often' than he normally does. How successfull and actually how often comes down to the players actual attributes.

The most important thing to remember when deciding the passing to give a player is tempo. Tempo controls the speed and urgency of how your team plays. So in short, tempo can affect how successful they are along with the players actual attributes.

This could lead to interesting questions like what kind of passing decisions would be likely if a player had a short passing instruction with through ball often with low mentality and creative freedom? Just a thought :-)

The players decision making, teamwork, determination, anticipation, flair and technique would take over. But you need to remember that most through balls are nearly always short passes anyway.

[furiousuk]

I would assume that it's the players ability which decide the amount of passing option. It had been covered in previous post, that vision (creativity) is the players ability to see his team mates, so it doesn't make sense if you can have a tactical instruction which can dictate which team mates he can see or not.

It's not that he can't see them, it's just that the tactical instructions help to shape which of those options he'll be more or less likely to execute. As you say, his vision dictates what he sees (of which creativity is crucial but other attributes also have a say) and pretty much how he sees it. The tactical instructions don't really have any affect on the options a player sees but they have a big influence on which option he'll choose, of which passing length instruction also plays a role.

I don't know how SI have chosen to implement things (it doesn't matter anyway) but it's likely they've used a 'weighted' system that gives each option a series of weights and the one chosen is the one with the highest weighting (this is a theory from real-life so it's perfectly valid in a philosophical debate about decision-making). Things that affect the weightings are the abilities of the player (i.e. a highly technical player is more likely to try the more difficult ball because he is more likely to pull it off, flair plays a big role here too but that's a whole different discussion) and the tactical instructions you've given them.

For example, my midfield are generally pretty good on the ball. They all have very good mental abilities so they'll see most options available to them and they'll more than likely make the best option (I won't discuss what constitutes the best option ). They also have a lot of options because most of my players are also good off-the-ball. So, at any given moment my player on the ball has most of the available list 'in his head' to choose from. Each of these options is assessed for viability (this is all to do with vision) - if the recipient is under pressure it'll be weighted lower, if the player is wide open it'll be weighted higher, if the player is in a position to score it'll be weighted even higher still (this is all linked to the decision-making ability and vision of the player in question).

Next, the tactical instructions provide their weightings. A high mentality increases the weighting of more direct options (as they will generally be closer to goal and therefore intrinsically more dangerous than other passes - I'm not sure how far ahead an FM player can actually think, probably not far), a low mentality increases weighting of conservative options and possibly decreases aggressive high risk/reward passes. Creative freedom effectively levels out weightings so they all end up closer together which means players are more likely to choose any of the options rather than strictly following instructions. In my view, a short passing length decreases the weighting for long passes meaning that they are less likely to be chosen (they might still be chosen though if the original weighting was high enough compared to other options). In contrast, a high passing length just leaves weightings where they are meaning that the player is free to choose where they pass and the longer passes aren't restricted from being chosen by having a lower weighting.

I was trying not to be too verbose but failed miserably

edit: Beaten to the quick again, I write too slowly!!

[spur80]

It's not that he can't see them, it's just that the tactical instructions help to shape which of those options he'll be more or less likely to execute. As you say, his vision dictates what he sees (of which creativity is crucial but other attributes also have a say) and pretty much how he sees it. The tactical instructions don't really have any affect on the options a player sees but they have a big influence on which option he'll choose, of which passing length instruction also plays a role.

I don't know how SI have chosen to implement things (it doesn't matter anyway) but it's likely they've used a 'weighted' system that gives each option a series of weights and the one chosen is the one with the highest weighting (this is a theory from real-life so it's perfectly valid in a philosophical debate about decision-making). Things that affect the weightings are the abilities of the player (i.e. a highly technical player is more likely to try the more difficult ball because he is more likely to pull it off, flair plays a big role here too but that's a whole different discussion) and the tactical instructions you've given them.

For example, my midfield are generally pretty good on the ball. They all have very good mental abilities so they'll see most options available to them and they'll more than likely make the best option (I won't discuss what constitutes the best option ). They also have a lot of options because most of my players are also good off-the-ball. So, at any given moment my player on the ball has most of the available list 'in his head' to choose from. Each of these options is assessed for viability (this is all to do with vision) - if the recipient is under pressure it'll be weighted lower, if the player is wide open it'll be weighted higher, if the player is in a position to score it'll be weighted even higher still (this is all linked to the decision-making ability and vision of the player in question).

Next, the tactical instructions provide their weightings. A high mentality increases the weighting of more direct options (as they will generally be closer to goal and therefore intrinsically more dangerous than other passes - I'm not sure how far ahead an FM player can actually think, probably not far), a low mentality increases weighting of conservative options and possibly decreases aggressive high risk/reward passes. Creative freedom effectively levels out weightings so they all end up closer together which means players are more likely to choose any of the options rather than strictly following instructions. In my view, a short passing length decreases the weighting for long passes meaning that they are less likely to be chosen (they might still be chosen though if the original weighting was high enough compared to other options). In contrast, a high passing length just leaves weightings where they are meaning that the player is free to choose where they pass and the longer passes aren't restricted from being chosen by having a lower weighting.

I was trying not to be too verbose but failed miserably

edit: Beaten to the quick again, I write too slowly!!

I think you have explained your thoughts very well here and I totally agrees with what you are saying :-)

I think it would be interesting to take your theory about the ME inner workings and combine it with the players abilities to start making predictions of what you are going to see in the game. I believe Cleon she has already started doing this in several threads, but this would be focused on getting the ball forward.

[spur80]

Creativity is not his ability to see his teammates (that's teamwork), creativity is the ability to see what options are available rather than which player is available.

I disagree.

I would say creativity is the ability to see options available including passing options = his team mates.

In real life team work is about coordination, personality trait, working together etc. It would be strange if a player with team work = 1, should be able to see his team mates like he was blind.

I would rather say team work is a weight on his decision-making, where he chooses to not see his team mates, which has the same effect as not seeing them ;-)

[Cleon]

I disagree.

I would say creativity is the ability to see options available including passing options = his team mates.

In real life team work is about coordination, personality trait, working together etc. It would be strange if a player with team work = 1, should be able to see his team mates like he was blind.

I would rather say team work is a weight on his decision-making, where he chooses to not see his team mates, which has the same effect as not seeing them ;-)

Creativity is the ability to see what 'tactical options' are available, i.e an opening, pass, throughball etc. Obviosuly if he sees a pass to a player then he sees the player. However the way you worded your original post was that creativity was to see 'the player'. I was just pointing out that's not true

[jimbobBRFC]

Excellent read Furious, has really helped me get back into a save i'd fallen out of love with. Playing as Blackburn 4-1-2-1-2 and I was using short passing. After reading this I went on and changed team insturctions to default, and went on and changed player instructions individully. Gave my CB's quite short passing as I want them to try and set up mvoes with simple passes. They are technically brilliant. My DM (DLP) had quite long passing and lots of creatvie freedom, I wanted him to play the long balls, but as you mentioned he still plays the short one two's etc. Both my Strikers on short, my treq just does what he wants.

Im currently on a 4 match winning streak highlights being 3-2 over Arsenal, 4-1 over florentina and 4-0 over rivals Bolton. Cheers Furious Outstanding thread

[furiousuk]

I think you have explained your thoughts very well here and I totally agrees with what you are saying :-)

I think it would be interesting to take your theory about the ME inner workings and combine it with the players abilities to start making predictions of what you are going to see in the game. I believe Cleon she has already started doing this in several threads, but this would be focused on getting the ball forward.

I think we all do this (or should do) to some extent. It's that predictive intuition which only comes with experience (and actually watching what happens of course) which often hampers new players and leads to frustration with this complex game.

As an example of where I got it wrong I've just played as Brazil against England in a November friendly (I've written more about it in another thread so I'll try and keep this to the point). I play a narrow formation and wanted to go straight through the heart of England so 'exploited the middle', shortened passing by 'retaining possession' and 'worked the ball into box' to make sure my guys didn't take speculative pot shots. I had players with great creativity and very good off-the-ball so predicted I'd do well. I was also banking on how England would play (hard-workers, press hard, try and shrink the pitch) and wanted to try and keep the ball (at least early on), move around and tire out the hard pressing English.

Well, England did play exactly like I thought but my tactical scheme was way off, particularly as I failed to factor in that it would probably be raining (which it was). Their hard pressing just meant I couldn't play tight stuff through the middle. My GK is instructed to pop it out to my DL so I can build up from the back but the short passing instruction really stuffed him up - the English MR/L pushed my FB's really hard which put them under pressure, their FC's pushed hard too so the short option to DC wasn't on and Shelvey did really well as hard-working MCa to also push and put pressure on, all this resulted in no short options for my FB's and a loss of possession. It wasn't until I extended the passing length that the FB's could at least try a better ball further up the pitch (which had limited success but was an improvement).

It just goes to show that you can make your predictions but you also have to accept that you can be totally wrong!!

[llama3]

been tracking this thread for a couple of days now - impressed with some of the points that have gone on here. I would also point out the link with creative freedom too - your instructions for short passing may be ignored for example if you have too much freedom allowed, and it is therefore important to try and ensure you have enough control over what is going on during the game on-pitch. Also consider mentality as well - someone more attack-minded is more likely to try and play a more direct route to goal than someone defensively minded

[furiousuk]

been tracking this thread for a couple of days now - impressed with some of the points that have gone on here. I would also point out the link with creative freedom too - your instructions for short passing may be ignored for example if you have too much freedom allowed, and it is therefore important to try and ensure you have enough control over what is going on during the game on-pitch. Also consider mentality as well - someone more attack-minded is more likely to try and play a more direct route to goal than someone defensively minded

Mentality is crucial in deciding the general direction of passes as you say and I think this is often overlooked. It's always tempting to play control or attacking as standard if you're the better team but the raised mentality can often hamper you if you're after patient stuff. I'm a fan of using counter and standard strategies more often, even though I'm almost always the better side. If you get your combination of shouts correct then it's quite possible to get many more chances using a standard strategy than an attacking one (this'll depend on your team and tactics of course).

[llama3]

Mentality is crucial in deciding the general direction of passes as you say and I think this is often overlooked. It's always tempting to play control or attacking as standard if you're the better team but the raised mentality can often hamper you if you're after patient stuff. I'm a fan of using counter and standard strategies more often, even though I'm almost always the better side. If you get your combination of shouts correct then it's quite possible to get many more chances using a standard strategy than an attacking one (this'll depend on your team and tactics of course).

completely agree, often nowadays as favourites I will use standard/control strategy to try and dictate the game instead. i am also wary of being caught on the break too.

[Cleon]

completely agree, often nowadays as favourites I will use standard/control strategy to try and dictate the game instead. i am also wary of being caught on the break too.

I often use standard for full games if I think the team is playing well enough.

[llama3]

I often use standard for full games if I think the team is playing well enough.

it makes sense, it can often give a great element of control to games, and i am much less inclined to not take an opponent seriously than a few years ago

[Cleon]

it makes sense, it can often give a great element of control to games, and i am much less inclined to not take an opponent seriously than a few years ago

Even if I was for some reason to change to attacking ot control, I always start the game with standard. That's what I class as my starting tactic and strategy. The rest is altered in game as it makes more sense to get your tactic fluid by been standard and use that as a start point. I think in the last 2 seasons I've only changed strategy a handful of times if that.

[llama3]

Even if I was for some reason to change to attacking ot control, I always start the game with standard. That's what I class as my starting tactic and strategy. The rest is altered in game as it makes more sense to get your tactic fluid by been standard and use that as a start point. I think in the last 2 seasons I've only changed strategy a handful of times if that.

i find it is the best strategy for my system as i heavily weight my team to ball retention and it works excellently with it, combined with my removal of the DLP and BWM that were formerly cornerstones of my set up i am much harder to dispossess and force into errors

[spur80]

I have wondered about the mentality slider when it comes to decision-making.

So, what kind of behaviour do you think there is between defensive, normal and attacking mentality when it comes to passing the ball?

I know, for the mentality slider, there is a link to positioning, so you could assume that mentality only affected the player's decision-making when it comes to movement on the pitch, but it

doesn't seems to be logical if it's should be so restricted.

[Colski]

I've read about 40% of this thread (an interesting debate btw) but am at work so I'm a bit limited, so feel free to point out if this is incorrect. The gist of furiousuk's point, as I read it, is that increasing the passing slider (or implementing the Get the Ball Forward shout - as this is just a shortcut to increasing the global passing slider) "unlocks" longer passes, so to speak. I think I read a point stating that a passing style of 'mixed' would mean the player would be restricted to only play short to medium passes. A question I have, in this case: How would you instruct your player to make medium to long passes, thereby restricting short passes? How would I encourage my team to play a long-balls?

The way I see it, if we were to accept Furiousuk's theorum then this would not be possible? Are we to assume, then, that a player cannot be instructed to purely play long-balls - merely that I have opened this up as an option for him? Or would this depend on the the creative-freedom slider? This seems very contradictory to the nature of the other sliders, for which the further the marker is to the right, the greater the extent the particular option is implemented, i.e. the greater the extent a player will close down opposition.

[James9]

Introduction

There's been a few threads about passing length and how it translates into the ME but there are still a lot of misconceptions about how this tactical instruction actually works. Getting the passing length right (in conjunction with other tactical instructions) is crucial if you are trying to develop a nice balance between conservatism and chance creation. I haven't started a thread in a while but I've been planning to talk about passing length for quite some time and want to try and explain why I feel that technical teams actually benefit more from shouting 'Get The Ball Forward' and that the shout is definitely not the consign of managers who want to recreate 80's/90's Wimbledon. I'll provide a couple of examples too and try to stick on topic!

Getting The Ball Forward

This shout simply increases the passing length but there is nothing simple about how it can drastically affect how your team will perform on the pitch. There seems to be a common misconception that increasing your passing length will result in your team aiming for the long ball at every opportunity but the truth is that this just isn't how the instruction works. Passing length effectively restricts or allows the player to play passes over a certain distance, it does not directly encourage either a short or long ball to be played, the choice of pass is mostly down to the player. A quick example is probably in order to reinforce this assertion:

1: The ball is played forward from Kelava to the open player, Sandro.

2: Most settings at this stage of the game are pretty neutral so width & depth are average, mentality is standard and my formation is evenly matched with that of Man Utd. If I had instructed a short passing length then Sandro would be left just the purple passes (possibly also a conservative ball to 9, although 9 has already started to make a run so maybe not). If I was also playing with a very high mentality then Sandro would be (tactically) unwilling to play those conservative shorter passes which would leave him in a quandry, when this happens in FM the player often delays on the ball and is tackled. As it is, Sandro has a pretty average mentality meaning that he is free to play those shorter passes but his passing length is also instructed to be long which means that he is tactically free to play a longer pass if he can see it. He can still play those conservative short passes if he wants, I haven't encouraged him to play the long ball but I haven't restricted him either. Sandro has good vision and he sees the run of 9, he also has good technicals so he knows he can make a good stab at playing the long ball, his incredible decision making then says that a long ball into space is the best option and he executes it perfectly and creates a decent chance for my side.

Balance

In the above example there is nothing wrong with Sandro playing the conservative short pass, nothing wrong at all and if I was 1-0 up then I'd probably prefer he does that most of the time but the scoreline is 0-0 and the teams and formations are evenly matched. It would take something special to unlock the solid Man Utd defence so it was time to just let my creators play which is exactly what increasing the passing length does. It does not encourage long balls forward, it simply allows them and understanding this concept is, for me at least, crucial in creating a balance between creating good chances and not giving the ball away needlessly.

Poor players, or players with poor vision or poor technique, wouldn't be able to see or execute the pass which Sandro made above (or the other players in the following examples) and so playing with a low to average mentality and a long passing length simply increases the chances that poorer players will make a poor decision. With superb players (like Sandro) I want them to be free to use their immense vision and technique to the fullest. I want them to make the decision whether to play it safe or whether to try something spectacular. I want them to be free to exploit their flair.

A Short Passing Length Decreases Options, a Longer Passing Length Increases Them

This mantra forms a big part of how I approach games now that my team and squad are excellent and that I am normally the favourite. If I'm facing a stingy and stoic defence I want my most creative players to be free to choose the best option. By restricting the passing length I would simply be restricting the options available to my most talented players which is probably not going to cut it. Once I've gone a goal or 2 up I might restrict passing length in order to control the ball but I wouldn't do it to 'unlock' a defence.

I've tried to keep this post short and to the point but I think a few examples are necessary to garner a bit more interest and hopefully encourage some comments about passing length and how it fits with other instructions.

Furiousuk could you give some advice and help on the passing instructions for my team. I playing with Arsenal and my formation is 433/451. From reading your post on getting the ball forward and also how you set up your team tactical I would like to model my team on your tactical set up

My players passing instructions are as follows

GK - 5

FB - 10

CB - 10 ( One of my centre backs is set up as a ball playing defender)

DLP - 20 ( I have given my DLP creative freedom - much)

DMC - 7

Advance Playmaker Support - 17

Inside Forward - 17

Advance Forward - 17

All of my defenders have normal creative freedom 12 clicks on the slider. My inside forwards and advance striker has creative freedom of 13 on slider and the advance playmaker has creative freedom of 15 on slider. I have drop the DLP mentality to 8 on slider to ensure that he stays back and dictates the play from deep. I am a bit confused on what mentality to give to my DMC.

My team instructions as as follows:

Balance

Standard

Closing Down - Press More

Passing - Default

Creative Freedom - More Expressive

Marking - Zonal

Crossing - Drilled

Roaming - Default

If you could let me know how you set up your player instructions that would be very helpful

[James9]

Furiousk could you give me an example of what passing instructions you give to your defenders, midfielders and attackers. I am also using a 451/433 also and I am having some problems with understanding what passing instructions to give them. I am using number sliders so if you can let me know what number range to give them that would be great. I am going to leave their mentalities and creative freedom as default tactic creator but let me know if you think I should change this aswell

[furiousuk]

I have wondered about the mentality slider when it comes to decision-making.

So, what kind of behaviour do you think there is between defensive, normal and attacking mentality when it comes to passing the ball?

I know, for the mentality slider, there is a link to positioning, so you could assume that mentality only affected the player's decision-making when it comes to movement on the pitch, but it

doesn't seems to be logical if it's should be so restricted.

The mentality slider is pretty much involved in each of the 3 main areas - movement/positioning, ball usage and defensive. Very generally, higher mentalities move players further up the pitch, encourages them to be more direct (i.e. forward passes) with their ball usage and, I think, encourages them to be more aggressive in defense (this last one is debatable but a team wanting to attack needs to get the ball back quickly so it makes sense that mentality is also a consideration of defensive decision-making). Mentality never works in isolation so each of the 3 areas considers a few other sliders at least.

Generally speaking higher mentalities mean that the players are under far more pressure tactically to get the ball in the net which generally requires that the ball is closer to the oppositions goal. This means passing the ball forward and quickly (linked to tempo). This is why it is very very difficult to get possession tactic working with attacking mentalities, even with control it can be difficult to see 60%+ possession because the raised mentality encourages 50/50 balls to played aggressively rather than conservatively. The lower mentalities can often mean your players are under less pressure to play the ball forward so, in theory, you'll see more sideways and backwards passes (i.e. the conservative option). This is all linked to player movement, finding space, passing options etc.

It's debatable but getting your mentality structure right is the key thing with any tactic. It's pretty much the foundation of your tactic - if you get it drastically wrong then everything else you do is likely to made much more difficult. Luckily, with the TC it's dead easy getting a good (and logical) mentality structure!

The way I see it, if we were to accept Furiousuk's theorum then this would not be possible? Are we to assume, then, that a player cannot be instructed to purely play long-balls - merely that I have opened this up as an option for him?

Yep, pretty much. Have a read of any thread where they are trying to play the archetypal English long ball style (a'la 80s/90s Wimbledon, Watford), it's just doesn't seem to be possible to really replicate this style of play in FM and it's likely to be the interaction of mentality and passing sliders that causes it. A long ball style is naturally quite attacking because it looks to get the ball into a dangerous area of the pitch very quickly but in FM this means that everybody pushes up and may well move forward too which isn't always typical of the style.

The passing slider works the same as the others - moving it to the right makes the option more likely, it's just that it doesn't restrict the opposite. Passing is not a mutually exclusive slider so you can't use it just as a bias slider (i.e. you can't play deep and high at the same time, they are mutually exclusive, but you can play short and long passes in the same move), it an allowance/restrictive slider. In terms of the type of passes that your players will actually play, it depends on the other sliders too, as well as the positioning of your team and the opposition.

Furiousk could you give me an example of what passing instructions you give to your defenders, midfielders and attackers. I am also using a 451/433 also and I am having some problems with understanding what passing instructions to give them. I am using number sliders so if you can let me know what number range to give them that would be great. I am going to leave their mentalities and creative freedom as default tactic creator but let me know if you think I should change this aswell

I just use TC defaults as they are well balanced with other sliders (such as mentality and tempo) so I get a fairly logical result i.e. if I use the retain possession shout I'll see far far less long passes whereas if I 'Get the ball forward' I'll see more. Simple. I'd strongly suggest using TC defaults and change it on a game by game basis. If your usual gameplan is to use short or long passing then set that in your tactic but don't be afraid to use the opposite passing style (or default, works really well most of the time, I always start with default and will often switch passing length a couple of times depending on the situation in the game) as the situation dictates.

[josev23]

have you tried switching the slider for certain players to the longest passing possible so they can pass it anywhere they want to? it may be useful for a deep-lying playmaker

[Midnight Rob]

A Short Passing Length Decreases Options, a Longer Passing Length Increases Them

[/i][/size]

This mantra forms a big part of how I approach games now that my team and squad are excellent and that I am normally the favourite. If I'm facing a stingy and stoic defence I want my most creative players to be free to choose the best option. By restricting the passing length I would simply be restricting the options available to my most talented players which is probably not going to cut it. Once I've gone a goal or 2 up I might restrict passing length in order to control the ball but I wouldn't do it to 'unlock' a defence.

If you have a strong, gelled and cohesive set up then why would you want to play more direct and high tempo?

The chances are that you will encounter more teams sitting back and defending deep. Against this problem you should be controlling tempo and encouraging players to be patient and pick the right pass. Other strategies simply run the risk of wasting possession and even losing shape. The fact you are being successful says more about how strong your team is and how the opposition in some instances are probably set up quite poorly.

Playing more directly at a higher tempo is really for playing on the break. And playing the long ball is a strategy for technically weaker trying to exploit a percentage of getting the ball into the mixer as many times as they can and making the game a more physical encounter.