Tactics, Asymmetry, Balance and Players.

[SFraser]

Simplicity has its virtues but in football and football manager achieving simplicity can be a complex and detailed task for the manager. Equal to this point is the fact that simple is not always best nor does it always get the best from the players of whom its asks the simple questions. No matter the theoretical perfection that the manager has in mind he is at all times tasked with taking the players at his disposal and unifying them into a team. Football is a team game but a team is composed of players. The two are not distinct, managing the team and managing the players as a single organism is what brings success.

As a long time Manchester United fan I have approached each C/FM with the same desire to replicate what I see in the real team within my United saves. As a long time football fan and strategy fan I find myself watching football to observe the tactics rather than the celebrities, and with each mistake or outstanding performance I see the managers frustration or ineptitude or success at his job with those players. Above all else football is a managers game. It is a game of motivation, of tactics, of mentoring and education. It is a game of choosing the players and the tactics and of providing every imaginable incentive and necessary direction for that united organism to succeed. Football manager surpasses every other football or management simulation because it understands and replicates this fundamental football truth. It surpasses every other strategy game because it models and represents the longest lived, most widespread, most widely played and therefore most evolved tactical contest in human existence. Football is like chess but with infinate variability, you have your pieces and the opponent has his, now make your moves. The difference is that the pieces are human and the prizes are wealth and immortality.

That last analogy sums up my personal approach to the tactical side of FM, atleast within the context of constructing my own team tactics. I must confess to lacking the patience to pick apart each individual opponent in minute detail across an entire season, although doing so would improve my performances immeasurably. This is after all what Sir Alex gets paid to do and has made it his life's work to do, while I myself have to pay to pretend on a computer game. As Keane says "fail to prepare, prepare to fail." It is a good thing I play a computer game with a scripted AI otherwise I would be as successful at FM as I am at real life football management.

My desire to replicate my tactical understanding of Manchester United in recent seasons has been immeasurably assisted by the principles of TT&F but this merely hints at the way in a general fashion, something the authors have never denied. Irrespective of success there is no "one super tactic fits all teams" set of instructions. TT&F hints at structural complexity the manual avoids, but cannot unlock the door of a mind closed to the concepts of players, roles and function. It is clear that on these forums there are people that not only "get" football but also understand how to replicate or interperate their understanding via the match engine. The former are few, the latter I am envious of. The combination of both numbers less than the fingers of one hand.

To return to the analogy of chess, the players are your pieces and the pitch is the board. You can set them up how wish and make any number of moves in 90 minutes. This is truly the fundamental aspect of football management. You have had your time to train players, to interact with them personally, to discipline them, to choose you starting eleven etc. but your job boils down to taking these pieces and setting them up. Those that state "I play 4-4-2 and my strikers are not scoring" are in all honestly beyond help. Why should you care if your strikers are not scoring? What matters is the result. What matters is their performance in the roles you wish them to play. What matters is your team selection and tactical setup. What matters is whether or not you are succeeding in playing the football you want or need to play to achieve the results that you want or need to achieve.

The fundamentals of football management reduce to tactics, asymmetry, balance and players. Tactics is both the first and final concern, you understand what needs to be achieved and how you can achieve it, then you must produce a tactical setup capable of achieving it. Asymmetry is both a blessing and a curse but is none the less inevitable. Your players are not twins of each other and so are capable of different things and make different decisions, but equally this asymmetry provides options and possibilities for the manager to exploit. Balance is key so that both attack and defence cannot be easilly overcome. Players are the tools and components of this entire system. If there is one sentence that can sum up both the problems and solutions of FM09 then it is this: the manager must understand the asymmetry of his players and unite them into a balanced tactic.

The game of football is such that balance is not a question of numbers but a question of ability, threat and options. Football is concerned with goal mouth to goal mouth action not flank to flank, yet for some reason a great many questions, tactics and discussion revolves around achieving or slightly varying the flank to flank balance of a team. The balance of the flanks is a concern only in defence, and then only when the manager is unsure of the exact threat of the opposition. Flank to flank balance looks pretty on the formation sheet, but is of absolutely no relevance whatsoever when it comes to the key question of scoring goals and has minimal true relevance when it comes to defending against threats. Balance is therefore not a question of formation symmetry but of the utilisation of player asymmetry to achieve tactical requirements. Just ask Peter Schmeichel, Steve Bruce and Gary Pallister how vital exact flank to flank balance was. Ask Yorke and Cole, Sheringham and Solskjaer, Giggs and Beckham, Ronaldo and Giggs, Rooney and Ronaldo, Evra and Brown, Keane and Scholes. Ask them how many titles.

Asymmetry is not just the fact of players at a club but it is the fundamental bedrock of a formation. Balance must be achieved not in flank to flank symmetry but in the key addressment of fundamental tactical issues through the entire team. As a whole it is the team that provides the balance, not the defence, not the midfield, not the strikers, not the pretty flank to flank equality. Through balls, crosses and long shots are the dangers that need to be nullified, or the pressure applied to the opposition, it is not the job of a manager to provide a pretty looking 4-4-2. The starting point of a formation can be 4-4-2 but if you do not take into account the asymmetry of your players then your formation and tactics are mere pretty pictures whose success is enabled by the weaknesses of a computer game.

This is what I am aiming for in my current save. Where is the balance? Where is the threat? Where is the defensive stability? Where is the attention to individual player abilities?

-------------DB-------

-----WR------------CR

PE-----------DF-------

---------MC-----------

-----NV----------GN--

------------RF--------

[micro-ice]

thanks for the interesting read sfraser.

i have tried before to give players different mentalities/ instructions e.g. i gave evra attacking mentality and gave wes brown defensive mentality(which worked), but not as far as changing the symmetry of the formation.

have you tried implementing any of your ideas with any success?

[micro-ice]

thanks for the interesting read sfraser.

i have tried before to give players different mentalities/ instructions e.g. i gave evra attacking mentality and gave wes brown defensive mentality(which worked), but not as far as changing the symmetry of the formation.

have you tried implementing any of your ideas with any success?

[Canabary]

In FM 08 my formation was basicaly

3-1-1-1-1-2-2

two cb's and a RB, one LWB, One DMC, LM, AM and RW, two strikers.

This was to reflect what I saw in United. A ronaldo that always went forwards. A gigs/Nani who held back more often than him, but still involved themselves in attack to one degree. A DM or holding midfielder that kept back , but sometimes joined in on the attack (Fletcher/Hargreaves/Carrick) an attacking midfielder or dominant midfielder who took care of all the play (Scholes/Carrick/Anderson (he was better in game )) as well as two hard-working strikers who would score the occasional goal, but mostly help the entire team.

Results were quite spectacular. I won the quadrople in my first season, Ronaldo became world player of the year with 40 goals and 10 assists. Rooney didn't get too many goals, but had a decent ammount of assists. Tevez was a mad-man, scoring like crazy if I gave him some freedom, and closed down opposition well when I didn't.

I only had problems a few times, mainly against Barca and Fullham (They always mess things up for me. Have since 2006 )

I haven't tried this in 09 though. I want to play around with other teams and try to understand the tactical system before I start my ManUtd career.

[peter-evo]

Very interesting read

[-vitalic-]

A load of sycophantic guff

[SFraser]

thanks for the interesting read sfraser.

i have tried before to give players different mentalities/ instructions e.g. i gave evra attacking mentality and gave wes brown defensive mentality(which worked), but not as far as changing the symmetry of the formation.

have you tried implementing any of your ideas with any success?

My current save is a brand new career incorporating my training and tactic ideas from previous saves. After 9 games of the season I have scored 21 goals and conceded 2. The only game I have failed to win and to completely dominate was a 1-1 draw away from home against Arsenal, where injuries and suspensions robbed me of Wingers and forced me to play a 4-5-1. Rooney has 7 starts, 6 goals and an average rating of 7.31. Ronaldo has 3 starts, 3 goals and an average rating of 7.78. Anderson has 7 starts, no goals and an average rating of 7.21

Infact the only position in my team that has players with an average rating of less than 7 is left midfield, where I cannot quite get the players positioning and role to work properly.

The initial setup for my formation on the tactic screen is 4-4-2 but each position has a completely different set of instructions and mentality. Evra has a mentality of 15, closing down of 6, FWR Often. Vidic has a mentality of 12, closing down of 8 FWR Mixed. Ferdinand has a mentality of 10, closing down of 3, FWR Rare. This allows my back four to act like a back 2 + Sweeper + offside trap if Evra is caught out of position, and tells Evra not to close down untill he gets back into position. I will experiment with the "Libero" role for Ferdinand in the future but at the moment I just want my team to gell in this formation.

two cb's and a RB, one LWB, One DMC, LM, AM and RW, two strikers.

This was to reflect what I saw in United. A ronaldo that always went forwards. A gigs/Nani who held back more often than him, but still involved themselves in attack to one degree. A DM or holding midfielder that kept back , but sometimes joined in on the attack (Fletcher/Hargreaves/Carrick) an attacking midfielder or dominant midfielder who took care of all the play (Scholes/Carrick/Anderson (he was better in game )) as well as two hard-working strikers who would score the occasional goal, but mostly help the entire team.

Results were quite spectacular. I won the quadrople in my first season, Ronaldo became world player of the year with 40 goals and 10 assists. Rooney didn't get too many goals, but had a decent ammount of assists. Tevez was a mad-man, scoring like crazy if I gave him some freedom, and closed down opposition well when I didn't.

I only had problems a few times, mainly against Barca and Fullham (They always mess things up for me. Have since 2006 )

I haven't tried this in 09 though. I want to play around with other teams and try to understand the tactical system before I start my ManUtd career.

The Match Engine of FM09 allows you to produce such dramatic variations of positioning and role from a pretty basic formation through the tactical instructions. A combination of high and low mentality to FWR rare or often for a Central Midfielder encompasses the roles of Makalele, Roy Keane, Gerrard and Pirlo.

A load of sycophantic guff

Had you ever watched football you would be aware that different players in apparently similar positions have radically different roles to play in a team, and that a team is infact nothing more than 11 different players arranged in a manner that suits there ability and deals with tactical problems. There is no such thing as a "4-4-2" in football but those that do not understand the game of football do not understand tactics and formations. And on that note you may also want to look up the word "sycophant". I can assure you that such a word does not apply to myself.

[-vitalic-]

You take yourself way too seriously, it's embarassing to watch. In the old days the game was about logging in, grinding down for a good solid session, just pure enjoyment, not listening to vapid monologues from self-absorbed tactical powerhouses such as yourself and wwfan. Please, for the good of humanity, spare us your pseudo-intellectual posturing and endless ramblings and generic diatribe about tactical theory which most probably has no bearing on the game whatsoever. Am I the only one to feel this way? Perhaps.

[peter-evo]

You take yourself way too seriously, it's embarassing to watch. In the old days the game was about logging in, grinding down for a good solid session, just pure enjoyment, not listening to vapid monologues from self-absorbed tactical powerhouses such as yourself and wwfan. Please, for the good of humanity, spare us your pseudo-intellectual posturing and endless ramblings and generic diatribe about tactical theory which most probably has no bearing on the game whatsoever. Am I the only one to feel this way? Perhaps.

I have found that following the advice and theories on here that I do a lot better and I find analysing the match-engine easier.

There are plenty of other forums so if you do not want to read this stuff you could always go there.

[SFraser]

You take yourself way too seriously, it's embarassing to watch. In the old days the game was about logging in, grinding down for a good solid session, just pure enjoyment, not listening to vapid monologues from self-absorbed tactical powerhouses such as yourself and wwfan. Please, for the good of humanity, spare us your pseudo-intellectual posturing and endless ramblings and generic diatribe about tactical theory which most probably has no bearing on the game whatsoever. Am I the only one to feel this way? Perhaps.

In the old days the game was about buying Batistuta and finishing the season on a Saturday between football practice and match of the day. SI have kept up with the competition in the ten years I have been playing C/FM and that has meant expanding a good football manager game into a great football strategy simulator.

You don't like what I am saying or how I say it but you dont add anything, while I love football and I love strategy and people seem to like what I have to say. When people stop thanking me for my contributions, stop replying to my posts and stop engaging in the discussions I bring up then I will stop regurgitating my spurious football tactical thinking and find something else to do while FM09 processes a hefty fixture list. Untill that day arrives you are welcome to ignore my threads, ignore my advice, and ignore my perspective on football tactics.

And as for taking myself too seriously, just what kind of deep thinker are you? The kind that comes to these forums to find tips or the kind that comes to these forums to write them?

[-vitalic-]

When people stop thanking me for my contributions, stop replying to my posts and stop engaging in the discussions I bring up then I will stop regurgitating my spurious football tactical thinking

I hope that day comes sooner than later

[Cleon]

I hope that day comes sooner than later

Stop being an arse or I'll remove you from here, stop spoiling the thread. If you don't agree with whats posted fine but no need to bring the thread down is there.

[Kevaldo]

I know United are good but do you really only need 9 players?!

[SFraser]

I had a few beers and missed out the final striker position. It doesn't make much difference to the point of thread.

Is it common consensus around here that football tactical asymmetry is "pseudo-intellectual posturing"? I would have thought a thread on this subject would generate a lot more discussion than it has.

[Chelsea4Lyf]

That was a very interesting read. Nice work SFraser

[Sinner264]

SI have kept up with the competition in the ten years I have been playing C/FM and that has meant expanding a good football manager game into a great football strategy simulator.

Sorry, but you are utterly wrong.

Beside pitch and (player, league, stadium) names, what is that even remotely looks like a simulation? Sliders instead of words? Generic PPMs? Inability to tell players exactly what you mean? Not being able to tell player simple command, like "Cut inside"? Simulation, mate, is where things, in essence, look like their counter-part in real life. Most topics here defy that - pick a random one and read it as a manager; total nonsense.

I play the game and I enjoy it - only because I love football, and unfortunately - there is not a better one.

But it makes no sense to call it "a great football strategy simulator".

[Ackter]

I don't get why people come to this forum if they feel that tactical discussion isn't worthwhile.

[Cleon]

I don't get why people come to this forum if they feel that tactical discussion isn't worthwhile.

To bitch, moan and slate the users who actually do contribute some kind of discussions. It's always the people who have't contributed anything in any forum who moan and ridicule.

[Sinner264]

You guys are so sweet.

[iamjerome]

whilst i can relate to this as i follow a similar path alongside with teams such as barcelona and ac milan, i've noted one glaring point i'd like to mention

Those that state "I play 4-4-2 and my strikers are not scoring" are in all honestly beyond help. Why should you care if your strikers are not scoring? What matters is the result. What matters is their performance in the roles you wish them to play. What matters is your team selection and tactical setup. What matters is whether or not you are succeeding in playing the football you want or need to play to achieve the results that you want or need to achieve.

this would only be applicable if FM wasn't bug-ridden and encompasses football perfectly, but it doesn't; it's getting better with each iteration though.

[iamjerome]

I had a few beers and missed out the final striker position. It doesn't make much difference to the point of thread.

Is it common consensus around here that football tactical asymmetry is "pseudo-intellectual posturing"? I would have thought a thread on this subject would generate a lot more discussion than it has.

you are right, and there will be more discussion. on my part, that may have to wait til tomorrow for a detailed post with regarding my own take on similar ventures since i have to research and write an analytical essay by 12.00 tomorrow.

[googoo56]

Sorry, but you are utterly wrong.

Beside pitch and (player, league, stadium) names, what is that even remotely looks like a simulation? Sliders instead of words? Generic PPMs? Inability to tell players exactly what you mean? Not being able to tell player simple command, like "Cut inside"? Simulation, mate, is where things, in essence, look like their counter-part in real life. Most topics here defy that - pick a random one and read it as a manager; total nonsense.

I play the game and I enjoy it - only because I love football, and unfortunately - there is not a better one.

But it makes no sense to call it "a great football strategy simulator".

Absolutely agreed.

[SFraser]

Sorry, but you are utterly wrong.

Beside pitch and (player, league, stadium) names, what is that even remotely looks like a simulation? Sliders instead of words? Generic PPMs? Inability to tell players exactly what you mean? Not being able to tell player simple command, like "Cut inside"? Simulation, mate, is where things, in essence, look like their counter-part in real life. Most topics here defy that - pick a random one and read it as a manager; total nonsense.

I play the game and I enjoy it - only because I love football, and unfortunately - there is not a better one.

But it makes no sense to call it "a great football strategy simulator".

Communication between the player and the game engine is easilly the most difficult and frustrating part of Football Manager there is no arguement there. I would disagree with your wider point though because principles that apply to real football apply to Football Manager, and ultimately that is the essence of a simulation. Not only do tactical principles apply from a manager perspective, but the automatic behaviour of players in response to the right instructions is logical and representative of real football. Take the defensive line for example, too much closing down on the fullbacks will result in gaps on the flanks but high closing down on a centre back will see the fullbacks tuck in and the centreback challenge for headers and challenge the midfield ball carrier while the rest of the defence reorganises.

The match engine is not perfect but this is magnified not only by the players inability to understand the means of communicating with the engine but also by his niaivety in football tactics. I come to this forum to chip in with my tuppence on what the sliders mean and my interpretation of actual football tactics and other do the same. Eventually the average player should be armed with a basic set of principles regarding communication and tactics, and will be in a better position to judge and enjoy the match engine as a simulator of football.

I think Football Manager is a great football simulator because although it is an imperfect representation of a real life sport on a computer, it is still a fundamentally accurate simulator that attempts to incorporate as many basic principles of all areas of football management into a single programme as possible, and the areas it gets wrong can be understood by the enthuisiast as an attempt and a work in progress rather than a failure.

But at the end of the day this thread is not an arguement about simulation but a statement and hopefully a discussion regarding player asymmetry and tactical balance, both ingame and in real life. No matter how inaccurate you think Football manager is, Wes Brown is not Patrice Evra either in real life or in game, and these points matter when it comes to tactics. Whether that is the tactics you watch or the tactics you build is irrelevant.

[Sinner264]

I'm sorry to have hi-jacked your topic.

I hope this discussion will be started, in a meaningful way, at some other place. Some other time, surely.

[ron.e]

Simplicity has its virtues but in football and football manager achieving simplicity can be a complex and detailed task for the manager. Equal to this point is the fact that simple is not always best nor does it always get the best from the players of whom its asks the simple questions. No matter the theoretical perfection that the manager has in mind he is at all times tasked with taking the players at his disposal and unifying them into a team. Football is a team game but a team is composed of players. The two are not distinct, managing the team and managing the players as a single organism is what brings success.

As a long time Manchester United fan I have approached each C/FM with the same desire to replicate what I see in the real team within my United saves. As a long time football fan and strategy fan I find myself watching football to observe the tactics rather than the celebrities, and with each mistake or outstanding performance I see the managers frustration or ineptitude or success at his job with those players. Above all else football is a managers game. It is a game of motivation, of tactics, of mentoring and education. It is a game of choosing the players and the tactics and of providing every imaginable incentive and necessary direction for that united organism to succeed. Football manager surpasses every other football or management simulation because it understands and replicates this fundamental football truth. It surpasses every other strategy game because it models and represents the longest lived, most widespread, most widely played and therefore most evolved tactical contest in human existence. Football is like chess but with infinate variability, you have your pieces and the opponent has his, now make your moves. The difference is that the pieces are human and the prizes are wealth and immortality.

That last analogy sums up my personal approach to the tactical side of FM, atleast within the context of constructing my own team tactics. I must confess to lacking the patience to pick apart each individual opponent in minute detail across an entire season, although doing so would improve my performances immeasurably. This is after all what Sir Alex gets paid to do and has made it his life's work to do, while I myself have to pay to pretend on a computer game. As Keane says "fail to prepare, prepare to fail." It is a good thing I play a computer game with a scripted AI otherwise I would be as successful at FM as I am at real life football management.

My desire to replicate my tactical understanding of Manchester United in recent seasons has been immeasurably assisted by the principles of TT&F but this merely hints at the way in a general fashion, something the authors have never denied. Irrespective of success there is no "one super tactic fits all teams" set of instructions. TT&F hints at structural complexity the manual avoids, but cannot unlock the door of a mind closed to the concepts of players, roles and function. It is clear that on these forums there are people that not only "get" football but also understand how to replicate or interperate their understanding via the match engine. The former are few, the latter I am envious of. The combination of both numbers less than the fingers of one hand.

To return to the analogy of chess, the players are your pieces and the pitch is the board. You can set them up how wish and make any number of moves in 90 minutes. This is truly the fundamental aspect of football management. You have had your time to train players, to interact with them personally, to discipline them, to choose you starting eleven etc. but your job boils down to taking these pieces and setting them up. Those that state "I play 4-4-2 and my strikers are not scoring" are in all honestly beyond help. Why should you care if your strikers are not scoring? What matters is the result. What matters is their performance in the roles you wish them to play. What matters is your team selection and tactical setup. What matters is whether or not you are succeeding in playing the football you want or need to play to achieve the results that you want or need to achieve.

The fundamentals of football management reduce to tactics, asymmetry, balance and players. Tactics is both the first and final concern, you understand what needs to be achieved and how you can achieve it, then you must produce a tactical setup capable of achieving it. Asymmetry is both a blessing and a curse but is none the less inevitable. Your players are not twins of each other and so are capable of different things and make different decisions, but equally this asymmetry provides options and possibilities for the manager to exploit. Balance is key so that both attack and defence cannot be easilly overcome. Players are the tools and components of this entire system. If there is one sentence that can sum up both the problems and solutions of FM09 then it is this: the manager must understand the asymmetry of his players and unite them into a balanced tactic.

The game of football is such that balance is not a question of numbers but a question of ability, threat and options. Football is concerned with goal mouth to goal mouth action not flank to flank, yet for some reason a great many questions, tactics and discussion revolves around achieving or slightly varying the flank to flank balance of a team. The balance of the flanks is a concern only in defence, and then only when the manager is unsure of the exact threat of the opposition. Flank to flank balance looks pretty on the formation sheet, but is of absolutely no relevance whatsoever when it comes to the key question of scoring goals and has minimal true relevance when it comes to defending against threats. Balance is therefore not a question of formation symmetry but of the utilisation of player asymmetry to achieve tactical requirements. Just ask Peter Schmeichel, Steve Bruce and Gary Pallister how vital exact flank to flank balance was. Ask Yorke and Cole, Sheringham and Solskjaer, Giggs and Beckham, Ronaldo and Giggs, Rooney and Ronaldo, Evra and Brown, Keane and Scholes. Ask them how many titles.

Asymmetry is not just the fact of players at a club but it is the fundamental bedrock of a formation. Balance must be achieved not in flank to flank symmetry but in the key addressment of fundamental tactical issues through the entire team. As a whole it is the team that provides the balance, not the defence, not the midfield, not the strikers, not the pretty flank to flank equality. Through balls, crosses and long shots are the dangers that need to be nullified, or the pressure applied to the opposition, it is not the job of a manager to provide a pretty looking 4-4-2. The starting point of a formation can be 4-4-2 but if you do not take into account the asymmetry of your players then your formation and tactics are mere pretty pictures whose success is enabled by the weaknesses of a computer game.

This is what I am aiming for in my current save. Where is the balance? Where is the threat? Where is the defensive stability? Where is the attention to individual player abilities?

-------------DB-------

-----WR------------CR

PE-----------DF-------

---------MC-----------

-----NV----------GN--

------------RF--------

Sfraser I love your insight into the game and tactics in general. But i'm still lost to the point that i just don't know what you're talking about tbh. When i first started playing the fm series i just picked up the game and ran with it. This was CM4. Now the game has changed, maybe for the better maybe for the worst. My problem is and always will be is the fact that i do not understand the direction that the game is going to in-terms of tactics. I have never managed a football team in my life. I know nothing about tactics and player management. If a player with 19 for passing and 15 creativity constantly passes it to the opposition i don't know whether it's my tactics or the match engine. And there's the dilemma. So i don't know where to start with tactics. If i knew 100% it was my tactics then i could do something about it. But i can never be too sure especially when it came to 9.0.2 patch. You say it's about asymmetry. What the hell is that suppose to mean?

[Kevaldo]

I had a few beers and missed out the final striker position. It doesn't make much difference to the point of thread.

Is it common consensus around here that football tactical asymmetry is "pseudo-intellectual posturing"? I would have thought a thread on this subject would generate a lot more discussion than it has.

Only joking mate, tho I think it's Park Ji-Sung possibly playing a bit narrower and deeper than a regular LM that you've missed out?

ron.e I don't think SFraser is claiming success is all about 'asymmetry' .. he's just trying to put into practice what he sees in real life at Utd. The issue is, how do you implement it successfully into FM? Do you simply change the position of the players on the field (e.g. Evra at left wing back, Ronaldo in AMR, Carrick in DM etc) or do you use a flat 4 and change mentalities / fwd runs / closing down (e.g. Evra more attacking and often fwd runs compared to GNev more defensive with mixed / rarely fwd runs). It'll be interesting to know how you implement these ideas and how much success you've had?

[JD nawrat]

Here is my formation.

I made it as soon as I started with the new Patch...

It's been working brilliantly. I've conceeded 1 goal, in 8 games. And scored over 26...

The only goal I conceeded was in France, against AS Saint Etienne...

And I came from behind to win it.

[ron.e]

Sfraser - I've been giving your comments some thought and i've decided to give it a try and build a tactic around the players i have and not the other way round. I've just taken over at blackpool and in the league it read P8 D5 L3. I was playing 4-4-2 but then i realised that my midfield were being over-run and outplayed because i have 3 average midfielders but 1 future star of the team. So i decided that he needed more protection. So i switched to 4-2-1-2-1. The idea was to protect my 2 centreback and stop the oppostion getting through the middle but still being able to get the best out of my star midfielder and attack down the flanks. I adjusted ind. player instructions to suit the players i was using as well. My next game was crystal palace at home. I don't have a great team so i decided to play with a slow tempo and target man to hold up ball. I won 2-0!! it was great and worked a treat. The whole team got rating over 7.5 the best performance so far. My next game is wolves at home, who are a top team i'll keep you informed.