Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ModernLefty

  • Rank

About Me

  • About Me
    London via Devon


  • Interests
    Football, Music, Philosophy, etc...

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Torquay & Tottenham

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, I've fell out of love with the game for a bit, but I'm going to try to get part 3 off the ground, I'll see what I can do.
  2. Well done to a bunch of very worthy choices, and thank you to Cleon for the tireless work over the years, for correcting idiots like myself and thousands (got to be getting that way) of others, so that by the time we've been dismantled, we are put together with a far more effective understanding. (I hope, I'm never sure!)
  3. Yes, it is a fine option, and is usually given the name of the inverted fullback, within the fm community. Here's mr eds article from his blog discussing it. http://fmcoffeehouse.wordpress.com/2013/03/18/exploiting-space-the-inverse-wing-back/
  4. Once the corners are sorted out on the next patch I'll give it a go, I had a short FM11 save with P.S.G. where I tried it out, worked pretty effectively against the weaker teams in the league, before I forgot to save and couldn't be bothered to play all the matches again. Tried it on this season's FM with Truro in the conference lower down, playing a 4-1-2-0-3 with a TM allowing me to play 2 AFs, didn't work as well as I hoped. But the players were rubbish for the league in any scenario. Ended up becoming increasingly defensive, something I hate myself for doing, but when your in that situation comes naturally.
  5. I love the look of this formation, the old fashioned 3 CF combo is something I've toyed a very small amount with, to positive results, it's nice to see people confident to be this adventurous. I don't know if anyone mentioned it, but it might help if the Treq & DLf are put on opposite sides of the 3Cfs, so they don't drop back into the same space.
  6. For the first time, I have really noticed the problem with conceding with corner kicks on a save. Just started one today with Millwall, and found that despite a fairly solid set of lumpy centrebacks, and players with decent aerial ability, I concede next to no goals from open play, but have conceded 10+ already. In the space of a few matches. I don't mind being outplayed or the opposition scoring screamers, but it's the one part of a game which is a lottery, and it just doesn't feel very even.
  7. The roles of that formation aren't really illogical. I might argue that a Winger(attack) and IF support/(advanced playmaker support is another possibility) combo would create a better attacking movement as the IF(A) will be looking to run into the space where the AF is occupying. Whereas with a right footed Winger on the Right with a winger (A) role while be looking to move in a more straight linish way that means he will occupy different space to the AF. Some would argue that due to the prevalence of generic roles in the formation a fluid philosophy might be better, however balanced I'm sure could/should still work. http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/334248-Understanding-Your-Tactic-The-Discussion This looks at creating a counter atacking tactic using the 4-1-2-2-1 shape you're using. Might provide inspiration. This leads to the thought that, maybe the players don't naturally fit the roles you've given them, do they fit those roles well? And secondly are they just not very good for the division, so realistically it will be a problematic experience during your first season. I found this in my first year in the Skrill Premier where I realised my original tactics (3-4-1-2 and a similar 4-1-2-2-1 to yours) that had been so successful in the Skrill South with Truro just wouldn't cut it against teams who were that step better than me again. I've moved and found solidity in a 4-1-4-1, that naturally is more defensively sound and brings greater protection to the fullbacks, (your left back has by far the lowest ratings). This has lead me to an acceptance that at lower levels that my fullbacks are going to be flawed in some area, unless you have a player of exceptional quality. So to counteract this, and I know it's old fashioned, but against teams who throw all against you, I moved to a level of caution I never thought I would reach, I play an almost flatback 4. FB (D) -(using a player who is primarily a CB, but can play LB) - LD(D) - LD(D) -FB(S). Though you could use CBs and I'm sure it would still work, but I've just become incredibly intent on trying to master playing in as risk averse a style as possible. This means that the gaps from a fullback moving forward and attacking just aren't there to be exploited. And if you expect to be on the back foot anyway, which I do, then you might as try to to soak up the play as best as possible as if they are throwing everything at you then. And if you are playing a counter attacking style that is looking to keep things tight, then your fullbacks aren't too required to be involved, when your main method of scoring is trying to attack quickly on the break the wingers or a central midfielder is most likely to be the one create the quick transition (usually via a through ball or dribble) to the striker that creates the opportunity. On that note, sometimes I find that the base counter-attacking setup isn't quite direct enough for me so I tended to play counter with more direct passing ticked. But again, it depends on the players. However, those are some thoughts, use them as you wish.
  8. Why bother with a comment like this? What does it add? Apart from sarcastic vitriol, that is. If you can think of a way to reduce the info into short nuggets that convey an equal ammount, why wouldn't you? And if your struggling with long words, the internet can always provide a dictionary.
  9. Just seen this pop up as a sticky, and I just want to doff my hat and say, like I'm sure many others will, that this is just a simply stunning piece of work, and leaves me with my jaw hanging open. Yeah, you can tell, everything is presented crisp and effectively. Brevity is key. The sliderless era has a masterwork.
  10. I want to help, but giving an opinion without knowing a fair bit more than that is like trying to cure a patient who tells you they are ill, but forces you to use only a knife and you're blindfolded. Hope you understand where I'm coming from.
  11. I've posted this else where, but it was my analysis of the issues with the original Fulham squad this time round. I think like Fulham this season in real life, FM Fulham are a tricky proposition to manage, because their squad is quite behind the times in it's composition, as it features almost completely specialists. Taraabt, Ruiz, and Berbatov, all brilliant creatively, but ask them to defend, no chance. Bent, classic number 9, no real want to defend or create, Parker, decent anchor man/ BWM, but ask him to pick a pass and he's stumped, Boateng pretty similar and all the centrebacks are tall, lumpy and slow and are poor with the ball at their feet, (okay in FM terms they are probably rigid philosophy centrebacks rather than limited defenders, however in comparison to fluid philosophy centrebacks or Ball Playing defenders) they are pretty dedicated defensive players. T This means that Fulham have a significant issue to overcome on FM, because as pressing high is pretty much out of the question, as their attacking players just wouldn't do it and their defence is too slow, so they have to sit deep. This has its own problems though, coming back to the prior paragraph, as teams who press high against them successfully can keep them hemmed pretty successfully as they cannot pass their way out, due to the defensive side of the team as I mentioned lacking in that area. This means you have to pretty direct football which Fulham don't really do well because all their AMs are delicate little technical types who aren't particularly great in the air. Now before I moved on from them, having decided finally to see whether I can manage to pull off the dafuge challenge, I thought of the best way to set the up against a high press would be a very rigid, narrow and deep 4-2-3-1 which sits deep and tries to counter attack by playing direct to Berbatov as a Treq in the AM position, with the attacking trio set to pass shorter so that he can who can lay it off to either Taarabt or Ruiz, or can play a through ball to Bent, and try to generate some attacking momentum that way. Whereas if your opponent also is sitting deep and there's no space in behind for Bent to use his pace, I was thinking playing Berbatov up front in a 4-1-2-2-1 with him pulling deep to allow Taarabt and Ruiz the space to operate in the channels from wide, and playing slightly more aggressively probably 'standard' instead of counter. I think that an Enganche with Berbatov is a very plausible option.
  12. I don't wanna put a downer on this, but veteran players and those at the peak of their careers tend to be considerably better developed in those all important hidden attributes that you cannot see. Youngsters tend to have lower in the pretty important 'consistency' attribute, which if you field an entire team of them means a tendency for, unsurprisingly, inconsistency. But if you're looking for that extra challenge go ahead.
  13. That's my point, but they all could be. They all have the appropriate attributes. Iniesta is just about the most natural number 10 style of player, to have never really played as a number 10.
  14. I know they won't go, and do have there uses, but I'm not honestly sure they are helpful. The one use I have with the current ability rating is that in the lower leagues when you have a bunch of players rated 5 star potential it allows you the rank them by 'current ability' this way you can ignore the ultra chaff that is always out there in the game, despite its 5* potential. My issue is how many times have you heard people coming to the forums, with odd role structures, the classic BWM at the base of a 4-2-3-1 with CMs, wondering why they are conceding so many goals on the match engine? Too many. This has a tendency to come back to people saying that the BWM was the best role for their player, or I do accept the other option is that it is a 'defensive role'. I think you have to trust that people are smarter than AI calculations and if you removed these shiny gold focal points, they would have to think for themselves and not just dive straight in with the 'best' team. The root of this problem comes from people thinking FM can be won, or there is the 'best' way to manage in FM, and the stars I feel reinforce that in peoples mind. This is made worse when players stars drop and people feel, I know I did, that they'd done something wrong. I feel that it is first time FM players who are the ones that are most vulnerable to stopping playing FM for good, unlike us addicts, because in all honesty they are the ones who aren't invested and probably watch on 'key' and don't see the gaping gap that there is in the centre of their formation, and wrongly feel that the game has got it in for them. Therefore I just feel that the stars, shoot in the foot, and lead astray the people who most need them.
  15. Part 2 is up. It's a little basic, and a little dry, but as the person I am, to get to the fun stuff I felt I'd try to make sure the foundations are reasonable.
  • Create New...