Snorks

and that is very good advice as well if you want general improvements across the board. This is where the training gets interesting for me, well, in FM18 anyways, not yet had chance to play in FM19. For me, from the Comparisons information, I can set my team training to work on the attributes that the overall squad need working on. You can then, and I often do, follow @Experienced Defender 's advice as a starting point for individual training. However if, for example, team training is set to Defending, I might want wingers/attackers/strikers to work on more offensive attributes so will set their training position to cover those attributes, with a focus on a particular one if needed. Rarely do I ever train a Player Trait, I feel it takes too much time away from the other activities and prefer to teach them earlier through tutoring. But, back to subject and the OP, short strikers isn't a problem necessarily, if they have good Jumping Reach and Headers they can still do the job in the air.

Not familiar with FMT so can't go much further than what I already said. Unless there is a way through the scouting module to give the General Manager (I assume this means DoF) assignments. Do you have other scouts? Does FMT allow secondary jobs at clubs? Offer your Gen Man a secondary role as scout might open it for you.

As Fraz says, both staff members are assessing and comparing with your current squad from differing viewpoints. You Chief Scout may have watched him play a few games at his former club, the AssMan is working with him day-to-day and judging his performance/ability based on training drills and exercises as well as match performances. If both were looking from the same vantage point, ie, both watching the same game he played in, I would let the Chief Scout's assessment shade it for me - simply down to the 2 point difference but, so little in it to be honest. What do YOU think of the player? His attributes should lead you anyway.

Probably would, but I thought we stopped comparing women's sports directly against men's sports decades ago - I can;t think of any sport where men compete against women except for tennis (mixed doubles). Think you need some directions to find the right planet to be on dude. Wouldn't bother me in the least if it was in the game, I would support it fully being added, but I do understand and accept the commercial implications and it's good that Miles has given the estimated cost to add it.

'Buying the kind of players to fit a fancy tactic' really is possible in any division as it's a comparison with the other teams in the league, not an overall quality thing. So yes, you can be successful at any level, with any formation if you have the right players for it - and by that, I mean better than average for the division you are playing in. Without seeing your squad in detail, it's impossible to advise, but firstly, look at your two or three best players - which position, role and duty will get the best out of them? There's the core of the tactic, everything else can be built around that to bring the best attributes of those players. Look at the comparisons as well, if your midfield is better than average for passing, then use that in your tactic. Your defenders lower than average in JR and Heading, then look to defend by negating crosses - force opposition inside as much as possible. The comparison page is the best place to go for the 'good numbers' as they are dynamic (but not by much) and 'Good' for some attributes can be quite low. I review these just before each season, and occasionally mid-season too - also helps guide on the type pf players you should for - and tweak tactic and training accordingly. At the end of the day, if your defender stats are average, midfield stats are average and attacking stats are average, chances are you will finish mid-table or thereabouts with a tactic that suits your players. What can make the difference is that player with one or more higher attributes that you can use to your advantage, as long as you use it to your advantage. whether it be a defender with high tackling or positioning, a midfielder with awesome vision/passing ability or a striker with pace.

Seriously?

NP. There is nearly always a clue in the message - whatever it may be a bout - in this case the last line. If you are playing Weds/Sat you can arrange a friendly in Spain for the following Tues or Weds it it makes sense.

You just described my wife ........

I can't remember the player, or the club, but he was a Full Back somewhere like Stoke, and his manager wanted a flying wing-back charging up and down the field so started training this guy to give him a better 'engine'. The coaches struggled to see any real improvement, the player hated it and then the line "We looked at his blood tests and realised he was never going to get it whatever we did" - this was about 15 years ago. Something in the blood tests told them this player would never have stamina - just built that way'. With Jonah, I think it's a similar thing, he was simply incapable of performing the endurance tests (although he was quite ill as well which nobody was fully aware of) but explosive short-term power was never a problem. I don't know about him getting dropped because of it, but his position never demanded endurance like that anyway. I don't personally see Bolt getting a pro deal with Mariners, I suspect the offer from Valletta was probably his best chance, but we will have to wait and see. I am pretty sure he doesn;t fit the 'Marquee Player' criteria so it may be an amateur deal in the end. Don't know if there is a cut-off for new signings but A-League kicks off this weekend.

I'm not sure if you can quantify it those terms tbh. If you are 6'5", can increase that height buy jumping to 7'9" (6'5 + 16inches) and you have a jumping reach attribute of 15. Another guy, who is 5'6" can also jump to 7'9" would also have a JR attribute of 15 I think. However, the little guy, by jumping the same distance off the ground, would only reach 6'10" (5'6 + 16") So, to assign a height with each attribute point would be different for each player. Tick 'Work Ball Into Box', Play Narrower and short passing, switch wingers to IFs and keep your FBs back - you won;t have to deal with crosses then - much easier :-)

Not just the gate receipts/appearance fees in your coffers, that are a little higher than 'Similar Rated Teams - Domestic' but you also get a cash injection through merchandising and shirt sales as well. It's not a huge boost, but significant enough for your board to be suggesting it so could be worth doing depending on your current financial status. You don;t see a direct affect on your TFR and Wage budgets, but a club that performs better financially will eventually have more funds available for that.\ Otherwise, it's two friendlies for you to work on tactics and team cohesion (I'm not sure, but there may be a Cohesion/Dynamics benefit to a tour with the squad as well) and, of course, there's nothing stopping you from arranging extra friendlies against Spanish teams while you are there if the calendar allows the time.

Saturday then?

When you are on he player's profile and open the Scouting drop-down menu, all the staff that are able to scout him appear in a list - simply select who you want to get the report from. If the staff member doesn't appear here then I don;t think you can send him on a scout assignment.

Both you @Svenc & @SD make sense and I cant't disagree with either of you to be honest. Never noticed it in the length of highlight if I am honest, but I usually watch 3d in Comprehensive or Full anyway and would assume the effect s more noticeable on the Key highlight options. As for the possession thing, I still aim to out-possess the opposition in the game, but that's not an FM thing, it's deeply ingrained from when I was a little kid being told 'they can;t score if we have the ball' so for me, I see it as more a defensive or protective approach to the tactic. Mind you, not gonna complain at 40% possession and a 1-0 win though, just wouldn't build a tactic with that in mind.

Yeah, I was kind of agreeing with you - except you misread one of my points - I never said I ran for 90 minutes. I said I covered that distance. No way could I run for and hour and a half, couldn't fast-walk for that length of time either and would now struggle to slow-walk for 90 mins lol. :-) For me and my biology (and yes we are all different in that regard - there are plenty of tests that can determine what each of us can/can't do) I was more suited to short period of high energy with recovery in between. 100 & 200 were my distances - my club tried to get me to run the 400m for them - and while I was still 'running' at the finish line, I was on my knees! Football was OK, short bursts (I was a winger) followed by slow jog/walk back. I refereed the same - it was the the slower jogging/distance runner pace that I struggled with but could still hit high speed after 90 minutes - calf and hip problems and barrage of tests and treatments and I'm simply 'not built for that kind of exercise'.