Jump to content

ryandormer

Members+
  • Posts

    249
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

30 "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Arsenal

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Arsenal

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Apologies if this has already been covered, but I'm trying to get my panels to look like this: With vertical formations and heat maps. At the moment, the only options I have are horizontal ones: Does anybody know how to amend them so that they are veritcal? Incredible work regardless!
  2. I tell my GK to pass to centre backs, and set the team to play out of defence, but every now and then the GK smashes the ball upfield. I'm not sure there's a way to guarantee that he doesn't do it.
  3. A Mez(a) can definitely work--within reason, anything can work, as long as there is some degree of balance, and you've got the right players. But as a rule, if I'm playing a 433, with an attacking central midfielder, I'd always have him on CM(a) if playing with a winger, or a Mez(a) if playing with an IF(s)/IW(s). I find those combinations tend to work better.
  4. It's possible that a CM(a) might solve that, to a degree, because then you've got (again, theoretically!) three players occupying the opposition centre backs: 1. IF(a) should cut in from out wide, and give the opponent's right centre back something to do; 2. The CM(a) will also attack through the middle, and is likely to challenge the opponent's left centre back; and 3. A decent supporting striker will also be in the same area, sometimes dropping deep to pull the centre backs out of position, or exploiting any space created by the IF(a) and CM(a) pulling defenders away. Alternatively, you could try keeping the striker on attack, and change the IF to support? Then the IF(s) might do a job creating through the middle.
  5. I'm not sure what your players are like, but I'm thinking the following, just based on the set up: Defence The combination of higher defensive line and regroup might be an issue. If you don't put pressure on the opposition ('regroup'), they've probably got more time to pick out a good pass or long ball, and exploit the space left behind your line ('higher defensive line'). Regrouping with a lower line, or counter pressing with a higher line, might be better combinations, depending on how you want the team to play. Attack I think part of the issue might be a lack of a central advanced creator, or a 'number 10' type player. On the left, the IF(a) and CF(a) will look to get forward more often (i.e. both playing as 'number 9s'). On the right, the W(s) stays wide, and the Mez(a). This leaves the IWB(s) and the DLP(s) as the two players in the middle. They might play well, but on paper it looks like they might play too deep to effectively link with the more attacking players. If you have the right striker for it, maybe put him on a support role. CF(s), DLF(s) or F9(s) might work a little better, as they should drop a little deeper to create chances for the IF(a). When I put tactics together, I look at the formation, which is how the team (in theory) defends, or plays without the ball, and I look at where the obvious gap is that needs filling when the team has the ball. I also play a 4-3-3, and the gap is clearly between the central midfield and striker: So I then consider who is likely to move into that position when I have the ball. For you, it is not clear who will do it: That is where the players are more likely to go. That is why I think possibly a supporting striker would be a good idea, because then you might see this (in theory!): Of course, it is dependent on you having good players for the roles. If your striker is a poacher, he will probably be useless as a supporting striker. I also agree with the above, that if you have a winger on the right, a CM(a) would probably work better, so that you have someone attacking the middle. Then you might have something more like this: I hope that helps to some extent.
  6. Given that it is a 'tendency' rather than an 'ability,' per se, can it actually be increased through training? I've noticed that it is one of the attributes that is apparently trained using the 'GK sweeping' additional focus, but I have not seen my goalkeepers' rushing out improve. Same thing with 'punching (tendency)' I guess, but I don't think that there is a focus that claims to train punching.
  7. That's what I always thought, but it just seemed odd when my (for example) Spanish scout found a Spanish player, and then my French scout was automatically assigned to keep scouting him. I assumed that would drag the French scout away from France!
  8. I have my scouting team set up so that each scout only scouts one nation. The problem that I am having is that if I ask my scout to 'keep scouting' a player, that player ends up being scouted by a different scout. For example, my Spanish scout finds a player who looks like he might be good. The Spanish scout recommends him in the scouting centre. I ask the scout to 'keep scouting.' Then when I look at the scouting priorities, I notice that my French scout has been assigned to carry on scouting that player that the Spanish scout found. This means that the French scout is (presumably) no longer scouting in France. Is there any way to ensure that the 'keep scouting' button means that the player is scouted by the same scout? If not, how do you make sure that your scouting network is not ruined in this way?
  9. This is the sort of thing I was asking about--is there a type of attribute that should be prioritised for youth players? Aside from finishing, all of those recommendations are mental attributes. So should you train youth players in mental, technical or physical? Does a youth player respond better to mental, technical or physical training? Or is there no preference?
  10. Maybe convert him into an attacking full back? I've read somewhere that you should try to avoid sending a player on loan to a non-simulated league, but I don't know for certain if it makes a difference.
  11. Thanks for the response, guys. How about the 'additional focus' bit? For example, I've signed this youngster, who has apparently got great potential, and I'm hoping to turn him into a bit of an all-rounder up front. Should I set additional focus to 'strength' in order to increase his relatively poor strength and jumping reach? Or should I instead focus on technical attributes, and hope that physical attributes increase naturally to an adequate extent?
  12. I've heard conflicting things about the best way to set training focus for youth players. I've heard some say do not train physical attributes, as they develop naturally. I've heard others say that it's the best time to train physical attributes, because it will enhance the natural development. What do you find to be the best attributes to focus on--physical, mental or technical attributes?
  13. Probably a basic question. Whenever I make a new signing, I get a message saying something like 'ask [player] to welcome new signing to the club.' Is it possible to ask a different player (ideally with a better personality) to welcome a new signing? Also, what effects can you expect from welcoming? Is it just a potential benefit to personality? Thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...