Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Grattade07

Members+
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 "What we've got here is a failure to communicate"

About Grattade07

  • Rank
    Amateur

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Arsenal
  1. Currently there is no way (or at least no clear way) to tell the managers of your youth squads how much playing time you'd like a player to have , i.e. First team player or just a squad player of the U23s, or what positon you'd like said player to play in to help their development. Implementing this would greatly help with the development of your young high potential players so that they are prioritised more and can have the playing time they need to develop before going on loan or stepping up to the first team.
  2. I have a very high potential CB in my U18s squad that my U18 manager keeps playing at AMR because he is also compentent there. Is there a way to tell my U18 manager that I specifically want this player to play at CB?
  3. Has anyone ever used leadership courses with any degree of success to make up for the lack of leadership within a squad and is there any criterea that leads to a higher chance of the board accepting the idea of sending a player on said course?
  4. I still need to decide what I want to do with my wide forwards. Both of them seem to be making a high number of mistakes durin matches however I'm not sure if this is due to their roles making them take these risks or maybe the wide attacking width forcing them to make risky passes over a long distance. I am trialling the RW as a winger to try and reduce the amount of people looking to move into the middle of the pitch straight away.
  5. So I've implemented a couple of the changes that were suggested and I am liking the play that I am seeing so far while watching the matches with comprehensive highlights. We are controlling the game very well whilst beating City, Utd and Chelsea at home which are encouraging signs. I experimented with the DLF on both sup and att roles but it didn't quite seem to work well as the match performances were hurt due to the inability of Laca and Nketiah to win headers consistenly (both around 5"10 with jumping reaches of about 10 on average), leading to match ratings of 6.6 - 6.4 on a regular basis unless the ST scored, which I assume meant the role somehow encouraged higher passes to the ST instead of regualr passes to feet. I'm now trying out the CF - at which, so far, is getting better ratings when not directly involved in any goals during the match. The IF-su is kind of struggling atm, only getting fairly poor performances so far mostly due to a high number of mistakes from the players there so I'm guessing I need to maybe switch the role to something less risk-taking or maybe tweak some PIs. The double pivot of the Anchor man and DM are working wonders. They are both my best and most consistent performers currently.
  6. I have been thinking about increasing the attacking width to spread the defence a bit and give my players more room to operate but I hadn't considered slowing down the build-up play more. I'm hoping that may slow down the play enough that an AF won't get as isolated as it usually does. Flipping the mentalities of the roles occasionally to mix up the attacking play is also an interesting thought that I hadn't considered. I'll be giving that a try to see if it has any effect for me.
  7. Would a DLF, PF or CF theoretically work better in this type of system if I'm looking for that kind of ST, or will it be more of a case of trying each out and seeing what works best? Both lacazette and Nketiah are most comfortable as AFs but I feel like they'd be heavily isolated as the lone striker due to the roles aim of trying to sit on the shoulder most of the time. If I do notice this would it be a sign for me to maybe clear some space for them by dropping the AMC into the CM strata or making the ST not drop deep? I have been thinking of swapping the sides of the DM and VOL to cover for the WB-At. I have also been considering making the VOL a DLP to form a proper screen for the CBs and making the WB-su a FB-su so that I have 5 players looking to have an effect in attacking areas and 3 players around the midfield to help cycle possession. Would you suggest upping the LOE and DL by one to start pressuring higher up whilst also maintaing a shorter distance between the front 4 and the deeper players?
  8. So I'm currently playing as Arsenal with this tactic, it working well for me as I'm currenly 2nd in my first season however I'm worried that my striker might be getting in the way of my AM by dropping to let the IF overlap. The theory behind all of this is that because we're a good team then pretty much every team is going to play a low block against us so I need to play more in-front of them instead of tring to get in behind, hence my choice of striker. I tried to create a possesion style of play to drag defenders out of place and make space to attack, but with my striker dropping will that crowd the CAM area and make it harder for both players to operate? Also are my current TIs suitable for the style that I'm aiming to achieve? My match analysis is telling me that the team is only keeping the ball for around 10-30 secs but we score most of our goals after retaining possesion for around a minute so I feel like something needs tweaking but I'm not sure what.
  9. I’m not sure how many people have mentioned this idea but while looking at real-life tactics for inspiration on how I want to make tactics in-game I’ve come across a lot of times where is has been stated that the shape of a team usually changes when defending/attacking. Such as Arsenal defending in more of a 4-4-2 but attacking in more of a 2-3-5 shape. I think it’d be good to have this implemented as it would also get rid of the confusion that the shape seen on the current tactic screen is more of a defensive/out of possession shape, and would allow more creativity and potentially more fluid transitions between phases.
  10. Ah yes, I did misunderstand that a bit. How should I look to setup with a shorter passing style in my current shape?
  11. I'll give those changes a go and see what effects I see. If I wanted to move to a formation that is more geared towards a shorter, pass-and-move game what would you suggest I go for and what kind of roles would suit it? I'm only using the 4-2-3-1 shape as I wanted to keep ozil in his perferred position at first.
  12. So I've started to take more interest in making my own tactics and I'm currently playing a 4-2-3-1 (DM not CM) with Arsenal and my results have been okay so far but I feel like there may be improvements that I can make to the tactic but I am not sure how go about tweaking things. I'm aiming for a fast pass-and-move kind of play with my CAM being the main playmaker in the side. I've only recently moved the CMs back into the DM strata as I've been reading up on how to give the CAM more room to work and make them more effective, the IF and IW have been told to stay wider to initially give more space as well. But I'm curious as to whether the rest of my roles and TIs will help me achieve the kind of football that I want to play, I hear that AFs when they are up top alone can be a bit inconsistent, which I have experienced, but I do realise that I may not be supplying them correctly. Also, do you guys look at the recent match analysis much or is it something I shouldn't pay too much attention to unless things are going horribly wrong?
×
×
  • Create New...