Jump to content

wwfan

Members+
  • Content Count

    7,646
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 "You're a bum, Rock"

About wwfan

  • Rank
    Development Squad

About Me

  • About Me
    Sydney

Interests

  • Interests
    Irony & Ambivalence

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I'll try to clear this up a little. Direct passing will, as Cleon says, move the ball quickly through the strata, i.e. defence -> midfield -> attack. Long balls will pretty much bypass the midfield strata, being defence -> attack. The TC works on the assumption that a team playing safer football will try and clear their lines more quickly than a team playing more risky football. Likewise, safer teams will try and play 'keep ball' higher up the pitch instead of looking for risky passes, whereas those playing more risky football will use the defence as a possession base and play ris
  2. That's just not true. I play with a conservative approach, whilst pushing the line up and closing down to maximum and have conceded 3 in 15.
  3. I'd love to but, due to current life circumstances, I haven't had enough time to watch them to be confident in capturing their system in FM terms.
  4. Remember that FM doesn't always perfectly reflect the way in which stats are measured in the real world, for technical reasons and research differences. Possession in FM is generally closer than it is in the real world, which might be caused by a technical element of the ME or that SI measure possession slightly differently than OPTA.
  5. It's the thread that never dies! I'd agree that you could use the FM14 roles as suggested. The remainder of the OP is still very relevant.
  6. I think it's worth pointing out that there are two extremes to the "counter" strategy. Hopefully, this will help people get to grips a little more with how TIs create a playing style. In the popular press at the moment, there is a debate about the relative strengths and weaknesses of tika-taka versus the direct, counter-attacking of the Madrids and pre-Pep Bayern. In FM terms, I would regard both styles as being Counter strategies, but with a very different set of TIs. I'd actually regard the lower end strategies as being the "go-to" strategies for those trying to recreate the modern styles
  7. I think you misread it. I say they defend high and press heavily, but drop deep when they win the ball. As Jonathan Wilson says, they use deep space better than any team in history.
  8. I think the half back role is an option. Busquets didn't always do it. As tomtuck1 says, it doesn't seem to be working perfectly at the moment.
  9. Think I should re-title this "the thread that never dies"!
  10. Neither of those training settings will help long-term. Team cohesion is useful when you've bought lots of new players. Tactics when you are implementing a new tactical system. I tended to play on the biggest pitch possible. I think player quality might end up being the problem for Liverpool.
  11. Up to you. Most of the shouts I employ from the off, but the Hassle Opponent one I turn on and off during the match in relation to scoreline / how well I was playing (or I did when I was using this system).
  12. I haven't tried this in FM13 because I'm I've been playing in the BSP. Not an ideal system for less than technical players. To try and make it more solid away, it might be worth using the Defend strategy against the bigger teams (assuming they are the ones you are losing to). Changes in the TC have made Defend a little more like Counter, so it wouldn't be a huge change. Certainly worth experimenting with.
  13. As I point out in the thread: Asking me for advice on who to buy is a waste of your writing time.
×
×
  • Create New...