Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About däkkä

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Traditionally, it's one stratum, two strata/stratums. But a lot of people here insist on 'one strata'. If you want to say that then just say two stratas.
  2. I think you're confusing me with someone else I never said (and never will say) "City are the best set of players or anything like that."
  3. Yes, you're right. In retrospect that was a bit too much perhaps. I still don't think you can't make a very good counter claim based on a couple of games even regardless of the teams in them. And I'm sure you don't either. "shows that attacking football against better opposition can work." If this your rationale, then you can just say that any type of football can work against any type of opposition, because you can find some games from the virtually endless pool of football matches where some style of play works against some type of opposition. Doesn't say anything substantial when it comes to analyzing bigger trends, the likes of which you must recognize OP was talking about. Containment defence or soaking up pressure isn't a style that should be guaranteed to concede fewer goals than an aggressive high pressing style, but I think FM has traditionally struck a bad balance and has favoured the more proactive styles. With two lines of solid defensive players with strength, team work, positioning, concentration etc. a deep block should be a true nightmare to break through but in my experience it's never as strong as a high line with quick defenders good on 1vs1 situations. I haven't played FM18 that much yet, but it seems that deep blocks do work somewhat better now, but I think the old issues still persist to some extent.
  4. I don't think my level of condescension was anywhere near what you showed OP with your point "Liverpool, CL finalists, won City, another great team, a couple of times so your claim is completely disproved". "this is not always true." No one ever said otherwise. Again, do you really think OP was claiming that it ALWAYS happens? Of course not. A few matches is not enough to completely disprove it. Especially given that Liverpool and City must be more close in ability than what OP had in mind.
  5. A singular match disproves his claim? Do you think he's claiming that literally every time a weaker team plays offensive football against a stronger team, they get beat? Do you also think they are literally spanked on the pitch?
  6. Painless but tedious. Given that the swap positions mechanism has gotten smarter, there's really no reason to not run with the idea of multiple roles for one position, which already is multiple tactics that take turns without manager input during the match, and just allow us multiple complete tactics.
  7. Yes, definitely. Especially in slow build-up we can spot teams trying different tactics fairly easily. I mean, a basic example of this is the French 4-4-2 -> 4-3-3 in transition from defence to build-up. The ME does a relatively good job of some of these changes in shape through having hard-coded actions. But what about something like Kanté moving to left-back position to help build from back when Pavard has already gone forward? That's clearly situational and not a major part of the tactic. Then you have Spain with Koke dropping to sort of DCR position when Spain had a slow attack that happened more systematically. I don't think this movement really exists in the ME. If it does, it's hard coded and out of our control. We should have some control over it to make the movement happen always, never or occasionally or under which conditions it should occur. I hope that in some future edition we'd get this, but it requires a leap as far as the ME goes.
  8. Can we do this in FM18? That's awesome! Haven't gotten too many hours on this years edition. That makes it more manageable then. I think I should just demonstrate what I was talking about because it was a bit incoherent but it seems you got the gist of it regardless. I want that my strikers to exchange between these four set-ups: 1. FCR Griezmann AFa FCL Giroud DLFs 2. FCR Griezmann DLFs FCL Giroud AFa 3. FCR Giroud AFa FCL Griezmann DLFs 4. FCR Giroud DLFs FCL Griezmann AFa I don't think the fourth one was really used in the final, but the three first ones definitely were at different stages of the game. I don't think Deschamps had to tell them this during the game either.
  9. I'd go for a literal 4-4-2 with DLFs and AFa swapping positions. That's the essence of the French tactic which is what I think tactical replications should aim for because of ME and tactical limitations. Can't use a trequartista role with strikers swapping sadly. Giroud the trequartista! A lot of the stuff forwards do regularly in real life are just so frustrating to try to do in FM. Ok, we can have the strikers swap positions in FM, and have for a decade, but why are the roles fixed for the position... ugh. Year after year. We should be able to set rotating "mini tactics" like a fluid striker partnership: this time I go forward, you drop deep. In 5 minutes, we'll swap roles. Because that's what strikers exchanging positions really is. It only becomes worse with a front three. Clearly it's not swapping positions or a tactical change but players executing pre-planned tactics of their own volition. But yeah, the ME is not there yet... we have tactics that are more conceptual than concrete. The midfield roles seem right and the defence as well although I didn't really pay attention to Varane's build-up play. Umtiti definitely tried to play some forward passes so maybe BPD for Umtiti and regular centre-back for Varane.
  10. I missed (most of) the Belgium game due to travelling, but at least in the final France's defensive formation was clearly a 4-4-2 and that's what the formation in FM is, right? In build-up, Matuidi would move narrower and Mbappé would get forward resulting in a lopsided 4-3-3 shape. If we agree that formation is the fundamental defensive shape, then WMs and Wa are the obvious roles for Matuidi and Mbappé, respectively. As for team instructions, I'd say exploit right flank throughout. There was a stark contrast between the careful left-side wide players (Matuidi-Lucas) and the courageous right-side wide players (Mbappé-Pavard). The latter were consistently overloading on the flank and their flank was also the focus of basically all penetrative passes. It is nice to see such a clear tactic and also to see it pay off so grandly. (2-1 Griezmann penalty goal attack was started by a long ball towards Mbappé by Lloris, 3-1 Pogba goal was started by a long ball towards Mbappé buy Pogba himself). Btw, those average position ("actual formation", sure...) charts can be pretty misleading. Mbappé was keen to get forward and when he had he didn't have much urgency to get back to the defensive shape. Meaning his average position is higher than the instructed/"ideal". Also, Griezmann and Giroud swapped positions bunch of times, but there always remained the same shape (although real-life strikers aren't really that concerned about defensive shape a lot of the time unlike in FM...). With Griezmann's tendency to drop deep, that leads to average positions hinting at a vertical AMC-FC setting although in reality they were clearly two forwards side by side. Think about two wingers that swap positions so they play 50% of the time on each flank: their "actual position" is a central one. Useful data? Of course there are some things that can be extracted from those average positions, but they're rather bad at telling a side's defensive shape.
  11. How about the other part? E: I'm gonna retire to bed now, but I gotta ask why does a [EDIT] lovely young man troll like tomtuck keep roaming free.
  12. "I decided that I think" does not constitute as reasoning by any stretch of imagination. Anyways, is that your sole argument in a topic in which you'd posted about 10 messaged even before tonight?
  13. Where is your reasoning though? You've stated your opinion about half a dozen times, "Busquets is a DLP" but you haven't given any reason as to why. I'd like to know what it is exactly that lead you to think that.
  14. I mean, for me there's no problem and we can continue if tomtuck01 can go back and make an argument. I've made mine in the "500 word essay" already.
  15. Are you suggesting no argumentation is better than excessive argumentation?
  • Create New...