THOG

The problem before this change was that passing focus caused unnatural decision making. For example, "Play Wider" could cause teams to try to force a ball down one flank instead of using the full width of the team's shape to facilitate switching play and actually getting around the defence, thus defeating the entire point of creating width. Now, the instructions will still affect where the ball goes, but it will occur as a more natural knock-on of the positioning of the players.

Aside from some differences in defensive behaviour, AMLR and MLR are basically coded as the same position and aren't really intended to be used together on the same flank.

Given how reluctant they are to carry the ball forward when they're not even under pressure, I don't think a Central Defender would ever actually use it.

Low closing down, deep defensive line or a defensive mentality would be tactical causes. Lack of defensive cover behind him would be a situational cause.

No, duty affects mentality on all settings, so you can't exactly recreate the old mentality structures. If you have everyone on the same duty, then it would be similar to the new Fluid. Still, it's worth keeping in mind that the ME has changed a lot in 8 years.

The actual consistency attribute can be improved slightly if a player is given game time and has good performances.

It is a defensive phase/without-ball instruction, but with any instruction, effects in one phase of the game will knock on to the next.

It means he will tend to move from the middle to a wider position, though not as far out as the flanks.

IIRC, the role was originally based on Kroos (with the Raumdeuter accompanying it as the two "Bundesliga roles" from FM14).

The role is intended to be a box-to-box midfielder with playmaker responsibilities, so it should be assigned to a player who is capable of doing everything, the aggression + work rate to want to be doing everything and the physical stamina to keep doing everything for the whole match. That being the case, when you use an RP, you are implicitly building the team around him since he is naturally going to be more involved in all phases of play compared to any other playmaker. In the abstract, Herrera isn't a bad candidate, but at United, you should ask whether building around Herrera is the optimal approach for utilising the squad as a whole, at least in the short term. As far as what the RP does, he mainly works as a shuttler, picking up the ball deep and carrying it forward to distribute to the attack before looking for space at the edge of the area. This will naturally have a big impact on your style of play as the RP will bias build-up toward dribbling into central areas as opposed to the DLP's emphasis on switching play between flank players or the AP's more direct, through ball-oriented passing style. Like others have said, there isn't a necessarily right or wrong answer, but if you use any playmaker, you are deciding on a starting point from which you need to make logical decisions about the other player's roles. In the case of the RP, since you will see more attempts to carry the ball into the centre, you will want to think about how you can open up some space ahead of him whilst still ensuring he has support once he's moved into advanced areas.

This is awesome. It looks a lot like the sort of work sheet that professional opposition scouts would use. Great work. If you're very interested in this sort of thing, Luca Prestigiacomo's "Coaching Soccer" is a great resource on analysing opposition tactics.

Little kid defending like you would see in a match between 7 year-olds. Klopp pressing involves multiple players closing down with other teammates converging around them to compress the team's shape around the attacker, often leaving supporting opposition players unmarked in the process. Since poor or lazy execution can see your entire midfield bypassed, it's relatively high risk compared to a style of pressing where, for example, one player closes down and everyone else focuses on marking the supporting attackers or carefully cutting off every passing lane, but the benefit is that the overall pressure is more effective (that is, the attacker with the ball has to quickly play it since there's no space to play out of trouble). But again, you can't really replicate this in FM.

Are there specific TIs you have in mind? "Moving between the lines" would generally mean a player on the attacking team positioning himself in space between the lines of the defending side's formation to receive the ball. For example, a midfielder moving forward into space between the opposition's central midfielder and central defender. Another example would be a forward moving back into the same area. "Varying/changing position" would generally mean an attacking player temporarily swapping positional responsibilities with a teammate. For example, a winger moving into the middle to act as the striker whilst the striker moves out wide. This is usually done to force defenders to switch who they're marking and give creative attacking players more opportunities to receive the ball. Moving between the lines could involve changing position and vice versa, but not necessarily.

It means he has an 80% chance of playing at his maximum technical/mental ability (physical ability is not affected). Even with max consistency, he will still take a technical/mental ability penalty about every 5th game, but the actual amount of this penalty can vary. Low consistency doesn't necessarily mean a player will have poor form, and high consistency doesn't guarantee that a player will always turn in good performances. A player's personality, overall ability level and suitability for his tactical role will also factor into how well he can maintain good form or overcome a spell of bad form. I think of consistency as representing a player's ability to mentally get into the zone before a match. It clearly helps a player, but low consistency is a weakness that can be overcome by a strong personality and good work ethic.