Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
goqs06

FM19 new player roles?

Recommended Posts

On 31/05/2018 at 04:13, LandonDonovan10 said:

Wrestler Center Back would be great role for Sergio Ramos

Ramos throwing those suplexes everywhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/05/2018 at 04:12, LandonDonovan10 said:

TARGET MAN 

I'd support a target man role from midfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the side note, I'd like SI to introduce the implementation of 6 at the back, akin to Mourinho's ultra-defensive style. The set-up would be like this:

 

WB   DFB   CB   CB   DFB   WB

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/06/2018 at 04:45, goqs06 said:

On the side note, I'd like SI to introduce the implementation of 6 at the back, akin to Mourinho's ultra-defensive style. The set-up would be like this:

 

WB   DFB   CB   CB   DFB   WB

 

You can really, have the WB's ahead of the DFB's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, craiigman said:

You can really, have the WB's ahead of the DFB's?

The starting positions do matter though in the shape. My intention is to still have the WBs in the full back strata, not the wing back strata.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, goqs06 said:

The starting positions do matter though in the shape. My intention is to still have the WBs in the full back strata, not the wing back strata.

Why would you do that? Many managers push their wingers back to act like wingbacks: nobody plays with a pair of orthodox fullbacks on both sides

Edited by enigmatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, enigmatic said:

Why would you do that? Many managers push their wingers back to act like wingbacks: nobody plays with a pair of orthodox fullbacks on both sides

He is trying to create the mourinho back 10. I like his idea for half space defenders... I know you can play off centre dms or carrileros but a specific role would be interesting.. As mezala is too good at the moment. 

I also agree with his suggestion for a back 6...what you call the position inside the widest defender is anyones guess... Dfb makes sense because they then maintain the back 4 in possession and the wbs become wingers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody plays with a flat back 6, and there's nothing stopping people playing with 5 defenders and a sweeper/halfback or sticking wingbacks in front of fullbacks to reflect very aggressive "doubling up" in defence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, enigmatic said:

Nobody plays with a flat back 6, and there's nothing stopping people playing with 5 defenders and a sweeper/halfback or sticking wingbacks in front of fullbacks to reflect very aggressive "doubling up" in defence.

I think @goqs06 is referring to something like this... Not easy to achieve in FM currently...

Screenshot_20180709-203832.thumb.png.941882785d49526cf01c1d9fb488ae32.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be an instruction where you can instruct players to dribble much more aggressively, especially inside the box, or an area outside of the box. The point is to get fouled on, or get the opposition player penalized. 

The drawbacks should be higher risk of injury and a drop in vision and team work as they will be more focused on getting fouled. If that makes sense. Just my idea, its a common strategy, nothing unfair or unsportsmanlike. It's common in all sports especially Basketball. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, aditya said:

There should be an instruction where you can instruct players to dribble much more aggressively, especially inside the box, or an area outside of the box. The point is to get fouled on, or get the opposition player penalized. 

The drawbacks should be higher risk of injury and a drop in vision and team work as they will be more focused on getting fouled. If that makes sense. Just my idea, its a common strategy, nothing unfair or unsportsmanlike. It's common in all sports especially Basketball. 

Isn't this just the "Run At Defence" instruction? I may be wrong but I'm assuming it encourages dribbling in the opposition half, not for your centre backs to suddenly try to skin the opposition strikers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

I think @goqs06 is referring to something like this... Not easy to achieve in FM currently...

Screenshot_20180709-203832.thumb.png.941882785d49526cf01c1d9fb488ae32.png

It would be interesting to see how DFBs either side of two CBs with WBs in the strata in front plays out in the match engine. 

Edited by khodder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, zlatanera said:

Isn't this just the "Run At Defence" instruction? I may be wrong but I'm assuming it encourages dribbling in the opposition half, not for your centre backs to suddenly try to skin the opposition strikers.

But it doesn't specifically include the intent to be fouled on. If that makes sense. Run at defense is pretty passive.

A good example would be Neymar, who would dribble aggressively across defenders in or outside hte penalty box so they can win free kicks/penalties., 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halbraumlibero, like a Alaba would be very interesting. 

https://spielverlagerung.de/2015/01/14/aspektanalyse-david-alaba-der-halbraumlibero/

Attacking centre-back or box-to-box defender, like a Piqué, Sergio Ramos, Hummels (in BVB), Stones, David Luiz (in PSG).

Rename Ball-Playing Defender for Playmaker Defender, like a Boateng

Poacher Defender or "Zagueiro-Artilheiro" like Yerry Mina, Sergio Ramos.

Fantasista like a Zizou, Sócrates, Falcão, Zico, Iniesta, Xavi, De Bruyne

Inverted winger in AM side positions, like a Neymar, Hazard, Pedro

Shadow Striker in ST positions, or false 9 in AMC position

Rakitic Position in 3-4-3 diamond's Luis Enrique... a midfielder who turns in a full back in defensive phase and in offensive phase, a box-to-box midfielder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps someone has already suggested that, but I really could not afford to read every single post... A role that definitely exists in real-life football but we've still haven't seen it in FM is something I would call "offensive centre back". It's a central defender that tends to get forward, often with the ball, and sometimes even very high up the pitch. This type of defender has become increasingly popular in modern football. If it were to be introduced into FM, I believe he should be available with support and attack duties. Of the currently existing roles, most similar to him is ball playing defender. So maybe instead of introducing an entirely new role, BPD could be given two additional duties (ie. supp and att).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Perhaps someone has already suggested that, but I really could not afford to read every single post... A role that definitely exists in real-life football but we've still haven't seen it in FM is something I would call "offensive centre back". It's a central defender that tends to get forward, often with the ball, and sometimes even very high up the pitch. This type of defender has become increasingly popular in modern football. If it were to be introduced into FM, I believe he should be available with support and attack duties. Of the currently existing roles, most similar to him is ball playing defender. So maybe instead of introducing an entirely new role, BPD could be given two additional duties (ie. supp and att).

This is what a libero does though? All that needs fixing is is to be available from DC and not in the sweeper position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see the "Defensive Winger" role back in the AML/R positions. For example, Mandzukic's real life role is basically this, but it would be a stretch to place him as a ML.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cleon said:

This is what a libero does though? All that needs fixing is is to be available from DC and not in the sweeper position.

Yes, that's actually as though a libero played in DC position. Btw, it could be available from both DC and SW positions, why not? True, few teams use sweeper/libero in modern-day football, but the FM should feature it nonetheless. It really can give an extra dimension to the game. After all, the more options we have, the more interesting the game gets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see:

- the libero in the DC slot, or a non-ball magnet variant, as has been suggested

- a Target Man in the AM strata, the Fellaini role

- a Raumdeuter available in the AMCL and AMCR slots. Lets be honest Müller has definitely operated behind the striker in this role at times, particularly during Robben and Ribery's hey days. It should only be available in the wide AMC slots, as the Mezzala is in the wide MC slots, due to its tendency to move into the channels

- an Inside Wing Back because the IWB does not cut in or stay narrow as such without any wide players in front of him. Essentially it would operate in a similar manner offensively to an IF

- and finally a WM in the AML/AMR slots. Perhaps a Wide Forward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't read the whole thread so apologies if I am repeating anyone:

The only 'roles' I would like to see addded are essentially 'none-role' options for each position. I would like to place a player in the tactic pitch, but give him instructions starting from a blank canvas. No hard-coded traits with the position, no tendencies. Just the player, his PPMs and attributes.

Obviously the PPMs and attributes for that individual player, those that make him an individual, but remove the restrictions around the hard-coded roles. I want a player who can play in X-position, but I want him to do this, this, and that.

I know I can personalise the PIs already, but I would like the option to start the process with a blank canvas - let me see what the player does in-game and then add PIs as I see fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Snorks said:

No hard-coded traits with the position, no tendencies. Just the player, his PPMs and attributes.

Obviously the PPMs and attributes for that individual player, those that make him an individual, but remove the restrictions around the hard-coded roles. I want a player who can play in X-position, but I want him to do this, this, and that.

What I think would be great is if the training module is changed enough so that you can really customize what style of player you want even further than what's currently available.  Maybe make it so that PPM's are learned a bit faster?  It would have to be balanced.  And in general I think they keep the match engine more robust by restricting those freedoms.  Letting everything loose might break the game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/07/2018 at 13:40, westy8chimp said:

I think @goqs06 is referring to something like this... Not easy to achieve in FM currently...

Screenshot_20180709-203832.thumb.png.941882785d49526cf01c1d9fb488ae32.png

There's your first challenge right there la! 1st season with Bayer Lederhosen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Analog said:

What I think would be great is if the training module is changed enough so that you can really customize what style of player you want even further than what's currently available.  Maybe make it so that PPM's are learned a bit faster?  It would have to be balanced.  And in general I think they keep the match engine more robust by restricting those freedoms.  Letting everything loose might break the game.  

Yes, it would be difficult to implement into the ME, yes it would need balancing somehow, but a player who is a 'natural' full back, say, can be placed in the FB position, and just let his PPMs and attributes dictate his decisions, rather than the pre-determined ones. I realise it would cause a number of opposing instructions and difficult to implement for the good peeps who code this stuff.

I like the idea of giving more control over training, although I am not sure how much I would use it - I am more the kind of player who plays for the match experience and already we are about at the limit of in-between matches for my liking - would be a good option to have although I ma pretty happy with training at the moment.

I do like the idea of PPMs developing organically, rather than ONLY through tutors or training them. So, say, 'Curls Ball' PPM, if it needs attributes Technique, Decisions, Composure, then when those attributes reach a certain level the PPM is added organically. If the player has the attributes to do it, we wouldn't then need to train it into them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Snorks said:

Yes, it would be difficult to implement into the ME, yes it would need balancing somehow, but a player who is a 'natural' full back, say, can be placed in the FB position, and just let his PPMs and attributes dictate his decisions, rather than the pre-determined ones. I realise it would cause a number of opposing instructions and difficult to implement for the good peeps who code this stuff.

I like the idea of giving more control over training, although I am not sure how much I would use it - I am more the kind of player who plays for the match experience and already we are about at the limit of in-between matches for my liking - would be a good option to have although I ma pretty happy with training at the moment.

I do like the idea of PPMs developing organically, rather than ONLY through tutors or training them. So, say, 'Curls Ball' PPM, if it needs attributes Technique, Decisions, Composure, then when those attributes reach a certain level the PPM is added organically. If the player has the attributes to do it, we wouldn't then need to train it into them.

I think PPM's coming through experience would be better as well, If a Player has high technical attributes he can surely figure out new ways like curling the ball or Trying Killer passes. Some times you don't need to teach players they will do it once they find the confidence. I also like to see PPM's coming organically as well as going off after say a player has a long term injury and lost his attributes. But i expect it would to too much for the Coding aspect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't expect new roles,but more control in the phases, WiB/WoB probably will never go back,but we should have more control in the transitions. Pressing traps, defensive/offensive moves and build-up more detailed and more tactical aproaches for us.
We have way many tactics with limited amount of options on how to use them in-field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/09/2018 at 22:50, sirpingus said:

Halbraumlibero, like a Alaba would be very interesting. 

https://spielverlagerung.de/2015/01/14/aspektanalyse-david-alaba-der-halbraumlibero/

Attacking centre-back or box-to-box defender, like a Piqué, Sergio Ramos, Hummels (in BVB), Stones, David Luiz (in PSG).

Rename Ball-Playing Defender for Playmaker Defender, like a Boateng

Poacher Defender or "Zagueiro-Artilheiro" like Yerry Mina, Sergio Ramos.

Fantasista like a Zizou, Sócrates, Falcão, Zico, Iniesta, Xavi, De Bruyne

Inverted winger in AM side positions, like a Neymar, Hazard, Pedro

Shadow Striker in ST positions, or false 9 in AMC position

Rakitic Position in 3-4-3 diamond's Luis Enrique... a midfielder who turns in a full back in defensive phase and in offensive phase, a box-to-box midfielder.

Some brilliant suggestions from @sirpingus here! Also, why inverted wingers aren't in the AMR/L strata is absolutely beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Walshy said:

Some brilliant suggestions from @sirpingus here! Also, why inverted wingers aren't in the AMR/L strata is absolutely beyond me.

Would Inside forward not be similar to Inverted Winger?

I agree the box to box defender would be great- this could of course work if the Libero was also available via the cb slots

As for the Zagueiro-Artilheiro while good option this could be worked into PPM's

I aslo agree the inverted wing backs don't ronseal (do exactly what they say they should) so this could be improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lblanc said:

Would Inside forward not be similar to Inverted Winger?

I agree the box to box defender would be great- this could of course work if the Libero was also available via the cb slots

As for the Zagueiro-Artilheiro while good option this could be worked into PPM's

I aslo agree the inverted wing backs don't ronseal (do exactly what they say they should) so this could be improved.

I don't think so. I see Inside Forwards as wide number 9s (Attack) and wide number 10s (support). Inverted Wingers are simply traditional wingers (pace, flair, dribbling) playing on the opposite flank (like Robben and Ribery in their early days). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/09/2018 at 17:50, sirpingus said:

Halbraumlibero, like a Alaba would be very interesting. 

https://spielverlagerung.de/2015/01/14/aspektanalyse-david-alaba-der-halbraumlibero/

Attacking centre-back or box-to-box defender, like a Piqué, Sergio Ramos, Hummels (in BVB), Stones, David Luiz (in PSG).

Rename Ball-Playing Defender for Playmaker Defender, like a Boateng

Poacher Defender or "Zagueiro-Artilheiro" like Yerry Mina, Sergio Ramos.

Fantasista like a Zizou, Sócrates, Falcão, Zico, Iniesta, Xavi, De Bruyne

Inverted winger in AM side positions, like a Neymar, Hazard, Pedro

Shadow Striker in ST positions, or false 9 in AMC position

Rakitic Position in 3-4-3 diamond's Luis Enrique... a midfielder who turns in a full back in defensive phase and in offensive phase, a box-to-box midfielder.

The Alaba role could easily be emulated if the libero position was available for the side CBs instead of just the middle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/09/2018 at 16:57, Walshy said:

I see Inside Forwards as wide number 9s (Attack) and wide number 10s (support)

Agree with the former but not the latter - if you mean 'playmaker' by number 10.  The 'playmaker' roles (wide and advanced playmakers) are already available for wingers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/09/2018 at 15:57, Walshy said:

I don't think so. I see Inside Forwards as wide number 9s (Attack) and wide number 10s (support). Inverted Wingers are simply traditional wingers (pace, flair, dribbling) playing on the opposite flank (like Robben and Ribery in their early days). 

To me this is result of the confusion about the CM/AM strata. In theory the deep one should be Winger (ordinary or inverted) and Forward (Wide or Inside).

One would be used for the 4-2-3-1 and 4-4-2, and the other for 4-3-3 and 4-2-4.

I’ve written about this on another post. I think there should be only 4 or even 3 strata, instead of 5 (not counting SW), and use roles and duties to separate “in-stratum” positions. This would make the formations much more better (and logical) looking.

The fact than you can literally have 3 different and working 4-2-3-1s is baffling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/09/2018 at 06:12, talhak said:

Agree with the former but not the latter - if you mean 'playmaker' by number 10.  The 'playmaker' roles (wide and advanced playmakers) are already available for wingers.

Agree with you 100%. Probably should have clarified that I meant drifting into number #9 or #10 positions, not actually acting as a classic #9/#10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, thizaum said:

To me this is result of the confusion about the CM/AM strata. In theory the deep one should be Winger (ordinary or inverted) and Forward (Wide or Inside).

One would be used for the 4-2-3-1 and 4-4-2, and the other for 4-3-3 and 4-2-4.

I’ve written about this on another post. I think there should be only 4 or even 3 strata, instead of 5 (not counting SW), and use roles and duties to separate “in-stratum” positions. This would make the formations much more better (and logical) looking.

The fact than you can literally have 3 different and working 4-2-3-1s is baffling.

That would definitely make it more logical and less messy, however teams like Man City definitely play Wingers in the AM strata, and there have been plenty of Inverted Wingers playing in the AM strata (like Neymar early in his career).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Walshy said:

That would definitely make it more logical and less messy, however teams like Man City definitely play Wingers in the AM strata, and there have been plenty of Inverted Wingers playing in the AM strata (like Neymar early in his career).

But what makes it another stratum, though? To me, each number is a line. What may differ, however, is how far one line is from another.

When I say that the 4-2-3-1 can be used in 3 different ways (actually 4), the difference is choosing if you want the DM or AM stratum empty. I won’t even mention how many times you see here people talking about how to “fill those gaps”. It’s just an extra problem for us to balance or fix.

Neymar’s Santos played 4-2-3-1. If it was one stratum or the other, it shouldn’t matter as you could (should) use roles and duties (and even PIs) to better replicate the team and the players. He was the attacking guy in the left flank cutting inside. If it should be called inverted winger, inside forward, raumdeuter, or wide trequartista is highly debatable.

I don’t mean to sound rude, but to me it doesn’t make sense to say this or that team clearly played with a 0-man strata. That’s what the roles, duties, fluidity and mentality are for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, thizaum said:

But what makes it another stratum, though? To me, each number is a line. What may differ, however, is how far one line is from another.

When I say that the 4-2-3-1 can be used in 3 different ways (actually 4), the difference is choosing if you want the DM or AM stratum empty. I won’t even mention how many times you see here people talking about how to “fill those gaps”. It’s just an extra problem for us to balance or fix.

Neymar’s Santos played 4-2-3-1. If it was one stratum or the other, it shouldn’t matter as you could (should) use roles and duties (and even PIs) to better replicate the team and the players. He was the attacking guy in the left flank cutting inside. If it should be called inverted winger, inside forward, raumdeuter, or wide trequartista is highly debatable.

I don’t mean to sound rude, but to me it doesn’t make sense to say this or that team clearly played with a 0-man strata. That’s what the roles, duties, fluidity and mentality are for.

Ah I see what you mean now! Sorry, I misinterpreted your last message. Your method would definitely solve issues that I have with how the stratas work at the moment. For expamle, a regular 4-2-3-1 with the 3 in the AM strata isn’t really typical of how it plays in real life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Walshy said:

Ah I see what you mean now! Sorry, I misinterpreted your last message. Your method would definitely solve issues that I have with how the stratas work at the moment. For expamle, a regular 4-2-3-1 with the 3 in the AM strata isn’t really typical of how it plays in real life. 

No problem.

I read it somewhere (I don’t recall if here or at guidetofm) that the AM stratum was considered “forward”.

So, if we say that the real life 4-2-3-1 is a 4-5-1 (4 defenders, 5 midfielders and 1 forward), it was supposed to be represented in FM as a 4-2DM-3-1, with no AM or even AM and no ST. But out of 10 teams playing 4-2-3-1 you play against, you see 9 using 4-2CM-3-1, which, using this logic, would be a 4-2-4.

That’s why I think there should only be 3 strata (defense, midfield, and attack) and no duplicated roles (treq, W, RPM, APM, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, thizaum said:

No problem.

I read it somewhere (I don’t recall if here or at guidetofm) that the AM stratum was considered “forward”.

So, if we say that the real life 4-2-3-1 is a 4-5-1 (4 defenders, 5 midfielders and 1 forward), it was supposed to be represented in FM as a 4-2DM-3-1, with no AM or even AM and no ST. But out of 10 teams playing 4-2-3-1 you play against, you see 9 using 4-2CM-3-1, which, using this logic, would be a 4-2-4.

That’s why I think there should only be 3 strata (defense, midfield, and attack) and no duplicated roles (treq, W, RPM, APM, etc).

A winger in CM strata has a deeper baseline defensive position than one in the AMR strata. There are real life examples where teams leave some players higher up the field with less defensive emphasis... there is certainly good reason for it in FM.

The biggest issue, and I've had several rants before, is just a UI thing. The tactic is your defensive setup, but the UI shows the tactic over the whole pitch. It should adjust the image simply to show that in your defensive base, a 442 (flat, with back 4, 4 across CM and 2 in the attack strata) will still have the forwards positioned around the half way line in defensive shape.

It's really simple. Then you can use TI, PI, mentality and shape to bring them further into the defensive transitions or leave them further forward (would be good if the UI showed the impact the various instructions, roles and duties have on your shape).

i.e. if I play defensive and very fluid, I'd like the UI to adjust to show a deep line, CMs playing deeper and forwards around the bottom of the halfway circle. If I play attacking and very fluid it should reflect this in the image that my D line will start higher and so on...

Arguably make the game a bit easy, but imagine the sigh of relief for any new players when they don't have to come here and get 100 opinions on shape, mentality and 'defensive shape' :D 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

A winger in CM strata has a deeper baseline defensive position than one in the AMR strata. There are real life examples where teams leave some players higher up the field with less defensive emphasis...

Agreed. But you're saying in relation to the pitch. I'm saying in relation to the CM, AM, and ST strata.

 

47 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

The biggest issue, and I've had several rants before, is just a UI thing. The tactic is your defensive setup, but the UI shows the tactic over the whole pitch. It should adjust the image simply to show that in your defensive base, a 442 (flat, with back 4, 4 across CM and 2 in the attack strata) will still have the forwards positioned around the half way line in defensive shape.

It's really simple. Then you can use TI, PI, mentality and shape to bring them further into the defensive transitions or leave them further forward (would be good if the UI showed the impact the various instructions, roles and duties have on your shape).

That's an interesting point. I certainly would help. But the problem with the relative spaces between the strata would remain. Why can't the 4 lines (4, 2, 3, and 1) be equally spaced? It bothers to see one with double the space as the others.

49 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

i.e. if I play defensive and very fluid, I'd like the UI to adjust to show a deep line, CMs playing deeper and forwards around the bottom of the halfway circle. If I play attacking and very fluid it should reflect this in the image that my D line will start higher and so on...

Arguably make the game a bit easy, but imagine the sigh of relief for any new players when they don't have to come here and get 100 opinions on shape, mentality and 'defensive shape' :D

Absolutely. If they want the ME to work like this and us to simply "deal with it", doing it like this would help a lot to graphically show the effects of the changes. If you play a 4-2CM-3-1 and move your defence line higher, it would close the aforementioned gap. And you were gentle on the 100... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/09/2018 at 06:42, Jean0987654321 said:

The Alaba role could easily be emulated if the libero position was available for the side CBs instead of just the middle

Unfortunately they didn't do that this year and now the sweeper strata does not exist anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, goqs06 said:

Unfortunately they didn't do that this year and now the sweeper strata does not exist anymore.

Just noticed that and surprised I haven't seen it commented on elsewhere. Think it's a good move considering the notion of someone actually standing behind the back line is essentially dead at professional level, and the cover role for pacy, game-reading defenders has been around for a while and the ability to carry the ball forward in recent games too.

tbh I'm surprised they didn't create a libero role for the side CBs given that it's been very high profile sides that have started playing a converted fullback there at least in part because of their ability to carry the ball forwards into midfield and sometimes even beyond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...