CM vs DM

[candystroy]

Hi everyone.

Just a small question, what do you think of the différence between a player (for exemple, DLP, BWM or Roaming playmaker) playing the role in CM vs playong in DM ? Is it just a question about height on the pitch or there is mutch more than that ? I'm interesting in your answers, because if you compare their mentalities, their exactly the same).

[FMunderachiever]

6 minutes ago, candystroy said:

Hi everyone.

Just a small question, what do you think of the différence between a player (for exemple, DLP, BWM or Roaming playmaker) playing the role in CM vs playong in DM ? Is it just a question about height on the pitch or there is mutch more than that ? I'm interesting in your answers, because if you compare their mentalities, their exactly the same).

With a playmaker, i like to move him into space.

So if the opposition was say, playing a flat 4 in midfield, moving him into the DM slot i think gives him more time to pick a pass and receive the ball off the back line. Its particularly good if he can play long passes too for counter attacks.

With ball winning midfielders i dont use them much but it can depend. Sometimes i use them high up the field to initiate high pressing, but in that situation i might just use a standard CM (s) but ask him to tackle harder and get further forward.

I think roaming playmaker is a role that would benefit greatly from having an anchor man behind him in the DM slot.

[candystroy]

Thanks for your answer. But my question was more about the difference between (i give you exemple) a pair of midfielders (dlpS and bwmD) playing both in CM vs both in DM, excempt their height on the pitch.

[Experienced Defender]

In the simplest possible terms, playing them in DM gives you more direct protection of the back-line compared to CM, but at the same time their deeper starting position makes it proportionally more demanding for them to effectively support your forwards. Therefore, both options have their pros and cons, so it ultimately depends on what you want to achieve tactically and what matters more to you. Of course, roles, duties and instructions can modify the described behavior(s) in one way or the other. For example, segundo volante will behave differently from anchor or HB, regista from BWM and so on. Likewise, lower tempo and possession-based play will give more time to your DMs to get forward in support of the forwards than a high-tempo counter-attacking style of football etc.

[lfds89]

Should be also taken into account if you have "play through the middle", DM line on defend will increase mentality.

[Malkael]

Positioning is indeed probably the most significant factor when comparing either the exact same, or two similar, roles between the DM and MF strata; a DM\D typically sits a bit deeper for me than CM\D when you are camped around the opposition third probing for an opening. So can be a combination of either the player sitting a bit deeper in the attacking or defensive phases, having to cover more ground to take up the same attacking positions when playing in the DM strata due to deeper starting position, how much ground they might have to cover to get touch tight or pressure an opposition midfielder, and other similar considerations.

 

Another would be how Team Instructions can have different impacts on facets like Player Mentality depending on Role, Duty and whether the player is in the DM or MF strata. The 'Play Through The Middle' team instruction will typically only affect players in the MF strata if they are on a Defend duty, however, in the DM strata it will typically affect any Role and Duty combination (a Segundo Volante on Attack in a team on Positive or above already has a Very Attacking player mentality though). So that can lead to subtle differences since a DM\S can end up with a higher Player Mentality category than a CM\S with 'Play Through The Middle' active, since the DM\S will be playing with a more positive\risky\adventurous mentality than the CM\S would.