Importance of players fitting 100% into a role

[CutTheRope]

Hi,

I have a question about the player roles in the game. When setting role you see a circle with green indicator how well the player fits into this role.

When starting a game with new tactic that players dont know and that they are not "purchased into" it is difficult to get all to be close to 100%.

See this enclosed exapmle (not mine found on internet, dont have game in front of me now):
View attachment 174764

Tiote here have around 60% of the circle made green, and several players have 70-80%. Is that a problem? Would a tactic work significantly better with all at 90-100%?

And how should I treat substitutions/rotation/injuries. When I first have found roles that fit good enough for my first eleven, the alternatives isnt necessary perfect in the same roles.

When I am satisfied with results and team performance and have to do a change. Should I change role to something that fit player better? Or will it confuse players that there are small changes to tactics all the time.

I understand that it is difficult to answer general on such question, it will depend on what roles we are talking of. But take one example. In my default tactic I use Mitrovic as target man, and then I need to use Cisse as substitute/alternative. He is not a perfect target men, but works ok. What to do in that scenario?

 

[WJ]

Very, very, very few players will "fit 100%" into a role. Use your own judgement. Each role has key attributes and additional attributes that would be preferential (a bonus) to have.

 

[Dobrin]

I have the feeling that the game penalize out of role players. Let's suppose you need a DMC, but your titular was injured and his replacement was injured too, or absent for some reason (youth national team, some exotic cups, etc.) and you decided to use one of your full backs instead. Your full back has good marking, tackling, concentration, decisions and positioning, so actually he can handle very well this new role. My observations say that if you use your full back as DMC in only one match, he will perform well. If you'll insist to use them in that role every match, his performance will decline with every match. If you want to use him for long term you need to put him to learn that position in his individual training and then he will perform better.

S

Now, if a player knows and play natural in a position, but you want to give him a different role, he will perform well if he has appropriate attribute for that role. Let's say you have a midfielder, who performs best as a ball wining midfielder and you want to play him as a advanced support playmaker. If he has decent flair and decent vision he will perform well. However, don't expect to give an intelligent assist pass every match. Also, if you have an inside forward and you want to use him as a winger and you expect him to cross a lot in the box, but he has only 10 at crossing, you could be disappointed because most of his crosses will be inexact.

If your tactics require a certain role, then you have to adapt the player to that role. If your tactic is more flexible you can adapt the role to the player.

In your particular tactic, the role of your lonely striker isn't so important. You use two inside forwards, so they will not cross and therefore you don't need a target man. Your lonely striker could have any role, so if you use Cisse you can change the role to fit better to Cisse.

 

[davelincs]

I don't think it matters that much for example I used roaming playmaker and non of my players fitted the role but beacause that role was integral to the tactic the player ratings were always high and receiving mom

 

[WJ]

I have the feeling that the game penalize out of role players. Let's suppose you need a DMC, but your titular was injured and his replacement was injured too, or absent for some reason (youth national team, some exotic cups, etc.) and you decided to use one of your full backs instead. Your full back has good marking, tackling, concentration, decisions and positioning, so actually he can handle very well this new role. My observations say that if you use your full back as DMC in only one match, he will perform well. If you'll insist to use them in that role every match, his performance will decline with every match. If you want to use him for long term you need to put him to learn .

The question was about roles specifically. This part of your answer refers to positions, which is something different. A player will receive a penalty to his decision making if he's being played out of position. There's no such penalty regarding roles though, except that you're maybe asking a player to do something he's just not good at.

 

[zekksmarquise]

I have the feeling that the game penalize out of role players. Let's suppose you need a DMC, but your titular was injured and his replacement was injured too, or absent for some reason (youth national team, some exotic cups, etc.) and you decided to use one of your full backs instead. Your full back has good marking, tackling, concentration, decisions and positioning, so actually he can handle very well this new role. My observations say that if you use your full back as DMC in only one match, he will perform well. If you'll insist to use them in that role every match, his performance will decline with every match. If you want to use him for long term you need to put him to learn that position in his individual training and then he will perform better.

S

Now, if a player knows and play natural in a position, but you want to give him a different role, he will perform well if he has appropriate attribute for that role. Let's say you have a midfielder, who performs best as a ball wining midfielder and you want to play him as a advanced support playmaker. If he has decent flair and decent vision he will perform well. However, don't expect to give an intelligent assist pass every match. Also, if you have an inside forward and you want to use him as a winger and you expect him to cross a lot in the box, but he has only 10 at crossing, you could be disappointed because most of his crosses will be inexact.

If your tactics require a certain role, then you have to adapt the player to that role. If your tactic is more flexible you can adapt the role to the player.

In your particular tactic, the role of your lonely striker isn't so important. You use two inside forwards, so they will not cross and therefore you don't need a target man. Your lonely striker could have any role, so if you use Cisse you can change the role to fit better to Cisse.

agree completely

 

[Stryker8]

I have taken charge of my clubs entire structure which includes the u-19s
A major problem is injuries and internationals, since I run all the sides.
I have been actively moving CAM's to Striker or Wing backs to the centre, and have succeeded in converting them within a season.
I think it depends on the players basic role. Wether he is more defensive or offensive minded, that way the positional role will eventually fit into his style of play. PPM's are extremely important too. You can have 2 players of similar stats and abilities, a player with as you said 60% to another with 90%, with the right PPM's the 60% player could be better in the same role.
Finding a tactical fit and enforcing your style is very important.