I understand that against teams that are better than me I should play on the counter could someone please give me a bit of help with 1) what mentality is recommended for teams that are similar ability that I think will give me tough game 2) teams that I am slightly better at for example teams that are similar but im at home therefore should be beating and 3) teams I should be winning with ease thanks
quick mentalty advice needed
- Thread starter dannyrefc
- Start date
- Replies 12
- Views 2K
Dynamo_ZahnZee
Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2010
- Messages
- 4,041
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 36
1) Standard (if they start better = defense/counter. if you start better = control/attacking)
2) Control
3) Either Standard of Counter (if they set up defensibly)
That's just my gut feeling. It really comes down to the players at your disposal, they PPM's, player form and ability. Mentality is a what you want the players to priorities when they have the ball.
I.e. Playing defensibly means your team will still attack but your players will position themselves waiting for a counter and refrain from getting too far forward.
2) Control
3) Either Standard of Counter (if they set up defensibly)
That's just my gut feeling. It really comes down to the players at your disposal, they PPM's, player form and ability. Mentality is a what you want the players to priorities when they have the ball.
I.e. Playing defensibly means your team will still attack but your players will position themselves waiting for a counter and refrain from getting too far forward.
I had a bit of a revelation the other day. If you set up an attacking tactic including all the shouts and player roles and instructions you'd associate with an attacking tactic, but then change your mentality to counter BANG! You have a successful counter attacking tactic. Ive tried it on three different saves with three different tactics with the same results, almost instant success. And really nice football too. It also makes it very easy to switch between mentalities mid game.
mentality changes a lot of things in your team, if you want your team to have a precise identity is better change fluidity instead and only in rare case change the mentality
1) start with balanced and see, if you are controlling the game go with fluid, otherwise rigid
2) fluid and see, if you are in control keep fluid or if you want the win at all cost very fluid, if you are struggling go to balanced or rigid
3) fluid and never go under balanced, if you are struggling to score then very fluid and in the 2nd half a more attacking mentality
1) start with balanced and see, if you are controlling the game go with fluid, otherwise rigid
2) fluid and see, if you are in control keep fluid or if you want the win at all cost very fluid, if you are struggling go to balanced or rigid
3) fluid and never go under balanced, if you are struggling to score then very fluid and in the 2nd half a more attacking mentality
Surely this will just open holes in your team? Even if you are, say, top of League 1 playing bottom of League Two in a cup match, if you go out instructing your defenders to attack and attackers to defend (as is loosely the effect of having fluid/very fluid philosophy) then unless your players are versatile and have a high standard of mental stats you are going to be vulnerable regardless (almost) of the opposition's strength or lack thereof?
Raises an interesting question though, if you do want your team to have a unique style or identity, which of mentality/philosophy should you keep the same?
no my friend, is not so, mentality changes mentality of all the players but doesn't change creative freedom, creative freedom affects the decisions and the movements of the player, more fluid styles provide more roaming and that means having your players more difficult to mark, there is only one case when all the team has the same mentality, and it is when you play very fluid, otherwise you will always have difference between roles. taking tiki taka as example if you want to keep possession you can go with very rigid, rigid, balanced, fluid, very fluid and with the right combination of mentality team instruction and player instruction you will have possession, but if you chose contain or overload you will waste possession, with defensive you don't have the right support to attack and the d-line too deeper for hassling the opponent. what i was saying (and maybe i explained it bad) is that with rigid styles your creative players are the more easy to mark, against weaker sides go with fluid let the team move, roam, against someone who is parking the bus even the CDs will have enough time to pick the pass
Sure, that makes sense. It does say, though, in the description of fluid/very fluid setting that players will be allowed more creative freedom, but perhaps this is loosely defined. I understand that its main effect is to narrow the gaps in mentality, meaning players' are required to 'contribute to more phases of play' and pay less attention to the role and position they have been assigned, a la Ajax Total Football (very fluid). Of course this is a good strategy if you have built a good team, but if you're a weaker team who is like you say 'struggling to score' then trying to open up the opposition using fluid is going to leave you vulnerable to your opposition's superior attack on the counter. But again like you point out, using rigid to try and be organised and break your way through makes you easy to mark. Tough one!
that's why in this edition of the game the most important thing is watch and react in real time, game by game, action by action; you can't pretend to face an entire season with the same mentality and fluidity, also you can't pretend to keep the same approach all match long, if you are winning it is almost sure that the opponent will try to score but this not means that you have to go counter, you can continue with your game style but be careful that some players might be pressed and make mistakes, it is better leave the possession and the build up to someone more capable of retaining possession (playmakers), this is exactly what rigid do
I use a fluid, attacking and direct system with League Two Torquay(predicted to finish 13th 2nd season) and works very well. I've rarely had moments where I left too much space, most of the goals I conceded come from brilliant individual play or players making a mistake. To counter this I simply use my DLP to man-mark the opposition AMC, and the AMC to mark the free MC, my team defends like a 4-3-3 when faced up with an AMC. To counter the fact I'm playing fluid football, I have "Be more disciplined" shout on and "fewer risky passes" for my central midfield and my centerbacks.
Against stronger sides, I deal with this by simply dropping deeper and play narrow, forming a somewhat secure barrier while still being great on the attack. I managed to win 3-1 against Peterborough and hold Brentford to a 3-3 only to lose on on penalties, I conceded the goals due to a pair of defensive blunders and a set piece.
bluebird123
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2013
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
It depends on how many specialist and generic roles you have.
More generic - Fluid/Very Fluid
More specialist - Rigid/Very Rigid
People saying base it off of your opponents and strategy are wrong (imo) you can play rigid/very rigid with an attacking system and vice versa with defensive and fluid.
More generic - Fluid/Very Fluid
More specialist - Rigid/Very Rigid
People saying base it off of your opponents and strategy are wrong (imo) you can play rigid/very rigid with an attacking system and vice versa with defensive and fluid.
The first thing you said isn't strictly true.
The specialist/generic roles thing is good as a general rule, but the terms 'specialist' and 'generic' are, in themselves, ambiguous. I know the 12 Step Guide roughly outlines which roles are generic and which are specialist, but you can't really take that as the final authority on the matter. For example, the Poacher could be considered a more 'generic' role than the Shadow Striker - whereas the guide indicates otherwise. Moreover, if the Winger, which generally serves one purpose (getting the ball forward and getting in a cross), is considered 'generic' by this guide then why isn't the Target Man?
What I'm saying is, the best way to understand Fluidity in game is to see that, in general, it serves to increase the 'multi-functionality' of your players - a la Total Football. So yeah, the perceived 'specialist' roles do become increasingly obsolete with greater fluidity, but by the 'More Generic = More Fluid/More Specialist = More Rigid' logic this can still lead to confusions. For example, you may by coincidence have a first XI whose respective best roles may all be considered 'generic', but this does not mean you ought to play Very Fluid.
Sure, if your players are versatile with good mental stats, and you want to play a kind of football that revolves around unpredictability and positional interchange, then go ahead and play with fluidity. However, you may not have a squad cut out for that, and you might want to keep things simple by going with Rigid, even if you have your team set up in the alleged 'generic' roles.
However, even this cannot be interpreted as wholly definitive; as the guy on the last page pointed out, you can still have success with a lower-level squad playing with high fluidity. It just means that for best results proficiency in multi-functionality is advised. Of course, the other instructions you have set factor in to the efficiency of the fluidity level as well.
In general, higher fluidity does what it says on the tin: you can expect to see your players popping up in 'unexpected' positions more often, and your players "are expected to contribute to more than one phase of play" i.e. help out in all aspects of a match. You could, contrary to the logic in the post above, have a first XI made up of entirely 'specialist' roles and still play using Very Fluid, it just means those roles would become more of a rough guide than fixed job.
Hope that helped!