retired_lourdes

I have played one match, reloaded four times, setting it up the same way every time exept MENTALITY.
The reason why I did this was to get some statistics that could get rid of all the doubt concerning TEAMMENTALITY vs. INDIVIDUAL MENTALITY.

So here's what I did:

I was Arsenal vs a greek 2nd rank team (friendly)


1st match:
----------------------------
Everything on NORMAL 10 in Teamsettings (width, tempo etc..)

Players: everybody on mentality: 10
Teammentality: Ultra-Attacking: 22
----------------------------

Total passes in match: 332
Total forward passes: 256 (77%)
Total backwards passes: 76 (23%)


Total shots: 15
posession: 53% (attack: 16% - midfield: 22% - defence: 15%)
Passes succeded: 64%
crosses:34%
tackles:63%
headers:72%

Opponent shots: 6

Result: 2-0 win

------------------
------------------

2nd match:
----------------------------
Everything on NORMAL 10 in Teamsettings (width, tempo etc..)

Players: everybody on mentality: 10
Teammentality: Ultra-Defensive: 1
----------------------------

Total passes in match: 280
Total forward passes: 221 (79%)
Total backwards passes: 59 (21%)


Total shots: 8
posession: 54% (attack: 14% - midfield: 26% - defence: 15%)
Passes succeded: 72%
crosses:20%
tackles:80%
headers:62%

Opponent shots: 5

Result: 4-0 win

------------------
------------------

Conclusion so far: I guess this pretty clearly proves that INDIVIDUAL instruction DOES override TEAM MENT.
There was very little difference in performance, and I'm sure if I repeated the 2 matched 10 times, statistics would

be even closer.

But I still have two scenarios left before final conclusion.

----------------
----------------
3rd match:
----------------------------
Everything on NORMAL 10 in Teamsettings (width, tempo etc..)

Players: everybody on mentality: 20
Teammentality: Normal: 11
----------------------------

Total passes in match: 426
Total forward passes: 326 (76%)
Total backwards passes: 100 (24%)


Total shots: 20
posession: 54% (attack: 11% - midfield: 29% - defence: 13%)
Passes succeded: 69%
crosses:25%
tackles:75%
headers:70%

Opponent shots: 0 (yes...zero)

Result: 4-0 win (should have won much bigger)

----------------
----------------

4th match:
----------------------------
Everything on NORMAL 10 in Teamsettings (width, tempo etc..)

Players: everybody on mentality: 1
Teammentality: Normal: 11
----------------------------

Total passes in match: 210
Total forward passes: 160 (76%)
Total backwards passes: 50 (24%)


Total shots: 6
posession: 50% (attack: 7% - midfield: 23% - defence: 20%)
Passes succeded: 67%
crosses:19%
tackles:65%
headers:55%

Opponent shots: 16

Result: 0-0 draw (lucky I did'nt loose)
------------------
------------------

Now this is funny, cause I think it is very wierd that the defensive scanario (4th match) gave so many clear chances

away, and that attacking (3rd match) gave zero away.
My final conclusion is that there was great difference on performance between 3rd and 4th as expected and none
between 1st and 2nd as I certanly think the manual states could be expected.

So I guess wwfan is right after all.....!?

This leads me on to another thing about mentality, from what I've seen in this test.
I guess Cleon is really on to something about going opposit of your opponent and not allways do your own thing. When
I went all-attacking on individual basis, I gave ZERO away wich is a bit wierd and when I went all-defensive on indiviual basis I gave away 16 chances (not all clear of course, but many).
I guess my attacking setup really countered my opponent, as they started out very defensive.
My defensive setup was on the other hand very bad choise.

One thing I still dont get though is why passing forward/backwards is pretty much allways 75%/25% as I wpould have expected attacking to have a greater deal of forward passing.

retired_kelseybobelsey23

interesting .. i always made my takticks around normal mentality .. from 5 to 15 .. guess i should try a 10 to 20, even higher

retired_ritaconn

but what wold happen if you swapped teams -- i.e. if you did the same experiment from the perspective of the second rate greek squad would the more defensive settings actually work better?

retired_kelseybobelsey23

hmm im loving it atm .. 3 games whit a medium team ... won all 3 .. best thing is i dont have to tell layers i aspect a win .. they atack like crazy and btw 0 goals conceded .. its just a big lol atm

retired_janellewood86

You're using extremes of the sliders again. I, one of the biggest supporters of the tandem theory, would expect those results. Perhaps I should explain further...

I never play like this. Nobody, surely, ever plays like this. I play with a spread of individual mentalities ranging usually from the highest defensive mentality to the lowest attacking one. At the moment, my current "Rule of One" tactic runs from 7 to 13. Dead centre.

The team mentalities I use are usually around 4 and 16. Never the extremes. And I also use value in between these if I need to change my style of play.

I notice a difference in the way the team plays. Indeed, from moving from my away framework to my home one in one game I managed to scrape a draw from a 2-0 deficit in the closing half-hour.

There is, and I've checked, no positional difference between my away and home frameworks. However, there is a major difference in the style of play.

You played a poor, Greek team, who would never attack you. Chances are you could play anything and still come our with those reasonable stats after 90 minutes providing your overall setup was good. Did you actually watch the games, in full? Did the side play differently, was there a noticable change?

I don't think these games against a poor side really make a good test. A competative game against a decent side might show you a bit more. The result was almost pre-determined here. Against Watford, Newcastle or Chelsea it won't be. Show me your results from those games.

I don't want to sound like a reactionary, automatically pooh-poohing anyone who disagrees with me, honest. I just think that a better test is needed. Besides, I'm playing quite successfully at the moment on the assumption that the two work together. I know individual takes precedence, especially on the positional side, but I still maintain that the team play differently when the t. ment. is changed.

retired_liliana

I think SI has recently closed this discussion in this thread.

retired_mgavlick

I have already referenced it but it is still being regarded as ambiguous, hence this thread.

retired_liliana

I have already referenced it but it is still being regarded as ambiguous, hence this thread. </BLOCKQUOTE>

That's amazing. I didn't think he could have been clearer.

retired_mgavlick

We need to discover whether it is your specific individual changes that alter team 'style' between your home and away tactics rather than team mentality. As you know, I will assume they do with you operating within your beautifully described 'self-constructed illusion' and highlighting the wrong aspect of the tactic switch for its success.

If every other tactical instruction is the same then you have a good point, but, if they are not then they are equally (in my opinion more) likely to be the determiners for tactical style. For example, switching FBs forward runs from mixed to often, unticking counter-attack, playing with a target man and dropping his mentality from 20 to 14 has had a massive impact on perfromance with my Home systems against inferior opposition. Previous to these changes I was struggling to break teams down but now I expect to score 2 or 3 (I have managed 10 in one match, 9 before half-time). The rest of my mentality remained exactly the same yet performance and performance 'style' has improved beyond measure.

retired_lourdes

I never play like this. Nobody, surely, ever plays like this. I play with a spread of individual mentalities ranging usually from the highest defensive mentality to the lowest attacking one. At the moment, my current "Rule of One" tactic runs from 7 to 13. Dead centre.

The team mentalities I use are usually around 4 and 16. Never the extremes. And I also use value in between these if I need to change my style of play.

I notice a difference in the way the team plays. Indeed, from moving from my away framework to my home one in one game I managed to scrape a draw from a 2-0 deficit in the closing half-hour.

There is, and I've checked, no positional difference between my away and home frameworks. However, there is a major difference in the style of play.

You played a poor, Greek team, who would never attack you. Chances are you could play anything and still come our with those reasonable stats after 90 minutes providing your overall setup was good. Did you actually watch the games, in full? Did the side play differently, was there a noticable change?

I don't think these games against a poor side really make a good test. A competative game against a decent side might show you a bit more. The result was almost pre-determined here. Against Watford, Newcastle or Chelsea it won't be. Show me your results from those games.

I don't want to sound like a reactionary, automatically pooh-poohing anyone who disagrees with me, honest. I just think that a better test is needed. Besides, I'm playing quite successfully at the moment on the assumption that the two work together. I know individual takes precedence, especially on the positional side, but I still maintain that the team play differently when the t. ment. is changed. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I did watch it full time - all 4 matches. I had a piece of paper writing down every pass of the game...
- was it passed forward or backward...?

And this it not about result or tactics or anything.
I just wanted to see for myself if there is a difference on teammentality 1 and 22 when individual is ticked as well - and I think I saw enough to sat: NO, there wasnt any changes at all even though the result came out differently, but that wasnt the point.
You say I play too extreeme, well if theres no difference between 1 and 22 why the h... should there be a difference between lesser differences..??? And I dont see why opponent strengt have anything at all to do with this.

Look, I saw two matches with totally same performance (1st and 2nd match)
and I saw two matches with very contradicting performances (3rd and 4th)
If I ad played Chelsea I might have lost all four, but Im confident that I had seen the same differences as in this test.

And btw - I WAS a supporter of the tandem theori as well, mainly because of the manual as I think is responsible for all this, and because of Cleons brilliant "Sheffield" thread - but now I'm convinced that INDIVIDUAL does override TEAM.