If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best
Hi all,
I have had great success with Tottenham for 2 seasons, but have been tailoring my tactics for every game, and it is taking AGES to complete a season. Now bearing in mind that with my job, I get around 2 hours a night on it, I wanted to possibly speed things up, and not tinker as much.
I have used VERY WIDE, DIRECT and QUICK tempo instructions and we score a lot of goals from crosses (as you would expect)
I have used SHORT, WIDE and SLOW tempo and have measured build ups dragging the ball from easch side of the pitch and created openings that way
I wanted to ask (as a general consensus) which system (NOT TACTICS but Playing style) have you had most success with?
I dont use counter attack, but have any of you guys used it with slow tempo and short passing? Surely this defeats the purpose?
On FM05 I tended to leave those on mixed and walked away with most games...FM07, to me, indicates that before you play every game, you have to assess, not just the oppositions formation, but their style of play...A GREAT ADDITION i must say, but for all of us that dont have the time (due to work and family) this can be a little time intensive..
What have your experiences been on playing style?
01-08-2007, 02:47 PM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #2
I find that a Direct style, quick and wide works best for my Everton team. I have tried the slow build up but with limited success. I play a more narrower formation against tough sides but still with direct and quick tempo and on the counter attack. I change my tactics and player instructions from game to game and it used to take me a long time, but now I am used to knowing what each of my players are capable of and set their instructions accordingly
01-08-2007, 02:51 PM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #3
I usually base it on the quality of my side. If they're technically good across the board I'll go short/slow. If not so good/lower league side I'll go direct/quick.
01-08-2007, 02:53 PM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #4
I found that using a direct, quick, wide formation, berbatov and defoe were banging in them in for fun (never used counter attack though)
I did find though that a lot of the "direct" balls from my defenders never reached my players, and instead went "direct" to the opposition.
I conceded a few this way, and despite my league win, changed to a more patient, passing style - with this formation, and berbatov set to hold the ball up and play lots of through balls, the threaded passes for defoe were fab to watch.
The only prob i had with this system is that berbatov never scored!!! he was key assist man, but i might have well have had a creative centre back up there!!!
Has anyone found that with this slow play, one striker outperforms another, considerably???
01-08-2007, 03:08 PM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #5
this may seem bizzare but I've found that my team is far more attacking if I take a slow/short approach, I'm now in my 24th season so I've had plenty of time to try out every approach.
I find playing more direct useful if the weather is very wet but apart from that direct play seems to mean a lot more passes going a miss
01-08-2007, 03:22 PM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #6
Originally posted by Scally Of The Wag:
this may seem bizzare but I've found that my team is far more attacking if I take a slow/short approach, I'm now in my 24th season so I've had plenty of time to try out every approach.
I find playing more direct useful if the weather is very wet but apart from that direct play seems to mean a lot more passes going a miss
So you play slow and short - 2 what extremes in terms of notches?
I agree with you about the misplaced passing - even players with 17+ for passing cannot seem to find a team member on direct passing.
01-08-2007, 03:31 PM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #7
I play a slow tempo, short passing, narrow width and high defensive line. Also a solid back four with no attacking duties (i.e. forward runs, run with ball, crossing). Works a treat with my Valencia side. Also I tried it with Liverpool and Atletico Madrid. But I think this would be impossible to use with poor sides.
01-08-2007, 03:41 PM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #8
Originally posted by Luketa:
I play a slow tempo, short passing, narrow width and high defensive line. Also a solid back four with no attacking duties (i.e. forward runs, run with ball, crossing). Works a treat with my Valencia side. Also I tried it with Liverpool and Atletico Madrid. But I think this would be impossible to use with poor sides.
with valencia are u using a 4-4-2? Does your midfield not get very congested? - where do you find most of your attacks come from?
That the trouble I have had playing narrow - no space for players and through balls get picked off - really vulnerable to balls over the top as well!!!
01-09-2007, 02:08 AM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #9
I play a 4-4-2 with wingers farrowed to AMR and AML. I find that a narrow width works better with a possession style of football (i.e. short passing and slow tempo). With this, my side plays a fluent passing game. I also play with four defenders+one MC with defensive mentality (about 5 notches) low (but not too low) creative freedom and closing down, and the rest of the players in Team mentality, wich is Normal or Low Normal (even for strikers).
I give one or two players high creative freedom (usually a winger and a skilfull striker).
So my side plays as a unit, well balanced between attack and defense.
01-09-2007, 02:29 AM
slow or direct - which do you guys use, and what do you find works best Post #10
Originally posted by Evil Man:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Scally Of The Wag:
this may seem bizzare but I've found that my team is far more attacking if I take a slow/short approach, I'm now in my 24th season so I've had plenty of time to try out every approach.
I find playing more direct useful if the weather is very wet but apart from that direct play seems to mean a lot more passes going a miss
So you play slow and short - 2 what extremes in terms of notches?
I agree with you about the misplaced passing - even players with 17+ for passing cannot seem to find a team member on direct passing. </BLOCKQUOTE>