bean feast

Firstly, I would like to say that I know exactly what the difference is between a playmaker and a target man in real life so no explanation is necessary thanks.

In FM 07 though, what is the difference? Let's use Pirlo and Luca Toni playing for Italy as an example. What would be the difference if Pirlo my anchor man was set to target man and play to feet? What if Toni was set as a playmaker? Would he then become the target man? It's the same thing is it not? The reason I ask this is because I have never really noticed any changes when target man is ticked. I do notice on occasions that my midfield playmaker will be picked out more often, but the target man just doesn't really serve a purpose in my opinion. At least in my interpretation of what a target man is (Everton lumping the ball forward to the legend that is big Dunc). The only reason I would use it would be if he is really strong in the air, and have my wingers and full backs on cross to target man. If you play with a target man and a playmaker, what then? will your players choose between the two what the best pass is? Any observations/comments would be wonderful.

borivoje213

am i right in thinking this isn't a case of 'assigning this roll doesn't make a difference' as much as the question 'is using a play maker AND a target man together truly effective'. Ive not seen many teams use both. In all honesty ive never seen that many clubs use a target man very effectively, it tends to be a weaker teams resolution to a long endured problem, the lack of creativity. I'm a coventry fan, so i can testify a once poor team lumping a ball up to the legend that was dublin, has now become far worse by switching to using their ONLY decent creative midfielder and then selling him to birmingham.

borivoje213

switching that is to using a playmaker in a less than inspirational team. just to clarify.

bean feast

So you think that checking target man should in effect make your team play more direct/long ball? Surely a player like Vieri/Adriano in a world class team can be picked out effectively by world class players and still have a playmaker? You would think that it would be based on the decisios of the passer as to who he passes to.

By the way, I have a strong affinity and respect towards Coventry. I was at Goodison a good few years back when we managed to stay up for the second time and we played Coventry. I was on the pitch at the end with the rest of the crowd and Coventry and Everton were singing to each other. "We are Premier League", and Coventry were singing Everton and vice versa. It was fantastic mate. On top of that, there was a picture of me and me best mate in the Daily Star on the pitch the next day. Nerve wracking but a hell of a day.

borivoje213

Nice memories. in respect to your comment i would agree that there are some highly talented clubs out there that have the versatility to use both approaches. on the other hand i still think they're quite differing styles. ie telling a play maker that he decides ball where ball distribution would be best implemented to build an attack and then adversely saying but really you should be aiming for such and such more offen than not. in this way i simply think that you wouldn't see either option being used to such a degree that'd the effects would be very noticable. if that makes sense

bean feast

I would disagree with statement to a certain degree if you are using both options in a talented side. It pains me to call them talented but let's use Liverpool as an example. If you had Xabi Alonso as a playmaker (one of the league's best passers of a football), and Crouch as a target man, then Alonso should have the quality to pick out Crouch. I agree fully that this would limit Alonso's options on the ball, but my point is that I don't really see the players even attempting to get it to the target man.

CrazyHorseLegend

My way of thinking is there are different types of target man.

You have 'big' dunc who is your traditional wimbledon type target man, bang long balls up field and hope he causes a big enough problem that the other players from his team can pick up the loose ball al la Bolton, then you have Crouch who (despite what people may think) likes the ball played into feet, not a long lumped ball, and holds it up playing the ball off to other players.

That is the reason i believe behind having into feet and onto head.

borivoje213

i mean this question with the greatest of respect but have you tried telling your players where to hit your target man? Kevin donkey Kyle is mine (jumping 15 & heading 15) and they seem to be picking him out quite well.

borivoje213

sorry crazy i didn't read your post. very well put and mine above 2nd's that. whats the verdict bean? tried it?

bean feast

Actually, I did a little experiment and I concluded (quite obviously now I think about it), that the way the target man is used is entirely dependent on the passing you pick.

I went shocking Tranmere, set my back 4 on long ball, and used Danny Graham (on loan) as a target man, and set it to play to head. Sure enough, my talentless back line continously hoofed the ball to Graham's head. I have noticed in this version that players who SHOULD win headers actually do win them now as opposed to the old one when it seemed that the defender won everything.

As for playing a target man with a shorter passing game, I can only conclude that your target man should be used in conjunction with wingers and full backs. In other words, specifically telling them who to cross to. If anyone has noticed anything with regards to getting the ball to the target man's feet, let me know.

What if you had Rooney as a playmaker and a taget man? He's the world's best 'in the hole' striker. I wonder what happens if you have a player as playmaker and target man?