Subject: Stop "special play": long pass

My back three stood in a line as the forward moved onto long distance pass from a defensive mid:

Min 49

Carley tried to get the ball - reaction was ok.

(maybe if Cloghiru tried had bigger chance, hard to tell).

The thing is, Carley was set as a mid, not as a defender. The mid reacted, while the defender didn't and just stood still.

will be fixed soon - at 12-12-2007 (or you want it tommorow?;).

Yes! You should not sleep, eat, rest, until finishing your homework! Don't answer back or you lose dessert! :P

Always nice to get feedback from you :D
(edited)

DEF players was in such situation most often as opponents were usually ATT or MID, so passed most often running pass (often of course if had high playmaking additionaly, at least - more often than MID's with the same playmaking as they had DEF or MID opponents close most time).

As it is important bug, and favours playing with 5 DEF

I knew it.

Will the ability for mids go up, or defs go down? or a bit of both?

I'm confused...why to penalize all the defence trainee, who have to line up 5 players with DEF role, most of the time one of two of them in MID area...?!?

For example, I play 4-4-2 with 5 DEF players, one of them play in mid area as an usual MID but play with DEF role to maximize trainings...now he will play very bad as MID, and this only to solve the problem of 5 aligned DEF that make too much running pass...?!?

The solution I think could be even simpler: made the chance to make a running pass lower at lower passing skill (as usual) and lower at more distance from opposite goal...so team which apply offside will have a bit more chance to made running pass (cause DEF are often near MID zone) and team which play with lower def line will favour action building...

No, he's saying that defs atm, play their passes too well, and they will be changing it, to make it like what they wanted it to be like originally, at least that's what I think he said.

The problem is for the one who line up a mid with DEF role. I expect he play almost as a mid (not the same but neither much worse), but now will play worse than in past...this is a penalization for DEF trainee for sure.

If by penalise you mean take away an advantage they shouldn't have, then yes, they are being penalised.

I have no advantage now to line up a MID with def role. They do not made more running pass than a normal mid in the same position...
(edited)

Actually, that is OK for me: if you want them to play as MID, set them as MID, if yu want them to play as DEF, set them as DEF. There's no point in complaining because players set as DEF won't play as MID... that's exactly the idea!

Besides, imagine a team training MIDs, and fielding a 4-4-2. Can he set a defender as MID? No, he would give away too many ball in his own side. Can he set a striker as MID? No way, he would not get as much dribbling/shooting as he wants.
I mean, is not the end of the world, but neither is it to have a mid set as DEF. But it wuld go straight against the idea of having a tactical order for players, wouldn't they behave as stated in those orders...
And making only DEFs do always the desired action regardless o being set as DEF would even be unfair ;)
(edited)

Besides, imagine a team training MIDs, and fielding a 4-4-2. Can he set a defender as MID?

Yes, it's so. A lot of mid trainee play with 3+1, with the +1 with MID role...and is the same of playing with 4+1, with the +1 with DEF role.

P.S. I don't understand properly if this change will change only running pass or also passing action in general (that is, DEF player will pass with higher chance to MID players and with less chance directly to ATT player).
(edited)

3+1 means 3 defenders an 1 defending midlefielder ;)
But anyway, is not the same: the +1 behaves as MID, not as DEF. If they decide to do so, it's fine, but it's not because there's no difference, but because they consider the difference is acceptable to them - or maybe they like it better that way.

You can do the same: placer your +1 as DEF, as long as it is OK for you to have him playing in a "DEF way" rather than a "MID way". Is the trade-off we all face if we want to set a lineup conditioned by training even in official matches...


PS: No, it was only the chance of making a running pass that was at the stake here ;)
(edited)

But maybe now is more advantageous to train 5 mid than 5 def, cause 2 more players have higher chance to made running pass :)
This is the implicit drawback of this change for def trainee :)
(edited)

but for a mid a running pass to a striker is just his job - nots so for a def

But that's what Barhilo meant: the "drawback" is just undoing the "extra advantage" they were getting by mistake :)

will be fixed soon - at 12-12-2007 (or you want it tommorow?;).

I think 12-12-2007 would be best. All NT tactics are set, and I suspect many league tactics are set. This is a potentially significant change for some teams - I think managers should be given notice before it's made.

i was looking for defs with high passing, but now i've changed my mind :)