Page 1 of 3
'Discriminated' positions
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 11:59 am
by keyelpk
The positions LF RF & SW seem to be a little bit 'discriminated'. All three are used in less tactical schemes than the others. But, I think I have something.
LF & RF
They are used only in 3-4-3 and 4-3-3. You can use LFs & RFs in 2-forwards schemes, but they will be 'off position'. Basicly what I am proposing is for left & right forwards to be able to play in 2-forwards schemes, without droping performance. Like, a manager can choose LF-CF, or CF-RF, or LF-RF, or the basic CF-CF.
SW
Those folks are just like garbage in game. Just so little people use them. My proposition is for them to be able to play in 3-defenders schemes as CB, without loss of performance.
Re: 'Discriminated' positions
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:10 pm
by kennyanu
keyelpk wrote:
SW
Those folks are just like garbage in game. Just so little people use them. My proposition is for them to be able to play in 3-defenders schemes as CB, without loss of performance.
this is very intresting. i agree with you here
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:52 pm
by Woko
In 2 forward system i am only for 2CF or LF-RF, the others are strange...
SW is a problem... But we could implement systems 1-3-3-3 (SW-LB,CB,RB-LM,CM,RM-LF,CF,RF) and 1-3-4-2 (similarly)... SW in 3 defender systems in also strange...
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 4:06 pm
by hannibal
Not a bad idea. Especially the SW could use a little upgrade.
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:39 pm
by gazza88
http://forum.soccerproject.com/viewtopic.php?t=89208
i brought this up a while ago, it generated alot of interest but nothing was done.
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:50 pm
by YouKnowWho
I think every player should have at least two roles. like RF/LF or RF/CF or LM/CM or SW/CB. In this way any player could be used in 2 positions without losing points.
This way the transfer market would also be more balanced and managers would also have more tactical options.
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:43 pm
by lee400
YouKnowWho wrote:I think every player should have at least two roles. like RF/LF or RF/CF or LM/CM or SW/CB. In this way any player could be used in 2 positions without losing points.
This way the transfer market would also be more balanced and managers would also have more tactical options.
stop getting things complicated...
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:58 pm
by YouKnowWho
lee400 wrote:YouKnowWho wrote:I think every player should have at least two roles. like RF/LF or RF/CF or LM/CM or SW/CB. In this way any player could be used in 2 positions without losing points.
This way the transfer market would also be more balanced and managers would also have more tactical options.
stop getting things complicated...
How this is making things complicated ? I think it will make the game more interesting. Or if you find it too complicated then remove the poor soul SW altogether from the game.
They are only useful with 5 defender tactics & I rarely see managers use a 5 defence tactics. SW can be used to sweep the ground before and after the games
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 9:38 pm
by Woko
YouKnowWho wrote:I think every player should have at least two roles. like RF/LF or RF/CF or LM/CM or SW/CB. In this way any player could be used in 2 positions without losing points.
This way the transfer market would also be more balanced and managers would also have more tactical options.
Idea = good, Implementing = problem -> then Idea = piece of something which stinks...
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:12 am
by keyelpk
if you read carefuly, then you will see that i've not written about double positioning, just a minor tweak in da script.
another solution for SWs are for them to stop come as youth, new teams to stop receeving them, and after a while there will be no SWs left, and this position can finaly be removed from script.
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:28 am
by SBroccoli
I agree with the OP.
If implementing SWs in more formations is a problem, how about just cancelling their penalty for playing 3-4-3 or 3-5-2? Or how about a 5-4-1 - do SWs not get used there?
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:31 am
by unicool
keyelpk wrote:if you read carefuly, then you will see that i've not written about double positioning, just a minor tweak in da script.
another solution for SWs are for them to stop come as youth, new teams to stop receeving them, and after a while there will be no SWs left, and this position can finaly be removed from script.
is not an option to remove the position from the script or game...is useful for some managers....what can be done is to limit the income of SW in game....one of 40 youth players from a club can be SW....or the players from youth center came on club depending on the manager A tactics....if he play 5-4-1 the CF must came rarely.....and more chances to get defenders...if he play 3-4-3 the chances to get a SW will be 1 or 2%.
about LF and RF...i support your ideea....in another game i saw an interesting thing...you can put the forwards in 5 positions on the pitch....at the corners of the 16m square left-right,on the front of the 16m square and on the field sides...with this option you can put LF and RF on the corners of the 16m square and play them like CF.
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:51 am
by keyelpk
this is an interesting article. it seems complicated, but what's life without challenges? one day something like this will hit the game. and then we will find other things to not be satisfied from.
btw look at fifa 2002 and formations inside
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:43 pm
by zandyy
I don’t understand the idea here.
At the moment, some positions are worth more than others. An SW is worth less that an LF, that is worth less than an LM, that is worth less than a CM. This is one of the basic fundamentals of the game, and a lot revolves around it. If you make SW’s able to play also as CB’s, you in effect make them more valuable than CB’s, which are now the second-most valuable position.
The hierarchy in value is one of the most basic issues for strategic planning in this game. Experienced managers know how to use this hierarchy. Some do play with SW’s; some would rather invest in CF’s and don’t use RF’s and LF’s. Changing this will change everything basically. And what for? Because someone’s unhappy about receiving an SW as a youth?
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:09 pm
by keyelpk
i'm not unappy. actualy i proposed for a certian thing to be changed- not to completely equalise CB to SW, but to give ability of SW to play as CB only in 3-4-3 and 3-5-2. The only other 2 line-ups with man-in-da-middl' of the defence.
Other things can get in if something as in fifa 2002 is done, i like it there