|
Post by Malky(Admin) on Sept 21, 2014 22:32:17 GMT
After A Difficult Few Weeks With Focus Being More On Managers And Clubs Than The Football I Was Looking Forward To Putting Everything Behind Me And Looking Forward To This Weeks Action!
Tottenham Have Been More Of A Focus This Week Than I Would Have Liked But Having A New Manager Its Always Going To Be Interesting To See What They Bring To The Game!
In Levi Stephen I Was Informed By The Manager That He Was Experienced In This Type Of Game, He Even Said Himself Hes Had Success In Other Games, This Week We Have Been Discussing There Transfer Policy And The 'Rash' Way Players Are Coming And Going Out Of White Heart Lane!
Some Of You Agreed There Was Cause For Worry While Others Said Leave Him Be.....
The Following Was Tottenham's Submitted Teamsheet For This Weeks Match With Lyon! Ive Added In Brackets The Actual Positions Of These Players!
tth P
GK J_Reina (Keeper) DF E_Johnson (Defender) DF R_Delap (Defender) DF L_Inagzij (Defender) DF B_McNeill (Defender) DF S_Irwin (Defender) DF Doriva (Defender/Midfielder) MF Ludovic (Midfielder) MF I_Jesus (Midfielder) FW S_Perrotta (Midfielder) FW V_Wanyama (Midfielder)
GK J_Hart DF M_Saganowski (Midfielder) FW J_Navas (Midfielder) FW S_Davis (Midfielder) FW D_Sulejmani (Forward)
PK: S_Perrotta AGG 8
SUB 3 16 FW IF MIN = 59 CHANGEPOS 10 DF IF MIN = 60 SUB 11 14 MF IF MIN = 61 SUB 10 13 DF IF MIN = 68 TACTIC P IF SCORE <= -2 TACTIC P IF SCORE = -1 TACTIC P IF SCORE = 0 TACTIC P IF SCORE = 1 TACTIC D IF MIN >= 64 SCORE >= 2
Commands Are Strange Also
CHANGEPOS 10 DF IF MIN = 60 (Change Forward S_Perrotta (who is a midfielder to a defender on 60 mins)
SUB 10 13 DF IF MIN = 68 (Sub 10 S_Perrotta again midfielder playing as a forward for 13 M_Saganowski (Midfielder) down as a Sub Defender (Tk 9)
Now is it just me or are managers really going to back this up and say this is how were going to play the game now?
the game would not play with the above teamsheet as when the following command kicked in SUB 10 13 DF IF MIN = 68 it meant Tottenham having 7 defenders on the pitch which is an illegal formation and the engine kept crashing!!
i'll be interested in your thoughts and discussions when i finish work tomorrow
Malky
|
|
|
Post by Levi (TTH) on Sept 21, 2014 22:44:07 GMT
But it would have been 6 DF. The sub at 59 removed a DF. I've had success with this type of 6-2-2 in other leagues. I'll post a reason later, just as evidence it is an attempt to win.
But if it's not allowed I'll adjust to other tactics. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Levi (TTH) on Sept 21, 2014 23:59:02 GMT
The case for Perrotta as a FW.
This is based on my understanding of the esms engine.
Perrotta's role is to create opportunities. Creating opportunities is determined by Ps and Sh with Ps being twice as important.
So, a player's contribution towards creating opportunities is calculated with 2*Ps*TW + 1*Sh*TW where TW is the weighting from the tactics table.
This gives us As a MF: 2*23*1.00 + 1*17*0.25 = 50.25 As a AM: 2*23*0.85 + 1*17*0.65 = 50.15 As a FW: 2*23*0.75 + 1*17*1.00 = 51.50
So,in a P formation S_Perroatta is most effective at creating opportunities when played as a FW.
|
|
|
Post by Malky(Admin) on Sept 22, 2014 4:28:25 GMT
I'll have to look at the match report error again today as it was late last night but the match kept crashing around the 60-70 min mark due to an illegal formation
at all time a formation must have
Min_DF = 3 Max_DF = 6 Max_DM = 3 Min_MF = 1 Max_MF = 6 Max_AM = 3 Min_FW = 1 Max_FW = 4
There is no right or wrong in this but we must act now and make a decisions which way EFL run's regards player positions, where we either use our SQUAD in any way possible to get a result or stick with using the positions and skills as close to there 'real' positions there skills set them out to be! (if that makes sense)
some might say well here is a manager who seems to know what hes talking about and how to get results using a '6-2-2 formation using his squad to get effect!!!
that is our decision we have to discuss and make!
|
|
|
Post by Malky(Admin) on Sept 22, 2014 12:44:26 GMT
Anyone have thoughts on this?
|
|
|
Post by scott777 on Sept 22, 2014 13:02:23 GMT
His post regarding Perotta as a fwd has confused the hell out of me...
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Sept 22, 2014 13:49:32 GMT
CHANGEPOS 10 DF IF MIN = 60 - This line is the cause of the error which is "Illegal formation specified" If you remove that line and run the tactic i can't see any benefit in using it myself I ran 10 simulated matches and Spurs managed 1 goal and very minimal abb gains for the MF or FWs. reports.txt (3 KB) I wouldn't want to force anyone to use certain tactics but i can't see the point in this one.
|
|
|
Post by pezza @ Marseille on Sept 22, 2014 14:19:06 GMT
Again, i don't see any harm in what he's tried - i don't think anyone will try it again - lesson learnt.
I just don't think a) you can make enough rules to govern who plays where and b) we should be.
Just let managers manage their teams, if it's clear they are fuckin about, then sack them.
|
|
|
Post by Malky(Admin) on Sept 22, 2014 14:50:54 GMT
Again, i don't see any harm in what he's tried - i don't think anyone will try it again - lesson learnt. I just don't think a) you can make enough rules to govern who plays where and b) we should be. Just let managers manage their teams, if it's clear they are fuckin about, then sack them. So what if we do that and another team gets beat 15-0, do we just say it didnt work? its all the abs the other team gains with these formation/tactics that are being 'tried' out!
|
|
|
Post by Levi (TTH) on Sept 23, 2014 0:20:30 GMT
CHANGEPOS 10 DF IF MIN = 60 - This line is the cause of the error which is "Illegal formation specified" If you remove that line and run the tactic i can't see any benefit in using it myself I ran 10 simulated matches and Spurs managed 1 goal and very minimal abb gains for the MF or FWs. View AttachmentI wouldn't want to force anyone to use certain tactics but i can't see the point in this one. Any idea why the changepos is causing the crash? Thanks for running the games. It's not designed to be a high scoring tactic, so I'm not surprised by a low number of goals for tth. I'm a bit disappointed to get no points in any of those games, but the results are no worse than the 3-0 loss that did happen.
|
|
|
Post by pezza @ Marseille on Sept 23, 2014 9:56:32 GMT
Again, i don't see any harm in what he's tried - i don't think anyone will try it again - lesson learnt. I just don't think a) you can make enough rules to govern who plays where and b) we should be. Just let managers manage their teams, if it's clear they are fuckin about, then sack them. So what if we do that and another team gets beat 15-0, do we just say it didnt work? its all the abs the other team gains with these formation/tactics that are being 'tried' out! If it's clear (like the last Spurs manager) that they are trying to ruin the team / game then sack them and replay the game. If indeed it's a genuine attempt to try and win, or get a result, then leave them to it - managers make mistakes in real life, it's impossible to govern this area without restricting what managers can do with their team. If a manager is %%?" about it'll be obvious Malky, then we can deal with it.
|
|
|
Post by johnraggett on Sept 23, 2014 10:24:05 GMT
I've not commented because I don't really get what is being tried, I could possibly understand trying to play one of the attacking mids as forwards but even that is questionable but both attacking mids, where is the logic in that?
Levi says he's trying to get the mid in attack to provide assists, or at least that is what I believe he is. It would be interesting as attackers rarely get assists, something I've always found a bit strange, even when back in the day I had Del Piero, he still didn't.
Also playing Passing with only 2 midfielders isn't going to work.
As I say, I'm still baffled as to what is trying to be achieved??
|
|
|
Post by johnraggett on Sept 23, 2014 10:25:48 GMT
CHANGEPOS 10 DF IF MIN = 60 - This line is the cause of the error which is "Illegal formation specified" If you remove that line and run the tactic i can't see any benefit in using it myself I ran 10 simulated matches and Spurs managed 1 goal and very minimal abb gains for the MF or FWs. View AttachmentI wouldn't want to force anyone to use certain tactics but i can't see the point in this one. Any idea why the changepos is causing the crash? Thanks for running the games. It's not designed to be a high scoring tactic, so I'm not surprised by a low number of goals for tth. I'm a bit disappointed to get no points in any of those games, but the results are no worse than the 3-0 loss that did happen. Yes but if you ran other tactics I'm sure you'd get more favourable outcomes.
|
|
|
Post by andieglen on Sept 24, 2014 11:36:02 GMT
The case for Perrotta as a FW. This is based on my understanding of the esms engine. Perrotta's role is to create opportunities. Creating opportunities is determined by Ps and Sh with Ps being twice as important. So, a player's contribution towards creating opportunities is calculated with 2*Ps*TW + 1*Sh*TW where TW is the weighting from the tactics table. This gives us As a MF: 2*23*1.00 + 1*17*0.25 = 50.25 As a AM: 2*23*0.85 + 1*17*0.65 = 50.15 As a FW: 2*23*0.75 + 1*17*1.00 = 51.50 So,in a P formation S_Perroatta is most effective at creating opportunities when played as a FW. Ha ha ha Why is it this makes perfect sense to me! I think if the defenders passing was slightly higher(x2 DM'S) and you replaced 1 of those regualar defenders for an actual forward to play up top with your AM's you might of scored! However the problem here, is your keeper! Nice try but won't work with your current squad and keeper. You should look at L and D tactics and work your magic there?
|
|
|
Post by trulskaare on Jul 28, 2015 12:06:44 GMT
I don't think Levi has done anything wrong here. His formation and tactics are un-orthodox, but it would be pretty boring if we all played 442N week in week out. Hopefully this will encourage others to be bold with secondary skill and we'll see some interesting results. If this had been a complete flop, my response might have been different, but I think Levi deserves credit for his effort and a big congratulation on gaining promotion!
|
|