Eternity RPC Board
The Return of the Blac
After sleeping for a thousand years, the Blac returned to claim his football superiority! And I wanted to see my Trapattoni-inspired 4-4-2 in action against the Silly Blac. The first game began quite silly: in the 2nd minute, a low cross was sent near the first post of my Villarreal. Huntelaar, Schalke's Dutch goalgetter, managed to get his toes against the ball and scored. A very silly goal indeed.
One minute later, a far cross this time, reached a Schalke 04 player and you've guessed it: goal.
![[Image: smsKNdq.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/smsKNdq.jpg)
Even Trapattoni would experience a genuine wtf-moment on the bench. Luckily, Blac's defenses aren't exactly watertight either. In the 9th minute Samuel rushed down the right flank, sent a long cross, and Soldado was left completely free to work the ball past the goalkeeper. Being back in the game, I tried to stabilize my own defense and then hope for an equalizer. I adopted a slightly more cautious playing style in ball-posession and made some defensive adjustments. The defense never became really stable however, with Schalke missing countless of opportunities by hitting the crossbar.
But I was getting my scoring opportunities as well, and I knew for certain that I would score the equalizer, which they did in the second half. For a moment Schalke was waning. They were giving away more and more opportunities, corner kicks, and my team had gained the momentum after that equalizer. With 15 minutes left on the clock I instructed the team to send every ball into the box and hope for a late winning goal. It didn't happen however, and the game ended in a draw again.
Although the defense was shaky in the first 30 minutes of the match, it steadily grew more solid and Ive seen moments when Blac's players just circulated the ball in my half, without finding any space to attack into. It was a beautiful, rythmic, mechanized movement of my players - along with Schalke's movement of the ball. This was not football anymore. This was pure maths!
Too bad my team failed to produce such a solid defending from the very beginning. Schalke fired 20 shots, but only 6 hit on target. Villarreal fired only 7 shots, but 5 on target. Schalke produced 2 clearcut scoring chances according to the statistics, Villarreal had 3 chances. Despite that, Schalke dominated ball posession with 63%. Villarreal's pass success rate of 64% however is quite poor.
The second game was, as usual in games between me and Blac, quite a disaster. Schalke opened the score around the 30th minute, with what was a bit of a lucky goal. A few moments later, Belhanda won a duel in midfield for the ball. He dribbled past one or two defenders, then played the ball into the penalty area to Huntelaar who finished it. It was a magnificent goal, I must admit that.
Being behind with 2-0 again, I proceeded to experiment with some things in the second half. Schalke scored again and the game ended 3-0. The odd thing is that after the game, the statistics claim that Schalke had 0 clearcut scoring chances, and Villarreal had 1. Blac Dominance, however, had returned.
The silly Blac left the game, bored with my inferiority, and I proceeded to continue for some more experimentation (CPU took over from Blac). What bothers me is that this is FM: and in FM there is no ''superior'' tactic, everything ~can~ work in the game, and everything ~can~ fail. It is very unlikely that there is only one magic solution to beat Blac's teams. It is more likely that there are many ways to beat him, but that I haven't tried those options yet. One way is to out-attack Blac. Blac builds insane scoring-machines, but one way to keep him from scoring is to keep the ball in his half. The offense is the best defense - so the Dutch would say.
I want to see however, whether the opposite can work. What if a team completely buries itself, and parks one big fat bus in front of its goal? I've always adopted for more defensive approaches against Blac, but always trying to maintain some balance and not give up the entire pitch to Blac. My reasoning for that is that when you withdraw too much in FM, the game punishes you by scoring from distance shots. I have however, in a season with Granada, kept Barcelona at 0-0 by withdrawing so much that I hit a sign reading ''Portuguese border''. It can work.
There is another reason why it might work against a team like Blac's. One of the reasons his teams are so hard to stop is because of the attacking intensity: many players join the attack, they swarm where they can find spaces, and they can give unexpected passes or suddenly dribble right into your penalty area. This sort of stuff is fun, but it only works if the opponent leaves space open to exploit like that. So what if I completely park the bus, deny any space in the key areas of the pitch?
In the experimental game, without Blac, Schalke suddenly found no room for dribbles anymore. No room for through balls. Crosses did reach their players, but there were too many defenders in their way to really become dangerous. What surprised me however, was that I did not end up having 20% ball posession. On the contrary, it was around 43% - which is better than I had in previous games. I suspect it might have something to do with a higher defensive intensity: upon reaching the vulnerable areas, Schalke's players found themselves under high pressure and they were surrounded by opponents with no space to play into. So when Schalke got too close to my goal, they inevitably lost ball posession. In the 79th minute my Villarreal scored from a counter-attack down the right flank. Schalke had no clearcut scoring chances that game, Villarreal had 1.
This image shows where my Villarreal intercepted Schalke's passes, and its quite telling: Schalke found no way through the extremely crowded center of the pitch before my goal, where I had concentrated all my players. So maybe that's one possible strategy for the future. If Blac exploits space so well, maybe I should just deny him even a single inch.
![[Image: 0VO8Djp.png]](http://i.imgur.com/0VO8Djp.png)
![[Image: SBhCSX7.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/SBhCSX7.jpg)
I noticed something in the FM analysis tool, and I went to check out one of my games against Blac's team. Here you can see the actual positioning of both our teams on the pitch. Green circles are the players positioning when the team is in ball posession, or one could say, in attack. Orange indicates the positioning of the players when the team is without ball posession, or one could say, in defence. Blue is the total sum and shows the average positioning of the players throughout the entire match.
One obvious thing that can be observed from comparing both teams is that Blac's team, in practice operates much more like a 4-1-4-1. But also the fact that Blac's team has much more players positioned in my half than I have in his, and generally speaking, my team is much deeper positioned than Blac's. So far, nothing new. I was aware of this.
But I've discovered another subtle difference. The blue positions, which represents the average position of the players throughout the entire game, differs in relation to the orange and green ones between the two teams. For long I thought the blue one simply showed the average, the mean, the median, the middle. Nothing interesting. But if you look closely, the blue positions of Schalke's players (Blac's team), are closer to the green positioning, than to the orange positions. With my team it is the opposite: the average positioning (blue) is relatively closer to the orange (without posession) positioning. This could simply mean that my team spent most of its time without ball posession, so therefore, its average positioning is relatively closer to that when the team is without posession. But in other games, when teams of mine dominated ball posession, they showed the exact same pattern: the overall positioning remained closer to the defensive positioning.
One thing that can be learned from this fact is that on average, Blac's players are more inclined to abbandon their defensive positions. Blac's teams are more likely to break out of their tactical shape. This accommodates Blac's attacking football style, because it makes it easier for his teams to retain ball posession if the players move into attacking positions, and it helps his attacks becoming less predictable als his players are willing to move into spaces. My players show a greater hesitance to abbandon their defensive positions. They play more disciplined and organized, and they are less likely to break the tactical shape of the team. It makes my team's attacking playing style more predictable, and clinical, but the advantage is that the team is able to quickly return to its defensive shape when the ball is lost.
A third thing to notice is the distances between the players. The distance between Blac's players is slightly bigger than between my players. Especially in the central areas, my team seems to stay much closer together and keep short distances. Blac's central players are further removed from eachother both vertically and horizontally. This accommodates Blac's attacking style, because the larger distances enables him to stretch the play and force my defenders to run their asses off until they can't anymore and Blac's team can get into a scoring position. My team's display is in accordance with a defensive mentality. By keeping the central players close to each other, my team tries to limit the space for Blac's players in the key area of the pitch. In ball posession, the short distances between the central midfielders reduces the risk of Blac's players intercepting a pass in this crucial area.
Line-ups:
![[Image: wHws5Xl.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/wHws5Xl.jpg)
![[Image: 56XBxxo.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/56XBxxo.jpg)
After sleeping for a thousand years, the Blac returned to claim his football superiority! And I wanted to see my Trapattoni-inspired 4-4-2 in action against the Silly Blac. The first game began quite silly: in the 2nd minute, a low cross was sent near the first post of my Villarreal. Huntelaar, Schalke's Dutch goalgetter, managed to get his toes against the ball and scored. A very silly goal indeed.
One minute later, a far cross this time, reached a Schalke 04 player and you've guessed it: goal.
Even Trapattoni would experience a genuine wtf-moment on the bench. Luckily, Blac's defenses aren't exactly watertight either. In the 9th minute Samuel rushed down the right flank, sent a long cross, and Soldado was left completely free to work the ball past the goalkeeper. Being back in the game, I tried to stabilize my own defense and then hope for an equalizer. I adopted a slightly more cautious playing style in ball-posession and made some defensive adjustments. The defense never became really stable however, with Schalke missing countless of opportunities by hitting the crossbar.
But I was getting my scoring opportunities as well, and I knew for certain that I would score the equalizer, which they did in the second half. For a moment Schalke was waning. They were giving away more and more opportunities, corner kicks, and my team had gained the momentum after that equalizer. With 15 minutes left on the clock I instructed the team to send every ball into the box and hope for a late winning goal. It didn't happen however, and the game ended in a draw again.
Although the defense was shaky in the first 30 minutes of the match, it steadily grew more solid and Ive seen moments when Blac's players just circulated the ball in my half, without finding any space to attack into. It was a beautiful, rythmic, mechanized movement of my players - along with Schalke's movement of the ball. This was not football anymore. This was pure maths!
Too bad my team failed to produce such a solid defending from the very beginning. Schalke fired 20 shots, but only 6 hit on target. Villarreal fired only 7 shots, but 5 on target. Schalke produced 2 clearcut scoring chances according to the statistics, Villarreal had 3 chances. Despite that, Schalke dominated ball posession with 63%. Villarreal's pass success rate of 64% however is quite poor.
The second game was, as usual in games between me and Blac, quite a disaster. Schalke opened the score around the 30th minute, with what was a bit of a lucky goal. A few moments later, Belhanda won a duel in midfield for the ball. He dribbled past one or two defenders, then played the ball into the penalty area to Huntelaar who finished it. It was a magnificent goal, I must admit that.
Being behind with 2-0 again, I proceeded to experiment with some things in the second half. Schalke scored again and the game ended 3-0. The odd thing is that after the game, the statistics claim that Schalke had 0 clearcut scoring chances, and Villarreal had 1. Blac Dominance, however, had returned.
The silly Blac left the game, bored with my inferiority, and I proceeded to continue for some more experimentation (CPU took over from Blac). What bothers me is that this is FM: and in FM there is no ''superior'' tactic, everything ~can~ work in the game, and everything ~can~ fail. It is very unlikely that there is only one magic solution to beat Blac's teams. It is more likely that there are many ways to beat him, but that I haven't tried those options yet. One way is to out-attack Blac. Blac builds insane scoring-machines, but one way to keep him from scoring is to keep the ball in his half. The offense is the best defense - so the Dutch would say.
I want to see however, whether the opposite can work. What if a team completely buries itself, and parks one big fat bus in front of its goal? I've always adopted for more defensive approaches against Blac, but always trying to maintain some balance and not give up the entire pitch to Blac. My reasoning for that is that when you withdraw too much in FM, the game punishes you by scoring from distance shots. I have however, in a season with Granada, kept Barcelona at 0-0 by withdrawing so much that I hit a sign reading ''Portuguese border''. It can work.
There is another reason why it might work against a team like Blac's. One of the reasons his teams are so hard to stop is because of the attacking intensity: many players join the attack, they swarm where they can find spaces, and they can give unexpected passes or suddenly dribble right into your penalty area. This sort of stuff is fun, but it only works if the opponent leaves space open to exploit like that. So what if I completely park the bus, deny any space in the key areas of the pitch?
In the experimental game, without Blac, Schalke suddenly found no room for dribbles anymore. No room for through balls. Crosses did reach their players, but there were too many defenders in their way to really become dangerous. What surprised me however, was that I did not end up having 20% ball posession. On the contrary, it was around 43% - which is better than I had in previous games. I suspect it might have something to do with a higher defensive intensity: upon reaching the vulnerable areas, Schalke's players found themselves under high pressure and they were surrounded by opponents with no space to play into. So when Schalke got too close to my goal, they inevitably lost ball posession. In the 79th minute my Villarreal scored from a counter-attack down the right flank. Schalke had no clearcut scoring chances that game, Villarreal had 1.
This image shows where my Villarreal intercepted Schalke's passes, and its quite telling: Schalke found no way through the extremely crowded center of the pitch before my goal, where I had concentrated all my players. So maybe that's one possible strategy for the future. If Blac exploits space so well, maybe I should just deny him even a single inch.
I noticed something in the FM analysis tool, and I went to check out one of my games against Blac's team. Here you can see the actual positioning of both our teams on the pitch. Green circles are the players positioning when the team is in ball posession, or one could say, in attack. Orange indicates the positioning of the players when the team is without ball posession, or one could say, in defence. Blue is the total sum and shows the average positioning of the players throughout the entire match.
One obvious thing that can be observed from comparing both teams is that Blac's team, in practice operates much more like a 4-1-4-1. But also the fact that Blac's team has much more players positioned in my half than I have in his, and generally speaking, my team is much deeper positioned than Blac's. So far, nothing new. I was aware of this.
But I've discovered another subtle difference. The blue positions, which represents the average position of the players throughout the entire game, differs in relation to the orange and green ones between the two teams. For long I thought the blue one simply showed the average, the mean, the median, the middle. Nothing interesting. But if you look closely, the blue positions of Schalke's players (Blac's team), are closer to the green positioning, than to the orange positions. With my team it is the opposite: the average positioning (blue) is relatively closer to the orange (without posession) positioning. This could simply mean that my team spent most of its time without ball posession, so therefore, its average positioning is relatively closer to that when the team is without posession. But in other games, when teams of mine dominated ball posession, they showed the exact same pattern: the overall positioning remained closer to the defensive positioning.
One thing that can be learned from this fact is that on average, Blac's players are more inclined to abbandon their defensive positions. Blac's teams are more likely to break out of their tactical shape. This accommodates Blac's attacking football style, because it makes it easier for his teams to retain ball posession if the players move into attacking positions, and it helps his attacks becoming less predictable als his players are willing to move into spaces. My players show a greater hesitance to abbandon their defensive positions. They play more disciplined and organized, and they are less likely to break the tactical shape of the team. It makes my team's attacking playing style more predictable, and clinical, but the advantage is that the team is able to quickly return to its defensive shape when the ball is lost.
A third thing to notice is the distances between the players. The distance between Blac's players is slightly bigger than between my players. Especially in the central areas, my team seems to stay much closer together and keep short distances. Blac's central players are further removed from eachother both vertically and horizontally. This accommodates Blac's attacking style, because the larger distances enables him to stretch the play and force my defenders to run their asses off until they can't anymore and Blac's team can get into a scoring position. My team's display is in accordance with a defensive mentality. By keeping the central players close to each other, my team tries to limit the space for Blac's players in the key area of the pitch. In ball posession, the short distances between the central midfielders reduces the risk of Blac's players intercepting a pass in this crucial area.