Blac and Nents silly match reports

[Nentsia]

FM 17


Sorry Blac... I couldn't stop myself. I noticed it was on sale, and I was a bit done with FM16... so I bought FM17. I still have FM16 on my computer though so we can still play our games c: (but if you can, get FM17 because they've definetely made it more realistic + sexy up to date squads and player ratings).

So the best way for me to see how the not-so-new FM 17 works is by picking the team that I most often use in my self-proclaimed tactical laboratories, implement the tactics that I often employ, and see what happens. First conclusions: football is harder in FM17. In FM16, a player instructed to dribble more almost always succeeds in running past his man down the flank and either deliver a cross, or he manages to get a corner-kick. In FM17, players running with the ball are likely to simply lose it. Crosses: in FM16, crosses are extremely accurate. They always reach the player it was intended for, and its a lottery whether they score or not. In FM17 the crosses are not that accurate anymore and simply miss their target. Passing: in FM16 one could set short passing or retain possession, and the opponent would be left chasing the ball forever. In FM17, I saw already on two occassions that defenders blatantly mishandled the ball or a pass and lost it to an attacker during the build up. In other words, build-up from the back is no longer an automatically useful thing to do. Same for long balls: it depends much more on the strikers now whether they can win those aerial duels or run after passes into space. So these things don't automatically work, and are potentially disastrous. Shooting from just outside the box: Be very afraid. In FM16 there was a low scoring chance if shots were fired from the edge of the box. Now they're devastating - as in real life - but not yet overpowered from what I've seen. And the players are much harder to coach, they're more inclined to do there own thing with the ball, regardless of the instructions or what you expect them to do in such and such role.

Show ContentMy Inter Milan setup:

I tested my beloved 3-4-1-2 system against AS Roma that was set up in that dreaded 4-2-3-1 formation. In the first game I literally set it up as I'd done in FM16, and I was shown that FM17 is more punitive when it comes to tactical errors. In FM16 those wingers (Candreva, Perisic) and the side defenders (Andreolli & Miranda) would've easily taken turns in plugging the holes in the wide areas of my defensive line so that AS Roma's winger's wouldn't get into scoring positions. The FM engine did this largely automatically. In FM17 they scored twice within the first half exploiting the gaps in these areas. The only reason I kept watching the game because after 1-0 my team immediately answered from the kick-off with a splendid goal. So the game remained tight, but I lost 2-1 nevertheless.

Show ContentSay hello to Salah:

FM17 is thus on the one hand more realistic, with players making more natural errors, and it's harder to make everything go as you planned, but it is at the same time more punitive (this will also play into my hands as well later on). So for the return game I tried to take meassures to minimize my vulnerability on the flanks, and then see what happens.

AS Roma scored in 30 seconds. But it was from a long ball on Dzeko, and even the game counted the goal as caused by an error of my goalkeeper. Other than that, it looked defensively quite secure. Roma's wingers had little space and if they even received the ball they were quickly under heavy pressure from two players. As AS Roma was in the lead, my team automatically took more initiative to control the game, but without rushing things.

What I like to do in FM, and its not easy to get this message across to the game and my in-game players, is to use ''concealed'' or clever attacks. Rather than going into attacking overdrive, flying around the pitch, like they do in the Premierleague, I want my team wait, hold back, give the opponent a false sense of security. ''When we are near, we must seem far away. When we are preparing to attack, we must seem unable to.'' In this FM, where errors are more likely to be punished, that works quite well. (In FM16, opponents are much less likely to self-defeat, and you run the risk of not creating any scoring chances throughout a match). In the 20th minute such a goal occurred for me. In a midfield battle with interceptions by both teams, the ball was picked up in my own half by Miranda who took his time. He passed it wide to Andreolli, who also took his time. He decided for a dump ball to Palacio, who semi-lost his duel and the ball landed before Mario's feet, near the half-way line. Until then, everyone was stationary and no danger seemed to exist for Roma.

But Mario initiated a tempo switch, quickly reached Icardi ahead of him. Icardi moved the ball to Palacio, and then people started running. Palacio dribbled diagonally to the right with the ball, Icardi went diagonally left, moving into the space while Roma's defenders were all distracted by the sudden danger posed by Palacio. Then came Palacio's diagonal pass to Icardi who was standing by the edge of the box and scored. I took off Icardi a second later because of an injury for Eder.

Show ContentPalacio and Icardi splitting Roma defence apart with their sudden actions:

In the 40th minute my team took the lead after a corner kick. The corner kick itself failed, but Eder picked the ball up on the side of the penalty box. Roma defenders weren't paying attention to Murillo who was left unmarked, and he could score near the far post.

In the 53rd minute, while my team was sitting back and passed the ball around with no other purpose than to keep it away from Roma, Eder took advantage of Roma's failing concentration. Inter had possession in Roma's half, but rather than moving forward, Perisic gave the ball to Medel. Medel and Banega, my two holding midfielders, then played a bit back n forth between each other. Everyone was stationary again. But Banega then hit a straight pass to Palacio, skipping Mario and thus surprising Roma. The defenders were forced to respond, upon which Eder quickly drifted into the space that opened up. Palacio immediately reached Eder who scored with a stylish shot in the upper left corner of the net.

Show ContentRoma forgetting about Eder:

For the remainder of the match my team sat deep and cleared balls away so as not to give away the comfortable 3-1 lead.

Another fancy FM17 feature is that it has included this passing analysis in the match analysis:


Im not really sure how to read it, but this is a schematic overview of the most-used passing combinations. The thicker the line, the more often this combination was used. It shows for example, I instructed my goalkeeper for most of the game to play the ball short to one of the defenders. Banega, nr. 19, was the player most frequently involved in passing combinations. It also shows what I already saw on the pitch, that many of my build-ups were like this: Keeper plays short to Miranda. Banega drops deep and receives the ball. Banega then, depending on his options, either goes for Candreva, Medel or Mario. He was most likely to pass to Medel or Candreva. Candreva was likely to look for Mario or Palacio. Alternatively, Banega played a longer pass to Mario or even to Palacio. It also corresponds to the statistic that no less than 47% of my actions took place in the central areas, 35% down the right flank, and only 19% down the left.

This had partly to do with Perisic, and partly to the tactics, I think. Both Banega and Palacio were positioned right-of-the-centre, and due to their player roles they were allowed more flexible movement and they were allowed to collect balls while the rest of the team worked for them. So naturally, the activity gravitated towards the right-of-the-center of the pitch. On top of that, Perisic is more of a wide attacker than a wide midfielder, and thus less comfortable in his role on the left. The players might thus find it safer to skip him or pivot to the other flank with Candreva.

The alternative build-up route, through Andreolli and Medel shows that Medel was more inclined to look for Mario than for Perisic, which basically means Perisic was being skipped. Especially since Medel also showed a great tendency to simply play it back to Murillo in the middle of the defence. Mario on the other hand did frequently look for Perisic if he couldn't reach the strikers.