Go to page 1, 2
| Forum » Doubts and questions » Man to Man obsolete with Advance Formation? | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Username
1117 msgs.
International
|
Would it not be obsolete to use "Man to Man" marking when at the same time placing players in very effective locations in "Advance Formation" for all squares of the board? Would it not be better to use Zone Defense? |
04/11/2011 03:54 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
2108 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Players move sporadically, there's only so much you can predict. Plus these formations can't go to every single square, so trying to do that with zones would pretty much be getting the worst of both worlds. Your players pretty much have no definite formation, nor are they close to anyone. | 04/11/2011 04:22 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1117 msgs.
International
|
Thank you for your answer : ) So what you are saying is that players do not have enough time to react and place themselves to the formation they were assigned for every square? My worries lie in that if one uses advance formation and man to man marking a good foward or om can destroy your formation and create havoc on your advance formation settings... what do you think? |
04/11/2011 04:27 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
I think you're right, at from some of the games I've seen at least. I think an OM behind a good Forward can work wonders. Just my thoughts though. IIRC, it's how my last league opponent scored his goal against me - I think my DFM moved to mark his OM whilst his CF was sitting in space all by his lonesome self. I'd be willing to test the theory with a zero (or reaaaalllly low) effort friendly. I don't want to burn out my not so deep squad. |
04/11/2011 05:19 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1117 msgs.
International
|
Ok, i will like to do the same... lets test this out ABC... lets play at zero... next week? |
04/11/2011 05:24 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1117 msgs.
International
|
So the question remains.... Using advance formation with man to man marking might cancel itself out, at best, or be contradictory and confusing to your players, at worst? therefore using zone might be a better choice? |
04/11/2011 05:27 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
5569 msgs.
Golden Ball
|
want to see what happens to a really good zone defense against a really good player? Watch my defense get made fools of repeatedly in today's cup game. |
04/11/2011 06:30 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1117 msgs.
International
|
Reb I think you played a fine game... that guy just has a lot of good players... With your tactics you would have won if you had the same quality players... I am leaning towards zone defence/with very detailed advance formation.... will having it 50% man to man and 50% zone defence confuse the players? or will lets say 60% man to man and 40% zone give you a better result? |
04/11/2011 06:44 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1117 msgs.
International
|
Reb I think you played a fine game... that guy just has a lot of good players... With your tactics you would have won if you had the same quality players... I am leaning towards zone defence/with very detailed advance formation.... will having it 50% man to man and 50% zone defence confuse the players? or will lets say 60% man to man and 40% zone give you a better result? |
04/11/2011 06:44 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
3363 msgs.
Best scorer
|
When you have the ball, your advanced formation player positions kick in. When the opponent has the ball, man marking will over-ride any advanced formation positioning. |
04/11/2011 07:03 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
Go to page 1, 2
1
