Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Onderwerp: [NT] USA NT - Discussion
no lies detected.
We've been in 50th in the past, but this is w/o question(as far as we can look back - 4 seasons afaik) we've never had close to this few points.
He was doing well in the first half but boy, we've dropped like 115 points in the last four weeks. Oof.
We've been in 50th in the past, but this is w/o question(as far as we can look back - 4 seasons afaik) we've never had close to this few points.
He was doing well in the first half but boy, we've dropped like 115 points in the last four weeks. Oof.
And that's against the weakest rivals, and the USA now has matches against Switzerland and Albania.
He was doing well in the first half
You're talking about 2 wins (against Kazakhstan 3:1 and Japan 4:2), a draw with Albania, where the USA lost ranking points, and 3 defeats (Switzerland 5:0, Austria 6:0 and Portugal 4:1), in total in the first half of the season the USA lost 78 ranking points, in the second it's actually even worse, because only three matches have been played and the USA has already lost 75 ranking points.
You're talking about 2 wins (against Kazakhstan 3:1 and Japan 4:2), a draw with Albania, where the USA lost ranking points, and 3 defeats (Switzerland 5:0, Austria 6:0 and Portugal 4:1), in total in the first half of the season the USA lost 78 ranking points, in the second it's actually even worse, because only three matches have been played and the USA has already lost 75 ranking points.
As an interesting fact, the USA has never had a worse result than a victory against Japan or Kazakhstan:
[url=https://postimages.org/][/url]
[url=https://postimages.org/][/url]
[url=https://postimages.org/][/url]
[url=https://postimages.org/][/url]
Btw. as a sidenote, you might find that interesting since you don't have experience at this level (yet)
Playing a team like Japan or Kazakhstan we have no business playing 5 at the back.
That's not really true and choosing 5 at the back was not the problem. Actually 532 with winger is the most effective tactic in the game, at this level. 541 is often good, but sometimes leeds to problems with finishing/creating chances [just 1 striker, no chance for follow up shots after GK spits the ball, no chance for catching the ball if the defender bounces the ball away from first striker etc.]
I'm using mostly 5 at the back with Germany and it's a team that plays for 80+, often around 84, so top level. The reason for that is in my opinion the most important aspect especially against lower level NTs is:
a. not allow them to have a situation to score - because if the have a situation, then due to handicap they will score [higher chance of finishing when a team is being crushed]
b. dominate them by regaining the ball as high and as fast as possible - allows for creating a higher number of situations
I played 4 such games this season
vs Honduras 24:0 and 27:0 in shots
vs Dominicana 20:1 in shots and 16:2
The problem with USA v Kazakhstan was not the 5 at the back (4 could lead USA to losing due to their winger and almost every NT has a decent winger that will cause you problems if you use 4 defs).
The problem was different:
a. he set the height of offensive players badly, the winger should've been played very highly, instead he was tracking back to own half and that honestly makes no sense
b. the strikers were going back to the half-way line and then they were receiving the ball and running up front to the defenders, you won't create nothing like that
it's (in my opinion) much better to get 3 or 4 more offsides than to have a situation when your ATTs receive the ball near centre of the pitch and then just run into low block of defenders
c. he positioned the CMs badly, too narrowly and close to eachother, so USA often had no way to play the ball around when ATTs/Wing were covered, in such situations the only possible passes for the engine were often back passes to side defenders
d. if you can play the ball around left-right with CMs then you have very limited chances of creating open spaces for strikers and winger - because they are static and they are covered all the time. if you pass the ball to left/right between CMs then they strikers move to different positions and often lose their marker, same with winger - people often move their side defs this way: left back is wide and marks the winger when ball is on his side of pitch, but when the ball moves to the other side then the left back goes narrow, closer to centre, and leaves the winger umarked. if your CMs are both narrow, close to each other and set dead in the centre of pitch, you won't make the defenders move, they will just stay well positioned
if he decided to play two CMs narrowly to block the centre defensively (not really needed against this opponent...) they he should have at least moved his side defenders more wide and higher up the pitch in some situations so there would be a possibility to pass the ball around the sides (assuming USA has side defs with good enough pm/pass for that kind of play)
(gewijzigd)
Playing a team like Japan or Kazakhstan we have no business playing 5 at the back.
That's not really true and choosing 5 at the back was not the problem. Actually 532 with winger is the most effective tactic in the game, at this level. 541 is often good, but sometimes leeds to problems with finishing/creating chances [just 1 striker, no chance for follow up shots after GK spits the ball, no chance for catching the ball if the defender bounces the ball away from first striker etc.]
I'm using mostly 5 at the back with Germany and it's a team that plays for 80+, often around 84, so top level. The reason for that is in my opinion the most important aspect especially against lower level NTs is:
a. not allow them to have a situation to score - because if the have a situation, then due to handicap they will score [higher chance of finishing when a team is being crushed]
b. dominate them by regaining the ball as high and as fast as possible - allows for creating a higher number of situations
I played 4 such games this season
vs Honduras 24:0 and 27:0 in shots
vs Dominicana 20:1 in shots and 16:2
The problem with USA v Kazakhstan was not the 5 at the back (4 could lead USA to losing due to their winger and almost every NT has a decent winger that will cause you problems if you use 4 defs).
The problem was different:
a. he set the height of offensive players badly, the winger should've been played very highly, instead he was tracking back to own half and that honestly makes no sense
b. the strikers were going back to the half-way line and then they were receiving the ball and running up front to the defenders, you won't create nothing like that
it's (in my opinion) much better to get 3 or 4 more offsides than to have a situation when your ATTs receive the ball near centre of the pitch and then just run into low block of defenders
c. he positioned the CMs badly, too narrowly and close to eachother, so USA often had no way to play the ball around when ATTs/Wing were covered, in such situations the only possible passes for the engine were often back passes to side defenders
d. if you can play the ball around left-right with CMs then you have very limited chances of creating open spaces for strikers and winger - because they are static and they are covered all the time. if you pass the ball to left/right between CMs then they strikers move to different positions and often lose their marker, same with winger - people often move their side defs this way: left back is wide and marks the winger when ball is on his side of pitch, but when the ball moves to the other side then the left back goes narrow, closer to centre, and leaves the winger umarked. if your CMs are both narrow, close to each other and set dead in the centre of pitch, you won't make the defenders move, they will just stay well positioned
if he decided to play two CMs narrowly to block the centre defensively (not really needed against this opponent...) they he should have at least moved his side defenders more wide and higher up the pitch in some situations so there would be a possibility to pass the ball around the sides (assuming USA has side defs with good enough pm/pass for that kind of play)
(gewijzigd)
The positioning of the CMs is almost the same as in Crna Gora… which is having an excellent season. The objective is, for example, to be on the left, and the CMs to put the ball on the right wing. We did that many times.
It's not, Crna Gora uses the midfielders much wider and crosses sides of strikers + uses them more widely instead of just putting them statically and narrowly in the centre
The objective is, for example, to be on the left, and the CMs to put the ball on the right wing.
that's a great objective, but that's not happening with this tactic that you used because of how your CMs as positioned
when I want to do that one of my CMs plays almost like half-winger... then it does happen... when you have two narrow CMS playing almost in one box then it's impossible
The objective is, for example, to be on the left, and the CMs to put the ball on the right wing.
that's a great objective, but that's not happening with this tactic that you used because of how your CMs as positioned
when I want to do that one of my CMs plays almost like half-winger... then it does happen... when you have two narrow CMS playing almost in one box then it's impossible
OK, thanks for the analysis, but here is how I see it.
1) I agree about forward/wing placement. The thing is, Kazakhstan had some inconsistencies in their defense setup on the sides that 'might' have been exploited. The forwards barely moved at all, ever.
2) As far as midfield, the entire set up, to me, is problematic since playing the winger as aggressively as you suggest (which isn't wrong) you're fundamentally playing a 2 man midfield. Which for me, is an absolute non-starter. Perhaps with Germany, where every defender is also a capable midfielder, you can trap and get away with this. I'm not a big fan of playing scared. and the only reason I do it in ML is because my team's really not better than virtually everyone else's save for a few sides, and my midfield is trash. 24 year first gens and a 500k 31 year old.
In the case of Kazakhstan, Woock at left back was completely wasted and ineffectual on the game. If he had been in the midfield instead, he'd have been more value. He could've been deployed as a holding mid if one were really skittish.
As far as you playing 532's against little sisters of the poor, I mean you still score 5-6 goals, but do you honestly think these clubs are going to outscore you in ANY scenario at all? If you play more aggressively, you may give up a goal, but you'll score 10. I believe in punishing weaker teams. I continue to win games without using the one winger tactic - in part because I literally don't have one.
Perhaps on the NT level this won't work. If you're not still learning, you're losing.
1) I agree about forward/wing placement. The thing is, Kazakhstan had some inconsistencies in their defense setup on the sides that 'might' have been exploited. The forwards barely moved at all, ever.
2) As far as midfield, the entire set up, to me, is problematic since playing the winger as aggressively as you suggest (which isn't wrong) you're fundamentally playing a 2 man midfield. Which for me, is an absolute non-starter. Perhaps with Germany, where every defender is also a capable midfielder, you can trap and get away with this. I'm not a big fan of playing scared. and the only reason I do it in ML is because my team's really not better than virtually everyone else's save for a few sides, and my midfield is trash. 24 year first gens and a 500k 31 year old.
In the case of Kazakhstan, Woock at left back was completely wasted and ineffectual on the game. If he had been in the midfield instead, he'd have been more value. He could've been deployed as a holding mid if one were really skittish.
As far as you playing 532's against little sisters of the poor, I mean you still score 5-6 goals, but do you honestly think these clubs are going to outscore you in ANY scenario at all? If you play more aggressively, you may give up a goal, but you'll score 10. I believe in punishing weaker teams. I continue to win games without using the one winger tactic - in part because I literally don't have one.
Perhaps on the NT level this won't work. If you're not still learning, you're losing.
Starting from week 1.
In the first and second week, which is Panama and Paragway, it was still my games.
In the first and second week, which is Panama and Paragway, it was still my games.
2) As far as midfield, the entire set up, to me, is problematic since playing the winger as aggressively as you suggest (which isn't wrong) you're fundamentally playing a 2 man midfield. Which for me, is an absolute non-starter. Perhaps with Germany, where every defender is also a capable midfielder, you can trap and get away with this. I'm not a big fan of playing scared. and the only reason I do it in ML is because my team's really not better than virtually everyone else's save for a few sides, and my midfield is trash. 24 year first gens and a 500k 31 year old.
playing 5 at the back is not "scared", it's pragmatic and often it can be offensive... depends how you set it up. you can't play very high line of 4 defs at NT level, you will be destroyed by a well set winger. even by a weaker team.
In the case of Kazakhstan, Woock at left back was completely wasted and ineffectual on the game. If he had been in the midfield instead, he'd have been more value. He could've been deployed as a holding mid if one were really skittish.
yes, but that's a post game analysis and you have to make the decision before the game. it is equally possible that your opponent uses a right high winger and if Woock wasn't there, you would be crushed. there was no winger on his side, but that's not something you can know before the game.
you don't really know this level, it's very, very different to games at rating 55-65. very different players, very different tactics work. according to each level you have to adapt the tactics a lot.
As far as you playing 532's against little sisters of the poor, I mean you still score 5-6 goals, but do you honestly think these clubs are going to outscore you in ANY scenario at all?
yes, in theory it is possible (especially since I used B-C team players and players that are out of form to try and boost it to upwards trend).
Saudi Arabia - a country with 1 users - is 2nd in their group and will probably go to World Cup.
Arabia beat rating 77 Scotland 3:0 and Scotland also managed to lose with rating 71 Salvador and twice lose against rating 71 Pilipinas - while playing for 77-78.
furthermore... the Domininican Republic (20:1 and 16:2 in shots for Germany) just beat Bosnia this week 4:0 (rating 71 vs 77 Bosnia)
An even better example... Eesti playing for 79.8 drawn 1:1 against rating 65 Nigeria [12:6 shots] so yes, definitely possible to lose/draw against teams with rating around 70
If you play more aggressively, you may give up a goal, but you'll score 10.
problem is it doesn't work this way in this game... you can set 3 ATTs and it won't make you create more chances because the match engine doesn't work like that
and in these games you often have a much lowered % of finishing. years ago they introduced a handicap for weaker teams so they don't get crushed - unfortunately they messed it up so once every x games you get a match with 20:1 in shots and 0:1 result.
I've lately had a game with 33 shots made by divine strikers and they scored only 3 - and I used only 4 defs in that game [Korea always uses same tactic so it was a no brainer]
That's the same amount I scored against Serbia with 10 shots.
(gewijzigd)
playing 5 at the back is not "scared", it's pragmatic and often it can be offensive... depends how you set it up. you can't play very high line of 4 defs at NT level, you will be destroyed by a well set winger. even by a weaker team.
In the case of Kazakhstan, Woock at left back was completely wasted and ineffectual on the game. If he had been in the midfield instead, he'd have been more value. He could've been deployed as a holding mid if one were really skittish.
yes, but that's a post game analysis and you have to make the decision before the game. it is equally possible that your opponent uses a right high winger and if Woock wasn't there, you would be crushed. there was no winger on his side, but that's not something you can know before the game.
you don't really know this level, it's very, very different to games at rating 55-65. very different players, very different tactics work. according to each level you have to adapt the tactics a lot.
As far as you playing 532's against little sisters of the poor, I mean you still score 5-6 goals, but do you honestly think these clubs are going to outscore you in ANY scenario at all?
yes, in theory it is possible (especially since I used B-C team players and players that are out of form to try and boost it to upwards trend).
Saudi Arabia - a country with 1 users - is 2nd in their group and will probably go to World Cup.
Arabia beat rating 77 Scotland 3:0 and Scotland also managed to lose with rating 71 Salvador and twice lose against rating 71 Pilipinas - while playing for 77-78.
furthermore... the Domininican Republic (20:1 and 16:2 in shots for Germany) just beat Bosnia this week 4:0 (rating 71 vs 77 Bosnia)
An even better example... Eesti playing for 79.8 drawn 1:1 against rating 65 Nigeria [12:6 shots] so yes, definitely possible to lose/draw against teams with rating around 70
If you play more aggressively, you may give up a goal, but you'll score 10.
problem is it doesn't work this way in this game... you can set 3 ATTs and it won't make you create more chances because the match engine doesn't work like that
and in these games you often have a much lowered % of finishing. years ago they introduced a handicap for weaker teams so they don't get crushed - unfortunately they messed it up so once every x games you get a match with 20:1 in shots and 0:1 result.
I've lately had a game with 33 shots made by divine strikers and they scored only 3 - and I used only 4 defs in that game [Korea always uses same tactic so it was a no brainer]
That's the same amount I scored against Serbia with 10 shots.
(gewijzigd)
In general the problem with 4 defs at top level is this - most if not all of your opponents will have at least divine pace - divine tech winger and strikers.
if you use 4 defs and play the side defs narrow, close to CBs - the winger will destroy you because he will have too much space = will receive the ball all the time and when the def catches up with him, he will try to tackle him from side/behind. which means he won't tackle him successfully in 90% cases.
if you use 4 defs and use side defs wide to cover potential winger - the strikers will destroy you because if they are set up properly, one of them will be left unmarked and in the "pocket" for through balls
that's why nobody uses 4 defs regularly at top level... it can be an option to surprise your opponent with one off but it's just a gamble in which you guess and hope he doesn't use a winger and you just set 4 defs narrowly - that was a viable strategy until they introduced tactic changes into the game, now most teams even if they decide to play through centre in tactic 1, then change to tactic 2 with winger when losing/drawing after first half... so it doesn't really work anymore
if you use 4 defs and play the side defs narrow, close to CBs - the winger will destroy you because he will have too much space = will receive the ball all the time and when the def catches up with him, he will try to tackle him from side/behind. which means he won't tackle him successfully in 90% cases.
if you use 4 defs and use side defs wide to cover potential winger - the strikers will destroy you because if they are set up properly, one of them will be left unmarked and in the "pocket" for through balls
that's why nobody uses 4 defs regularly at top level... it can be an option to surprise your opponent with one off but it's just a gamble in which you guess and hope he doesn't use a winger and you just set 4 defs narrowly - that was a viable strategy until they introduced tactic changes into the game, now most teams even if they decide to play through centre in tactic 1, then change to tactic 2 with winger when losing/drawing after first half... so it doesn't really work anymore
some good results of those "little sisters" from this season ;) in order of lowest to biggest rating difference
Nicaragua - Lietuva 0:0 / 72 v 77
Dominican Rep - Bosnia 4:0 / 71 v 77
al-Jazā’ir - Portugal 1:1 / 69 v 77
U.A.E. - België 2:1 / 74 v 82
Indonesia - Hellas 4:1 / 73 v 82
Israel - Česká republika 4:0 / 71 v 80
Guatemala - England 3:3 / rating 66 v 76
Zhōngguó - España 2:2 / 72 v 82
Nigeria - Danmark 2:1 / 64 v 75
Nigeria - Armenia 2:1 / 62 v 75 / 3:14 in shots
Nigeria - Eesti 1:1 / 65 v 80
and of course USA :)
USA - Nippon 2:2 / 75 v 67
Kazakhstán - USA 0:0 / 62 v 73 [rather 75-76, the GK got 45 rating due to inactivity]
(gewijzigd)
Nicaragua - Lietuva 0:0 / 72 v 77
Dominican Rep - Bosnia 4:0 / 71 v 77
al-Jazā’ir - Portugal 1:1 / 69 v 77
U.A.E. - België 2:1 / 74 v 82
Indonesia - Hellas 4:1 / 73 v 82
Israel - Česká republika 4:0 / 71 v 80
Guatemala - England 3:3 / rating 66 v 76
Zhōngguó - España 2:2 / 72 v 82
Nigeria - Danmark 2:1 / 64 v 75
Nigeria - Armenia 2:1 / 62 v 75 / 3:14 in shots
Nigeria - Eesti 1:1 / 65 v 80
and of course USA :)
USA - Nippon 2:2 / 75 v 67
Kazakhstán - USA 0:0 / 62 v 73 [rather 75-76, the GK got 45 rating due to inactivity]
(gewijzigd)
In the first and second week, which is Panama and Paragway, it was still my games.
OK, I stand corrected on this. Sometimes I forget these elections go longer than a week.
OK, I stand corrected on this. Sometimes I forget these elections go longer than a week.
Last warning, keep this to the NT for USA only or you will have you will lose the ability to post on this thread.
USA - Schweiz: 11 shots, 5 goals
USA - Österreich: 12 shots, 6 goals
Portugal - USA: 8 shots, 4 goals
Österreich - USA: 9 shots, 4 goals
Therefore I have to assume that the USA has the best Sokker team, as the "handicap" is always to hurt the USA. Harming or benefiting a team is a simple flag in the middle of thousands of lines of code. A flag that activates or deactivates this handicap you mentioned.
The only way the USA didn't concede goals in Sokker was not having conceded any shots in the last game. Thus, with 0 shots it was possible to have 0 goals conceded.
USA - Österreich: 12 shots, 6 goals
Portugal - USA: 8 shots, 4 goals
Österreich - USA: 9 shots, 4 goals
Therefore I have to assume that the USA has the best Sokker team, as the "handicap" is always to hurt the USA. Harming or benefiting a team is a simple flag in the middle of thousands of lines of code. A flag that activates or deactivates this handicap you mentioned.
The only way the USA didn't concede goals in Sokker was not having conceded any shots in the last game. Thus, with 0 shots it was possible to have 0 goals conceded.