Definitive Illegal Formation Rules

[Potemy]

I'm guessing 50%-50%? As each teams 30% possession loss would cancel each other out

I'd guess 50-50 too, but not for that reasoning as it's not exactly a 30% possession loss, just definitely 80-20. I won't assume that it's 50-50 if legal because one side or the other will have the lion's share of possession.

[Razz]

Watched this match today ... adds a new wrinkle again, because I see no reason why it's illegal

EDIT: On further review, this team has a DL playing GK. See post below

[Potemy]

Watched this match today ... adds a new wrinkle again, because I see no reason why it's illegal

It's not, unless something is very wrong with the DR?

[Razz]

Ok, at first blush, this looks ok. 4-3-2-1 should be good, right?
On further investigation, it turns out E. Silva is a MC playing keeper.
So, I'm thinking rule 1 is: a Goalkeeper playing Goalkeeper.

[Potemy]

Ok, at first blush, this looks ok. 4-3-2-1 should be good, right?
On further investigation, it turns out E. Silva is a MC playing keeper.
So, I'm thinking rule 1 is: a Goalkeeper playing Goalkeeper.

I don't think that's it, though. You play against plenty of abandoned teams with other players as GK, and you only get something over 70% possession most of the time. Very confusing, and there's also someone claiming that they played 5-1-1-0-3 for the whole of last season and it was fine.

[Razz]

Tempting to make a second team just to test this stuff

[scale89]

personally don't see how any formation can be considered "illegal" football is a game that requires flexibility therefore surely football management games should have this also?

[Potemy]

personally don't see how any formation can be considered "illegal" football is a game that requires flexibility therefore surely football management games should have this also?

Not sure who first used the term illegal, I wouldn't exactly call it that. You have to agree that if you have noone on the left or right, then you're going to concede lots of possession. Yes, in real football, players can drift out wide to defend, but there will still be plenty of space more than usual for the opponents on that side.

[scale89]

At the top of this thread however it is discussed that you should have a minimum of 3 defenders etc. I cannot see how having only 2 defenders is "illegal" or against the rules of the game. Like I say football is an evolving game and surely people should be given a freedom to play whatever formation they wish. For example on the game you cannot have 4 out and out forwards yet there is a formation in real life football 4-2-4. Whilst I concede this is not football manager etc. surely managers should be given the freedom to create new formations to trouble opponents? for example if I wanted to play a 2-5-3 formation.

[Rapyer]

At the top of this thread however it is discussed that you should have a minimum of 3 defenders etc. I cannot see how having only 2 defenders is "illegal" or against the rules of the game. Like I say football is an evolving game and surely people should be given a freedom to play whatever formation they wish. For example on the game you cannot have 4 out and out forwards yet there is a formation in real life football 4-2-4. Whilst I concede this is not football manager etc. surely managers should be given the freedom to create new formations to trouble opponents? for example if I wanted to play a 2-5-3 formation.

you are joking, right?>
4-2-4 is a 2 striker formation with 2 wingers, wingers are considered forwards in spain italy and south america, while in english speaking countries they are considered part of midfield