Definitive Illegal Formation Rules

[Razz]

1 of my friend uses this formation and got 20% ball possesion. It meets ALL requirements. I don't know why it's illegal.

---ST ST ST---

----MC MC-----

DL DC DC DC DR
------GK-------

Looks fine to me, 5-2-3 is actually a real life formation, albeit a rare one. Maybe his team is just really bad, or maybe you need 3 midfielders? The yellow players, that is.

Were you watching the match, or looking at statistics after? I've looked at games that showed a player with 4-4-2 20% possession, so there's something else going on there - I'd speculate that they had red cards/injuries and didn't have subs set.. - e.g. maybe the DL was injured so he had a 10-man formation with no left flanker or something like that.

You don't need at least one MC, you need at least one player in that row. Having just an ML or MR is fine as well. The rest is all correct, but I'd just write defenders, I don't think anyone uses DB, and FB is only used for the side defenders. I think those are all the rules regarding illegal formations. Tentatively, I'm suggesting that you need at least 3 midfielders, yellow dots in the formation box in-game.

How about this: "Some combination of 3 Defenders (3 players anywhere in the back row - GREEN icons)"?
I'm confused with your comments on midfielders. Are you saying "at least 3 midfielders (DM*, M*, AM*) one of which has to be in the middle row (MC, ML or MR)"?

There's no need to list out all the known illegal formations, because let's say we're listing out illegal formations due to no right sided player, you can have any combination of 10 players in the other 19 positions as long as they aren't on the right, and then there are other rules for illegal formations, left sided, 3 defenders, etc, so a final list would be too long.

No, no. Not asking for ALL illegal formations, just examples that don't fit the (definitely) known criteria. So no need to show a formation with only 2 defensemen or no strikers, because we already know why those are illegal.



Jay, I don't know. But it's part of Top Eleven, and nobody knows exactly what the criteria are.

[Lê Anh Minh]

Were you watching the match, or looking at statistics after? I've looked at games that showed a player with 4-4-2 20% possession, so there's something else going on there - I'd speculate that they had red cards/injuries and didn't have subs set.. - e.g. maybe the DL was injured so he had a 10-man formation with no left flanker or something like that.




How about this: "Some combination of 3 Defenders (3 players anywhere in the back row - GREEN icons)"?
I'm confused with your comments on midfielders. Are you saying "at least 3 midfielders (DM*, M*, AM*) one of which has to be in the middle row (MC, ML or MR)"?





No, no. Not asking for ALL illegal formations, just examples that don't fit the (definitely) known criteria. So no need to show a formation with only 2 defensemen or no strikers, because we already know why those are illegal.



Jay, I don't know. But it's part of Top Eleven, and nobody knows exactly what the criteria are.

I watched the match. His team got only 20% ball possesion.

[Lê Anh Minh]

His team is very strong and everyone's in the right position. That why I said that "I don't know why"

Here's the screenshot

[Rapyer]

you dont need 3 mc, you need to have 3 in midfield, be that dmc or amc

[Expadaloco]

It is a good topic but like Justdome stated when he was a mod on the old board, yes there are illegal formation but the programmers will not disclose which.
I remember justdome stating he played with two DC's and a DML/DMR for several seasons but then it became ineffective, assuming the rest of his formation was 3MC's AML/AMR and a ST that was a fair set up.
I assume this would have been when certain formations were clamped down on.
What will give us a more conclusive guide is by others like Razz bench testing the formations against as many managers with secondry teams as possible
I do not have one and friendlies for me are out of the question.

That's the format I put on my team now, as it seems ok against 3-4-3 format. I don't have many other options because of red card and injuries.

My team is somewhat stronger than my opponent tonight. I can leave it and post results tomorrow.

[Jay_]

Jay, I don't know. But it's part of Top Eleven, and nobody knows exactly what the criteria are.

Ok, but this is what I'm trying to find out.. I want to know the reasons behind a formation being deemed illegal!

If it's a game that a player can pay to use, surely they should be able to do anything they like to their own team that they deem fit.. If a manager wants to put out a certain formation, then how on earth can the creators not allow this??

[Razz]

OK, so based on all that, here's an update

Theoretical Legal Formation Requirements:

• Goalkeeper
• Some combination of 3 defenders (i.e. 3 players anywhere in the back row )
• At least 1, but no more than 2, players on EACH outside flank. {the D(L/R), DM(L/R), M(L/R), AM(L/R) slots}
• at least 3 midfielders (DM*, M*, AM*) one of which has to be in the middle row (MC, ML or MR)
• at least 1 Striker

feel free to suggest better phrasing for clarity.

[Rapyer]

you dont have to have ANY in middle row eg 4-2-3-1 deep, just 3 midfielders min, same as 3 defenders min

[Accyrover]

Agreed all my games played with one DMC, MC and AMC are asymmetrical so none in the centre row as were calling it.
If it was my tweak on total football would get battered and it doesn't. 16 outings this season I'd say makes that pretty conclusive.

[Accyrover]

That's the format I put on my team now, as it seems ok against 3-4-3 format. I don't have many other options because of red card and injuries.

My team is somewhat stronger than my opponent tonight. I can leave it and post results tomorrow.

Yes but the engine has had many up dates since those days.
Playing two defenders will definitely lose you 30% possession, giving your opponent 80/20 advantage.