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.

[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.

[Accyrover]

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??

Jay, do us all a favour, seek your answer here. Nordeus Support
They are the only people with a factual answers to your question.

[Potemy]

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.

The new statement for defenders is fine, I guess. I think we need at least one in the M row (ML/MC/MR), but at least 3 midfielders (yellow players).

And about the posting illegal formations, understood.