Bring back DML/DMR positions or something similar? (My opinion)

[tomu741]

When they removed dml/dmr they said that they combined both dl/dr and dml/dmr. So they are right. Just divide fullbacks square in the half - and you will have dl in first half and dml in second.
Same goes to aml/amr. Divide his zone and you get aml/amr and your lst/rst.
Not sure about other positions but those two for sure changes players position/movement in the game

[Aris Vardakas]

When they removed dml/dmr they said that they combined both dl/dr and dml/dmr. So they are right. Just divide fullbacks square in the half - and you will have dl in first half and dml in second.
Same goes to aml/amr. Divide his zone and you get aml/amr and your lst/rst.
Not sure about other positions but those two for sure changes players position/movement in the game

I know how it works mate but I do not get why I should have a defending (green player) in my midfield while I have a DMC (yellow player) also in my midfield.
Either make it equal or remove DMC as well and forward DC in his place.

Also, about AML/AMR as you say, it makes no sense for a midfield to play in the same line as ST, those players are attacking midfield wingers not strikers.

Do you want to see a difference of why old DML/DMR are not combined into current DL/DR?
They removed their SA like dribblers, playmakers they used to have.
To have such SA nowdays you need to also have ML/MR positions and still they will have no real effect.
(DMC can still use playmaker).
I know that it is not a big deal, to have such SAs, but if they "combined" them as you say, they should still be able to learn those.

[tomu741]

Dmc is midfielder and dc is defender. And in real life in both dl or dml positions anyway play same players and probably same with aml/lst. But yes you are right about sa .

[Aris Vardakas]

Dmc is midfielder and dc is defender. And in real life in both dl or dml positions anyway play same players and probably same with aml/lst. But yes you are right about sa .

Back when DML/DMR were still in the game, a DL/DR could play at a maximum of ML/MR position (makes a lot of sense).
Now imagine this, you can have DL/ML/AML in current top eleven, so in real life CR7 for example can play as a DL. (really?)

Players should not go as high or low on the pitch like that.

To me, DL and AML is a long distance, especially if AML goes as forward as a striker. (if they have 3 positions DL/ML/AML of course)

Yes some players in real life may be able to play the whole wing, but never as good as their "primary" position. (semi-illegal)

[tomu741]

same here. Anyway if you have 3 positions, that player would be better only at one position.
I am not comparing dl with aml, i'm comparing dl with dml. Very similar position but dml will have less defensive and more offensive responsibilities but for me anyway same player. When someone plays 4-2-3-1 for example with dl/dr and change their formation to 3-5-2 so anyway those dl/dr would become dml/dmr.
Anyway positions which doesnt exist here are lam ram and cf.
You talked about sweeper - i dont think that here exist such a role.
In my opinion they can introduce player roles and that would be more interesting.

[Aris Vardakas]

same here. Anyway if you have 3 positions, that player would be better only at one position.
I am not comparing dl with aml, i'm comparing dl with dml. Very similar position but dml will have less defensive and more offensive responsibilities but for me anyway same player. When someone plays 4-2-3-1 for example with dl/dr and change their formation to 3-5-2 so anyway those dl/dr would become dml/dmr.
Anyway positions which doesnt exist here are lam ram and cf.
You talked about sweeper - i dont think that here exist such a role.
In my opinion they can introduce player roles and that would be more interesting.

Actually, I never said you compared DL with AML. I said that it is now possible for a DL to also play alongside a ST (when you put him in the same line with ST and when he has 3 positions DL, ML, AML). And in the real world, the players who can do that are not many and common. The distance is just too long.

Now concerning the sweeper, I did not say it ever existed, though I have read in this forum that when you put the central DC closer to the GK with blue arrow, he acts like a sweeper. Many people believe that but I do not. Even if it did, it would be wrong, the sweeper is not an ordinary DC, he has his own role. And as long as the arrows matter, they were never made for a DC with red arrow to "be" a DMC, it just makes him more "attacking". (that is just an example, people tend to say that when you put arrows you kind of change his role, a DC with red arrow -> DMC, a ML with red arrow -> AML, a MC with blue arrow -> DMC, etc., when clearly that is not the case)

By the way, never mind the colors of the arrows I describe above, I simply call them as they were back in the old days.

[IImaestroII]

Hello mate,

Allow me to disagree on that, it is not the same really, by the same logic why not remove the DMC from the game also as well and move DC forward to "act" like DMC?

It just makes no sense at all.

And please do not get me wrong, I would not want DMC to get removed from the game, all I am saying is that they should add more positions in general rather than removing and make others "act" like the removed ones did.

And here I am not talking about adding some random fantasy positions, I am talking about positions that exist in the real world.

Another example would be the sweeper, people tend to say that you can move a bit down a DC with defending arrow and voila, he acts like a sweeper. Meh, I play formations with 3 DCs for like 5 years now, that theory is garbage.

To continue, another example is the attacking midfielders. Why do we have 3 (AML/AMC/AMR)? In my opinion, they should, of course remain in the game, but what happens when you move an AML or AMR in the ST's position? It changes the formation to a 3-attacking one. Again, wrong. Just add 2 more positions for wingers with the red icon, just like the ST's to indicate that you have 3 attackers in your team (this is how real football is by the way and the image I use in OP is from the wikipedia).

Lastly, allow me to present you with an example of the change that happened when they removed DML/DMR positions.
Let us say, I used a 3-2-3-2 (DC-DC-DC-DML-DMR-MC-MC-MC-ST-ST) formation, back in the days. This formation was considered as a 3-5-2 formation, which means higher ball possession (5 midfielders right?). When they "merged" the positions, it is now considered as 5-3-2, which means a defensive one. Why?

I can continue with many more, as I said this is just an example.

If it were for me, I would personally add the below positions in the game:
1. Sweeper
2. DML/DMR
3. LST (or some other name for left winger attacker in the same line as the ST)
4. RST (or some other name for right winger attacker in the same line as the ST)

Again, there is a difference between AML and LST or AMR and RST, hence the reason I added them.
1, 3 and 4 were never introduced in the game, this is just my point of view and in football world in general. Managers should be able to use all the positions available and not make them "act" like they should.

I hope I did not tire you, again, it is just my opinion and point of view.

I agree that the tactical page can be designed much better

[Ποσιδονας]

DML and DMR are already there , just move foward the DL and DR ( same line of dmc )

I agree, we don't need more players positions.
The arowws could do this job.
Also I agree that could not have a player DL-ML-AML, also a player MC-AMC-ST but ok, it's a game.

[tomu741]

Why arrows? Players positioning makes them dl or dml not the arrows. Arrows just make them more attacking or defending.