PES series question: Should the "CR7" Ronaldo character have the "Flip-Flap-Floppo" card? I only know about PES and the FIFA series from my grand-kids...
Defensive mids only You didn't understand me I just named categories like defensive, offensive etc. those includes several skills (For example heading is a defensive skill in Fifa) which gives the characters their OVR (how good they are overall) . Defenders only need those which I named before. If a defender has very high offensive skills, technique and mentaly but no defensive skills, he is useless. But if inverted, he is a very good player. In other words: For a defender are less skills necessary. To RoyoftheRovers, sorry I didn't play PES for ages. Now I'm a Fifa fan, no need for PES.
In many teams, midfielders other than defensive mids contribute to their team not conceding. Maybe we just agree to disagree. I mean, being good with airball situations is not a def or att skill, it's a footballer skill (imo). So is "mentality", etc. My opinion in short: dif positions demand different things (while a huge amount of skills is common for all the positions). Attackers can attack better than defs can, defs can defend better than attackers etc, and in reality everyone participates in how their team attacks and defends.
Gotcha Yes but, Pardon m'sieur, I was mistaken. Header is a offensive skill in Fifa. But that doesn't help us lol P.S. Fifa FTW!
Because attackers' skill set is about creating and scoring goals, while defenders' skill set is about preventing that. Fans watch football for the goals, therefore they appreciate more players with skills for creating and scoring goals.
Yeah I get that, and I agree. I just think it's two different things when we talk about what is appreciated by the audience and what is needed on pitch. Hence I disagree with the idea of attackers having more "skills".
it 's MORE tahn just the idea! It's like OBVIOUS. name me 1000+ teams and their best player( or most skillful) 99.99% would be an "ATTACKER". Ecept a few cases : Beckenbauer for Bayern 70's, or Lev Yashin of USSR
I don't like the idea either, but we can't handle the truth, can we? Messi, Ronaldo, Falcao, Neymar VS Silva, Lahm, Ramos and Pique. Who are more skilled?
Nah, I disagree, it's not about "handling the truth". The attackers are capable of attacking, the defs are more capable of defending. Both are equal parts of football, and the tasks ask that a player have "skills". So while from a certain pov it's understandable that people would say the attackers are more skilled, I don't think it's really the case. (but we already said to agree to disagree - now this is starting again lol)
[My grand-kids play both the FIFA & PES series: as long as you can make new players. I'm utter crap at the actual game (the football simulation part); so I help them re-create players from the past. We put our version of George Best in the current (to the game) Toon squad and the like...]
I think that skips an important level; it happens far more often (is believed, dunno whether that is actually investigated properly) that a forward becomes a defender before he turns 20, as a defender becoming a forward. In a very simplistic way, the move to deeper lines is easier to take as the other way around. I'm not aware of actual numbers but if it is investigated, this might give a satisfactory answer about whether midfielders and attackers are rated higher in a fair manner. Is the move to advanced lines more logical or the move to deeper lines? Esp. for the age group 15-20 this is interesting because from that age on they have a basic awareness about tactics and positioning. Of course, there are always exceptions and good traits for a forward do not make one for a defender and vice versa. Indeed, put Pique up front and he is at the very least a good and tall targetman with decent trapping as well! Similarly, some defenders are just as influential as a forward. True, destruction is easier as construction but if, say, someone has a very pacy and accurate long range pass it can make sense to place him at the back. Though, in recent times the deep-lying playmaker role has become fashionable of course. Tenths of a second can make the difference. With an equal technique it comes down to the processing of information; this is harder right in the middle of the action as at the back and observing it from a quasi birds eye view. One can see different things at the back as at other positions but ultimately games are won by scoring goals. For that purpose one has to move to a more advanced position, either as provider or scorer, where information is harder to process.
Just to name a few: Pele/Di Stefano/Cruijff/Gullit/Boby Charlton .... would make better defenders than Baresi/Moore/Pasarella/Maldini/Scirea in attack -- LOL just a wild fantasy: if we play like an indoor football with a team of 5 each side: 1- ALL Attack team A ---------------- Pele ------------------ ----- Cruijff ----------Di Stefano ---- -----Charlton-------- Gullit ---------- ------------- Chilavert ---------------- 2- ALL Defenders team D ------------ Passarella -------------- --Maldini -----------Beckenbauer---- --- B Moore --------- Baresi -------- --------------G Banks---------------- I bet Team A will beat team D by 5-2 following a possession of 70% (over 90 mins)
You can disagree, but the fact is that attackers do need and have more skills. And let's not forget that Beckenbauer started as a midfielder, then he moved back to defense. History shows us that it's more often we see attacking players move back to defensive roles, than vice versa. Puck makes a good point in his post. Many skillful defenders have started as attacking players.
Depends what you mean by skills. Ball control, dribbling, shot accuracy, not-getting-nervous in scoring opportunities etc are not the only "skills" in football.
It's kinda funny people would consider attackers the best players. Wouldn't midfielders be better than both defenders and attackers?
Who are more versatile? I'd say the latter 4 easily. The answer to the thread's question is: "because we are in the FIFA Playstation era." 15-20 years ago defenders weren't underrated as much, if at all.
But that's generally only at a young age, when they've obviously not been identified for their best position during their development, or for certain players with an all-round skill set. The point I was trying to make (using a somehwat leading question) is that defenders and attackers have different skill sets, but a defenders basic skills will generally allow them to play in attack better than a typical attacker will play at the back. Take a full back and a winger - the full backs skill set will mean they will tend to be a better winger (as they have attacking as well as defensive skills) than a winger will a full back. Attackers tend to be more specialised in their skills, while (some) defenders often have better all round games. Midfielders are a different case altogether, though.
It does in a way. If top defenders are going to be better attackers than top defenders are going to be defenders, it stands to reason that they have a skill set that is more spread out while an attackers is more focussed (Obviously there will be exceptions, but I'm talking in general terms of footballers of a certain, accomplished level). Now the question is: Who is more skilled - the player that can do a few things to a 9/10 or 10/10 level but not much else, the player that can do most things to a 6/10 or 7/10 level or the player who can do a few things to a 8/10 level and most others to a 5/10 level?
who? WC94: Romario was best player WC98: Ronaldo was best player WC02: Ronaldo beat Kahn twice in final (Kahn won it "before" that final game lucky him) WC06: Zidane was best player WC10: Forlan was best player there