I Did Start Playing Again, But...............

...............after 2 Test Saves and what i had hoped would be a Career Save, i've had to stop again.

This is of course since Patch 9.3.0

Test 1

Tested a tactic with a Holiday Save, came 5th with West Ham(1st season).

I took back over to strengthen the squad for season 2(decent warchest this time) made some key signings, we were clearly a much better squad, played and won friendlies, team gelling, superb morale.

Went on Holiday Mode again and found i was sacked after 21 EPL games(W 10 D 1 L 10)

Test 2

Tested a different tactic with a Holiday Save, came 6th with West Ham(1st season)

Again i took back over to strengthen the squad, similar kitty, bought different players(as different tactic set up) again a much better squad, played and won friendlies, team gelling, superb morale.

Went on Holiday Mode again, this time checking in every month, results after 15 League games were, W 7 D 1 L 7

Game 3 Intended Career Save

Using yet another different tactic playing through the season myself, came 5th with West Ham(1st season)

Again i strengthened the squad and went from 3 to 4 stars to 5 to 6 stars, had a very strong squad, played and won friendlies, team gelling, superb morale.

Played 13 League games of season 2, W 5 D 2 L 6

Look Familiar?

All 3 tactics were a different range of mentalities, formations, width, tempo etc, the players purchased in each save were different, yet the results panned out with scarily similar outcomes?

The only similarity is that i used a single tactic in each save, which i'm aware people are going to quickly conclude is the cause, but even so, why such similarities between overall games won, drew and lost? especially as each tactic has such different instructions to one another.

I like using one tactic if i can get away with it, as long as it is balanced and gives me good consistent performances, whilst not unrealistically dominating every match like previous patches and games and with which i only concede a realistic amount of late goals, as well as scoring a realistic amount of late goals myself, then what is the problem?

The most annoying thing was that the tactic i used in what i'd hoped was my Career save was the most attacking of the 3 in nature and having finished 5th in my first season and ultimately ranked three places higher for my second season, with a much better squad i had half expected it to perform better, not worse?

I even did a quick Holiday Test with it as Liverpool and won every game, so it was not like with the re-ranking it would struggle against teams who played more defensively against it?

I just dont get it anymore, but i just feel like i'm being forced out of playing and enjoying this game?

Ahhh c'mon mann.

It has to be your tactics this time.

How many players are you 'strengthening your team' with?

Sorry, can you just clarify what you are trying to say? That the game has preset ideas on where a team using the same tactic all season long will finish? There's some sort of agenda? A conspiracy?

You do well first season, then your second season is harder when you change you squad around and bring in more players. Every time.

When you say, "I like using one tactic if i can get away with it, as long as it is balanced and gives me good consistent performances, whilst not unrealistically dominating every match like previous patches and games and with which i only concede a realistic amount of late goals, as well as scoring a realistic amount of late goals myself, then what is the problem?" does this mean you think you should have a tactic that you can stick with and be successful? If so, sorry, that's just silly.

Although I've not read them all thoroughly, I know from your previous post you have some sort of beef with FM09, and I'm really not trying to shout you down with this, but I'm just a bit confused. I tend to stop reading threads when they get all "I'm saying this", "no you're not," "Look, my test proves there's a conspiracy and the game has in-built systems to stop me winning" and all the rest of the tedious nonsense.

But all I see from this is that you sign on as West Ham, play for a year as one single tactic, sign some players, then play a second season. You do this three times and get similar but not identical form.

What am I missing?

Hmmm.... Its Saturday, that means its Hammer time! Also Mondays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and the odd Friday.

Seriously though, I just believe you approaching this whole thought process from a negative perspective. Maybe you just need to leave it alone for a few weeks and come back with a fresh ideas. I in no way claim to be a genius at this game, but even I manage a modicum of normality within the game life. Even win a couple of games. Holidaying, I think, proves nothing except the pre-determined quality (or lack of) of teams within the database. And all things being equal (which the are) things will turn out mostly as predicted pre-season.

But the best laid plans of a computer program are often thrown astray by one persons' interference based on a pre-concieved notion that the game is cheating and/or Biased and/or totally random. Step back and breathe, Hammer. You'll figure it out.

if you buy too many players your team suffers.. simple as that.

Hmmm.... Its Saturday, that means its Hammer time! Also Mondays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and the odd Friday.

Seriously though, I just believe you approaching this whole thought process from a negative perspective. Maybe you just need to leave it alone for a few weeks and come back with a fresh ideas. I in no way claim to be a genius at this game, but even I manage a modicum of normality within the game life. Even win a couple of games. Holidaying, I think, proves nothing except the pre-determined quality (or lack of) of teams within the database. And all things being equal (which the are) things will turn out mostly as predicted pre-season.

But the best laid plans of a computer program are often thrown astray by one persons' interference based on a pre-concieved notion that the game is cheating and/or Biased and/or totally random. Step back and breathe, Hammer. You'll figure it out.

Ahhhhh.... What he said

It's known as cognitive dissonance, Garry. You have an assumption that good tactic plus better players will always produce better performance. It's how you perceive football, or certainly Football Manager. In order to maintain that assumption, you must discard multiple alternative arguments:

• Opposing managers will play differently against you based on last season's performance
  
• Your new players need time to adapt
  
• Professional football, both real and virtual, requires more than one tactic
  
• Player motivation makes no difference to performance
  
• Other teams aren't strengthening their team
  
• etc, etc
  

Because you must discard these in order to support your original assumption, you are left with only two alternatives, based on the evidence you continually produce.

1. You don't understand football as much as you think you do
   
2. The game is broken/cheats and has nothing to do with football
   

Because option one will be too painful to admit, you choose to pursue and pursue and pursue option two, despite it getting you precisely nowhere. You have even partially admitted to option one when you determined you could tell in real life whether a player was having a bad game, but not if the tactic was fundamentally wrong. Unless you address option one (read Inverting the Pyramid for example) you will continue to have these issues.

Your basic logic is all wrong. Your approach is akin to a manager lining up his squad and telling them he has a tactical approach he can apply to every match that will which guarantee them a top six finish and from this point on all the manager has to do is get in better players before winning the league becomes an inevitability. Surely you can see how ridiculous this is? We can conclude from your test that doing this can give you one good season followed by a very average one, as teams no longer think you're a soft touch. Realistic. Hmm. Ipswich, Reading, Southampton under Strachan, even Hull first quarter to the rest of this season. All developed a very specific method of playing which allowed them to do well for a period of time, before crashing and burning.

Oh how I love Hammers threads.

Oh how I love Hammers threads.

Yeah me too *shakes head*

Hammer, if there is something fundamentally wrong with this game then riddle me this.

Why am I not having the same kind of problems you are? Why are they people who actually do well with West Ham? I wager my current FC Utd game is circumstantially more difficult than your West Ham games. But then maybe it's just me and the way I play the game.

Out of morbid curiosity I'm going to start a West Ham game one of these days...

it's known as cognitive dissonance, garry. You have an assumption that good tactic plus better players will always produce better performance. It's how you perceive football, or certainly football manager. In order to maintain that assumption, you must discard multiple alternative arguments:

• opposing managers will play differently against you based on last season's performance
  

this implies that in my first season every team i played against, lined up in exactly the same way? I dont agree, surely some teams played more attacking, some balanced, whilst others more defensive? In that case is it not true that teams i come up against in season 2 will also line up in a mix of defensive, balanced and attacking? Therefore, if we managed to play well against these different settings in the first season, there is no logical reason why we should start to struggle in season 2.

• your new players need time to adapt
  

in the first season i signed 8 players, thats not including the number of loan signings we already had, whilst in season 2 i brought in just 6 with no loan signings at all?

• professional football, both real and virtual, requires more than one tactic
  

its true of professional football i give you that, but you are the one who introduced it into fm09, before that not a single previous release of this game in whatever shape or form required it. In fact, could it not be said that the inclusion of a tactical wizard for fm2010 shows that many people are having a hard time or finding it just plain impossible, to get to grips with this new system in which multiple tactic sets are now considered necessary?

• other teams aren't strengthening their team
  

yeah, like we dont all know how well that works?

because you must discard these in order to support your original assumption, you are left with only two alternatives, based on the evidence you continually produce.

1. you don't understand football as much as you think you do
   

football yes, fm no, thats because however realistic you try to make it look, fm is never going to be anything more than a number cruncher and if just one little co efficient is even slightly skewed then your asking for problems?

1. the game is broken/cheats and has nothing to do with football
   

take out the word "cheats" and your somewhere near. With all the issues and bugs that remain in fm, is it not at all plausible that somewhere inside all that code something is not quite on the money? You cant tell me that this is the one part of the game si managed to get "perfect"?

because option one will be too painful to admit, you choose to pursue and pursue and pursue option two, despite it getting you precisely nowhere. You have even partially admitted to option one when you determined you could tell in real life whether a player was having a bad game, but not if the tactic was fundamentally wrong. Unless you address option one (read inverting the pyramid for example) you will continue to have these issues.

your right, i wont admit to not understanding football, because i do understand it. I could write you a 10,000 word essay on just how much i do know, but i'll save you from that fate.

fm however is not football, it never will be, not because the game is poor, but because it is just not possible. I always thought that si understood that? But all of a sudden they are attempting to add a sophistication that i dont believe they can achieve at the same time as programming a game that continues to appeal to the masses?

your basic logic is all wrong. Your approach is akin to a manager lining up his squad and telling them he has a tactical approach he can apply to every match that will which guarantee them a top six finish and from this point on all the manager has to do is get in better players before winning the league becomes an inevitability. Surely you can see how ridiculous this is? We can conclude from your test that doing this can give you one good season followed by a very average one, as teams no longer think you're a soft touch. Realistic. Hmm. Ipswich, reading, southampton under strachan, even hull first quarter to the rest of this season. All developed a very specific method of playing which allowed them to do well for a period of time, before crashing and burning.

like i said, in all previous iterations of this game over the years i have been able to play this game in a way that it appealed to me, with some versions obviously being better than others in that time, the amount of detail in which i would immerse myself when playing has changed, but at the end of the day i have gotten out of it pretty much what i wanted, which has kept me coming back for more year after year.

now all of a sudden, i am literally being "forced" into playing the game a certain way, one which i neither have the time or inclination to get out of it what i want from a game which is largely fun and enjoyment?

am i the only one? By the looks of things no and it appears i'm not in a tiny minority either?

if you take a look for instance at all the polls conducted you will see that i'm far from the only one who feels this way, just take a look at the "best tactic" poll and all the "try my tactic" threads, by far the most popular way of playing this game appears to be by using a "single" tactic? I'm not saying this is the most realistic way, but after all this is just a game and people do not want to spend their first 6 months of playing it just trying to get a feel for it, they want to enjoy it and have fun, enough so that when the next version is released they can have another years fun and enjoyment before the version after that is released.

rich, i hope you understand that this is not a rant of any kind, neither is it anything to do with the game cheating in any way. I'm merely trying to interpret the feelings among many fm'ers what it appears they want from this game and what for them/us makes it fun and enjoyable and coming back for more?

......................................................................................................................

Rather than jumping on Hammer as a conspiracy nut, I think they guy actually believes there is a genuine fault with the game. Like WWfan says, though, approaching the game with the idea that Good Tactic+Good Players = Good results. Look at Man City in real life. Near-unbeatable at home, but playing like cripples away.

When people on here - not just Hammer - complain that "Fergie uses the same tactic every game" or Mourinho or Wenger or, heck, even Moyes, that is simply not true. What they use each game is a FORMATION, a way of lining up to start the game. The tactics within each match vary every few minutes. "Rooney, drop deeper"; "Fabregas, more forward runs"; "Cahill, more attacking, get in the box more, support your striker"; "Rooney, stop dropping deep; go wider"; "Fabregas, they're getting too much possession in midfield, only run forward when we're on the break"; and so on and so on.

FM is actually waaayy more simplified than real football. I know you have to pay more attention to it but it still isn't nearly as complicated as real life.

I am sorry but I fail to see the point of this thread.

I am sorry but I fail to see the point of this thread.

Dont apologise, just dont post in it then, simple as that!

Try reading Post 11 then you may grasp the point.

......................................................................................................................

You assume to be talking "for the masses", but actually the vocal contingent on the forums are less than with previous versions.

SI do listen to their customers, and THAT'S why they try and try and try to make it more realistic. I don't think anyone can expect a computer game about football can ever simulate the real game any more than Call of Duty will ever recreate the horror of genuine violence.

In the end, and you're not the only one wanting this, if you want one single tactic to go through the entire season unbeaten and win every cup, why not just get a pen and paper and write out your transfers, your preferred results, then list the end of season table?

If you don't wish to "win everything" and go unbeaten, what's the problem with the current setup?

Dont apologise, just dont post in it then, simple as that!

Try reading Post 11 then you may grasp the point.

I have just read post 11 and I disagree with most of it.

However your right and I will leave you to it. But before I do I am interested on your views on this

Do you think this may help you if implemented into FM10?

Rather than jumping on Hammer as a conspiracy nut, I think they guy actually believes there is a genuine fault with the game. Like WWfan says, though, approaching the game with the idea that Good Tactic+Good Players = Good results. Look at Man City in real life. Near-unbeatable at home, but playing like cripples away.

When people on here - not just Hammer - complain that "Fergie uses the same tactic every game" or Mourinho or Wenger or, heck, even Moyes, that is simply not true. What they use each game is a FORMATION, a way of lining up to start the game. The tactics within each match vary every few minutes. "Rooney, drop deeper"; "Fabregas, more forward runs"; "Cahill, more attacking, get in the box more, support your striker"; "Rooney, stop dropping deep; go wider"; "Fabregas, they're getting too much possession in midfield, only run forward when we're on the break"; and so on and so on.

FM is actually waaayy more simplified than real football. I know you have to pay more attention to it but it still isn't nearly as complicated as real life.

In one sense,FM is simpler. However, the difficulty is that you can't say 'Rooney drop deeper' in FM. You have to communicate through the sliders and what you tend to be saying is something like this 'Rooney drop deeper, which means that I don't want you to be so keen to take attacking options - however I don't really want you to become less enthusiatic about taking risks so will you please show more creative freedom and make more forward runs ( I don't mean more forward runs than you are making now, I mean more forward runs than you would be making otherwise when you drop deeper....) etc, etc'.

That's where the complication with the game lies. As things stand, you find that trying to alter one thing alters 15 others in ways which you didn't want and changing those alters other things and so on.

Of course, one of the problems in the quest for 'realism' which SI seems to be engaged in is that the number of variables increases all the time. Every additional feature (eg media relationships) decreases the relative importance of the human manager's tactical input. As a consequence, the more 'realistic' the game becomes, the greater the degree of apparent randomness about the results. For a number of us, this detracts from FM as a game.

What Hammer is finding with the results which he's quoting is that his input doesn't seem to matter all that much to the end result. That may be realistic, but I really wonder if it makes for a good game.

the assumption on buying better players making the team better just isnt so. some players simply dont gel into a certain league etc, e.g. sergei rebrov, dynamo kiev - tottenham £11m. just how much of a success was he at spurs? yet he was a very good player at dynamo with shevchenko.

really ou would be surprised how the small changes can affect things. for example my tactic i designed i used to concede lots of goals, consequently losing too much, i fixed that with a small change to my defensive line and suddenly problem solved. consistency, and being able to adapt slightly with 2 or 3 tactical variations on a formation is what you really need.

You assume to be talking "for the masses", but actually the vocal contingent on the forums are less than with previous versions.

Really? If you take a look at the relevant Polls you will find that 60% of the Community have little or no understanding of the ME, 40% would prefer a more simplified tactical system similar to previous games and 50% prefer using a single tactic.

I'm not suggesting these numbers are set in stone, but they do give you a clear indication that a large number of FM'ers are not happy.

SI do listen to their customers, and THAT'S why they try and try and try to make it more realistic. I don't think anyone can expect a computer game about football can ever simulate the real game any more than Call of Duty will ever recreate the horror of genuine violence.

I have every respect for people such as PaulC, who first of all realises that i'm not just ranting and that i'm genuinely concerned about the game and my enjoyment of it.

As for realism, just to pluck something completely out of thin air, do you really think that if you go in at HT 2-0 up, that telling your team you are pleased with their performance should almost guarantee a poor second half, whilst sitting in the dressing room and saying absolutely nothing would ensure a better response from your players?

In the end, and you're not the only one wanting this, if you want one single tactic to go through the entire season unbeaten and win every cup, why not just get a pen and paper and write out your transfers, your preferred results, then list the end of season table?

If you don't wish to "win everything" and go unbeaten, what's the problem with the current setup?

This is absolutely not the case, people just assume that the simpler system we have gotten used to over the years requires that the game itself has to be easy and that people just want to go out and win every game, whether they are Man Utd or Hull City.

My belief is that a simpler system should NOT belie the need for quality players or a strong sound tactic, so that simple system does not amount to easy game.

I have just read post 11 and I disagree with most of it.

However your right and I will leave you to it. But before I do I am interested on your views on this

Do you think this may help you if implemented into FM10?

My initial reaction is that its a great idea and i intend to keep close tabs on the feedback from it in FML(i did mention the Tactical Wizard in post 11)

Implemented correctly it could make all the difference when i consider purchasing FM2010, there are some issues to consider, but i'll jump off that bridge when i have a little more information?

In one sense,FM is simpler. However, the difficulty is that you can't say 'Rooney drop deeper' in FM. You have to communicate through the sliders and what you tend to be saying is something like this 'Rooney drop deeper, which means that I don't want you to be so keen to take attacking options - however I don't really want you to become less enthusiatic about taking risks so will you please show more creative freedom and make more forward runs ( I don't mean more forward runs than you are making now, I mean more forward runs than you would be making otherwise when you drop deeper....) etc, etc'.

That's where the complication with the game lies. As things stand, you find that trying to alter one thing alters 15 others in ways which you didn't want and changing those alters other things and so on.

Of course, one of the problems in the quest for 'realism' which SI seems to be engaged in is that the number of variables increases all the time. Every additional feature (eg media relationships) decreases the relative importance of the human manager's tactical input. As a consequence, the more 'realistic' the game becomes, the greater the degree of apparent randomness about the results. For a number of us, this detracts from FM as a game.

What Hammer is finding with the results which he's quoting is that his input doesn't seem to matter all that much to the end result. That may be realistic, but I really wonder if it makes for a good game.

I agree with a lot of that. Improvements to the tactical side of things is one thing I'd like to see. On a basic level I'd say the sliders are fairly intuitive, but when you try to make too many changes, then yes, it does get more complicated, especially in the example you give. I have also said for some time that media comments have way too much influence on games, so I can't knock that.

But holidaying and saying this proves that the human user has little impact on results is just plain flawed. I have managed the great majority of my games (I only holiday when the result is meaningless) I can say without doubt that with some thought and basic football knowledge the tacitcal system is relatively intuitive. I have only scanned the tactical bible and gave up when I realised how long it was. My tactics are simple, slightly tweaked versions of the default ones, and although I don't sweep everything in front of me, I have done a lot better than the 'real' managers would with those clubs. I'd class myself as successful.

Room for improvement? Definitely.

Broken game? No, it just requires more thought than previous versions.

Polls on here are almost irrelevent - it all depends on who in online the most (usually people who struggle) and who can actually be bothered to vote (the vocal people who want their opinion out there). Doesn't matter if it's positive or negative, I don't hold any value in them. Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned "vocal" people, but it does feel less vitriolic than on previous version. But that's my perception vs yours, so I'll end there.

As for realism, just to pluck something completely out of thin air, do you really think that if you go in at HT 2-0 up, that telling your team you are pleased with their performance should almost guarantee a poor second half, whilst sitting in the dressing room and saying absolutely nothing would ensure a better response from your players?

If you don't wish to "win everything" and go unbeaten, what's the problem with the current setup?

This is absolutely not the case, people just assume that the simpler system we have gotten used to over the years requires that the game itself has to be easy and that people just want to go out and win every game, whether they are Man Utd or Hull City.

My belief is that a simpler system should NOT belie the need for quality players or a strong sound tactic, so that simple system does not amount to easy game.

Yes, going in 2-0 up at half time and just saying, "Pleased", ie, "that was good, same again please", and not altering your tactics at all WILL usually result in the other team staging a pretty impressive comeback. If the other team is losing 2-0, there will be some seriously motivational chats going on and some changing of tactics. Compare that to "ho-hum, same again lads" and it's just common sense you'll struggle second half.

And regarding previous versions, the simpler ME meant a multitude of tactics that exploit ME weaknesses. The inability of the AI to learn and counter these tactics meant that you could go through a season often unbeaten if you had a good squad of players. Not sure if it was FM07 or 08 but a 5 or 3-man midfield with a line from the MC to the ST position often meant that a decent AMC in the MC position (Lampard, VdV, etc) got 20-odd goals a season.

Quality players are of course a must to win the league. But just filling the team with superstars and playing the same formation/tactic every game should definitely not guarantee success. Other managers play differently against them, some will unlock the tactic, some won't. I don't think anyone has disputed that. But quality players need handling. If throwing them all together in whatever tactic meant winning the league and CL etc this would make for a very boring game.

I'm all for improving the tactical interface, I won't fault any comments about that, but to make the winning of matches easier would, imo, be a step back.

I think a test with a holiday game is useless. I did fine with a simple 4-4-2- tactic in my career game until 2011. Only changes a made were little tweaks on defensive line, width and tempo for home or away games.

It won me promotions with Farsley Celtic, Macclesfield Town and 1. FC Magdeburg. So i believe it is possible to stick with one tactic.

Frank

Here's a quote from a thread concerning the new Tactical Wizard taken from the T&T Forum.

It sounds great, i dont really struggle with the tactics system at the minute but its so unbelievably time consuming to make one that works it takes the fun out of the game, id love to see this tactics wizard implemented into FM10

Here's another.

Waste of time, they need to fix the underlying flaws before working on a shiny new front end for creating tactics, this is just a façade to appease the people who are unhappy about what the game has become.

Also, I don't think wwfan and company can any longer deny that they are directly involved in the development of the game. That means from now on Football Manager is going to be modelled around the views of people that think you need a phd in the match engine to have any form of self-derived success, and if you don't have time to spend hours analysing the ai model you will be forced to use in game wizards or follow 50 page user guides just to give you a slim chance of competing. What's the bet that even after this new wizard is created (which I presume will just be a graphical version of the TT&F spreadsheet) the same problems still persist? The same inbalances and match engine flaws and anomalies will still dog the game, because even following the advice of TT&F it doesn't represent a realistic management experience at the moment.

This, in my opinion, is the final nail in the coffin for FM. Instead of consulting UI and usability experts for the actual front end and real tactical experts for the match engine, they are consulting these pseudo-scientific frauds who want to mould FM into their own fetishistic tactic simulator. Do you not wonder why the people that are involved in TT&F are never complaining about the match engine but always sticking up for it, without fail, whatever the argument against it? Despite it's obvious flaws? This is because they are actually creating it to their own tastes and specifications and anyone who opposes this tide of change simply "doesn't understand football".

I'm not being fooled by these gimmicks and neither should you, don't just sit back and watch them destroy the game.

Both of these(which were posted one after the other) sum it up for me.

The first quote the guy admits not struggling with the tactical system, but also freely admits that it does detract from the Fun of what is primarily a GAME

The second quote IS a little harsh, but then again i can empathise with the fella.

Rich(wwfan) once told me that he got more out of the game from all the working out how to counter the changes made by the AI than he did the Football side of the game.(i may actually have the actual post or e-mail somewhere?)

Its looking like all his dreams are coming true?

As an aside, lets look at a game from my recently abandoned save.

I am playing away to Arsenal who are evens favourites, whilst we are 9-4.

In one game i used a standard defensive counter attack tactic, whilst in the other i used a very attacking tactic.

Which of the HT stats is from which tactic used?

Circles.Ending.Never.

Circles.Ending.Never.

What was the point of that really???

I'm not ranting or raving, or claiming conspiracy, i'm not abusing anyone, i'm not saying the game is crap, or that i have given up for good and will never buy another SI product am i?

There is a chance of getting a good discussion going here, so why spoil it with childish posts that others then jump on the bandwagon with?

The point, Hammer is you have strated so many threads about this it's frankly embarrassing.

If you look at my posts you will see I never post pointless rubbish in threads, I will rather ignore what I see and stop reading the thread but with you I have read so many threads all stating the same mindless, clueless, embarrassing drivel time and time again.

If you seriously think the game has some magic system in-built to stop your West Ham side from winning then you need help.

I'm honestly surprised you have not recieved infraction points for being a troll, IF what you believe to be true then EVERYONE would experience the same thing but I, like many others don't.

Never has the most over used cliche ''it's your tactics'' been ever more accurate than for you.

You're not worth a constructive argument anymore quite frankly.

The point, Hammer is you have strated so many threads about this it's frankly embarrassing.

If you look at my posts you will see I never post pointless rubbish in threads, I will rather ignore what I see and stop reading the thread but with you I have read so many threads all stating the same mindless, clueless, embarrassing drivel time and time again.

If you seriously think the game has some magic system in-built to stop your West Ham side from winning then you need help.

I'm honestly surprised you have not recieved infraction points for being a troll, IF what you believe to be true then EVERYONE would experience the same thing but I, like many others don't.

Never has the most over used cliche ''it's your tactics'' been ever more accurate than for you.

You're not worth a constructive argument anymore quite frankly.

What on Earth are you going on about?

This thread as well as any others i have posted recently has nothing to do with the game CHEATING

Try reading through the thread fella!

I have been posting more regularly lately, but thats only because i have not been able to play the game much, due to issues of which some are included in this thread.

I would never skim through a couple of lines of somebodys posts and deduce a reaction from it, why so many others do it is beyond me?

I've had enough of this. Won't go anywhere and is repeating the same argument ad infinitum.