Too many one on one chances missed by world class strikers - FM 2010

I've been playing the demo as Chelsea and my striker force consists of Drogba, Villa and Dzeko supported by Robinho and Silva in the flanks (yes I did use the 48 month spread transfer to get them). I never watched FM 09 in 3D, but thought I'd give the 3D in FM a chance. I use Dzeko as an Advanced Forward, Villa as Trequartista or Poacher and Drogba as Target man generally. Robinho and Silva are Inside Forwards fwiw.

The one-on-one finishing in this game is horrible. I have no problems creating chances, but 80% of the shots are hit straight at the keeper, none through his legs, at a variety of speeds, from inside the penalty box. Is it my tactics? Is it the match engine or is it the poor representation in the 3D? I watch matches in Full, Extended or Key at different times and against different opposition.

This post is not meant to be rant, as the problem is not scoring goals. I score on average 2 goals a game, but if my strikers finish half their one on one chances (forget the long range efforts and half chances, I'm talking about pure one-on-one chances) each game, I would comfortably winning each game by a minimum of 4 goals. Is it a case of my team creating too many one on one chances and the match engine keeping the scoreline realistic?

I don't use 3-D so I can't comment but there was a similar thread recently which discussed this problem. Don't know whether its a bug or not but have a look in the bugs forum and see if it has been mentioned.

I brought up this point in a thread the other day too and got called an idiot, its the same annoying bug that was in 9.2 and i'm pretty sure its in 10.0

My guys are putting away about 1 in 3 so I'd call that generous rather than a bug.

This complaint has surfaced for years; the counter-argument is that, according to SI's latest batch of OPTA stats, the finishing rate for one-on-ones IRL is about 25% -- even for the best strikers in the world.

As you state, if you were finishing 50% of your chances, you'd be scoring at least 4 goals a game ...

.. which I do hope you'd admit is unrealistic considering Chelsea have netted 2.1 p/g this season, 1.8 last year, and 1.7 the year before that!

The fact is, the media love to overhype the world-class players using words such as "lethal", "clinical", etc., which seem to imply that they never miss .. while in reality, even the best strikers do miss many opportunities.

I have to agree with the OP here about the sheer number of clear cut chances that are missed in the game. While finishing percentages may be ‘similar’ to real life, what I think is a genuine issue in the game is the amount of shots that are missed inside the area. How this is depicted in the 3D engine the overwhelming majority of time is that the player shoots the ball directly at the goalkeeper. Now this may just be the games way of showing this, but how it looks to the player is that

a) shooting from inside the box (including one-one ones though I don’t think pure one on ones are the only issue) is very poor and has a low chance of being successful even with world class players

b) shots almost always go straight at the keeper (even with players with ppm’s for places shots/rounds keeper AND with keepers with average or poor positioning and reflexes)

c) the keeper doesn’t even move to save the shot…he just stands where he is and the shot hits him…its not like he’s saving it…at least with the long shots the keeper appears to be diving to make a save

I too am still scoring a decent amount of goals, but have also found it really frustrating seeing the amount of chances wasted when the keeper doesn’t even seem to have to move to save a shot. It might be ‘realistic’ in a statistical sense, but it certainly doesn’t look real in a footballing sense……and I hope that makes sense!

I agree too, and i complained about this at several threads. It is very pathetic wasting such one on ones so often. Whatever the media crap is about, Milito, Eto'o and Cassano just won't miss 4-5 one on ones a match. I would really like to reduce the number of one on ones in general, but also increase the scoring ratio out of them.

FM is a manager football game with a different game engine with real life (duh) In real life the pitch is massive and its hard to run end to end in a quick time, FM Pitch is not that big compared to the players playing in it its more easy to attack then it is in real life,When in the stats of FM there is one called clear cut chance's but in real life there ain't no stats for that you know why cause you don't get that much clear cut chances if FM played the same engine then real life does it will kind of been borning to be honest.Real life it will take some time for a team to get a chance where you are in a good angle to shoot,

But FM is different, FM they have more shots then real life and when you see them shoots one or one ect you can say that its not realistic because its the Way fm matches are they have lots of shots lots of chances that what makes FM interesting then real life. In FM you don't see the players passing to the defenders to each position keeping possession ect. FM plays different then that so if you want FM to be realistic on the shoots then there will be 8-6 nearly all the matches just like championship manager(which I wont like).

In real life they miss or something because pressure goal keeper does great saves or defenders block it or there are to many defenders in the box ect. FM way of missing a shoot is missing from one on one because come on you wont see FM playing like real life the matches are kind different you wont see defenders sticking in or jumping or all defence in FM I sensed that when someone has the ball its unlikely that you see the defender stick in and take the ball. Also when theyrun you dont see the defender battling him by streagh ect so you expect the attacker to cross in or cut in a shoot and sometimes they do miss cut in chances. It balances out the score board and that's how FM plays by missing cause of chances, Because each team every time they attack they always get near the coroner flag or get near the box or sometimes shoot form far because they don't have no options.( if it was real life they wont shoot they will sometimes look back and pass )

also in real life you see Torres as the top goal scorer with 7 or something imagine if FM scores lots of their miss cut chances Torres will have 15 goals or more in FM.

I think if you watched a selection of random games in real life you'd be surprised at just how many "easy" chances strikers miss, and how many times they hit the ball directly at the keeper.

There was a thread somewhere saying strikers score too many goals, now we have one saying strikers miss too many chances. So which is it? Or are they just too many clear cut chances being created?

ok look at the avg amount of goals happen in a math in FM which is like 3-0 or 2-1 ect. In real life its the same but FM scores them goals differently and misses them chances differently, by missing cut chances and in real life its cause of defenders and the other team cant get to their box or cant go on on one to their keeper ect.FM matches play different then Real life matches.

got to go to school bye!! i cant reply next post

I've been playing the demo as Chelsea and my striker force consists of Drogba, Villa and Dzeko supported by Robinho and Silva in the flanks (yes I did use the 48 month spread transfer to get them). I never watched FM 09 in 3D, but thought I'd give the 3D in FM a chance. I use Dzeko as an Advanced Forward, Villa as Trequartista or Poacher and Drogba as Target man generally. Robinho and Silva are Inside Forwards fwiw.

The one-on-one finishing in this game is horrible. I have no problems creating chances, but 80% of the shots are hit straight at the keeper, none through his legs, at a variety of speeds, from inside the penalty box. Is it my tactics? Is it the match engine or is it the poor representation in the 3D? I watch matches in Full, Extended or Key at different times and against different opposition.

This post is not meant to be rant, as the problem is not scoring goals. I score on average 2 goals a game, but if my strikers finish half their one on one chances (forget the long range efforts and half chances, I'm talking about pure one-on-one chances) each game, I would comfortably winning each game by a minimum of 4 goals. Is it a case of my team creating too many one on one chances and the match engine keeping the scoreline realistic?

All I can say is...RVP's first clear chance to score against AZ last night is a typical example of a "Class" striker (on his preferred foot!) creating an brilliant opportunity, with time....kicks it directly at the keeper.

With regards diving...I have seem my keeper dive in FM to save a shot.

If they scored more they would score 50 goals at the end of the season.

On the other hand wingers can't even get into chance to score..

The issue is one on ones, not the finishing.

There are too many one-on-ones in a match. Sometimes even 5 or 6 a game. This just doesn't happen in real life.

One-on-Ones should be rarer, and when they do occur, world class strikers should more often than not finish the the chance.

I'm playing with Tottenham, and I have defoe running onto the keeper in a one-on-one situation 5 times a match. Sometimes I question whether SI actually watch real games of football? It just never happens in real life.

I think my biggest problem about the one-on-one situations is that a very good striker rarely makes the keeper work to make a save. Like on FM09 strikers, well anyone really, who are clear on goal and have a fantastic chance would just put it straight in the keepers arms. I know this happens here and there IRL but constantly, as it's been during my half season, is quite frustrating. I can appreciate a decent save but it's silly to watch the keeper just standing there catching the ball.

I've had a few one-on-ones scored, so it's not like I haven't seen them for my team. But the amount of chances hit straight on the keeper is way too much. I mean, they don't ever even seem to miss the target, ever...as one can do at times IRL. It's either a goal or straight in the hand of the keeper. But I suppose the real problem is the amount of one-on-ones, they are a bit many and SI seem to still use the "quick fix" by having bad shots. A couple of times a striker would even run away from goal or stop running letting defenders take the ball of him!

This complaint has surfaced for years; the counter-argument is that, according to SI's latest batch of OPTA stats, the finishing rate for one-on-ones IRL is about 25% -- even for the best strikers in the world.

As you state, if you were finishing 50% of your chances, you'd be scoring at least 4 goals a game ...

.. which I do hope you'd admit is unrealistic considering Chelsea have netted 2.1 p/g this season, 1.8 last year, and 1.7 the year before that!

The fact is, the media love to overhype the world-class players using words such as "lethal", "clinical", etc., which seem to imply that they never miss .. while in reality, even the best strikers do miss many opportunities.

As I've understood it that conversion rate percentage includes all shots. Doesn't it? A striker would be much more prone to miss if he's under pressure from defenders or the GK, is shooting from range, in a difficult angle or using his weaker foot.

I agree with the OP. Strikers miss too many one-on-ones in the game. Then again they get way too many one-on-ones chances in the first place.

No, that conversion rate is just for one on ones (although you can argue about what exactly consitutes a one on one, I suppose). The last set of figures I saw (admittedly from a few years ago) had strikers getting around 50% of their shots on target, and scoring from around 25% of their chances. Freakishly good finishers like Shearer and Van Nistelrooy score from maybe 30% of their chances. When it came to one on ones, the finishing percentage was lower, around maybe 20%, with most shots being wide and the rest mostly being hit at the keeper.

Maybe try and teach your strikers to place their shots? I have always found that this means the striker will pick his shot and be more successful in finishing the one on ones. SO much so that in the demo so far my most lethal striker has been Andy Keogh who just cant help but score every time he is put through. I have also manager Flamengo with Adriano and Juventus with Del Piero, Iaquinta and Trezeguet.

like i said, if the amount of one-on-one's/clear cut chances being converted is close to real life, then perhaps the issue is more about the number of clear shooting chances that the match engine creates (unrealistic), and from this, the way that the game then attempts to make the actual goals scored (realistic). so what we then 'see' is the visual calulations of the match engine, whereby it is trying to make the 'unrealistic' number of chances end up in a 'realistic' result.

Something else i wonder is related here is tne number of blocked/deflected shots and crosses that happen in the game, which then end up as corners. I would like to see what the real life average of corners per side per game is, because i am averaging over 10 corners per game. Again, i'm not bagging the game but i do think that this is an area where the game has yet to replicate realistic football.

The point people miss is that while those one on one conversion rates may be real you'd generally be lucky to see 1 or 2 clear one on one chances (striker through on his own running at the keeper) over a couple of games in reality. In this version, as well as many other versions of FM you more often than not get several in one game. Also, the statistics include snap shots, shots by strikers out of balance, when being challenged by defenders, when cutting in from an angle etc. In the game you get strikers clear through the center rolling it straight into the keeper, running into them or smashing the ball into orbit from 3 yards.

They always fix this issue in final patches, then manage to ruin it again for new releases. It was pretty much perfect again in 9.3.0, just as it was in 8.0.2 while everything in between was buggered. How they've managed to mess it up again is a mystery to me.

If they scored more they would score 50 goals at the end of the season.

On the other hand wingers can't even get into chance to score..

I've got Di Maria and Kuyt both cutting inside getting on the end of crosses and drilling into near post.:confused:

I've got Di Maria and Kuyt both cutting inside getting on the end of crosses and drilling into near post.:confused:

I haven`t even scored a one on one yet and ive had plenty of chances. Ive had games where its a clear run to goal and torres just kicked it at the keeper. In one game there were 4 one on ones and they all went the same way. surely there should be more variety in how they score, if the player is skilled enough then lobbing the keeper or bending it round him should be possible.

Somebody may have mentioned this but I think people are missing the point in terms of watching the 3-D match. I don't watch the 3-D because my computer is not great (but I can still play it) and just feel my imagination from the commentary is far more rewarding than the 3-D which is a great addition for many people but in fact shows some drawbacks in terms of reflecting real life as I believe this is ultimatley impossible. If my strikers were missing heaps of one on ones then I would be a bit mad and dissapointed with the game, but people need to realise that the 3-D is a reflection of the game and cannot be taken literal for a real life game even as much as we want it to.

So when you are mssing lots of clear cut chances then you will score more from other situations or you will have even more clear cut chances to conpensate for so many clear cut chances been missed (if that makes sense). So what I am trying to say is the 3-D option should be used if you like it but I believe it has flaws as it allways will, because it is a computer game and as this is the second year of 3-D it will never be perfect and cannot be simulated to the nth degree.

I dont think that the score of a game will be effected by the by the clear cut chances been missed, maybe you should score more from them but as a result the number of clear cut chances will be reduced, or like in my game of 6 months I don't think I have scored any headers from corners but this will be conpensated in the form of free kicks for example. What I am saying is that FM will have some sort of pre programme i.e. to a certain extent you convert 1/10 free kicks 1/15 corners 1/4 one on ones 1/50 own goals if you know what I mean. So the result does not reflect the 3-D game but the 3-D reflects the score and the game and portrays this to the viewer. So maybe SI need to change the programme where by clear cut chances are increased and other areas are less clinical to even it up.

Think ive just spouted the biggest load of rubbish ever!

This complaint has surfaced for years; the counter-argument is that, according to SI's latest batch of OPTA stats, the finishing rate for one-on-ones IRL is about 25% -- even for the best strikers in the world.

As you state, if you were finishing 50% of your chances, you'd be scoring at least 4 goals a game ...

.. which I do hope you'd admit is unrealistic considering Chelsea have netted 2.1 p/g this season, 1.8 last year, and 1.7 the year before that!

The fact is, the media love to overhype the world-class players using words such as "lethal", "clinical", etc., which seem to imply that they never miss .. while in reality, even the best strikers do miss many opportunities.

But I don't set the team up to play the way Chelsea do irl

I do agree, that way too many one on one chances are being created each game. Defenders positioning is probably the issue and to compensate that, strikers hit it straight at the keeper.