Playing above stats...

You know when you get one of those players that has pretty average stats or even poor ones but they keep on playing well? Do you think the game factors in how bad they are when considering their ratings? So like they're not actually playing as well as someone with the same stats would be, because the grades are set higher the better stats they have?

Or do you just think they play so far above themselves all the time and are exceptions to the stats rule, and actually are playing as well as everyone else?

Consistency and Important Matches are two ratings that you should definitely take into account when researching this. I remember that Vagner Love had decent / nice stats in FM09 but he was a beast in terms of scoring and overall performances: he averaged a 7,5 IIRC. His Consistency and Important Matches attributes were both 20, which would be the explanation.

I've also noted that players with a lot of flair tend to play better overall than players without flair, even when the other vital stats are way better than theirs. Marquinhos is one I think about immediately. He had decent / nice stats but a very high flair. He was an absolute beast, topping the scoring charts and winning several player awards like Liga BBVA best player and more.

So these are important attributes for the overall performance of a player.

good point recklessnl

Also consider whether the player have low stats due to being two-footed. Usually, a player who can use both his feet is way better in terms of performances.

Or try this. Take over an EPL club midseason, transfer list the local legend, bad mouth him to the press, loan him out to a conference side then sell him to the team's most bitter rival. Slag him off again in the press when you get ready to play that rival and watch him torch you. I did that last year with Dean Windass at Hull and it was hilarious, burned me for a hat trick and broke my best Central midfielders leg all in one game.

Or try this. Take over an EPL club midseason, transfer list the local legend, bad mouth him to the press, loan him out to a conference side then sell him to the team's most bitter rival. Slag him off again in the press when you get ready to play that rival and watch him torch you. I did that last year with Dean Windass at Hull and it was hilarious, burned me for a hat trick and broke my best Central midfielders leg all in one game.

Lol classic.

Consistency and Important Matches are two ratings that you should definitely take into account when researching this. I remember that Vagner Love had decent / nice stats in FM09 but he was a beast in terms of scoring and overall performances: he averaged a 7,5 IIRC. His Consistency and Important Matches attributes were both 20, which would be the explanation.

I've also noted that players with a lot of flair tend to play better overall than players without flair, even when the other vital stats are way better than theirs. Marquinhos is one I think about immediately. He had decent / nice stats but a very high flair. He was an absolute beast, topping the scoring charts and winning several player awards like Liga BBVA best player and more.

So these are important attributes for the overall performance of a player.

This doesn't really answer the question i posed though.

I think morale and form play a part too. In-form players with superb morale can perform well consistently (for a few games at least).

One of my strikers has very average stats (and only 13 Finishing, 13 Composure, crap for Serie A) and he once had a massive scoring streak, 14 goals and 9 assists in 10 games. Then suddenly he stopped scoring and even went on an 18 hour goal drought.

So yeah they don't play "above themselves" all the time.

I can't quite understand the point you are making.

Being both footed, or very high consistency means players actually are a lot better than their attributes suggest.

I can't quite understand the point you are making.

Being both footed, or very high consistency means players actually are a lot better than their attributes suggest.

A both footed player with good stats will probably be better than a player with very good stats who is one footed. Consistency as well is a massive attribute in the match engine!

My main example is Alex at Chelsea. You can slot him in, despite his average stats, and he'll play roughly 7.25-7.65 for the season. So some people do play way above themselves, gotta remember he's been playnig in Champions League final, Premiership matches and all the rest. So he's been storming.

I don't look at any attributes other than those we get shown, so i don't use the editor to gain an unfair advantage as many people do. I'd like people not to release hidden stats in this thread please.

Alex is an example of a player (mentioned above) whose looks less impressive than he is because he's pretty useful with his weaker foot. He's far from average

Alexis Sanchis appears to be one of these players from FM10 he seems to score a lot of goals considering his finishing goes no higher than 14

Alexis Sanchis appears to be one of these players from FM10 he seems to score a lot of goals considering his finishing goes no higher than 14

Scoring is determinded by much more than just the finishing stat.

My main example is Alex at Chelsea. You can slot him in, despite his average stats, and he'll play roughly 7.25-7.65 for the season. So some people do play way above themselves, gotta remember he's been playnig in Champions League final, Premiership matches and all the rest. So he's been storming.

I don't look at any attributes other than those we get shown, so i don't use the editor to gain an unfair advantage as many people do. I'd like people not to release hidden stats in this thread please.

Alex tends to be a beast at heading, and in my opinion the game overrates winning headers. Any player doing very well in the air averages .25-.5 better than a player doing average in the air it seems.

Sometimes flair, physicality, and speed seem to compensate for poor stats, depending on the position. Sturridge has rather unimpressive attacking abilities, yet in 2 seasons scored 34 goals in 30 appearances for me. Zhirkov's defense/offense, when compared to Ashley Cole, are lacking...yet due to his speed, he averages the exact same as Cashley. And he isn't even a natural left back.

I guess all ratings are constructed in the same way, on how he has performed in that match. If he keeps getting high ratings despite having average attributes then obviously he is performing way above his expected level but also better than other players in that particular match.

Alex tends to be a beast at heading, and in my opinion the game overrates winning headers. Any player doing very well in the air averages .25-.5 better than a player doing average in the air it seems.

Sometimes flair, physicality, and speed seem to compensate for poor stats, depending on the position. Sturridge has rather unimpressive attacking abilities, yet in 2 seasons scored 34 goals in 30 appearances for me. Zhirkov's defense/offense, when compared to Ashley Cole, are lacking...yet due to his speed, he averages the exact same as Cashley. And he isn't even a natural left back.

Just to piggyback on this: I think that the ME also tends to apply some "momentum" to a player who's having a good game that works something like this:

1) Mediocre centerback wins a lot of headers, causing his match rating to rise.

2) Because said mediocre centerback's match rating is higher than usual, he's more able to accomplish other tasks (like the MR is factored into the ability check).

3) As he accomplishes more difficult tasks (trickier tackles, whatever), he's match rating goes up.

This is my theory for the "super keeper" issue, too; because CCC are calculated liberally, and saving a CCC gives the keeper an MR boost, you've in effect created a cycle where a keeper who saves one CCC (however legitimate it is) is more likely to save three or four.

It's not necessarily momentum, per se, but players certainly gain confidence or feel more pressure on the basis of match events.

Players who make key tackles or headers, or score goals or get assists will gain confidence (and so on the motivation tab, you might see them 'playing with confidence'); whereas players who miss interceptions or make mistakes that lead to goals, or take a lot of shots off target will become more nervous (so you might see them 'playing nervously').

Zhirkov's attacking skills aren't lacking compared to Ashley Cole's, by the way!

You know when you get one of those players that has pretty average stats or even poor ones but they keep on playing well? Do you think the game factors in how bad they are when considering their ratings? So like they're not actually playing as well as someone with the same stats would be, because the grades are set higher the better stats they have?

Or do you just think they play so far above themselves all the time and are exceptions to the stats rule, and actually are playing as well as everyone else?

i think u mean players like agbonlahor, martins and a few others, theyv got that stats not much better than a championship player yet they score ridiculous amounts of goals. i think with those players that there is an overriding stat somewhere, such as pace for the two mentioned above, or it could be consistency for some players but not all. ive seen many a player with not great consistency do well. and some players will have so much flair that it makes up for other stuff.

i think its like that in real life, theres players outthere who get by on 1 strength without being anywhere near a complete or even technically sound footballer.

but in regards to your point id say that i have noticed how players who shouldnt score 40 a season, do manage to do it. it doesnt bother me, i mean it would be crap if every player had a cap on how good they could play.

Zhirkov's attacking skills aren't lacking compared to Ashley Cole's, by the way!

Eh, true enough on paper, but I find Cole to perform a lot better than Zhirkov offensively, in the same role. Perhaps due to Yuri not being natural LB, or having to focus more on defense to compensate..who knows, but regardless they average right around the same it seems, and it's due to the Russian's speed in my opinion.

i think u mean players like agbonlahor, martins and a few others, theyv got that stats not much better than a championship player yet they score ridiculous amounts of goals. i think with those players that there is an overriding stat somewhere, such as pace for the two mentioned above, or it could be consistency for some players but not all. ive seen many a player with not great consistency do well. and some players will have so much flair that it makes up for other stuff.

i think its like that in real life, theres players outthere who get by on 1 strength without being anywhere near a complete or even technically sound footballer.

but in regards to your point id say that i have noticed how players who shouldnt score 40 a season, do manage to do it. it doesnt bother me, i mean it would be crap if every player had a cap on how good they could play.

No i don't mean those players, their lack of skill is obviously masked by speed. I mean, as i posted, people like Alex.

Also as someone else has already posted, Zhirkov's attacking and eventually defending abilities (if you train and play him in LB, he eventually becomes natural at it after a season or two) aren't less than Cashley's (i now call him this as he left me in the game for ****ing Man ******).

Alex tends to be a beast at heading, and in my opinion the game overrates winning headers. Any player doing very well in the air averages .25-.5 better than a player doing average in the air it seems.

Sometimes flair, physicality, and speed seem to compensate for poor stats, depending on the position. Sturridge has rather unimpressive attacking abilities, yet in 2 seasons scored 34 goals in 30 appearances for me. Zhirkov's defense/offense, when compared to Ashley Cole, are lacking...yet due to his speed, he averages the exact same as Cashley. And he isn't even a natural left back.

Finally some kind of useful explanation, although i disagree on the Cashley bit. So, with him getting these great ratings, does the computer decide he is actually playing amazingly, like the best, or does it take it into consideration? Also i don't think the pace thing is the same as this, or players in other positions over performing not due to pace. Having played a lot of football i know that idiots who could run fast can seem like twice the player they are, it's not the same with tall defenders though. Well not in my experience, if anything those huge defendcers i found easier to mess around with.