Match engine is so... easy?

author - Trian, fmfan.ru

Instead of the introduction.

First, it is not the Research because it is not confirmed by tests (in a kind of their impossibility) and, in general, any special efforts for studying of a question has not been undertaken by me (therefore a lot of screenshots is not expected, as you can see all this facts within one match personally).

It is attempt of the answer to a question like "Why my FM-player under which it is written Henry cannot finish at least one of 1-on-1 from ten?", or: "And what is the main reason of these 1-on-1?"

I analysed playing of AI defenders. All that described below is a generalisation of my own supervision and impressions from a long enough period (in particular some things have been noticed in 07th, some are actual only for 8.01), accordingly, this cannot and is not any definitive true.

1. P without ball (PwoB) vs running P with ball (PWB)

PWB stay. Where will run PwoB? Sure. There, where PWB is staying

http://i034.radikal.ru/0802/56/8636119d46a2.png

Everywhere, where it is not described separately, it is considered, that goal is somewhere at the left-from below).

PWB run. Where will run PwoB? Sure. There, where PWB was few seconds ago.

http://i047.radikal.ru/0802/14/51b6b1260ba7.png

â€it's incorrect!†- you will say! â€PwoB should consider speed and a direction of PWB movement. It would be much better!â€

â€But that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

http://i047.radikal.ru/0802/f1/7bc591e3521d.png

http://i033.radikal.ru/0802/cc/5c0d476674da.png

And more: PwoB should consider position on the field and at first try to cut PWB a direct way to goal, and then choose a correct positionâ€, - you will add.

†But that variant is easier â€, - I will respond.

http://i011.radikal.ru/0802/5e/691089c0c1fa.png

http://i022.radikal.ru/0802/a6/17bddc86dbec.png

2. Defender (D) vs Forward with Ball (F1) and Forward without ball (F2)

F1 is free, D mark F2. D is on last defensive line. What will do D? Sure. Runs to F1.

http://i032.radikal.ru/0802/1f/0602e6b49457.png

http://i047.radikal.ru/0802/3b/e4320e8d7a08.png

"it is not correct!†- you will say!. â€Potentially F2 position is more dangerousâ€, - you will add.

â€But that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

3. Defender has dropped out of a line.

Defender has escaped to put pressure or has not returned after corner or has broken or has lost to a football boot or smth else. What will do other defenders? Sure. Nothing.

http://i008.radikal.ru/0802/8d/47431ab8edc2.png

http://i029.radikal.ru/0802/4a/f47ee3253d92.png

â€It is not correct!†- you will say! â€Other defenders must mark his empty zoneâ€, - you will add.

â€But that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

4. Defenders and flanks.

Ball is on flank. How many defenders are going to closing down strikers and wingers? Correctly, only those, who are situated near the ball.

http://i027.radikal.ru/0802/cf/0616dea9c843.png

http://i015.radikal.ru/0802/49/72bf82ced3a0.png

â€It is not correct!†- you will say. â€And what about flank pressure?â€, - you will add.

â€Well, you know. that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

5. two defenders vs one striker

Will defenders co-ordinate their actions? Correctly. No, no, no.

http://i015.radikal.ru/0802/3b/c0eec21e0770.png

http://i033.radikal.ru/0802/a3/5bdd1dadc36d.png

â€It is not correct!†- you will say. â€It's NOT so as IRLâ€, - is will added by you.

â€That variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

to be continued...

and sorry my English)

author - Trian, fmfan.ru

Instead of the introduction.

First, it is not the Research because it is not confirmed by tests (in a kind of their impossibility) and, in general, any special efforts for studying of a question has not been undertaken by me (therefore a lot of screenshots is not expected, as you can see all this facts within one match personally).

It is attempt of the answer to a question like "Why my FM-player under which it is written Henry cannot finish at least one of 1-on-1 from ten?", or: "And what is the main reason of these 1-on-1?"

I analysed playing of AI defenders. All that described below is a generalisation of my own supervision and impressions from a long enough period (in particular some things have been noticed in 07th, some are actual only for 8.01), accordingly, this cannot and is not any definitive true.

1. P without ball (PwoB) vs running P with ball (PWB)

PWB stay. Where will run PwoB? Sure. There, where PWB is staying

http://i034.radikal.ru/0802/56/8636119d46a2.png

Everywhere, where it is not described separately, it is considered, that goal is somewhere at the left-from below).

PWB run. Where will run PwoB? Sure. There, where PWB was few seconds ago.

http://i047.radikal.ru/0802/14/51b6b1260ba7.png

â€it's incorrect!†- you will say! â€PwoB should consider speed and a direction of PWB movement. It would be much better!â€

â€But that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

http://i047.radikal.ru/0802/f1/7bc591e3521d.png

http://i033.radikal.ru/0802/cc/5c0d476674da.png

And more: PwoB should consider position on the field and at first try to cut PWB a direct way to goal, and then choose a correct positionâ€, - you will add.

†But that variant is easier â€, - I will respond.

http://i011.radikal.ru/0802/5e/691089c0c1fa.png

http://i022.radikal.ru/0802/a6/17bddc86dbec.png

2. Defender (D) vs Forward with Ball (F1) and Forward without ball (F2)

F1 is free, D mark F2. D is on last defensive line. What will do D? Sure. Runs to F1.

http://i032.radikal.ru/0802/1f/0602e6b49457.png

http://i047.radikal.ru/0802/3b/e4320e8d7a08.png

"it is not correct!†- you will say!. â€Potentially F2 position is more dangerousâ€, - you will add.

â€But that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

3. Defender has dropped out of a line.

Defender has escaped to put pressure or has not returned after corner or has broken or has lost to a football boot or smth else. What will do other defenders? Sure. Nothing.

http://i008.radikal.ru/0802/8d/47431ab8edc2.png

http://i029.radikal.ru/0802/4a/f47ee3253d92.png

â€It is not correct!†- you will say! â€Other defenders must mark his empty zoneâ€, - you will add.

â€But that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

4. Defenders and flanks.

Ball is on flank. How many defenders are going to closing down strikers and wingers? Correctly, only those, who are situated near the ball.

http://i027.radikal.ru/0802/cf/0616dea9c843.png

http://i015.radikal.ru/0802/49/72bf82ced3a0.png

â€It is not correct!†- you will say. â€And what about flank pressure?â€, - you will add.

â€Well, you know. that variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

5. two defenders vs one striker

Will defenders co-ordinate their actions? Correctly. No, no, no.

http://i015.radikal.ru/0802/3b/c0eec21e0770.png

http://i033.radikal.ru/0802/a3/5bdd1dadc36d.png

â€It is not correct!†- you will say. â€It's NOT so as IRLâ€, - is will added by you.

â€That variant is easierâ€, - I will respond.

to be continued...

and sorry my English)

so...the variant is easier?

A long and painful-to-read post that tells us what we already know?

that's for SI. Not for you, guys. Let Si change this)

I actually think this is quite a good deconstruction of 8.0.1 engine issues. English is obviously a second language, and I don't think it becomes us to belittle such a contribution. Underneath its linguistic complexities it is a very intelligent post.

Is FM only for those who speak English like a native? Or should we be encouraging constructive criticism, such as this, from all corners of the globe? Just becasue it is difficult to understand does not make it not worth trying to understand. And the pictures do a great job illustrating his point.

For what it is worth, sehvelevee is one of the most exact analysers of the training module I have had the pleasure of reading. The other is kittipol, who is Thai. There are many non-native English speakers who offer hints and tips on how to play FM that haven't crossed the mind of a first language speaker. The next Diaby's threads on man-management being an example. He isn't a native speaker either.

I believe the address of these forums is http://community.sigames.com. The word community means something. Try to keep it in mind when a non-English person tries to contribute. It's not like we could have written his post in Russian or Thai!

Thank you, wwfan.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wwfan:

I actually think this is quite a good deconstruction of 8.0.1 engine issues. English is obviously a second language, and I don't think it becomes us to belittle such a contribution. Underneath its linguistic complexities it is a very intelligent post.

Is FM only for those who speak English like a native? Or should we be encouraging constructive criticism, such as this, from all corners of the globe? Just becasue it is difficult to understand does not make it not worth trying to understand. And the pictures do a great job illustrating his point.

For what it is worth, sehvelevee is one of the most exact analysers of the training module I have had the pleasure of reading. The other is kittipol, who is Thai. There are many non-native English speakers who offer hints and tips on how to play FM that haven't crossed the mind of a first language speaker. The next Diaby's threads on man-management being an example. He isn't a native speaker either.

I believe the address of these forums is http://community.sigames.com. The word community means something. Try to keep it in mind when a non-English person tries to contribute. It's not like we could have written his post in Russian or Thai! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't really need to add anything to your post so a big to what you've said.

^^^ i would like to second what Barside said

good job shevelevee. it's all about AI inteligence. movement and postioning is very hard to implantate in match engine. let's see what we'll get in 8.0.2

you were reading my match engine thread, right

excellent post and the thought and effort is appreciated. It makes a nice change to see an actual analysis of issues rather than a general rant with nothing too specific. My first thought was the lack of actual screenshots might take from your analysis, but I would assume that most people have seen this type of poor defensive behaviour themselves.

I think this post illustrates what for me is the key difficulty in creating a simulation of a sport (whether that be one where you control players or not). I'll use FM as the example since that's what we are discussing but you can apply the same argument to what you see in FIFA, Pro Evo, Madden etc.

In real life football a lot of chances that are created are produced by players on the defending team making poor decisions. Not closing down quickly enough, failing to pick up the opposition runner, not positioning themselves to cover for team mates, getting dragged out of position in such a way that creates exploitable gaps, etc. etc. This is where the issue lies with simulating sports. When player make these mistakes (often they are subtle enough or occur so rapidly that closer analysis of a replay is the only way to spot them) it is organic, part of real life whereby humans make mistakes in the heat of the battle.

But when a game simulating human behaviour attempts to recreate this organic process of poor decision making it often comes across as being contrived. As you have done with your screenshots it is easy for us to analyse and point out what the player should have done in a given scenario and how defensive players appear to move in a contrived manner in order to create attacking chances. In particular this effect becomes exaggerated from the gamer's perspective when they are the injured party because for the gamer the AI not only controls the opposition team but also controls how the match engine plays out. The fact that the code controlling these two facets of the AI are most likely two separate entities is not something that the average gamer will consider. Hence the gamer starts to feel cheated which leads them to vent their frustrations, often using an internet forum as their release valve.

It is a difficult balancing act that SI, and other sports simulation companies, are faced with. It is a game and it's behaviours are controlled by code that is by it's very nature logical and predictable. Thus the programmer has to introduce a random element to replicate the randomness of real life sports without this randomness itself becoming predictable. Added to this is that football, as with other sports, involves at any given moment an attacking team playing a defensive team whereby one set of behaviours, decisions and abilities has to outweigh the other to produce a result. Thus the programmer needs to create a balance between theses two fundamental elements of the sport to produce a realistic simulation but again has to do so without it becoming too predictable or too random. As it stands it appears, from my experience, that the scales are tipped in favour of attacking AI behaviour.

This for me is at the core of the current match engine's issues as illustrated by this post. From my experience of playing this game attacking players move more fluently than their defensive counterparts, taking advantage of space and time in a way that the defensive AI seems unable to cope. When you add the human manager's creativity in producing tactics that exploit these differences (whether knowingly or not is irrelevant) then you get some of the unrealistic occurances (teams having 30+ shots on goal on a regular basis) which, when combined with a perceived lower efficiency in converting these shots on goal compared to the AI, lead to gamer frustration and the feeling of being cheated. Although many on this forum have pointed out that it is unlikely that SI would create code that determines how many goals to be scored should be restricted independent of the number of chances created to maintain realistic score lines, in my opinion it is not an unusual conclusion (however incorrect or ill informed it may be)to arrive at when your experience indicates that this is the case.

In SI's defense it easy for you or I to do the equivalent of 'arm chair analysis' whereby we freeze the game and say 'this is what defender A should have done'. The reality of it is that a professional player's ability to process their surroundings and make a decision in the same instant is what makes them professional footballers and the average person like you and me a fan. It's this decison making, combined with physical and technical abilities, that separates international class footballers from Sunday league amateurs and everything in between. Replicating this in a game is by no means an easy task and I think the fact that our expectations as FM gamers have risen to the level they are at is a testament to the quality of product that SI have produced with each iteration.

Having said all that that, and recognising the difficulty of simulating independent human thought for 22 players, it still doesn't stop me from getting ****ed off when my defenders behave in the way you illustrated and the AI scoring because of it .

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wwfan:

I actually think this is quite a good deconstruction of 8.0.1 engine issues. English is obviously a second language, and I don't think it becomes us to belittle such a contribution. Underneath its linguistic complexities it is a very intelligent post.

Is FM only for those who speak English like a native? Or should we be encouraging constructive criticism, such as this, from all corners of the globe? Just becasue it is difficult to understand does not make it not worth trying to understand. And the pictures do a great job illustrating his point.

For what it is worth, sehvelevee is one of the most exact analysers of the training module I have had the pleasure of reading. The other is kittipol, who is Thai. There are many non-native English speakers who offer hints and tips on how to play FM that haven't crossed the mind of a first language speaker. The next Diaby's threads on man-management being an example. He isn't a native speaker either.

I believe the address of these forums is http://community.sigames.com. The word community means something. Try to keep it in mind when a non-English person tries to contribute. It's not like we could have written his post in Russian or Thai! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ONE poster, Gunnerfan, mentioned it was "painful to read" without specifying whether or not it was down to the command of English being wielded or otherwise. This produces a typical PC (and lengthy) stasi response in WFan's typical pole-the-backside delivery to show us all how very right-on and liberal you are. Are you an aspiring equality and diversity officer? Are you itching to conduct a few pc witch hunts do blind us in the glare from your pc halo? Still, if you're pc your opinion is by definition impeccable and your actions unquestionable; that's the prevailing climate, is it not? Not unlike MacArthyite 1950s USA or medieval Europe of the witchfinders. I hope Gunnerfan was guilty for he is surely to be burnt at the pc stake.

At least you got a positive response from the op. When I was an EFL teacher in Hungary and London it was the patronising pc brigade that prompted the ire of the students, much to the Guardianista's bewilderment.

Gunnerfan and I go back a long way and I have total respect for his posts, intelligence and personable manner. His smiley face hinted at the humour and irony in his statement, although perhaps you didn't spot it. It was the statement above his I found crass. I also thought that Gunnerfan's post could provoke the type of comment that wouldn't have been fair on the OP if the humour had been missed. That would be hard on a foreign-language speaker aiming at improving FM, whom I also communicate with and respect, and I wanted to stave off any possible flaming before it began. Yet the thread still gets flamed! Well, I'm a big boy, older than a pubescent teenager with delusions of grandeur anyway, and I think I can handle it.

You obviously have a problem with me and my 'pompous prose' which seems to have lead you towards stigmatizing my personal character as PC and 'liberal'. I assure you I wouldn't ever get stuck in such relativist claptrap as political correctness, nor the humour-free liberalism it tends to be identified with. Strangely enough, I actually find myself agreeing with your definition of PC liberals. A first perhaps?

Perhaps it is you that has tarred someone with an impossible to shake off label despite your seeming commitment to freedom of the individual. Enough of this personal vendetta. It demeans you and adds nothing of interest to the forums or to FM discussions in any way. You don't like my writing style. Fine. Block me. Don't read me. Just don't pigeonhole me into a little box, full of ticky-tacky, all of you own devising.

If you want, I can post here in very good Russian.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shevelevee:

If you want, I can post here in very good Russian. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think Imperius just tried that - and I didn't understand any of it.

Great post shevelevee. I enjoyed reading that.

Great post shevelevee

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wwfan:

Gunnerfan and I go back a long way and I have total respect for his posts, intelligence and personable manner. His smiley face hinted at the humour and irony in his statement, although perhaps you didn't spot it. It was the statement above his I found crass. I also thought that Gunnerfan's post could provoke the type of comment that wouldn't have been fair on the OP if the humour had been missed. That would be hard on a foreign-language speaker aiming at improving FM, whom I also communicate with and respect, and I wanted to stave off any possible flaming before it began. Yet the thread still gets flamed! Well, I'm a big boy, older than a pubescent teenager with delusions of grandeur anyway, and I think I can handle it.

You obviously have a problem with me and my 'pompous prose' which seems to have lead you towards stigmatizing my personal character as PC and 'liberal'. I assure you I wouldn't ever get stuck in such relativist claptrap as political correctness, nor the humour-free liberalism it tends to be identified with. Strangely enough, I actually find myself agreeing with your definition of PC liberals. A first perhaps?

Perhaps it is you that has tarred someone with an impossible to shake off label despite your seeming commitment to freedom of the individual. Enough of this personal vendetta. It demeans you and adds nothing of interest to the forums or to FM discussions in any way. You don't like my writing style. Fine. Block me. Don't read me. Just don't pigeonhole me into a little box, full of ticky-tacky, all of you own devising. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL

Just because you are intelligent, or allude to be, doesn't actually matter in this world.

Nobody with an IQ over 100 cares. Coincidentally, nobody with an IQ below 100 does either.

State your point, not waffle and pontificate.

Most people have written an essay and/or been to university. Its not a good style to carry over into the real world if you want to be taken seriously.

I realy don't know why this post is so realy great. I meen it's something that's been known on this forum for months....oh, yeah I'm not a nationalist, that's the point. the slavs can actually think, I didn't know that!!

great post sheva!!!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gubbs:

LOL

Just because you are intelligent, or allude to be, doesn't actually matter in this world.

Nobody with an IQ over 100 cares. Coincidentally, nobody with an IQ below 100 does either.

State your point, not waffle and pontificate.

Most people have written an essay and/or been to university. Its not a good style to carry over into the real world if you want to be taken seriously. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very nice touch, a "real world" pontification about the perils of pontification

Okay, in the first place, let me apologize to shevelevee. wwfan read my post correctly, but others obviously did not. That's what I get for posting on serious analysis when I'm overtired. In my view, anytime people take the time and effort to analyze what the match engine and tactical interface do in FM, relative to what actually happens on a real life pitch, that's valuable. So, I certainly didn't mean to demean shevelevee's efforts.

But what I really don't understand is why anyone who suggests that people treat each other in a civil and respectful manner is derided as "PC". There is a world of difference between insisting on decent behavior (my grandfather used to call it "manners", and woe betide any of us grandkids if we didn't exhibgit them!) and refusing to discuss things that are objectively true because they might offend someone. The latter is PC.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gubbs:

LOL

Just because you are intelligent, or allude to be, doesn't actually matter in this world.

Nobody with an IQ over 100 cares. Coincidentally, nobody with an IQ below 100 does either.

State your point, not waffle and pontificate.

Most people have written an essay and/or been to university. Its not a good style to carry over into the real world if you want to be taken seriously. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah, but I work in academia. Hardly the 'real' world! Waffling and pontification is what it's all about!

i didnt actually understand this post to be honest

sorry...

I'm very disappointed that the follow-on in this thread hasn't matched the quality of the original post. Can we please get back to the issues shevelevee raised?

And, shevelevee, can you restate your conclusion?

Are you suggesting that SI have taken the easier-to-code path in the instances shown?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Amaroq:

I'm very disappointed that the follow-on in this thread hasn't matched the quality of the original post. Can we please get back to the issues shevelevee raised?

And, shevelevee, can you restate your conclusion?

Are you suggesting that SI have taken the easier-to-code path in the instances shown? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is roughly what he is saying. I believe he has some more data yet to come which will make things clearer.

Excellent. I look forward to it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wwfan:

Gunnerfan and I go back a long way and I have total respect for his posts, intelligence and personable manner. His smiley face hinted at the humour and irony in his statement, although perhaps you didn't spot it. It was the statement above his I found crass. I also thought that Gunnerfan's post could provoke the type of comment that wouldn't have been fair on the OP if the humour had been missed. That would be hard on a foreign-language speaker aiming at improving FM, whom I also communicate with and respect, and I wanted to stave off any possible flaming before it began. Yet the thread still gets flamed! Well, I'm a big boy, older than a pubescent teenager with delusions of grandeur anyway, and I think I can handle it.

You obviously have a problem with me and my 'pompous prose' which seems to have lead you towards stigmatizing my personal character as PC and 'liberal'. I assure you I wouldn't ever get stuck in such relativist claptrap as political correctness, nor the humour-free liberalism it tends to be identified with. Strangely enough, I actually find myself agreeing with your definition of PC liberals. A first perhaps?

Perhaps it is you that has tarred someone with an impossible to shake off label despite your seeming commitment to freedom of the individual. Enough of this personal vendetta. It demeans you and adds nothing of interest to the forums or to FM discussions in any way. You don't like my writing style. Fine. Block me. Don't read me. Just don't pigeonhole me into a little box, full of ticky-tacky, all of you own devising. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fair enogh WW, I wouldn't like to think I was "labelling" an un-PC Stasi type as the very sort of Sheep-link handwringer he isn't.

You obviously know Gunnerfan quite well so I should have kept my mouth shut, though I do think a simple "please make allowances for a non-native speaker" would have sufficed.

Apart from that, I apologize.

That obviously should have been "sheep-like" not "Sheep-link".

I wish you could edit these things! Either that or I should remember to proof read.

since when being good manner is equal to being politically correct? Some people seems to believe that being rude to other people is the way to go in life.

There’s nothing wrong with being “polite†and nobody has suggested that there isn’t.

The problem with political correctness is that it has created a climate where people can be vilified and picked on by a sheep-like pack for merely denounced.

An innocent off the cuff remark can, these days, lead to misinterpretation by some brainwashed pc zealot. Once labelled, other none too bright individuals will join in and, desperate to appear as liberal as possible thus avoiding similar un-pc labelling, will make the innocent denounced individual’s life a misery.

People these days have mainly been churned through an educational system, a university and a cultural system (in Britain, anyway) that inculcates a certain opinion that has no truck with opposition. A pc opinion or policy is correct, no matter what the logic or the consequences of the practical application. An opinion or line of reasoning that is contrary to the prevailing pc one is held to be wrong and the advocate written off as a narrow minded idiot without any analysis of the logic or facts. In Orwell’s animal farm the sheep chanted “four legs good, two legs badâ€, now, the masses cry “pc good, non-pc badâ€. There’s a climate of hysteria and mass bullying over this that ruins lives (Celebrity Big Brother) and stifles debate.

Example: The HIV infection rates have been rising alarmingly in Britain. The pc interpretation that will have no truck with any other is that this is down to wicked indigenous (Britain HAS an indigenous population when it suits) youths having sex without condoms. The REAL reason, though unfortunately not in tune with pc diktat, is because of mass immigration from areas of, for example, sub Saharan Africa with huge HIV rates. This include the NHS, where mass recruitment of staff has taken place with zero health checks (followed by the entire family).

I worked in a major NHS trust for over three years and the discomfort from the pc policy was palpable. The equality and diversity officers and their henchmen stalked the place as surely as the Stasi in 1970s East Germany. Doctors who would take their career in their hands to point out the above were simply shouted down; no debate, no logic. If stating the facts sounds anything but pc and cuddly, then make something else up to make us look caring and kind.

I’ve also worked fairly recently at a County Council. If you don’t subscribe to pc shibboleths like The EU is a Good Thing; Britain has No Culture; The Empire Was A Bad Thing etc you might as well be a N@zi camp guard and resign immediately. Zero freedom of thought.

THAT’S what’s wrong with pc. If I was mistaken in my interpretation of WWFan’s comments and overprotective of Gunner’s post (I had no such protection when I lived in Hungary and Germany and tried to communicate with them, btw), then fine. But don’t make the mistake of thinking pc is merely politeness. It stifles debate at the highest levels, it can ruin careers and it’s turning in to the new MacArthyism.

Here Here fantastic post.

i totally agree with imperius and enjoy shocking and shuting up the pc gang. however i dont think it really has much to do with the point of this op.