Clear Cut Chances Discussion

Let me first of all state, I am not bashing SI or complaining because I can't win...because I am winning.

However, I do think there is an issue with the amount of CCC's that actually = goals for the human player. The amount of times I've had Robin Van Persie or Dzeko miss one on one chances, only to concede to the computer who hasn't had a CCC all match is quite alarming. I'm not sure how everyone else feels about it, or if they feel the game has it just right?

To me, with a top player, a one on one or very clear chance should equal a goal more times than not...It's also weird because the computer will score these types of goals even with lesser players.

Let the discussion begin.

What's to discuss?

Players miss, IRL or in-game.

In my experience with 11 I miss CCC's and make impossible shots left and right, so does the opponent. It's frustrating in that you want to make you strikers in front of the net for 10 hours knocking in balls to punish them, but seems plenty fair.

What's to discuss?

Players miss, IRL or in-game.

I feel the same, compared to real life they seem normal in my games & watching an AI vs AI match

Just watching MOTD or the football league highlights each week shows the amount of CCCc missed & non CCCs scored

As I said elsewhere a few weeks back, the introduction of the stat 'CCC's' has made a rod for SI's back. Its not a stat I see on any TV/media coverage of the game so fail to see why its in. Since its inclusion all you hear is 'CCC this. CCC that.'

The real problem is how CCC's are recorded. wwfan said recently that he disagrees with some of the shots being classed as CCC's and I agree wholeheartedly. Too many 20 yarders, with a defender in close proximity are being classed as a CCC when they shouldn't be.

Anyway, its your tactics

Anyway, its your tactics

100% sure of that? lol

100% sure of that? lol

Of course

I haven't paid too much attention to what is being considered a CCC, which isn't very clever of me I know.

I do think there is an imbalance in AI scoring CCC's and Human scoring CCC's...maybe it's my tactics .

I agree that some chances are classified as CCC when they really aren't a clear chance IMO having said that..

Everyone misses sitters IRL but my biggest annoyance is the 1-1 when they are clear on through with all the time and space in the world to choose a finish.. those seem to go straight to the keeper a little bit too much.

I agree that some chances are classified as CCC when they really aren't a clear chance IMO having said that..

Everyone misses sitters IRL but my biggest annoyance is the 1-1 when they are clear on through with all the time and space in the world to choose a finish.. those seem to go straight to the keeper a little bit too much.

For less then they did in 10.3 imo.

This happened to me (I'm Boavista, I had Rabiola on loan from Porto (I think), and signed Viktor Elm on a free):

Long ball forward from Elm, Rabiola one-on-one with keeper near edge of box. As the ball bounces down, he lobs it over the keepers head. He runs round the keeper, the ball is bouncing in and about 3 yards out, he runs across and heads it wide.

What?!

I just lost a game 4 - 3 when I had seven ccc's to their one. There is something wrong with the chances in this game.

This happened to me (I'm Boavista, I had Rabiola on loan from Porto (I think), and signed Viktor Elm on a free):

Long ball forward from Elm, Rabiola one-on-one with keeper near edge of box. As the ball bounces down, he lobs it over the keepers head. He runs round the keeper, the ball is bouncing in and about 3 yards out, he runs across and heads it wide.

What?!

Heh... sorry but that's really funny to me. because half the time I'm yelling at my players for not following up on strikes to get rebounds. Your guy chased after and saved the goal, maybe my guys not chasing is better after all. lol

It was hilarious, I was 3-0 up at the time.

But it would've made him joint top scorer in the league..

I've had games the other way around - one CCC for each team but I've won 5-0.

I agree with what others have said about CCCs not being very accurate, so I tend to ignore them.

You know what the key is... ignore CCC's

All that matters is shots on target. It doesn't matter if they come from 2 yards out or midfield. If your players are shooting on target then you will score goals once you get to that point focus on making you D so your keep it good close in and farther out their shots are off target.

Might not win all your games big, but I'd rather draw then lose.

There have been similar discussions re. FM10 and I daresay other FM releases as well. This was something I noticed when I was playing an FM10 save, or so I thought.

I decided to properly measure the incidence of CCC's and goals, for my team, and the opposition AI over a season.

What I actually found was that, over the course of a season, there was a good correlation between CCC's and goals scored, both for the human player and the AI. Furthermore, I didn't find any evidence of advantage for the AI.

I personally think that, quite often, and I've been guilty of this, people "notice" when your team make loads of CCC's and miss them i.e. your strikers just have a shocker and the opposition get lucky. But when the boots on the other foot i.e. the AI outplays you, misses loads of CCC's and you get a lucky win yourself, it gets put down to brilliant tactics on the part of the human player, or just overlooked. We notice the deviation from the average when its against us, but overlook it when it works in our favour.

I personally think that, quite often, and I've been guilty of this, people "notice" when your team make loads of CCC's and miss them i.e. your strikers just have a shocker and the opposition get lucky. But when the boots on the other foot i.e. the AI outplays you, misses loads of CCC's and you get a lucky win yourself, it gets put down to brilliant tactics on the part of the human player, or just overlooked. We notice the deviation from the average when its against us, but overlook it when it works in our favour.

Couldn't agree more.

I personally think that, quite often, and I've been guilty of this, people "notice" when your team make loads of CCC's and miss them i.e. your strikers just have a shocker and the opposition get lucky. But when the boots on the other foot i.e. the AI outplays you, misses loads of CCC's and you get a lucky win yourself, it gets put down to brilliant tactics on the part of the human player, or just overlooked. We notice the deviation from the average when its against us, but overlook it when it works in our favour.

This

I said the same thing in other threads recently.

Until you look at it statistically and review a lot of matches it's a a subjective opinion liable to bias. As pointed out, we have something of a selective memory!