Are clear cuts chances on FM realistic compared to real life?

In my opinion no, and they haven't been in for a while.

I've got to say no. No matter who it is on the ball, at least 80% of the one on ones in my game are saved. In my opinion a top class player like Rooney or Hernandez should put away at least half of these sort of chances, but they stroke it wide or hit it at the keeper almost every time. The problem is that these kind of chances, when you get a striker clean through on goal, are far too common on the game and SI seem to balance this out by having them very difficult to score.

100% agree and nothing seems to be done about it. How great would it feel to know that your a playing with say Liverpool and if you get one chance, Torres is nearly certain to finish it and not miss say 4 one on ones.

I have to say some misses are just plain stupid and don't reflect my players attributes.

That said real strikers miss quite a lot of chances, sometimes FM gets a bit carried away though in my opinion.

Babacar misses a load of CCC despite having some great attributes such as 19 finishing and 16 composure, yet he seems to hit it wide plenty of times. I'm not sure, FM might be right where it is at but I'm just denying it because my strikers aren't finishing opportunities that are being fed to them.

I voted yes, but I realise this will be a thread for whingers and my input won't be welcome.

Last year (I mean before FM11 came out) PaulC presented detailed charts showing the amount of CCCs in the Premier League and other leagues and compared with FM. SI take great pains to replicate real life. It's our tactics that change the statistics. A lot of gamers play unrealistically attacking tactics that prioritise the number of chances over the quality of chances, so the explanation is really very simple - it's your tactics !

By the way, ironic that you should use Rooney Torres as your examples. They're missing CCCs left, right and centre these days! I don't think either of you follow football very deeply.

It's pretty obvious there are too many missed chances. It must be hard to get it balanced I think. But as long as the scorelines are realistic, I won't complain.

I REALLY really hate threads about this.

When are people going to get it - a CCC is not the same as a sitter. Repeat - a CCC is not the same as a sitter.

The people who think CCC's are broken don't understand what a CCC is, and place far too much emphasis on it.

And this is coming from someone who is certainly not an FM fanboy!

I have to say some misses are just plain stupid and don't reflect my players attributes.

That said real strikers miss quite a lot of chances, sometimes FM gets a bit carried away though in my opinion.

Babacar misses a load of CCC despite having some great attributes such as 19 finishing and 16 composure, yet he seems to hit it wide plenty of times. I'm not sure, FM might be right where it is at but I'm just denying it because my strikers aren't finishing opportunities that are being fed to them.

it depends i've had not many problems missing chances for sure dzecko puts away his one on ones 9 times out of 10 in my game. i think it depends on the tactics you play and how the ball is played to the player.

I still haven't seen a goal from situation like this:

striker dribbled through defense running up towards goal, one on one with the goalkeeper and shoots...

99.9999999%, either the keeper miraculously saves it or the ball flies to either side of the net

even players like Lukaku haven't scored in situations like this, despite his 19 for composure, 15 for long shots, and 14 for finishing!!! (possible all the time???)

let me repeat... I haven't seen a goal scored like this!!!

I still haven't seen a goal from situation like this:

striker dribbled through defense running up towards goal, one on one with the goalkeeper and shoots...

99.9999999%, either the keeper miraculously saves it or the ball flies to either side of the net

even players like Lukaku haven't scored in situations like this, despite his 19 for composure, 15 for long shots, and 14 for finishing!!! (possible all the time???)

let me repeat... I haven't seen a goal scored like this!!!

[video=youtube;8nPbOL2xV1A]

There you go.

Merry Christmas.

I REALLY really hate threads about this.

When are people going to get it - a CCC is not the same as a sitter. Repeat - a CCC is not the same as a sitter.

The people who think CCC's are broken don't understand what a CCC is, and place far too much emphasis on it.

And this is coming from someone who is certainly not an FM fanboy!

Dont' bother mate, you're shouting into the wind

But while I'm here Ill shout into the wind with you

I've made this point before, but it still stands. I feel the game is very woolly on what it designate as a clear cut chance, but then that leads to the question; What is defined as a clear cut chance? I tend to ignore the CCC stat and judge each chance on its own, you often see that some CCC really arent all that clear cut, whereas some will be absolute sitters.

Its hard to make a comparison with the FM CCC's since the stat itself doesnt exist in real life. As for striker conversion rates i've dug up a few stats on the top finishers from last season (league goals only), these are all comparable to stats that can be found in game:

Edin Dzeko: 22 goals from 153 shots - 14.37% conversion rate; 70 shots on target 31.42% conversion rate

Mamadou Niang: 18 goals from 108 shots - 16.66% conversion rate; 42 shots on target 42.85% conversion rate

Wayne Rooney: 26 goals from 182 shots - 14.28% conversion rate; 58 shots on target 44.83% conversion rate

Didier Drogba: 31 goals from 178 shots - 17.41% conversion rate; 67 shots on target 50.81% conversion rate

Cristiano Ronaldo: 26 goals from 211 shots - 12.32% conversion rate; 94 shots on target 27.66% conversion rate

Gonzalo Higuaín: 27 goals from 198 shots - 13.63% conversion rate; 52 shots on target 51.92% conversion rate

David Villa: 21 goals from 139 shots - 15.10% conversion rate; 61 shots on target 34.43% conversion rate

Lionel Messi: 34 goals from 163 shots - 20.85% conversion rate; 86 shots on target 39.53% conversion rate

Antonio Di Natale: 29 goals from 152 shots - 19.08% conversion rate; 71 shots on target 40.85% conversion rate

Diego Milito: 22 goals from 86 shots - 25.58% conversion rate; 36 shots on target 61.11% conversion rate

Dont' bother mate, you're shouting into the wind

I know, I know... just irritates me badly when there's plenty of real problems with FM2011 and people bang on about this.

As a last ditch effort to help, here's my FM dictionary definition of a CCC:

Clear Cut Chance - An opportunity for an attacking player to score whilst not under the usual amount of pressure from an opposition defender, and is within a reasonable distance of the goal.

I feel the game is very woolly on what it designate as a clear cut chance, but then that leads to the question; What is defined as a clear cut chance?

It is very wooly! I'll admit to that - but it's also common sense when you think about it.

A shot on target is anything that is within the goal posts. A shot off target is anything outside the goal post. A CCC is simply a shot on or off target resulting from a clearly defined opportunity to take a shot on for the striker.

I'm not getting into this argument, just going to answer the OP. 'No' was my vote, what the ME decides is a CCC is still not correct in my eyes, there are still too many from distance and under pressure.

Personally I think CCC's are a poor stat to show in game, they are not used IRL and are now used as a stick to beat SI with. IMO if you can't decide for yourself by looking at the match what is a CCC and what isn't then you are playing the wrong game.

I'm not getting into this argument, just going to answer the OP. 'No' was my vote, what the ME decides is a CCC is still not correct in my eyes, there are still too many from distance and under pressure.

Personally I think CCC's are a poor stat to show in game, they are not used IRL and are now used as a stick to beat SI with. IMO if you can't decide for yourself by looking at the match what is a CCC and what isn't then you are playing the wrong game.

Your last sentence is bang on. I can understand why SI brought it in, but way too much focus is put on it.

I'm not getting into this argument, just going to answer the OP. 'No' was my vote, what the ME decides is a CCC is still not correct in my eyes, there are still too many from distance and under pressure.

Personally I think CCC's are a poor stat to show in game, they are not used IRL and are now used as a stick to beat SI with. IMO if you can't decide for yourself by looking at the match what is a CCC and what isn't then you are playing the wrong game.

Agree 100%. Would love to see them removed, or at the very least re-named. Just "Chances" would do actually!

Your last sentence is bang on. I can understand why SI brought it in, but way too much focus is put on it.

I asked PaulC why it was introduced, and he said it was entirely because the user base demanded it, which is baffling and I refer you all to my last sentence that themadsheep is talking about.

I asked PaulC why it was introduced, and he said it was entirely because the user base demanded it, which is baffling and I refer you all to my last sentence that themadsheep is talking about.

I bet you anything the same people who go on and on about it now are the ones who clamoured for it in the first place.

I bet you anything the same people who go on and on about it now are the ones who clamoured for it in the first place.

I don't take losing bets.

Sometimes it is easier to score the more technically difficult goals. This reflects real life. Arsenal have traditionally tried to 'walk the ball into the back of the net' on occassions have suffered for it. CCC's in my view reflect this accruately. Sometimes, due to the position of the keeper, the space the player has, and importantly a little luck it is easier to score a 30 yard screamer than a tap in.

I have no problem with the way CCC's work in FM and so I haven't voted on this thread.

As an aside we seem to be getting a lot of threads about semantics recently!

Sometimes it is easier to score the more technically difficult goals. This reflects real life.

Again, spot on. I usually score more than the CCC stat.

The only thing unrealistic about that screen shot is the decent performance from Bilyaletdinov.

It was introduced to silence the "OMG i had 30 shots in game but didn't score , but the opposition scored with only 2 shots... WHYYYYYY!!!!!!!!" and the " There is a bug !!!! I was 10 times 1v1 with the goalkeeper and only score 1!!!!!!"

It's purpose was to show how good your tactic was at creating GOOD scoring chances. Before all discussions about how good a scoring chance was ended up in arguments about.

"Was he under preassure, did he use his weaker foot, did he slip..." a.s.o. Basically things you couldnt see from watching the game.

The CCC stat is just a scoring chance that has a higher liklyhood of going in. As i understand it the stat gets derived after taking to account all factors that influence the scoring chance and then comes up with a % value. If this value X is

X% >= CCC% it gets marked down as a CCC. After that its down to the player and luck how well he does compared to the goalkeeper. That is just how i have understood it.

But back to the main question

NO

There are too many CCC in FM compared to real life. Both because of the user and SI. This is why we then have to watch most of them miss so the scorelines stay realistic.

I guess most of us like the escape from real life that FM gives us in that we can make tactics that are ultra pacy and attacking. Very rarely do you run in to people here who build purely tactics designed with defence in mind. By making ultra attacking tactics we force the game in a bad situation as we create a senario where we get loads of more action and scoring chances then in real life, but the game is tuned to real life statistics so you will not go on to score 10 goals a game.

Last year (I mean before FM11 came out) PaulC presented detailed charts showing the amount of CCCs in the Premier League and other leagues and compared with FM.

Can you point me to that or remember a keyword I could use to search? CCC is too short and I tried PaulC plus Premier and got no hits, PaulC plus conversion and again no hits.

Messi and Villa are missing 90% of one-on-ones...

definately REALISTIC

Messi and Villa are missing 90% of one-on-ones...

definately REALISTIC

Awesome contribution to the thread, thanks!

Messi and Villa are missing 90% of one-on-ones...

definately REALISTIC

As Tubey says a great contribution, did you happen to read post 11? Or did you just see the title and think that we all needed your enlightening and repetitively boring comments?]

Here's the important bit for you:

David Villa: 21 goals from 139 shots - 15.10% conversion rate; 61 shots on target 34.43% conversion rate

Lionel Messi: 34 goals from 163 shots - 20.85% conversion rate; 86 shots on target 39.53% conversion rate

Now CCCs are not tracked IRL so these stats don't tell you everything but if you think they hit 90% of their CCCs then they must be absolutely shocking with their other chances.

I know you won't listen to reason but the facts speak for themselves.

I still haven't seen a goal from situation like this:

striker dribbled through defense running up towards goal, one on one with the goalkeeper and shoots...

99.9999999%, either the keeper miraculously saves it or the ball flies to either side of the net

even players like Lukaku haven't scored in situations like this, despite his 19 for composure, 15 for long shots, and 14 for finishing!!! (possible all the time???)

let me repeat... I haven't seen a goal scored like this!!!

I don't have a youtube to show you, but I probably score at least 20% of my goals this way.

isuck - sorry, can't remember.

The problem is the definition of a CCC. I understand it's an effort on goal from a player under less pressure than usual and from a reasonable distance from goal, but how exactly does FM work this out? There must be a lot of grey area ones, which is actually the same as real life. I quite often watch games on TV with a group of mates and while half of us think a chance was an absolute sitter, the other half think it's a difficult chance.

Real life CCCs are left to your interpretation, and so it should be in FM. Perhaps they should remove the stat in the next version? It wouldn't bother me as I watch extended/key highlights of every game and I know which chances are CCCs and which are not. But then again, someone else might disagree...

The real problem is with the definition of clear cut chance. I was playing in the FA cup, against Newcastle I believe, watching extended highlights. At one point, I glanced up at the stats - 20 minutes played, and I was surprised to see that it had me down as having had 3 clear cut chances. I certainly hadn't noticed anything I'd consider to be a CCC from watching the extended footage, and chances I had created the strikers were under pressure or the angle was so horrid the ball wasn't going to go anywhere. So I wasn't at all surprised that I hadn't scored for any of the three supposed clear cut chances.

On the other hand, there are a whole raft of what I'd consider to be a clear cut chance, that even a 3 month old baby would be able to score from, that just go horrendously wrong. I know it happens in real life at times, and howlers end up on youtube for everyone to laugh at, but the frequency of it happening in FM does seem absurd at times. But then I guess the frequency of my strikers being 3 meters away from an open goal in FM is also absurd, compared to real life

[video=youtube;8nPbOL2xV1A]

There you go.

Merry Christmas.

I'd be more annoyed by the obvious bug exhibited by the defender that was tracking Messi and decided to take a step back so Messi has an unobstructed view of the goal after rounding the keeper...

Again FM fan boys criticize me stating that I do not follow real football because I made a thread asking a poll and stating my opinion. The thing is I don't care about the CCC stat, I judge the chance my self. It seems to me even though I win the league and score the most goals, I still miss a absurd amount of chances because of so many of them being created. And even worse their keeper makes one good save and im like Noooo its super keeper time its going to be a 0-0 and the keeper will put on a keeping clinic.

Again FM fan boys criticize me stating that I do not follow real football because I made a thread asking a poll and stating my opinion. The thing is I don't care about the CCC stat, I judge the chance my self. It seems to me even though I win the league and score the most goals, I still miss a absurd amount of chances because of so many of them being created. And even worse their keeper makes one good save and im like Noooo its super keeper time its going to be a 0-0 and the keeper will put on a keeping clinic.

Super keepers do not exist!

Its a well known fact that confidence plays a huge part in performance in any sport, so if a keeper makes a good save early on then his confidence will increase and he will play better. Also, a stirker missing a good chance early on will sometimes lose some confidence, and therefore will have a worse game.

I refuse to answer this baiting poll that's just here to beat a dead horse. Many people claim the 90% stat and have nothing to back it up but their opinions, while others come in with stat after stat saying the rate of converted chances in FM is comparable to real life. But the poll is missing the one real answer...I don't know. Because none of us can know the answer to a question about a stat that doesn't exist.

Oh good, another thread about CCC's. Can we give this up now? People judge CCC's differently, and so does the match engine, therefore, there will never be consensus on this issue. Please, no more of these threads.

Again FM fan boys criticize me stating that I do not follow real football because I made a thread asking a poll and stating my opinion. The thing is I don't care about the CCC stat, I judge the chance my self. It seems to me even though I win the league and score the most goals, I still miss a absurd amount of chances because of so many of them being created. And even worse their keeper makes one good save and im like Noooo its super keeper time its going to be a 0-0 and the keeper will put on a keeping clinic.

No you are being criticized because your view of what happens in RL is quite simply wrong.

In RL strikers miss far more chances than you think.

I voted no but I should explain my answer. Basically, I feel that I can never really trust the clear cut chances stat in this game. I've seen chances counted as a CCC that look anything but to me personally. Then, I've also seen what I would suggest is a CCC not counted under this match stat.

We've all seen screenshots where someone's team has had a whole bunch of CCCs but is not scoring goals. Usually, this is accompanied by a high number of shots but a low percentage actually on target, and it often seems that the quality of chances wasn't great for their side most of the time. In these circumstances, I would tend to question how accurate and useful the CCC stat actually is.

No you are being criticized because your view of what happens in RL is quite simply wrong.

In RL strikers miss far more chances than you think.

This! Liam - calling somebody a fan boy does not legitimise your opinion any more...

I was a big critic of missed chances last year but after it had been sorted and Carlton Cole was banging in 40 goals a season for me I had mixed feelings. Every time he was 1 on 1 with the keeper he smacked a cracking finish across the keeper into the corner of the net. Nice,,,,but not realistic.

This year yes it is frustrating to see your players 1 on 1 and either putting it at the keeper or wide but I do feel an element of realism. I can't speak for the Rooney's and the Messi's beacuse I only play as the Hammers but certain finihing issues are more realistic.

An example. Now I find my left sided striker if right footed misses more chances if he is shooting from the left side. That's better than lasy year IMO as last year regardless of which foot they were better with their finishing seemed the same. I mean by that PLAYER A with a weak left foot and a finishing stat of 10 would score as many as PLAYER B who is left footed and has a finishing stat of 17. That was unrealistic. When you see PLAYER A miss this year it looks like just that, he is weaker on that side. I therefore now am looking for a decent left footed striker or use a PPM to try and improve his ratio.

As some have said before there is a misbelief that a CCC is a sitter. That isn't the case. Using Carlton Cole as a real life example. As a striker he scores very few goals when he has time to think (actually very few goals full stop!). Whereas when he doesn'tb have the time to think he finishes quite well. Therefore with your strikers there are a lot of elements I suspect that you have to take into account as well as finishing. Confidence, morale, decisions, composure just a few. Look at Rooney IRL recently, he is struggling to score from open play whereas last year everything he hit went in.

I think possibly the CCC would have been better left out of the stats. Looking at the Man City v Everton game on Monday Sky showed City had many more efforts on goal than Everton, both on and off target but they didn't show a reference to clear cut chances.

some people here are REAL idiots, amazing community

some people here are REAL idiots, amazing community

If you don't have anything constructive to say in a thread, say nothing rather than posting this type of comment. No more please.

some people here are REAL idiots, amazing community

Rearrange these words into a famous saying: kettle, black, calling, pot, the.

Any other cerebral comments you'd like to add?

Any more words of wisdom that you feel the community needs to hear from you?

I've not read the whole thread as I see it's full of the usual pointless bickering, but the issue with CCC's, as I've said many times, is less about the conversion rate and much more about the amount of them being created. I only recently got FM11 and haven't played much, but so far I don't see much wrong with the finishing. I agree with Sussex Hammer that the variety of one on one finishes and misses on this is much better than 10.3 where everything was either perfectly in the corner of the net, missed horribly or straight at the keeper. But there are still way too many chances of this kind. Part of this is down to poor defensive mechanics, another part is the way too precise pass and move patterns that get strikers in behind the defense.

I've got to say no. No matter who it is on the ball, at least 80% of the one on ones in my game are saved. In my opinion a top class player like Rooney or Hernandez should put away at least half of these sort of chances, but they stroke it wide or hit it at the keeper almost every time. The problem is that these kind of chances, when you get a striker clean through on goal, are far too common on the game and SI seem to balance this out by having them very difficult to score.

This.

Seems easy to solve if this is actually a "problem".

I remember that in FM 2008 (?) all had the same problem. Players were missing one-on-ones to often. After patching the game (i don't remember if it was 2-nd or 3-rd patch) the problem was solved. Simply there were not so many one-on-one situations in patched ME. For me the main thing to improve in ME is defensive play what should cause less one-on-one chances. Now the defenders allow the strikers to do what they want.

A better thread would ask people what percentage of clear cut chances they score.

For me, the problem is what defines a CCC, and as its a computer it has to have specific boundaries as to what is a CCC. If you listen to match comentaries in real life you will hear the commentator scream 'he missed a sitter' or words to that effect. In the game that would come up as a CCC. However if you watch match of the day often the people in the studio will disagree over how easy or hard a chance was. They will defend a player saying 'well he was leaning back to much' or 'he was already stretching for it' or such like.

Thus in real life there are no stats for CCC because it is entirely subjective.

I think we all suffer from 'highlights syndrome' This is where we are all used to watching match of the day or other such programs where they have to squeeze 10 games into an hour and half show (or is it an hour these days?). Thus, pretty much every time they show a clip you KNOW something interresting is going to happen in it. We will miss all the long shots that scream off towards the corner flag or the really neat passes that got towards goal, but was eventually uneventful.

A very specific example of this is roberto carlos - he is not the greatest free kick taker in the world - but his single unbelievable free kick has been ingrained in our minds so strongly that often that is the first thing people think about when someone says a free kick specialist. We are far too influenced by what we perceive to be true, rather than statistically what is true.

Spot on Maidel.

You sum it up pretty well, I think.

Spot on Maidel.

You sum it up pretty well, I think.

And I second that.

Some peeps expect Andy Gray/Sky Sports analysis and reflection...and erm....was going to say 'realism', but I remember seeing Andy Gray play. He wasn't as good as his own analysis might lead him to think he was.

I'd say i'm 60/40 towards yes. Room for improvement, but fairly realistic

And I second that.

Thank you

I can give another example of a stat that is biased by the media.

Who is the best penalty taker ever to play in the premier league? (appologies if this has become wrong since I got this information, Im pretty certain its still accurate)

Well Alan Shearer scored the most penalties in the premier league, but he also missed some. (53 scored from 57 taken I think it is) Highlight here when you have had a think - But the best conversion rate by a regular taker is Matt Le Tisser who scored 48 from 49 taken. (both of those stats I think contain penalties in the old 1st division, but its top flight goals either way)

Shearers penalty record is impressive with a 92% conversion ratio, however surely the record of best (not most prolific) must go to Matt Le Tissier with 48 out of 49 (97%).

And I agree with jibby and crouchy, yours was a good post, its an opinion that is shared by a lot of people on here.