Ridiculous result...

So I'm wandering along with my 442 tactic at Newcastle.

Picking up some points, lost a couple of matches 1-0 to good teams - Man U, Liverpool, but some good wins too - Tottenham 2-0, Blackpool 5-0, WBA 2-1.

Morale fantastic, team playing well, no problems. Overall rating over 10 games is very good.

Then Chelsea rock up to St James and put 7 past us without reply.

All my players had ratings in the 4 or 5 zone, average rating 5.5.

Despite that, we had 55% possession, and 82% pass completion.

Fine - a couple of quick counters by Chelsea and a 2-0 defeat, with them having less possession I could accept.

But only having 42% possession and scoring 7 goals?

How can a team play better, pass better, retain possession better, tackle better, but still lose 7-0?

And how come we had such high possession and pass completion, but all my players got an average rating of 5.5?

Well, your team did not play better, because they had an average rating of 5.5 and lost 7-0. Were the goals similar? For example from counter attacking by pacey players? It is possible if you have short passing that you kept the ball but could not get past a sturdy chelsea defense, and they were more direct and incisive with their attacking.

"Only" 42%?

42% is a decent amount.

They did what they needed to when they had the ball, whereas your team did not.

Can't really answer and can't really say that it is a ridiculous result, you can however answer them all by going over your match an looking at what went wrong.

Possession is all well and good but what did you do when you had it?

Same applies for passing, no good completing 80% of your passes if you are just passing around the midfield.

How dangerous were you in the final third?

Where were their goals coming from, Route 1 long balls?

Was one of your CM's instructed to lie a little deeper and just have a really bad day?

Did one of your defenders appear to be the main thoroughfare and he had a meltdown?

If your run of success had been good to better than expected, maybe the old complacency issue.

7 zip is a bad one no doubt, and I am sure it was gut wrenching for you whilst playing , so I have empathy for you there.

Go outside scream at the top of your lungs for two minutes, then grab yourself your favourite beverage, take a deep breath and go back and have look and see if you can spot something

Hope you kick on and it was just a hiccup

what about shots on goal?

It's a funny old game.

Count yourself lucky!

I lost 4-0 away at Dnipro with Liverpool.....

Too busy trying to accomodate Carroll and Suarez, thankfully (and I use this loosely) Carroll got injured for 4 months and I can go back to my trusty 4-5-1 which had brought me success in the last patch. Now all is well

Didn't Chelsea stuff a couple of teams 6 / 7-0 last season?

Basically, **** happens!

Despite that, we had 58% possession, and 82% pass completion. We won more headers than them, and more tackles than them.

That is just NONSENSE!!! That's a totally stupid result. Completely unrealistic.

Fine - a couple of quick counters by Chelsea and a 2-0 defeat, with them having less possession I could accept.

But only having 42% possession and scoring 7 goals? Rubbish!

How can a team play better, pass better, retain possession better, tackle better, win more headers but still lose 7-0?

And how come we had such high possession and pass completion, but all my players got an average rating of 5.5?

This can't possibly be correct...

I have to agree with the OP. It wouldn't have been so bad if they had won 1-0 or 2-0 or 3-2... But 7-0 and with a rating of 5.5 after having so much of the ball? Doesn't add up. Maybe 6+ but not a rating as low as 5.5 after having dominated the match.

It's the low ratings that puzzle me.

Also, a team can play well and still lose

I have to agree with the OP. It wouldn't have been so bad if they had won 1-0 or 2-0 or 3-2... But 7-0 and with a rating of 5.5 after having so much of the ball? Doesn't add up. Maybe 6+ but not a rating as low as 5.5 after having dominated the match.

It's the low ratings that puzzle me.

Also, a team can play well and still lose

Again, possesion should not be confused with domination.

See here for a recent League Two game.

Both teams 50% possession, yet the scoreline was 7-0.

I 100% agree with you. But I think prem league teams are just too good for that to happen to them, to lose 7 goals to nil after being so heavily involved in the match (or at least not in this sort of manner anyway).

Edit: Not that he lost 7 goals but in the manner in which he lost

I 100% agree with you. But I think prem league teams are just too good for that to happen to them, to lose 7 goals to nil after being so heavily involved in the match (or at least not in this sort of manner anyway).

Edit: Not that he lost 7 goals but in the manner in which he lost

I very much suspect there is a lot of user influence tbh.

During the match did he make any changes to counter what Chelsea were doing?

What speed was the match played at? what level of highlights?

he's prolly exaggerating a little bit anyway

It's not that he lost 7 goals (anything can happen in football), it's the average rating that puzzled me, I'd expect that to be a little higher even though I lost 7 nil because I dominated, my passes completed was high (hence why I had so much of the ball etc).

Maybe 6 something but not 'generally' as low as 5

Edit: It wasn't an overall shambolic performance

While we all have had those "FM hates you" matches, there are a couple of questions to ask here:

1) What did you say in the pre-match Press Conference?

2) What was your pre-match Team Talk?

3) What was the half-time result and what did you say to the team then?

4) Did you make any in-match adjustments?

The match stats don't look too likely for such a thrashing, but it could mostly be due to counter-attack football and/or long shots/corners goals... Basically one of those bad days when everything goes horribly wrong.

I still put my money on "overconfidence+wrong team talks+Top Club being ridiculously effective against you"

High pass completion and possession could indicate that your defensive players just passed the ball around a lot without coming under pressure and maybe you lost the ball whenever you really tried to start an attack. It's difficult to say much at the moment because statistics can be misleading.

Hope you kick on and it was just a hiccup

Yeah - seems that way, thankfully. Just a really bizarre game!

I've been playing CM/FM for a while, and I don't think I've ever seen a team lose that heavily while retaining so much possession, and passing so well.

Both Mike Williamson, Colocinni andTiote all had appalling games. But then the whole team did.

I'll get over it!

what about shots on goal?

Good point.

Chelsea had 18 shots, and hit 13 of them on target.

Toon had 14, and hit 3 of them on target.

Tells a story, I suppose!

I do wonder on here sometimes if people actually follow the real world of football

he's prolly exaggerating a little bit anyway

It's not that he lost 7 goals (anything can happen in football), it's the average rating that puzzled me, I'd expect that to be a little higher even though I lost 7 nil because I dominated, my passes completed was high (hence why I had so much of the ball etc).

Maybe 6 something but not 'generally' as low as 5

Edit: It wasn't an overall shambolic performance

This is the point.

I'm not fussed about being beaten by Chelsea - it is a game after all!

It just doesn't make a huge amount of logical sense.

As you said, it wasn't a shambolic performance - my team passed and played pretty well.

Just strange that they all got such appalling ratings, and that Chelsea managed to get 7.

The stats just don't really add up, in my opinion.

How many of the goals were defensive mistakes? If your CB's got a rating of 4 point something then that would drag the rest of the teams ratings down. Any chance of a screen shot of your teams ratings for the match?

BOO HOO I LOST AND I AM GONNA CRY ABOUT IT - boring!

Thanks for your pathetic, immature input.

This is a forum for people to talk about the game FM2011.

That's what I'm doing.

If this thread is one you find boring, go elsewhere.

Poor little boy...

I do wonder on here sometimes if people actually follow the real world of football

I follow football pretty closely, thanks. And I have played FM for a long time.

I've never seen stats like that in a 7-0 defeat. That's all. Seems a very strange result.

I am perfectly aware that sometime weird stuff happens in football, but this result came out of nowhere.

The stats just don't suggest I should've lost by a seven goal margin.

How many of the goals were defensive mistakes? If your CB's got a rating of 4 point something then that would drag the rest of the teams ratings down. Any chance of a screen shot of your teams ratings for the match?

I used to use this program for posting pictures on here, but I've forgotten what it was called!

If you can point me in the direction of some way to upload screen shots I'll do it...

The stats just don't suggest I should've lost by a seven goal margin.

Stats can always be misleading though.

It only takes one shot to score a goal at the end of the day.

Its also easy to get high possession if your players are knocking it around the defence in their own half especially if the opposition let you which they most likely will at three/four goals ahead.

I used to use this program for posting pictures on here, but I've forgotten what it was called!

If you can point me in the direction of some way to upload screen shots I'll do it...

http://imageshack.us/ & http://photobucket.com/ seem to be two of the most common sites used to upload screenshots.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Poor finishing definitely a problem!

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Bit weird central defensive positions there - they are basically playing on top of each other.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Any thoughts, anyone?

If people think this kind've thing is just par for the course, then no worries!

Just thought it was quite a weird result...

http://imageshack.us/ & http://photobucket.com/ seem to be two of the most common sites used to upload screenshots.

Nice one! Thanks for the Imageshack reminder!

Any thoughts, anyone?

If people think this kind've thing is just par for the course, then no worries!

Just thought it was quite a weird result...

Just write it off as a bad result & try & pick the team up for the next game, as you said, it's a freak result

I've been on the receiving end & issued tonkings but these things happen in football

Just out of interest, what was Chelsea's form like going into that game?

Just write it off as a bad result & try & pick the team up for the next game, as you said, it's a freak result

I've been on the receiving end & issued tonkings but these things happen in football

Hmmm. Got to admit summat here!

I couldn't live with a home 7-0 defeat on my record, even to Chelsea!

Went back to previous save, replayed the game, and lost 2-1.

I can live with that, but I'm sure I'm going straight to FM hell for my treacherous cheating! ; )

Well you gave them twice as many free kicks as you had and they had a high percentage of long shots. Don't know what shots went in, but maybe your D wasn't closing them down well enough?

Those stats don't say anything that would mean you had real control of the match. It was probably a combination of things...

You're boys were just making little passes around the midfield and not making any real attack.

A number of your boy's just choked all in the same game... personally I hate that randomness.

Chelsea just completely outclassed you, not like it never happens.

Just out of interest, what was Chelsea's form like going into that game?

Before the game:

Newcastle: WWWWD

Chelsea: LWWDW

Any thoughts, anyone?

If people think this kind've thing is just par for the course, then no worries!

Just thought it was quite a weird result...

Well its clear you didn't deserve to lose 7-0 but really once the third goal goes in heads drop and the match is over anyway, its really down to how much effort the opposition want to put in to attack. Its just one of those games you forget about and move on.

Your team had a shocker to put it bluntly, possibly partly due to overconfidence (morale is excellent on the assistant feedback) with most of the team underperforming. Did Coloccini make any mistakes that led to goals? either way a fine would have been heading his way if it had been me & possibly others as well (the four defenders).

Team talk wise I think you made a poor choice - "For the Fans" seems to give unpredictable performances and I normally reserve it for rival matches and perhaps cup finals. Depending on your team positions/recent results "You can win" or more likely "Good luck" would probably have been better options.

Given four of Chelsea's goals came in the twenty minutes after the break I also think either your HT team talk could have been better or Chelsea got a kick up the arse or possibly both.

Well you gave them twice as many free kicks as you had and they had a high percentage of long shots. Don't know what shots went in, but maybe your D wasn't closing them down well enough?

Those stats don't say anything that would mean you had real control of the match. It was probably a combination of things...

You're boys were just making little passes around the midfield and not making any real attack.

A number of your boy's just choked all in the same game... personally I hate that randomness.

Chelsea just completely outclassed you, not like it never happens.

Yeah - you're right. Colocinni was the main culprit...

Never seen him get a 4.1 in FM before!

It seems on these forums anytime people lose a game it's unrealistic.

You got thumped. If you keep losing 7-0 then you have a complaint.

Hmmm. Got to admit summat here!

I couldn't live with a home 7-0 defeat on my record, even to Chelsea!

Went back to previous save, replayed the game, and lost 2-1.

I can live with that, but I'm sure I'm going straight to FM hell for my treacherous cheating! ; )

You sure are and deservedly so lol.

It's just one of them results the strikers shooting off target and the defenders mistakes just meant a low average rating. 2-1 is a much easier lose to cope with though.

Hmmm. Got to admit summat here!

I couldn't live with a home 7-0 defeat on my record, even to Chelsea!

Went back to previous save, replayed the game, and lost 2-1.

I can live with that, but I'm sure I'm going straight to FM hell for my treacherous cheating! ; )

BTW - I changed virtually nothing about the way I approached and managed the game to get the 2-1 defeat instead of the 7-0.

Another example of inconsistency of results in FM?

Same team, same tactics, same pre-match talk, same team talks in game, little difference in touchline shouts, similar substitutions.

Very different result, though...

Yeah - you're right. Colocinni was the main culprit...

Never seen him get a 4.1 in FM before!

Like i said.. hate that 'random player X is going to have a terrible game and can't do anything right' stuff. But oh well.

Team talk wise I think you made a poor choice - "For the Fans" seems to give unpredictable performances and I normally reserve it for rival matches and perhaps cup finals.

You might have a point there.

I never normally use 'For the fans' unless we're playing the Mackems!

Not quite sure why I chose that option on this occasion...

Not inconsistency it's a stimulation if any two teams played in real life 50 times there would be different results even with the same 11 on both sides and the same tactics.

Not inconsistency it's a stimulation if any two teams played in real life 50 times there would be different results even with the same 11 on both sides and the same tactics.

I've had this conversation a couple of times about FM. Not just this version, but the series in general.

I agree there would always be different results, but there are often such wild differences that it can make the game a little hard to swallow at times.

Did a bit of testing on this on FM10 (sad, I know, but I was in bed ill!), playing the same game over and over again, with pretty much the same choices every time.

The results I got back had little in the way of consistency about them.

But yeah - it's just a game! Got to keep that in mind, I guess!

BTW - I changed virtually nothing about the way I approached and managed the game to get the 2-1 defeat instead of the 7-0.

Another example of inconsistency of results in FM?

Same team, same tactics, same pre-match talk, same team talks in game, little difference in touchline shouts, similar substitutions.

Very different result, though...

You say that as if its a bad thing?

But tbf although you didn't change anything plenty did, the opposition's approach & tactics would alter, each goal/miss brings changes to the players & tactics.

Show us the "home stats" screen - should be easier to tell who's messing up your game plan.

From what you've shown, Coloccini has probably given away a couple of goals all by himself- probably conceding the penalty and making one another screw-up. That's usually why one defender gets a far lower rating like that.

Were your CBs set to tight mark one of Chelsea's STs? Or to always close them down? Just trying to think of an explanation for the ridiculous clumping of your CBs on the heat map.

As to the overall crap ratings- remember that IRL the press would never say a team played well if they got drubbed 7-0, and so in the game, a team will always lose ratings points just by virtue of being on the end of a thrashing. Similarly, if you are completely dominating a game and win by a country mile, even players who have contributed nothing much (your standard 6.9s, normally) will get a 7.3ish kind of score.

The ratings are like the ones in the papers, remember: your ST can be cack all game, then score a bicycle kick to win you the game, and he'll get a really high rating and all the plaudits. A steady performance in midfield will be dismissed as lightweight and anonymous if your side go on to take a thrashing.

You say that as if its a bad thing?

But tbf although you didn't change anything plenty did, the opposition's approach & tactics would alter, each goal/miss brings changes to the players & tactics.

I just find it a bit strange, personally.

I'd expect there to be a bit of difference in the results, but that they'd bear some resemblance to each other.

A 7-0 thrashing playing with almost exactly the same choices as a tight 2-1 defeat just seems a little unlikely.

Shouldn't be so wildly different, in my opinion.

But hey - FM11 after patch 3 is a joy to play (so far!) so I have no real complaints! : )

I've had this conversation a couple of times about FM. Not just this version, but the series in general.

I agree there would always be different results, but there are often such wild differences that it can make the game a little hard to swallow at times.

Did a bit of testing on this on FM10 (sad, I know, but I was in bed ill!), playing the same game over and over again, with pretty much the same choices every time.

The results I got back had little in the way of consistency about them.

But yeah - it's just a game! Got to keep that in mind, I guess!

This is one of those subjects that people are always going to disagree on. Your last sentence sums it up best I think.

I just find it a bit strange, personally.

I'd expect there to be a bit of difference in the results, but that they'd bear some resemblance to each other.

A 7-0 thrashing playing with almost exactly the same choices as a tight 2-1 defeat just seems a little unlikely.

Shouldn't be so wildly different, in my opinion.

But hey - FM11 after patch 3 is a joy to play (so far!) so I have no real complaints! : )

Goals make huge differences in matches both in RL and FM.

The first goal can give the scoring team a confidence boost but it can also add a little complacency while for the other team it might lead to heads dropping or they might raise their games showing determination & resolve.

At 2-0 the gap becomes a little wider in the players mentality.

3-0 and only the most determined players will show any belief in getting something from a match and at this point a team can easily crumble with more goals on the horizon. We don't see it happen on a regular basis in real life because the managers of the leading team tend to make changes to protect the lead as opposed to chasing more goals.

On the flip side when a team thats behind scores it gives them belief and places doubt in the mind of the leading team. Another goal back and suddenly its game on as their confidence grows.

There must have been some horrific defending going on if Chelsea only had 2 clear cut chances and still scored 7....