GP Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 I wonder if anyone can help with this question. If for example I have 2 x DR's in my first team (Both play & prefer the support role) and one has a CA of 140 & one has a CA of 165 then the obvouis choice is the latter. However the player with a CA of 165 has an average match rating of 6.70, but the player with the CA of 140 has an average match rating of 7.20. My question is which one is better to play? I am torn by this problem and cannot make up my mind. Also what is the average match rating based on, and how important is it in conjunction with the CA? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nottingham Forest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 I'd play the player that is more in form. Imo, CA is usually quite useless. If a right back has the attributes to play the role I want him to but is not as good as another right back who is better CA wise but not attributes wise, I'd player the player with better attributes as they'd be more suited to the role. Also what are their determinations? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 I wonder if anyone can help with this question.If for example I have 2 x DR's in my first team (Both play & prefer the support role) and one has a CA of 140 & one has a CA of 165 then the obvouis choice is the latter. However the player with a CA of 165 has an average match rating of 6.70, but the player with the CA of 140 has an average match rating of 7.20. My question is which one is better to play? I am torn by this problem and cannot make up my mind. Also what is the average match rating based on, and how important is it in conjunction with the CA? Just ignore the CA and look at the player that has the best attributes and plays the best. I have said it several times but some people put too much faith into PA and CA, I have had a player with a 160 CA win best Champions League player in my team he outperformed a couple of players who I am guessing had CA of 180 or more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcornell68 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Yeah, people get obsessed with CA/PA, there are all kinds of reasons that a player may over/under achieve. On the pitch is all that matters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP Posted January 3, 2012 Author Share Posted January 3, 2012 There determination is very similar, but then I suppose consistancy comes into it also. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP Posted January 3, 2012 Author Share Posted January 3, 2012 Sometimes though you have a player, lets say a DC, who has 12 for tackling and 12 for marking (Which is quite low compared to my other DC's) & he is a rock, with a great average rating, but I would not look to buy a player with attibutes this low for this position as a rule. I mostly now look at the players average rating before buying but this imo negates the whole attributes system? Also does every player have the ability to get a good average rating if played correctly? What determines a good average rating? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nottingham Forest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 The defender with not so good attributes, what's his decisions. I'm sure that's important and determination. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP Posted January 3, 2012 Author Share Posted January 3, 2012 Sorry for some reason I cannot reply with quotes? Anyway the DC's in question have similar decisions, positioning and determination attributes, but the best one has the low Marking and Tackling which is really strange. I know the variables are prob endless, but I am trying to get my head around it a bit as sometimes I just cannot fathom why a player is getting better match ratings than another when there stats are so similar or in some cases seem worse. That is why I was trying to link to the CA as well? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nine_iron Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 I usually look for 3 or 4 key attributes in a player including things like height for certain positions like CD, I also like to play a mixture, one faster CD and one stronger taller player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Sorry for some reason I cannot reply with quotes?Anyway the DC's in question have similar decisions, positioning and determination attributes, but the best one has the low Marking and Tackling which is really strange. I know the variables are prob endless, but I am trying to get my head around it a bit as sometimes I just cannot fathom why a player is getting better match ratings than another when there stats are so similar or in some cases seem worse. That is why I was trying to link to the CA as well? Could be a case of the player with the poorer attributes having better hidden ones like big matches and consistency. There are examples of this in real life, if you had to rate the EPL strikers attributes then there would be several players with better attributes than Demba Ba but he is outplaying every striker apart from RVP at the moment. Despite his poor form that has lasted a long long time you would arguably rate Torres better than Sturridge yet Sturridge is playing better. You are looking into things too deeply just keep the player who is playing best in the team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.