Stat attack

I want to discuss something and because I don't want anyone to use the word 'tactics' as an excuse, I thought I would put it in here.

I want an answer to a question regarding player stats/attributes. How FM gives us player attributes in order to choose the players to buy to counter the opposition and why in every game I play, the oppositon player will out run someone who is faster or outjump some who is better in the air. Not just this, pound for pound the player who they are playing against are not only better physically but mentally too. No excuses, the player stats/attributes tell use one thing but the match engine shows us another. This ultimately contributes to another of my latest bugbears, the shots to goals ratio issue. This happens every game and I repeat every game I play. I don't want any use of the word tactics to explain this because I am still getting the needed results.

This gripe is simply to understand why I spend so much time analysing players to buy when 'weaker' players seem to play quite well against my better players. I know about these 'weaker' 'players just maybe up for the game' excuse too.

Here's an example for a recent game I have just played out:

I am Liverpool and i was 3-0 up against Reading at home. I pull my backline back slightly and change my mentality to normal. Their striker makes a break down the left wing, i've got 8 players back defending, 5 in the box against the lone striker awaitng the cross. Cross comes in and striker outjumps my 5 defending players to score. This is their only shot of the game Reading have and I win 3-1. The player who crossed the was Dave Kitson, lets take alook at his stats:

Crossing 10

passing 12

creativity 12

Based on many theories these abilities are just below prem level and in the post match report stats, although he got an assist, he didn't create one key pass all game. Strange but true!!

Now the goalscorer, his name is Shane Long and he's 5ft 10".

Heading 12

composure 13

finishing 13

jumping 14

strength 13

This guy is just borderline prem quality, however my main marker was a defender is called Frederico Fazio and he's 6ft 5":

Heading 20

marking 17

strength 20

jumping 18

Now how are we supposed to treat the attributes as fact when there is so much contradiction?

My reason for these happenings is in the coding. I have A level computer programming and I have wrote a few games in my time. What the have achieved in FM08 is the abitility to reflect imperfections. Imperfections that occur when you least expect it, when you're crusing to another victory and clean sheet. Imperfections that go completely against the grain and don't reflect how the game went. Of course these imperfections also work in your favour but the depends on whether you're the underdog or not and whether your team talk was effective. these imperfections are also effective by nothing more than the laws of averages and will completely undermine the stats/player attributes we spend a lifetime studying.

The programmers need the understand the following: the search for enlightenment and the most realistic footy sim ever cannot be contradictary. Either a player is faster or he isn't. Either a player is stronger or he isn't. Either a player is taller or he isn't.

Keeping it simple will keep it real.

I want to discuss something and because I don't want anyone to use the word 'tactics' as an excuse, I thought I would put it in here.

I want an answer to a question regarding player stats/attributes. How FM gives us player attributes in order to choose the players to buy to counter the opposition and why in every game I play, the oppositon player will out run someone who is faster or outjump some who is better in the air. Not just this, pound for pound the player who they are playing against are not only better physically but mentally too. No excuses, the player stats/attributes tell use one thing but the match engine shows us another. This ultimately contributes to another of my latest bugbears, the shots to goals ratio issue. This happens every game and I repeat every game I play. I don't want any use of the word tactics to explain this because I am still getting the needed results.

This gripe is simply to understand why I spend so much time analysing players to buy when 'weaker' players seem to play quite well against my better players. I know about these 'weaker' 'players just maybe up for the game' excuse too.

Here's an example for a recent game I have just played out:

I am Liverpool and i was 3-0 up against Reading at home. I pull my backline back slightly and change my mentality to normal. Their striker makes a break down the left wing, i've got 8 players back defending, 5 in the box against the lone striker awaitng the cross. Cross comes in and striker outjumps my 5 defending players to score. This is their only shot of the game Reading have and I win 3-1. The player who crossed the was Dave Kitson, lets take alook at his stats:

Crossing 10

passing 12

creativity 12

Based on many theories these abilities are just below prem level and in the post match report stats, although he got an assist, he didn't create one key pass all game. Strange but true!!

Now the goalscorer, his name is Shane Long and he's 5ft 10".

Heading 12

composure 13

finishing 13

jumping 14

strength 13

This guy is just borderline prem quality, however my main marker was a defender is called Frederico Fazio and he's 6ft 5":

Heading 20

marking 17

strength 20

jumping 18

Now how are we supposed to treat the attributes as fact when there is so much contradiction?

My reason for these happenings is in the coding. I have A level computer programming and I have wrote a few games in my time. What the have achieved in FM08 is the abitility to reflect imperfections. Imperfections that occur when you least expect it, when you're crusing to another victory and clean sheet. Imperfections that go completely against the grain and don't reflect how the game went. Of course these imperfections also work in your favour but the depends on whether you're the underdog or not and whether your team talk was effective. these imperfections are also effective by nothing more than the laws of averages and will completely undermine the stats/player attributes we spend a lifetime studying.

The programmers need the understand the following: the search for enlightenment and the most realistic footy sim ever cannot be contradictary. Either a player is faster or he isn't. Either a player is stronger or he isn't. Either a player is taller or he isn't.

Keeping it simple will keep it real.

I don't wanna comment on it all, but my first thought was : who says it has to be a high cross? you claim your man was outjumped, but if the ball was at head-height, then no jumping is neccesary. How about a fast near post flick header? Anyway...

yes, and small players have never scored and won header duels in real life?

It happens.

fm does not take height into consideration

i think you will get alot of stick for this post however i think that your argument is well worded and thought out and in the end i agree with you that they should just keep it simple

good disscusion

Bullybeef: The stats of a player reflect his ability NOT his performance in every single match situation. If players with 20 for dribbling never lost the ball and beat 8 men before shooting you would rightly say that it was unrealistic. If srikers with 20 for composure never missed the goal they would end with 100+ goals per season; again, unrealistic. Similarly, a player with better stats will not always perform perfectly. In real life small strikers with no real aerial ability quite often beat taller, more aerially proficient centre-backs to the ball. Mistakes happen in every single football match and I think this is fairly reflected in 8.0.2. Football is about beating the odds as a team, hence the fantastic results this weekend in the FA Cup. If we follow your logic thru to its end then we would never get upsets or surprises in FM 08 which would be extremely 'unrealistic'.

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

I want to discuss something and because I don't want anyone to use the word 'tactics' as an excuse, I thought I would put it in here.

I want an answer to a question regarding player stats/attributes. How FM gives us player attributes in order to choose the players to buy to counter the opposition and why in every game I play, the oppositon player will out run someone who is faster or outjump some who is better in the air. Not just this, pound for pound the player who they are playing against are not only better physically but mentally too. No excuses, the player stats/attributes tell use one thing but the match engine shows us another. This ultimately contributes to another of my latest bugbears, the shots to goals ratio issue. This happens every game and I repeat every game I play. I don't want any use of the word tactics to explain this because I am still getting the needed results.

This gripe is simply to understand why I spend so much time analysing players to buy when 'weaker' players seem to play quite well against my better players. I know about these 'weaker' 'players just maybe up for the game' excuse too.

Here's an example for a recent game I have just played out:

I am Liverpool and i was 3-0 up against Reading at home. I pull my backline back slightly and change my mentality to normal. Their striker makes a break down the left wing, i've got 8 players back defending, 5 in the box against the lone striker awaitng the cross. Cross comes in and striker outjumps my 5 defending players to score. This is their only shot of the game Reading have and I win 3-1. The player who crossed the was Dave Kitson, lets take alook at his stats:

Crossing 10

passing 12

creativity 12

Based on many theories these abilities are just below prem level and in the post match report stats, although he got an assist, he didn't create one key pass all game. Strange but true!!

Now the goalscorer, his name is Shane Long and he's 5ft 10".

Heading 12

composure 13

finishing 13

jumping 14

strength 13

This guy is just borderline prem quality, however my main marker was a defender is called Frederico Fazio and he's 6ft 5":

Heading 20

marking 17

strength 20

jumping 18

Now how are we supposed to treat the attributes as fact when there is so much contradiction?

My reason for these happenings is in the coding. I have A level computer programming and I have wrote a few games in my time. What the have achieved in FM08 is the abitility to reflect imperfections. Imperfections that occur when you least expect it, when you're crusing to another victory and clean sheet. Imperfections that go completely against the grain and don't reflect how the game went. Of course these imperfections also work in your favour but the depends on whether you're the underdog or not and whether your team talk was effective. these imperfections are also effective by nothing more than the laws of averages and will completely undermine the stats/player attributes we spend a lifetime studying.

The programmers need the understand the following: the search for enlightenment and the most realistic footy sim ever cannot be contradictary. Either a player is faster or he isn't. Either a player is stronger or he isn't. Either a player is taller or he isn't.

Keeping it simple will keep it real. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You just said yourself, it was their one shot on goal, maybe they got lucky. Take a look at real life. Odejayi outjumped a 'keeper (similar height plus arms!) to score for Barnsley against Chelsea. I'll use my current FM game to compare their height/jumping stats (it's in 09/10 by the way)

Odejayi: Jumping = 6, Height = 6'2"

Cudicini: Jumping = 15, Height = 6'1"

I don't mean to sound patronising, and I apologise because I know I do, but sometimes the stats don't, and can't tell the whole story. I'm sure that there has been more than one occasion that you have experienced something similar, but the same can be said of Barnsley this season!

Apologies for the double post, but I'd just like to add that it's refreshing to see a well thought-out critique, rather than just SI-bashing.

Kudos

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

I don't wanna comment on it all, but my first thought was : who says it has to be a high cross? you claim your man was outjumped, but if the ball was at head-height, then no jumping is neccesary. How about a fast near post flick header? Anyway... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was an high ball because the ball changed shape, however high ball or not, based on the stats/attributes FM gives us for the two opposing players (not to mention the other 4 defenders in their at the time) there is still a gulf in class both mentally and phyiscally between the two players.

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

fm does not take height into consideration </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I agree, small players can be good in the air and score headers against bigger opponents, but I am simply going off what the game is telling me...Fazio is a better defender than Long is a striker. This is not my opinion it is the game stats that reflects this.

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

My reason for these happenings is in the coding. I have A level computer programming and I have wrote a few games in my time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How many of them sold any copies let alone the amount of copies FM/CM has sold throughout the years? I have A level Maths and Politics, I hope the budget isn't wrong tomorrow or i'll kick up a right stink!!

As for your other points they are almost farcical. Football is not an exact science so smaller players will score headers against taller better headers of the ball. Slow players will skin quick opponents sometimes and big teams will lose to smaller teams. It is not a science is not determinable at all.

Put it like this, we have witnessed players score headers when challenging a keeper who is considerably taller and is allowed to use his arms to achieve greater height. A smaller player scoring a header despite poor heading ability aginst your team is wholly realistic and good for the game.

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

fm does not take height into consideration </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If this is true why is it given to you as a choice? if true it is a serious impederment when choosing yours players and should be stated in the instuctions.

A good point made, however if all games were won by the team with players with the higher stats it would not be realistic at all. Chelsea v Barnsley, Man U v Portsmouth are a few recent examples but there are many more!

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

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

fm does not take height into consideration </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If this is true why is it given to you as a choice? if true it is a serious impederment when choosing yours players and should be stated in the instuctions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's just a visual attribute. Everyone has a height.

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

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

fm does not take height into consideration </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I agree, small players can be good in the air and score headers against bigger opponents, but I am simply going off what the game is telling me...Fazio is a better defender than Long is a striker. This is not my opinion it is the game stats that reflects this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Barnsley beat Chelsea at the weekend, in game and IRL the Chelsea stats are considerably better physically, mentally etc etc so if it happens IRL it should happen in game.

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

Bullybeef: The stats of a player reflect his ability NOT his performance in every single match situation. If players with 20 for dribbling never lost the ball and beat 8 men before shooting you would rightly say that it was unrealistic. If srikers with 20 for composure never missed the goal they would end with 100+ goals per season; again, unrealistic. Similarly, a player with better stats will not always perform perfectly. In real life small strikers with no real aerial ability quite often beat taller, more aerially proficient centre-backs to the ball. Mistakes happen in every single football match and I think this is fairly reflected in 8.0.2. Football is about beating the odds as a team, hence the fantastic results this weekend in the FA Cup. If we follow your logic thru to its end then we would never get upsets or surprises in FM 08 which would be extremely 'unrealistic'. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again I agree with you, however this should be reflected when you are choosing players to buy or your players on match day. What is the point of my choosing a big man to mark a small player if he is going to beat him with his only chance of the game. Not to mention my keeper, who again according to the stats has greater quality than my opponents but lets in the only chance of the game. Let me repeat this happen in every match it isn't just a one off and this is why I have gone to this much trouble reporting it.

If you bought a game after reading the box in the store and got the game home to find out everthing in the instructions may not be completely true and the gameplay was also inconsistant you could say it is a poor advert that deluded you. This is my point and these are opinions based on what we are lead to believe from FM without us having any other knowledge. The most important point is there is nothing we can do about it!

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

Let me repeat this happen in every match it isn't just a one off and this is why I have gone to this much trouble reporting it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't mean to be rude, but this is just another typical exaggeration to try and prove a point. In my game the stats are as follows.

Season 1

Goals per game - 2.1

Conceded per game - 0.8

Season 2

Goals per game - 2.8

Conceded per game - 0.5

Season 3

Goals per game 2.0

Conceded per game - 0.7

It does not happen every game, if your players are good enough and playing with a good enough tactic. Peoples ability to blame a game for their own obvious lackings in game astounds me.

Upsets and unusual occurances are realistic and despite my records I conceded a goal from the half way line, scored by a left back. I would not start claiming the game is wrong for this occuring, it happens in football e.g. Jason Cundy for Spurs.

besides all your players could have 20 on all atributes, but the one major one in my eys is consistacy. no point having a 9 foot tall defender with 20 heading 20 jumping and 20 marking if he only has 1 good game in 10, same as striker can have 8 shooting but 20 in consistancy and score 1 goal every 2 games

also as every one else has pointed out if you went on there stats then man utd and chealsea would be in the semis of the fa cup (and my beloved middlesbrough)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nomis07:

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

My reason for these happenings is in the coding. I have A level computer programming and I have wrote a few games in my time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How many of them sold any copies let alone the amount of copies FM/CM has sold throughout the years? I have A level Maths and Politics, I hope the budget isn't wrong tomorrow or i'll kick up a right stink!!

As for your other points they are almost farcical. Football is not an exact science so smaller players will score headers against taller better headers of the ball. Slow players will skin quick opponents sometimes and big teams will lose to smaller teams. It is not a science is not determinable at all.

Put it like this, we have witnessed players score headers when challenging a keeper who is considerably taller and is allowed to use his arms to achieve greater height. A smaller player scoring a header despite poor heading ability aginst your team is wholly realistic and good for the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand your point however I don't think ppl are understanding mine. It isn't my opinion that one player maybe faster than another or one player maybe taller that another, it is FMs decision. This is what my point is. In the real world a small player can on his day beat a taller player in the air, but it is obviously very rare. For FM to simulate this the game has to have imperfections at random moments that can completely contradict not only how the game has gone but how two simulated (Not real) players performed in direct competition. If the only thing for us to go by is the stats and moral etc, how can we respond to these imperfections? Rememer this is only ONE example and I have many. That is why this I have choosen this as analysis.

again, your point is valid and should be looked at if you are having so many problems with it. I can't say I have noticed anything unrealistic about what I have seen.

By buying a better player with good stats means that he a better chance of winning that header or scoring that goal but, as in real life, nothing is guarenteed. Look at Owen at the moment, he has always been a decent scorer (not the best but good) and has a decent goal scoring record - yet at the moment he can't hit a barn door. His ability hasn't changed. It is down to other factors.

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

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

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

fm does not take height into consideration </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If this is true why is it given to you as a choice? if true it is a serious impederment when choosing yours players and should be stated in the instuctions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's just a visual attribute. Everyone has a height. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But wouldn't you agree that height could be described has a phyiscal attribute too. What's the point of having a 5ft 1" target man?

i have downing as a target man put run onto ball set so u can have a small target man

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

I understand your point however I don't think ppl are understanding mine. It isn't my opinion that one player maybe faster than another or one player maybe taller that another, it is FMs decision. This is what my point is. In the real world a small player can on his day beat a taller player in the air, but it is obviously very rare. For FM to simulate this the game has to have imperfections at random moments that can completely contradict not only how the game has gone but how two simulated (Not real) players performed in direct competition. If the only thing for us to go by is the stats and moral etc, how can we respond to these imperfections? Rememer this is only ONE example and I have many. That is why this I have choosen this as analysis. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry i'm getting confused. You're acknowledging that strange occurances will happen in football but you are asking how we are supposed to combat this in game. I don't really get it TBH. A RL manager cannot prepare for something odd just as we can't when playing the game.

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

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

Bullybeef: The stats of a player reflect his ability NOT his performance in every single match situation. If players with 20 for dribbling never lost the ball and beat 8 men before shooting you would rightly say that it was unrealistic. If srikers with 20 for composure never missed the goal they would end with 100+ goals per season; again, unrealistic. Similarly, a player with better stats will not always perform perfectly. In real life small strikers with no real aerial ability quite often beat taller, more aerially proficient centre-backs to the ball. Mistakes happen in every single football match and I think this is fairly reflected in 8.0.2. Football is about beating the odds as a team, hence the fantastic results this weekend in the FA Cup. If we follow your logic thru to its end then we would never get upsets or surprises in FM 08 which would be extremely 'unrealistic'. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again I agree with you, however this should be reflected when you are choosing players to buy or your players on match day. What is the point of my choosing a big man to mark a small player if he is going to beat him with his only chance of the game. Not to mention my keeper, who again according to the stats has greater quality than my opponents but lets in the only chance of the game. Let me repeat this happen in every match it isn't just a one off and this is why I have gone to this much trouble reporting it.

If you bought a game after reading the box in the store and got the game home to find out everthing in the instructions may not be completely true and the gameplay was also inconsistant you could say it is a poor advert that deluded you. This is my point and these are opinions based on what we are lead to believe from FM without us having any other knowledge. The most important point is there is nothing we can do about it! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am in complete agreement but this is fundermentally a game. Shocks happen all the time in the real world, however imperfections that simulate 'shocks' aren't suppoosed to happen every game, are they?? If so I am suprised I've actually won any games and no wonder it has took me a good month to get the girps with FM08. If it is something you cannot control, what chances do we have??

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

again, your point is valid and should be looked at if you are having so many problems with it. I can't say I have noticed anything unrealistic about what I have seen.

By buying a better player with good stats means that he a better chance of winning that header or scoring that goal but, as in real life, nothing is guarenteed. Look at Owen at the moment, he has always been a decent scorer (not the best but good) and has a decent goal scoring record - yet at the moment he can't hit a barn door. His ability hasn't changed. It is down to other factors. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When a player is affected by loss of form etc, FM has ability to reflect this in the players stats and moral, however, random imperfections that occur game in game out a impossible to restrict. Incidently, in my game example Shane Long is currently playing in Readings reserves have only score 2 goals all season and i'm in march!! If random imperfections are coded to reflect reality, we all may as well take no notice of the play attributes at all.

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

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

again, your point is valid and should be looked at if you are having so many problems with it. I can't say I have noticed anything unrealistic about what I have seen.

By buying a better player with good stats means that he a better chance of winning that header or scoring that goal but, as in real life, nothing is guarenteed. Look at Owen at the moment, he has always been a decent scorer (not the best but good) and has a decent goal scoring record - yet at the moment he can't hit a barn door. His ability hasn't changed. It is down to other factors. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When a player is affected by loss of form etc, FM has ability to reflect this in the players stats and moral, however, random imperfections that occur game in game out a impossible to restrict. Incidently, in my game example Shane Long is currently playing in Readings reserves have only score 2 goals all season and i'm in march!! If random imperfections are coded to reflect reality, we all may as well take no notice of the play attributes at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct - i just haven't seen this in every game - only once in a while. But like I said before we get at least one or two examples a week in real life

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

I want to discuss something and because I don't want anyone to use the word 'tactics' as an excuse, I thought I would put it in here.

I want an answer to a question regarding player stats/attributes. How FM gives us player attributes in order to choose the players to buy to counter the opposition and why in every game I play, the oppositon player will out run someone who is faster or outjump some who is better in the air. Not just this, pound for pound the player who they are playing against are not only better physically but mentally too. No excuses, the player stats/attributes tell use one thing but the match engine shows us another. This ultimately contributes to another of my latest bugbears, the shots to goals ratio issue. This happens every game and I repeat every game I play. I don't want any use of the word tactics to explain this because I am still getting the needed results.

This gripe is simply to understand why I spend so much time analysing players to buy when 'weaker' players seem to play quite well against my better players. I know about these 'weaker' 'players just maybe up for the game' excuse too.

Here's an example for a recent game I have just played out:

I am Liverpool and i was 3-0 up against Reading at home. I pull my backline back slightly and change my mentality to normal. Their striker makes a break down the left wing, i've got 8 players back defending, 5 in the box against the lone striker awaitng the cross. Cross comes in and striker outjumps my 5 defending players to score. This is their only shot of the game Reading have and I win 3-1. The player who crossed the was Dave Kitson, lets take alook at his stats:

Crossing 10

passing 12

creativity 12

Based on many theories these abilities are just below prem level and in the post match report stats, although he got an assist, he didn't create one key pass all game. Strange but true!!

Now the goalscorer, his name is Shane Long and he's 5ft 10".

Heading 12

composure 13

finishing 13

jumping 14

strength 13

This guy is just borderline prem quality, however my main marker was a defender is called Frederico Fazio and he's 6ft 5":

Heading 20

marking 17

strength 20

jumping 18

Now how are we supposed to treat the attributes as fact when there is so much contradiction?

My reason for these happenings is in the coding. I have A level computer programming and I have wrote a few games in my time. What the have achieved in FM08 is the abitility to reflect imperfections. Imperfections that occur when you least expect it, when you're crusing to another victory and clean sheet. Imperfections that go completely against the grain and don't reflect how the game went. Of course these imperfections also work in your favour but the depends on whether you're the underdog or not and whether your team talk was effective. these imperfections are also effective by nothing more than the laws of averages and will completely undermine the stats/player attributes we spend a lifetime studying.

The programmers need the understand the following: the search for enlightenment and the most realistic footy sim ever cannot be contradictary. Either a player is faster or he isn't. Either a player is stronger or he isn't. Either a player is taller or he isn't.

Keeping it simple will keep it real. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's like IRL ... you know, when Michael Owen NEVER scores a header..... but Peter Crouch scores hundreds.

Oh, Wait....

How about player positions? Movement? Plain Luck? the Wingers Crossing Attributes? The goalkeepers savings ability?

Things that have an effect on this kinda complaint, that go unnoticed.

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

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

I want to discuss something and because I don't want anyone to use the word 'tactics' as an excuse, I thought I would put it in here.

I want an answer to a question regarding player stats/attributes. How FM gives us player attributes in order to choose the players to buy to counter the opposition and why in every game I play, the oppositon player will out run someone who is faster or outjump some who is better in the air. Not just this, pound for pound the player who they are playing against are not only better physically but mentally too. No excuses, the player stats/attributes tell use one thing but the match engine shows us another. This ultimately contributes to another of my latest bugbears, the shots to goals ratio issue. This happens every game and I repeat every game I play. I don't want any use of the word tactics to explain this because I am still getting the needed results.

This gripe is simply to understand why I spend so much time analysing players to buy when 'weaker' players seem to play quite well against my better players. I know about these 'weaker' 'players just maybe up for the game' excuse too.

Here's an example for a recent game I have just played out:

I am Liverpool and i was 3-0 up against Reading at home. I pull my backline back slightly and change my mentality to normal. Their striker makes a break down the left wing, i've got 8 players back defending, 5 in the box against the lone striker awaitng the cross. Cross comes in and striker outjumps my 5 defending players to score. This is their only shot of the game Reading have and I win 3-1. The player who crossed the was Dave Kitson, lets take alook at his stats:

Crossing 10

passing 12

creativity 12

Based on many theories these abilities are just below prem level and in the post match report stats, although he got an assist, he didn't create one key pass all game. Strange but true!!

Now the goalscorer, his name is Shane Long and he's 5ft 10".

Heading 12

composure 13

finishing 13

jumping 14

strength 13

This guy is just borderline prem quality, however my main marker was a defender is called Frederico Fazio and he's 6ft 5":

Heading 20

marking 17

strength 20

jumping 18

Now how are we supposed to treat the attributes as fact when there is so much contradiction?

My reason for these happenings is in the coding. I have A level computer programming and I have wrote a few games in my time. What the have achieved in FM08 is the abitility to reflect imperfections. Imperfections that occur when you least expect it, when you're crusing to another victory and clean sheet. Imperfections that go completely against the grain and don't reflect how the game went. Of course these imperfections also work in your favour but the depends on whether you're the underdog or not and whether your team talk was effective. these imperfections are also effective by nothing more than the laws of averages and will completely undermine the stats/player attributes we spend a lifetime studying.

The programmers need the understand the following: the search for enlightenment and the most realistic footy sim ever cannot be contradictary. Either a player is faster or he isn't. Either a player is stronger or he isn't. Either a player is taller or he isn't.

Keeping it simple will keep it real. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's like IRL ... you know, when Michael Owen NEVER scores a header..... but Peter Crouch scores hundreds.

Oh, Wait....

How about player positions? Movement? Plain Luck? the Wingers Crossing Attributes? The goalkeepers savings ability?

Things that have an effect on this kinda complaint, that go unnoticed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you read my original post:

The player who crossed the was Dave Kitson, lets take alook at his stats:

Crossing 10

passing 12

creativity 12

Again I agree. But we have to get away from the words "In reality". FM is a game and not reality and without sounded like I am repeated myself, to reflect "reality" random inperfections are added to the game engine. It leaves us having to guess what to do in certain situations rather than make a educated jugdment and we end up hoping for the best rather than feeling that we've have a the game under control. This an interesting point i've stumbled upon. A lot of managers will comment on how much control they had post match over their opponents and this reflected their win. If we think we have a control over a match and are winning 3-0 continuing to create chances and then the AI throws in an imperfection to accommodate "reality" and the match isn't has mcuh in your control as you thought. For me this happens every game, home or away and against anyone. If the game is also effected by moral, would you be at the top of your game, mentally, if you were 3-0 down? As in "reality", the best team doesn't always win. Or, as quoted by many a footy pundit, 'The premiership never lies.'. How's that for contracdiction!!

Again either a player in fast, either a player is good in the air or a player is tall. All I'm asking for is a bit of simplicity and it may help with the shots to goals ratio issue too.

like i said before it has a lot to do with consistancy a player could have the stats of ronaldo but if his consistancy is only 1 he wont be as good as ronaldo except for just say 1 game in 20 so maybe that striker just had his 1 game in 20

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

like i said before it has a lot to do with consistancy a player could have the stats of ronaldo but if his consistancy is only 1 he wont be as good as ronaldo except for just say 1 game in 20 so maybe that striker just had his 1 game in 20 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, I can understand your point but like i have said in previous points, I have only used this one expample, this situation happens to me in every game. When you code a game things ONLY happen by chance if they are put there to happen. Depending on the coding depends on how often it happens. I am beginning to understand based on the comments recieved from this thread that this may happen more often if your are the favourite. Perhaps this doesn't happen as often if you're the underdog. But please believe me this happens to me every game and when I dig deep into the instigating players who scored these "unlucky" goals, it becomes clear that they are not in the slightest bit prolific!

maybe u r unlucky and every time a team plays u they have there 1 in 20. or as u said because u r fav to win the game they up there game a bit. but i do agree in some way, the computer no matter who there manager is always if needs be finds a goal from somewhere. people will say u got beat because of ur tactics but hey the other team has tactics to and me being a boro fan will understand more, southgate has not got a clue against cardiff he played long ball 4-5-1 formation with alves up front we go 2 down half time he stays with formation and subs alves for mido. why put a lazy (if the ball dont come to my feet) player on the pitch if u still going to use the long ball with 1 up front. so if you lose its your tactics sorry but if you lose almost all the time it aint your tactics because there will almost certanly be a southgate (i aint got a clue)out there for you to beat

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

maybe u r unlucky and every time a team plays u they have there 1 in 20. or as u said because u r fav to win the game they up there game a bit. but i do agree in some way, the computer no matter who there manager is always if needs be finds a goal from somewhere. people will say u got beat because of ur tactics but hey the other team has tactics to and me being a boro fan will understand more, southgate has not got a clue against cardiff he played long ball 4-5-1 formation with alves up front we go 2 down half time he stays with formation and subs alves for mido. why put a lazy (if the ball dont come to my feet) player on the pitch if u still going to use the long ball with 1 up front. so if you lose its your tactics sorry but if you lose almost all the time it aint your tactics because there will almost certanly be a southgate (i aint got a clue)out there for you to beat </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can kiss tactics goodbye if you sell mark Viduka and replace him with Aliadiere. didn't southgate sell another striker and replace him with mido?? One thing is my buys generally are pretty good, fazio is outstanding. Cost £4.5 from sevilla. he's replaced Jamie Carragher and he's acutally scored 13 goals in 20. He's immense from corners.

THis is the sort of thing that used to infuriate me and sometimes still does.

However - I have been playing a Villa game recently and occasionally playing

a young winger who, stat for stat, is worse than the defenders/mids he's up against.

However, he still makes most of his passes, puts in a few assists and generally does

better than his comparative attributes 'should do' against the opposition. So it does work both ways for

human and AI managers.

Also I've often wondered how and when the attributes of players are 'tested' - ie. when does

a player's passing get used as most premiership players should and indeed can pass the ball fairly well

(and FM game stats seem to show that most players complete a majority of passes even if their passing attribute is, say, 12).

It's when they have to pass a 'test' that these things get used presumably in the game engine - so

if your 20 head/20 jump defender tries for 20 headers, and has a consistency (or whatever impacts

on heading reliability) of say 19, then on the 20th header he misses the striker may just pop that ball

in the net if he has out manoeuvered him or whatever. (especially infuriating if he hasn't scored for toffee all season and suddenly does against me - as often seems the case!)

Well sice my last outing (3-1 win at home to Reading) I'm away at Portsmouth and guess what. I play my strongest team and loose only my 1st game of the season...3-0. The stats:

Portsmouth 5 shot - 3 on target.

Liverpool 19 shots - 10 on target.

And you wondering why I have looked into this. There is certainly something dodgy going on and this shots to goals ratio bug has for me to be completely unplayable.

My strikers have 18 goals in 25 games between them.

Pompey play 1 man up top (Defoe) admittedly a top class striker. He has 15 in 25, obviously thanks to 2 against us. So before he played us 13 in 24.

I will continue to report this because it is happening to often to be a 'one off' and there has to be some kinda bias.

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

Well sice my last outing (3-1 win at home to Reading) I'm away at Portsmouth and guess what. I play my strongest team and loose only my 1st game of the season...3-0. The stats:

Portsmouth 5 shot - 3 on target.

Liverpool 19 shots - 10 on target.

And you wondering why I have looked into this. There is certainly something dodgy going on and this shots to goals ratio bug has for me to be completely unplayable.

My strikers have 18 goals in 25 games between them.

Pompey play 1 man up top (Defoe) admittedly a top class striker. He has 15 in 25, obviously thanks to 2 against us. So before he played us 13 in 24.

I will continue to report this because it is happening to often to be a 'one off' and there has to be some kinda bias. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

sorry forgot to mention i was away at pompey

Bullybeef, this has been happening in Football Manager for as long as I can remember.

I've started a similar thread here: http://community.sigames.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=2101905...2075583&r=5172075583

SI have already said that the match engine is "tweaked" so that at the end of a season, statistics mimic those from real world. It's a shame that this is the way they chose to do it.

Here's a post from another thread I have been running. I could have siad it better than tis guy:

Originally posted by Jose-Maria Felicidad:

The thing that's annoying is that it shouldn't be "the AI" though, should it?

You're supposed to be pitting your wits against DIFFERENT managers, of different abilities, tactical knowledge and personality, to say nothing of basic differences in intelligence.

FM is more like playing a collective consciousness, where all the managers use the same tactics as soon as they need to get out of a jam, and they can all see through your tactics regardless of their ability and the ability of their team.

Furthermore, just because they *can* see through what you're doing doesn't mean they should automatically be able to combat it if you're the better team, playing to your strengths.

In reality it's not like that, is it. Some lesser teams who - for example - only aim to survive in the Premiership would be quite happy merely to lose 1-0 to a big club away from home in the league, whereas in this they all go for it if you're the big club, regardless of the supposed mentality of the manager concerned.

And they nearly ALL switch to the same 4-2-4, even if they never normally use a formation remotely like it.

The telling thing to me is that, whenever I've watched a match as a spectator with two AI teams playing, they hardly ever switch formations in the same manic, gung-ho way.

Why repost this, it's wrong.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The thing that's annoying is that it shouldn't be "the AI" though, should it?

You're supposed to be pitting your wits against DIFFERENT managers, of different abilities, tactical knowledge and personality, to say nothing of basic differences in intelligence.

FM is more like playing a collective consciousness, where all the managers use the same tactics as soon as they need to get out of a jam, and they can all see through your tactics regardless of their ability and the ability of their team. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

424 is a universally acknowledged tactic, it is commonly used by teams when they are trying to get a last gasp winner or overturn a losing scoreline. Teams like Boro will use it against Cardiff in the FA Cup, teams like Derby will use it against other relegation candidates and even the big four will use it when they need to. This is regardless of their playing staff and it is common to see defenders join the attack.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Furthermore, just because they *can* see through what you're doing doesn't mean they should automatically be able to combat it if you're the better team, playing to your strengths.

In reality it's not like that, is it. Some lesser teams who - for example - only aim to survive in the Premiership would be quite happy merely to lose 1-0 to a big club away from home in the league, whereas in this they all go for it if you're the big club, regardless of the supposed mentality of the manager concerned. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The very basic element of football is a desire to win. End of discussion. Teams will always try to combat your tactics and we've seen this happen with Arsenal etc in recent years who have had to adapt their playing style to deal with teams who have "worked them out".

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The telling thing to me is that, whenever I've watched a match as a spectator with two AI teams playing, they hardly ever switch formations in the same manic, gung-ho way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Must have a different copy of this game to me then because I see it even more so in games between AI teams.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nomis07:

Why repost this, it's wrong.

The thing that's annoying is that it shouldn't be "the AI" though, should it?

You're supposed to be pitting your wits against DIFFERENT managers, of different abilities, tactical knowledge and personality, to say nothing of basic differences in intelligence.

FM is more like playing a collective consciousness, where all the managers use the same tactics as soon as they need to get out of a jam, and they can all see through your tactics regardless of their ability and the ability of their team. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

424 is a universally acknowledged tactic, it is commonly used by teams when they are trying to get a last gasp winner or overturn a losing scoreline. Teams like Boro will use it against Cardiff in the FA Cup, teams like Derby will use it against other relegation candidates and even the big four will use it when they need to. This is regardless of their playing staff and it is common to see defenders join the attack.

ok the middlesboro bit never happend we were 2-0 down and he never once changed from a 4-5-1 formation with long ball so no all managers dont do the 4-2-4 thing but they all seem to do it in game and have about a 95 percent chance of scoring even if u change your formation to defend and take pressure

also works the other way u are 1-0 down with ten mins to go you change to a 4-2-4 formation and prob only score 10 percent of the time all ai managers act the same way in game from alex ferguson to steve mclaren

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

ok the middlesboro bit never happend we were 2-0 down and he never once changed from a 4-5-1 formation with long ball so no all managers dont do the 4-2-4 thing but they all seem to do it in game and have about a 95 percent chance of scoring even if u change your formation to defend and take pressure

also works the other way u are 1-0 down with ten mins to go you change to a 4-2-4 formation and prob only score 10 percent of the time all ai managers act the same way in game from alex ferguson to steve mclaren </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

David Wheater played up front for the last 10 mins, whilst it wasn't 4-2-4 it was an attempt to salvage something from the game. The 4-2-4 is synonymous with FM08 but my comparison was a broad one in relation to last gasp managerial tactics such as playing a defender up front. So whilst the Middlesbor "thing" technically didn't happen, there was a managerial attempt to add strnegth to the attack in a no win situaion.

As for 95% this is just another blatant exaggeration used by the people of these forums as if they actually believe their guess is fact and so others must agree. I don't.

In 4 seasons I have lost 20 games, of those 20 games most were resoundign defeats on off days. I have, as yet, not lost to a 4-2-4 formation. That isn't to say I haven't conceded in this scenario but it is to say that I have counteracted it successfully.

10% is yet another exaggeration. If losing or drawing aginst a lesser opponent I change to a 4-3-3 and have had resounding success, on occassion winning by a considerable margin despite it being 0-0 with 20 to go.

What I have noticed is that if I change to 4-3-3 with 20 to go, score and then leave it as 4-3-3 whilst the opposition changes to 4-2-4 there is a likelihood that I will concede. This is because of my tactics. If I return to 4-2-3-1 after scoring then I almost always remain in the lead and watch the clock wind down.

4-2-4 is easily dealt with as I have discussed and many others have discussed, the problem lies in peoples over attacking tactics and almost insatiable need to blame the AI for their own discrepencies.

As for comparisons to real life, just as a RL manager you must alter your style to deal with whats coming (if you are playing offensively yet in the lead).

Attacking when staring at defeat is football and has been football for as long as I can remember, so is perfectly acceptable in game.

I don't mean to rant and I don't mean to offend you re: percentages but these are not facts and i'm fed up with people portraying them as so.

Basically,

If things went the way you expected them every time the game would be extremely boring and predictable.

Take Peter Crouch, he'd be a goal machine!

The match engine needs alot of space for errors, failed attempts and general bad luck.

i dont mind losing games (i do play as middlesboro)so dont expect it to be easy i am 9th in league in 3rd season but i still believe that in the match engine the managers will all act the same from prem to non league if they are losing they all change to a 4-2-4 formation where yes they are trying to salvage a draw/win but it does not happen in real life maybe my percentages where a bit exagerated but they do seem to score more often than u do if you try the same

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

You can kiss tactics goodbye if you sell mark Viduka and replace him with Aliadiere. didn't southgate sell another striker and replace him with mido?? One thing is my buys generally are pretty good, fazio is outstanding. Cost £4.5 from sevilla. he's replaced Jamie Carragher and he's acutally scored 13 goals in 20. He's immense from corners. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So your complaining that kitsons crossings 10 and its unrealistic that a pro footballer can cross a ball, yet its ok when your defender fazio scores 13 in 20 Games

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ytfc2005:

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

You can kiss tactics goodbye if you sell mark Viduka and replace him with Aliadiere. didn't southgate sell another striker and replace him with mido?? One thing is my buys generally are pretty good, fazio is outstanding. Cost £4.5 from sevilla. he's replaced Jamie Carragher and he's acutally scored 13 goals in 20. He's immense from corners. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So your complaining that kitsons crossings 10 and its unrealistic that a pro footballer can cross a ball, yet its ok when your defender fazio scores 13 in 20 Games </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think ppl have completely misunderstood my point.

I agree that this is a petty gripe at best but I was playing devils advocate toward the level of information we get to prepare for games and ppl have obviously taken it completely personally for some reason. I was questioning how FM tells us about a player within his stats is completely different to how he performs on the pitch. I understand other aspects con also conspire to go against you and anyone can score on their day. The Fazio remark was me taking FM’s view of players and twisting it in my favour.

Incidentally Fazio is stats are 20 heading & jumping.

Imagine if Alex Ferguson, for example, gets a report back from his scout and it is done in FM format. It shows that a player isn’t particularly for at crossing, maybe a 10 at best. Would he be worried about him. Probably not has much has the player on the other wing who’s a 15 for crossing. If FM tells us one thing and the other happens, we have a god given right to have a moan about it because it is us who paid our hard earned money for the game.

This was only to get ppl’s feedback regarding the shots to goals ratio that goes against the player . I know this happens. It drove me crazy on the FM06, but if it happens why can’t we discuss it? Just to get a little advice maybe?

Do we have to accept everything and curl up in a corner like a good little boy??

I can understand your frustration at these things, but you're misunderstanding what attribute ratings indicate.

To sum it up briefly, a 10 for Kitson's crossing indicates a certain level of talent relative to other players. For example, he's not a strong winger like C.Ronaldo or Joe Cole, but he's significantly better at crossing than John Terry or Rio Ferdinand. But you're missing the fact that a 10 crossing rating doesn't mean he doesn't occasionally hit a 20 cross. Essentially, that 10 represents his average cross, which includes different crosses across the quality spectrum. As others have mentioned, this is affected by the players consistency rating, as well as other things such as game situation (up 3-0 in the last ten minutes your defenders are much more likely to relax), and number of opportunities. Personally, I think this is spot on. Just because Kitson is a 10 crosser and Rio Ferdinand is a 5 (just approximating, so don't hold it against me) doesn't mean that if you gave each 20 crosses, they wouldn't put in a few that were quite remarkable.

You're also forgetting that other attributes can contribute to the situation leading up to the goal. What is your defender's positioning rating? Consistency rating? Teamwork rating? Maybe he didn't put himself in a position to get to the ball, or maybe he assumed another defender would help out, or maybe he made a mistake because he wasn't paying attention. What is the forward's off-the-ball rating? Creativity rating? Positioning rating? Anticipation rating? Maybe he outmaneuvered the forward before the cross, or maybe he found a gap between defenders, or maybe he just guessed the crosses trajectory better than the defender.

There's a million possible explanations for each mistake, just as in real life. It's the same reason you can expect a Premiership team to crush a Championship side because on paper their attributes are dominating, but yet you occasionally find the underdogs pull one out. The more highly rated team (or player) doesn't necessarily win every game (or challenge, shot, etc.) because there's more to the sport than simply being better in one or all regards.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hyperion479:

I can understand your frustration at these things, but you're misunderstanding what attribute ratings indicate.

To sum it up briefly, a 10 for Kitson's crossing indicates a certain level of talent relative to other players. For example, he's not a strong winger like C.Ronaldo or Joe Cole, but he's significantly better at crossing than John Terry or Rio Ferdinand. But you're missing the fact that a 10 crossing rating doesn't mean he doesn't occasionally hit a 20 cross. Essentially, that 10 represents his average cross, which includes different crosses across the quality spectrum. As others have mentioned, this is affected by the players consistency rating, as well as other things such as game situation (up 3-0 in the last ten minutes your defenders are much more likely to relax), and number of opportunities. Personally, I think this is spot on. Just because Kitson is a 10 crosser and Rio Ferdinand is a 5 (just approximating, so don't hold it against me) doesn't mean that if you gave each 20 crosses, they wouldn't put in a few that were quite remarkable.

You're also forgetting that other attributes can contribute to the situation leading up to the goal. What is your defender's positioning rating? Consistency rating? Teamwork rating? Maybe he didn't put himself in a position to get to the ball, or maybe he assumed another defender would help out, or maybe he made a mistake because he wasn't paying attention. What is the forward's off-the-ball rating? Creativity rating? Positioning rating? Anticipation rating? Maybe he outmaneuvered the forward before the cross, or maybe he found a gap between defenders, or maybe he just guessed the crosses trajectory better than the defender.

There's a million possible explanations for each mistake, just as in real life. It's the same reason you can expect a Premiership team to crush a Championship side because on paper their attributes are dominating, but yet you occasionally find the underdogs pull one out. The more highly rated team (or player) doesn't necessarily win every game (or challenge, shot, etc.) because there's more to the sport than simply being better in one or all regards. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excellent explanation, shame it wasn't explained like that in the instruction or the box.

Before any accuses me of double standards again and just to play devils advocate once more, the game doesn’t necessary ‘do what it says on the tin’ then? I understand the ambiguity of every level of FM adds to the learning part of the game, but FM bases itself as the ultimate football stat nerds playground. However, when you study the stats closely, game in game out, you may begin to wonder why we bother taking any notice of the player abilities at all.

It is amazing how this game pulls ppl in so affectively, including myself and the AI can and does legitimately ‘cheat’ went it wants to and we’re the ones finding excuses for this. If ppl think my use of the word ’cheat’ is excessive than what would we say if, like the AI, we knew exactly the internal workings of FM, the sliders and player instructions In fact, we wrote the game itself. The AI/computer my not win all the time, but there is no doubt it knows exactly what it is doing and how to ‘play’ us

as i have said i think it may not cheat as in a way that you will never win the league or cups but when the match engine is on all ai managers teams act the same sam alyrdyce plays long ball every team he has managed but in game his team pass short all the time which i have noticed with all teams they might have a different formation but every team will try and get ball wide and cross in even if they dont have any good crossers of the ball or even good headers of the ball and always if losing in the last ten mins change to a 4-2-4 formation never a 4-3-3 or 2-3-5 always 4-2-4

I think if more "issues" with the game were thought out like this the forums would be a nicer place to visit.

As for your tactic of defending the lead rather than keeping your original tactic, that's exactly the right thing to do - if you'd kept your original tactic you'd probably have lost 4-3.

Other than what has already been said, I just wanted to add two points:

Determination is a factor when teams are losing - I seem to remember Kitson being pretty high, but not sure about the goalscorer. And conditions may play a part too.

I think someone mentioned it may not have been a high, looping cross, and if it was low the defender often pulls out of a challenge as the odds of him putting it into his own net are higher than the opposition putting in.

In general, players with high determination seem to player slightly above what their stats suggest when losing.

I'd say it's down to psychology. In the 3-1 example your players got complacent.