Need more proof that the ME defending is shambolic?

[Mitja]

here: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=155861

[mdbussen]

here: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=155861

thanks

10char....

[crouchaldinho]

This guy was spreading troll in several other thread, and have not said a damn thing constructive in this thread either. Why should I then act humble? To be honest I should reported him to the mods. If he continues in the same track, I would have to. The only reason why you defend him is because he licks your ass. Well, I m sorry that not everybody feels doing the same.

This kind of language and attitude really isn't necessary Jascko. I defended him simply because he hasn't done anything wrong and your comments were unnecessarily rude. I couldn't care if he agrees with me or not.

If you have a problem with someone's post, then report it with an explanation to the mods. They will take the appropriate action if necessary. There is no reason to go around being rude to them in other threads.

C.

[crouchaldinho]

It seems that your largest issue with this thread isn't the contents at all but rather the title, which, I will admit, is a bit sensationalist

Correct.

The main problem I see with this match is that a 10-man side would never score 6 goals in a match against a reasonably talented side like Arsenal, regardless of their tactics

The trouble is that you can never say never in football. I never expected Havant & Waterlooville to take the lead twice at Anfield a few years back but they did. I'm not trying to make comparisons but I'm just pointing out that very unlikely things can and do happen in football all of the time.

Try concentrating less on the specific wording of my thread title and more on the result itself and let's have a good discussion about whether such a result is possible and what it means for the FM10 match engine.

I personally feel that it doesn't really mean very much at all, as I have argued above. I won't go over the same points again because it's a waste of time for both of us.

I actually think that Phrox said it best when he said:

Maybe it'd only happen once in a hundred. Maybe only once in a thousand. Maybe even only once in a million. But if you think about how many copies of FM there are out there, and how many games are being played, sooner or later, that one in a million is gonna come up at some point. If it comes up for someone who's already frustrated with the game, and is a member of these forums, then, well, we get a thread like this.

Spot on if you ask me.

Anyway, well done for uploading the PKM in the 'bugs' forum. That's the best way to help to improve the game.

Regards,

C.

[jascko]

simply because he hasn't done anything wrong

Yes he has, and you know that. He was breaking the same forum rules as we do right now, wich is posting off topic and spreading the troll. In contrast to us he was doing it in the majority of the time. Since I do not want to do the same as he, this discourse is dead according to my subjective preferences.

[Bongo-Bongo]

Whilst I do agree that this match is extremley odd, it is far from being proof of anything as it is just one match and could be put down as a freak. Before being able to draw any real conclusions, we would need a much wider selection of matches where similar occurances are happening. One match doesn't really show anything. Maybe if you get the chance again, try doing the same thing and see what the outcome is.

[mdbussen]

The trouble is that you can never say never in football. I never expected Havant & Waterlooville to take the lead twice at Anfield a few years back but they did. I'm not trying to make comparisons but I'm just pointing out that very unlikely things can and do happen in football all of the time.

The NEVER I am using obviously doesn't mean 0% of the time as theoretically there is a non-zero chance that Fulham would win this game 1000-0. Feel free to continue arguing semantics if you want so long as it helps you ignore the result itself.

[mdbussen]

Indeed. Maybe it'd only happen once in a hundred. Maybe only once in a thousand. Maybe even only once in a million. But if you think about how many copies of FM there are out there, and how many games are being played, sooner or later, that one in a million is gonna come up at some point. If it comes up for someone who's already frustrated with the game, and is a member of these forums, then, well, we get a thread like this.

Now, I'm not saying that the ME doesn't have some problems, but pulling up a one off result, no matter how unlikely it is, doesn't prove anything.

I just wanted to state that far from being frustrated with the game I am enjoying it a great deal

That being said this result is a bridge too far for me - Getting this kind of result really kills of some of the believability in the game and makes a customer lose some faith in what they are playing for. It points to a flaw in the match engine or the tactical setups of AI managers and if you think otherwise you need to remove your head from the sand.

[vishers]

I don't think this scoreline proves anything other than the overload tactic provides some high-scoring games. I'm not too sure what the OP wanted when he switched to this tactic ie would he have been happy winning by 4-2, 5-3 etc. In other words when did the desired result become unrealistic?

I've been to probably near 1000 live games and watched countless others and never seen a team play one at the back for more than a few minutes so the only unrealistic thing in the OP's scenario is the tactic

[crouchaldinho]

The NEVER I am using obviously doesn't mean 0% of the time as theoretically there is a non-zero chance that Fulham would win this game 1000-0. Feel free to continue arguing semantics if you want so long as it helps you ignore the result itself.

I don't think that's what I am doing at all. If you read my posts, you'll surely see that this isn't true.

I think my argument has actually been pretty strong throughout the thread but I do think that we are metaphorically passing in the street here when it comes to the discussion.

Aware of the fact that we aren't really getting anywhere, and also not wanting for things to get personal (as they so often do on this forum, to my deep regret), I will respectfully agree to disagree and withdraw from the thread.

I'm pleased that you have uploaded the PKM and posted a 'bug' report so some progress has been made.

I don't think that I have anything else to add so I will leave it there.

I genuinely do hope that you will find some way to get back into FM10 again as I, personally, am finding it to be very enjoyable.

Regards,

C.

[TheRiddler]

Actually I could (sort of) see something like this happening.

Arsenal. a young team, are suddenly coasting through the tie, and a man to the good. Suddenly Fulham switch to pushing up men, making it hard for Arsenal to clear their lines. Grab a goal, the home crowd is with them. Arsenal start to panic....

It takes me back (in all sorts of horrible ways) to the Spurs - Man C cup tie a few years ago. We were 3-0 up at half time, a man up, and lost 4-3....

[mdbussen]

I don't think this scoreline proves anything other than the overload tactic provides some high-scoring games. I'm not too sure what the OP wanted when he switched to this tactic ie would he have been happy winning by 4-2, 5-3 etc. In other words when did the desired result become unrealistic?

I've been to probably near 1000 live games and watched countless others and never seen a team play one at the back for more than a few minutes so the only unrealistic thing in the OP's scenario is the tactic

People seem to be completely obsessed with the idea that the tactic I was using in this game is "unrealistic". The fact is that this couldn't be further from the truth.

Going to an all-out attacking mentality (i.e. "overload") when down 3-0 in the second leg of a knockout cup tie is a completely realistic tactic given the circumstances.

Playing 4-3-2 when a man in defense gets sent off is completely realistic as well.

Even the tactic that most of you seem to think is "unrealistic" is actually not at all - playing 1 at the back and pushing as many players into attacking positions as I could in the last 10-15 minutes of a knockout match when I need 2 goals to progress is a perfectly reasonable and, IMO, "realistic" tactic. Or do you think that most premier league managers would just leave it on "standard" and hope for the best?

[wwfan]

Just to clarify, I believe there is a 'rare' bug that influences how attacking players move when only facing a lone DC in a 10-man formation, which stops them from retreating into their standard defensive positions, leading to a completely open, end to end match. I believe this is what happened here, which resulted in the weird scoreline.

Could I request that the game in question is uploaded with a post asking for Paul to look at the Arsenal FCs/wingers movement once the lone DC formation has started.

[jascko]

Just to clarify, I believe there is a 'rare' bug that influences how attacking players move when only facing a lone DC in a 10-man formation, which stops them from retreating into their standard defensive positions, leading to a completely open, end to end match. I believe this is what happened here, which resulted in the weird scoreline.

...or that AI manager doesnt recognize the situation on the pitch when opposition choose to play with only one DC? It looks to me that Arsenal in this case didnt know how to deal with this situation like we human managers do. They could exploit the Fulham tactic with easy, and I m not sure that AI managers are capable of taking rational decisions in relation to weird formations and unrealistic tactics.

[ottey_swe]

I think the point that needs to be made is that Fulham could in real life "play overload" all they wanted against a full strength Arsenal side and 9 times out of 10 they would get beaten badly, and 0 times out of 10 would they win 8-5 having been down to 10 men for almost half the match.

Touche..

BTW, people arguing this is possible, it would probably happen if he reloaded like 9999 times. As far as i know, this was his first try

[wwfan]

...or that AI manager doesnt recognize the situation on the pitch when opposition choose to play with only one DC? It looks to me that Arsenal in this case didnt know how to deal with this situation like we human managers do. They could exploit the Fulham tactic with easy, and I m not sure that AI managers are capable of taking rational decisions in relation to weard formations and unrealistic tactics.

No. There's a bug. Your attacking line never retreats, leaving the whole midfield vacant.

I've seen it a few times in FML. It is relatively rare and very unusual to see in FM due to no AI manager ever playing a lone DC.

[jascko]

No. There's a bug. Your attacking line never retreats, leaving the whole midfield vacant.

I've seen it a few times in FML. It is relatively rare and very unusual to see in FM due to no AI manager ever playing a lone DC.

Ok, fair enough. Do you have any information about SI looking at this bug in the oncomming patch?

[wwfan]

I've reported it a few times, but it is so rare that it is very difficult to fix. Hence my request for the OP to upload the pkm in question.

[mdbussen]

Just to clarify, I believe there is a 'rare' bug that influences how attacking players move when only facing a lone DC in a 10-man formation, which stops them from retreating into their standard defensive positions, leading to a completely open, end to end match. I believe this is what happened here, which resulted in the weird scoreline.

Could I request that the game in question is uploaded with a post asking for Paul to look at the Arsenal FCs/wingers movement once the lone DC formation has started.

Should I upload it to this thread or to the bugs thread?

This bug may be responsible for some of the madness but by the time I was playing with 1 DC the score was 6-5 already... :S

[wwfan]

Should I upload it to this thread or to the bugs thread?

This bug may be responsible for some of the madness but by the time I was playing with 1 DC the score was 6-5 already... :S

Bugs thread. Which player was missing before the DC?

[mdbussen]

Bugs thread. Which player was missing before the DC?

Prior to playing 1 at the back I was playing a 4-3-2 with 3 MCs

[wwfan]

If you look back at the pkm, can you see if the Arsenal front line was failing to drop back into standard cover positions once you had the man sent off.

[Ellis_D]

This guy was spreading troll in several other thread, and have not said a damn thing constructive in this thread either. Why should I then act humble? To be honest I should reported him to the mods. If he continues in the same track, I would have to. The only reason why you defend him is because he licks your ass. Well, I m sorry that not everybody feels doing the same.

'spreading troll in several other thread'

Where? I think you must have mistaken me for someone else.

'I should report him to the mods'

Go ahead, please do, and they will find nothing of the sort.

'The only reason why you defend him is because he licks your ass'

I have only ever commented on - or spoken to - Crouchaldinho twice in ALL my posts, both on this thread. The first post was agreeing with him on this, which I do. That is contributing to the thread; giving my opinion.

The second was just replying to his post, which yes I agree, was off-topic, but it was NOT a post that is just made to start an argument. Which you have now done my way twice in this thread, for no apparent reason.

You are the one resorting to insults for no reason, you are the troll, and I refuse to rise your childish behaviour.

[crouchaldinho]

Ellis_D - It's a shame that he has felt the need to insult both of us but the best thing to do is just to ignore him. Report the post, as I already have, and perhaps the moderators of the forum will deal with it. There really is no need for it though, especially as I thought that the discussion in this thread was really quite civil and polite up until that point.

Regards,

C.

[DeathSpawn]

i didn't bother reading the whole thread but i noticed everytime i get 1 player sent off the others will play better for the rest of the match...

[FMADDICT69]

ok, can i just make this point, you say that no more proof is needed, well how bout just coming up with more proof and shutting up all those that have anything to say against the OP. for example, try you hardest to get someone sent off and then use the same tactics again, if you keep getting similar results then ill defo say there is something wrong here, but all i can see at the moment is that you have had a freak result. which however insane they may seam, they do happen. this is the beautiful game of 2 half dont forget.

[Codename47]

Crouch:

It does not matter if it was unrealistic of him to play for 90 minutes with one centarback and "overload". That was not the core of his example. The core of his post is that despite the fact that he played an unrealistic tactic, he should not in fact managed to score 8 goals against Arsenal with only 10 men, regardless of tactic. Whatever tactics Roy Hodgson had chosen IRL, he will never managed to score 8 goals against Arsenal with only 10 men. In reality, if Hodgson had used "overload" against Wegner, Wegner will probably change his tactic immediately, or in the wake of the first goal from Fulham, and then punished Fulham. As it appears in this example Wegner looks like a complete idiot without a hint of football knowledge and understanding.

Can I ask you something Crouch, do you think such a thing could happen to you in FM if you were Arsenal? I guess you would made changes immediately after they go "overload" and punished Fulham terrible without any more goals against you. It means basically that you are better manager than Wegner? When you are able to make rational tactical changes, why could not manager of Wegner`s reputation do the same in this case with simple tactical moves and punish Fulham? Something is very wrong here, I suspect bad coding of the use of tactics from the AI managers.

Another good post. You type what I think.

[Ellis_D]

Ellis_D - It's a shame that he has felt the need to insult both of us but the best thing to do is just to ignore him. Report the post, as I already have, and perhaps the moderators of the forum will deal with it. There really is no need for it though, especially as I thought that the discussion in this thread was really quite civil and polite up until that point.

Regards,

C.

Agreed, there were differences of opinion on here, which is fine, it's a discussion. But too many theads are spoilt on this forum by people coming on and insulting others, or trying to cause pathetic arguments. Unfortunately that only ends up with a moderator closing the thread which is unfair on the people who can talk politely to each other - whilst still having a debate - and do not have to resort to inflammatory/derogotary comments.

[jascko]

Agreed, there were differences of opinion on here, which is fine, it's a discussion. But too many theads are spoilt on this forum by people coming on and insulting others, or trying to cause pathetic arguments. Unfortunately that only ends up with a moderator closing the thread which is unfair on the people who can talk politely to each other - whilst still having a debate - and do not have to resort to inflammatory/derogotary comments.

And one of these people who spoils the good discussion are you. In fact, you're the only one in this thread who have not contributed with anything constructive. Tell me something, can you read all your posts in this thread and tell me how many of them are topic related? I tell you, none. Then you can go and read how many of my posts are related to topic. Is absurd that you are talking about people who destroys good discussions when you're the only one in this thread that does not have a single post that is topic related, which means you have not contributed at all. How irrational some people can be is always a surprise to me.

[mdbussen]

And one of these people who spoils the good discussion are you. In fact, you're the only one in this thread who have not contributed with anything constructive. Tell me something, can you read all your posts in this thread and tell me how many of them are topic related? I tell you, none. Then you can go and read how many of my posts are related to topic. Is absurd that you are talking about people who destroys good discussions when you're the only one in this thread that does not have a single post that is topic related, which means you have not contributed at all. How irrational some people can be is always a surprise to me.

Why don't you little girls go take your quarrel elsewhere.

[Ellis_D]

[quote name=

Quote:

Originally Posted by crouchaldinho

I don't think that this really proves anything at all' date=' apart from that when you play 'overload' for the whole game, you end up conceding a lot of goals and scoring a lot of goals, which many of us could have guessed in the first place.

The scoreline isn't terribly realistic admittedly but then neither were your tactics. I also disagree that you 'shouldn't have even had a chance in this match' once down to 10 men. It's football and it's a cup match where anything can happen, plus it frequently happens that a team rally and end up somehow stronger after going a man down. Also, a lot of the goals came in extra-time where tired legs and possible shattered confidence would have made all of the difference. This game just looks like a freak result really, probably made worse by the fact that you played 'overload' the whole match.

Regards,

C.

[quote name='

Ellis_D']Most sensible post on the thread.

That was my first post on here, how is that not relating to the thread? I then made ONE (yes a massive one!) post that was off topic.

I have since had to add three off topic posts to defend myself against your rudeness and abuse. I hardly think picking up on one post that in no way related to you - or indeed in no way insulted anyone - is excuse for you dishing out verbal abuse.

This will be my last post on this subject as I have no intention of getting into a pathetic argument with you, which is clearly your goal.

[mdbussen]

have now posted the PKM for SI to take a look at http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?p=4444578#post4444578

[GillsMan]

This is a relatively interesting topic. Let's not spoil it with petty squabling. You know, it is possible to disagree with someone on the Internet and not have to turn it into a Flamez War.

Here's a line I've just drawn under it:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[PDAquinas]

Crouch:

It does not matter if it was unrealistic of him to play for 90 minutes with one centarback and "overload". That was not the core of his example. The core of his post is that despite the fact that he played an unrealistic tactic, he should not in fact managed to score 8 goals against Arsenal with only 10 men, regardless of tactic. Whatever tactics Roy Hodgson had chosen IRL, he will never managed to score 8 goals against Arsenal with only 10 men. In reality, if Hodgson had used "overload" against Wegner, Wegner will probably change his tactic immediately, or in the wake of the first goal from Fulham, and then punished Fulham. As it appears in this example Wegner looks like a complete idiot without a hint of football knowledge and understanding.

Can I ask you something Crouch, do you think such a thing could happen to you in FM if you were Arsenal? I guess you would made changes immediately after they go "overload" and punished Fulham terrible without any more goals against you. It means basically that you are better manager than Wegner? When you are able to make rational tactical changes, why could not manager of Wegner`s reputation do the same in this case with simple tactical moves and punish Fulham? Something is very wrong here, I suspect bad coding of the use of tactics from the AI managers.

I am very confused by a lot of these type of posts. It would kind of suggest that people are expecting to have bought an accurate football league results simulator.

It is a game that starts out as accurately as SI can manage from July/August 09 and diverges from reality quickly and with every day in the game. Even if they had managed to produce an accurate simulator (check if anyone from SI has won the pools recently) why would you want to buy it (unless you want to be part of many thousands of people winning the pools every week)? As far as I can tell it is meant to be a fun sandbox type game with a strong footing in reality. It succeeds pretty well most of the time. :o

[jascko]

I am very confused by a lot of these type of posts. It would kind of suggest that people are expecting to have bought an accurate football league results simulator.

It is a game that starts out as accurately as SI can manage from July/August 09 and diverges from reality quickly and with every day in the game. Even if they had managed to produce an accurate simulator (check if anyone from SI has won the pools recently) why would you want to buy it (unless you want to be part of many thousands of people winning the pools every week)? As far as I can tell it is meant to be a fun sandbox type game with a strong footing in reality. It succeeds pretty well most of the time. :o

If you are not interested in this type of manager simulator, can I recommend FIFA or PES? Sorry but the goal of SI with FM has always been to simulate the best possible way of real football. If this was not the goal of the game, I had certainly not buy the game, and I m sure many agree with me.

There is no one here who wants from FM to reflect pure replica results from the real world. What we are asking for is reflection within certain limits. The result represented in this thread is in no way within the limits of what can be considered as reality or acceptable, simply because they happen rarely or never in real life.

If you read all the posts here on the forum you will find that most complains from people about the game are related to the factors in the game that seems unrealistic. As I said, no one asks pure replication of the results from the real world, because the results are random and should be that way. But when Fulham with only 10 men manage to score 8 goals against Arsenal, along with a fact that tactic wich was used from Fulham would probably had been punished very hard from Arsenal IRL, then we move far from what can be accepted as realistic.

If you believe that the results presented in this example are unproblematic and realistic, then most likely everything will go through your censorship of what is acceptable. I, along with many others here on the forum, are not happy when such things appears in the game, because such a result is very unlikely no matter how many times you repeat the test to verified the hypothesis. If such results were verified by the fact that they are repeated often in real football, then nobody would complain in this post. But this is not the case.

[philly_flyer10]

i didn't bother reading the whole thread but i noticed everytime i get 1 player sent off the others will play better for the rest of the match...

Exactly, going down to 10 men seems to have no bearing on the match for either side, even if it the 1st 5 mins

[mdbussen]

ha ha quality and here is the message I get from SI:

In isolation this is fine, odd scorelines happen in real life. If this is a common trend and happens in a lot of games, then we'd be interested in the PKMs but as a one-off it's fine.

well done lads, glad I put in the effort to upload the PKM so you could ignore it

[Glenn Wakeford]

It would have been useful if you'd mentioned how this thread had turned out earlier. All that was posted in the bugs forum was this:

Basically it was just a very crazy high scoring match between Fulham (me) and Arsenal where fulham ended up winning 8-5 in extra time despite being a man down for more than half the match.

Now, a high scoring game is going to get that response from me, as you are only reporting a "crazy high scoring match". If you had mentioned the defensive issues, you would have a had a "better" response. If you're reporting bugs it's best to actually mention what the bugs or problems are, not just saying there was an odd game.

I have passed this PKM on into our database now. Cheers.

[Leicester]

I've noticed that in big games like derby matches and especially cup semis/ finals that scores tend to be high scoring games more often than not, this has happened in the last 3 versions of FM, and the person I play network games with has also picked up on this.

Two examples of this are in the FA Cup final in the second season, Liverpool vs Man Utd and the game finished 5-3, and his 2 games vs Everton in the first season finished 4-3 and 3-3 (He was 3-0 up with 7 minutes to go and they had a man sent off and Yakubu who was on a 5.7 rating on 83 minutes turns superhuman and scores 3 goals). As for me, I lost 7-3 in a FA Cup quarter to Man City with Arsenal, we both went with strong teams and I kept my usually solid defensively minded tactic (Where I had conceded something like 12 goals in the last 18 games prior to this.) I'm aware a shock result could happen like this even with a strong defence, it happened to Leicester in real life very recently conceding 8 goals in 2 games after like 15 in all the games in the league before them, but it's just too common for my liking.

Sure, these high scoring games could happen once every season in big games but to happen regularly, particularly in the late rounds of competitions, I find it ridiculous and it spoils the big games, and the sense of achievement of a win if you are 3-0 down and then suddenly score 4 in 5 minutes to win. Is it to make the game more 'exciting'? If it is, then it has the reverse effect on me.

P.S. I do love the game and spend an unhealthy amount of hours on it, but I'd just like some views on this and if many people have noticed it/ it's been reported?

Thanks and sorry for the 'rant'.

[mdbussen]

It would have been useful if you'd mentioned how this thread had turned out earlier. All that was posted in the bugs forum was this:

Now, a high scoring game is going to get that response from me, as you are only reporting a "crazy high scoring match". If you had mentioned the defensive issues, you would have a had a "better" response. If you're reporting bugs it's best to actually mention what the bugs or problems are, not just saying there was an odd game.

I have passed this PKM on into our database now. Cheers.

Rather than manually retype everything Glenn, that is why I included a link to this thread in my bugs forum post. I thought that was pretty reasonable.

Either way I'm glad you'll be taking a look at it - although with the release of 10.2 today perhaps it won't really matter anymore

[Glenn Wakeford]

Rather than manually retype everything Glenn, that is why I included a link to this thread in my bugs forum post. I thought that was pretty reasonable.

Yes, I started reading it but got near halfway and it was mostly bickering and fighting. We are normally pretty busy so reading threads of bickering isn't really constructive or helpful. As soon as you'd quoted wwfan when you replied I immediately went back to it and tried to filter out the arguments.