Superkeeper is really disrespectful to FM players

[Rista]

You might want to read my post wwfan and make yourself feel better.

As stated before, I understand your frustrations but sometimes you just cannot "win" an argument, even when you are 100% correct.

I have read a lot of posts where you also had some altercations with my brother too about similar issues (My brother and I are two very different people) and sadly he too, just could not see past his point of view as do others in this thread.

All I can say is, you have fought your point, and unfortunately this talk will just go back and forth for an eternity - you just can't sway one's opinions when they are not open to listen to yours.

Merry Christmas mate, and thanks for the cool guides and the hard work you put into the game.

Interesting how you go on about people defending their arguments and how no evidence will make them change their mind and then you present your OPINION that one on ones in the game are fine and how there is no problem with goalkeepers as a fact.

So anyway, how do we "stop trying to create those type of chances" when the default 4-4-2 does it as well? Why do I see tons of one on ones without touching my tactics? Is it even remotely realistic that keepers are saving one on ones literally every single game?

I don't think something like that is available, but I would really like to see Ronaldo's (the fat one) conversion rate of one on ones. 1 in 5 or even 1 in 4 is so way off the mark for top class strikers in my opinion. And yet you could create a perfect footballer in FM and his one on one conversion rate will still suck.

[akkm]

: )...yeah i do love an argument/rant

wwfan...

where was my statement...'I watch a lot of football and I know this is a false figure'

the 66% was an 'up to' or max rate estimate with david villa as an example..you might read back to that post and the sentence re david villa started with an 'if'..nowhere was it claiming that his statistics are actually that...but he is clinical in 1on1 situations and i know this from actually WATCHING real life football...forgive me if that elusive article doesn't back it up : ). i love the way you go on about perspective bias when you, wwfan are the one who has a bad case of it...i don't deal in perception, only reality...what i see actually happens...david villa does actually play real life football and the evidence is there to actually see him convert these 1on1s...it is not perception...he actually DOES convert them more often than he doesn't...i know because i have seen it happen...no perception on my part whatsoever..just reality..watch it and don't harp on about perception/subjective bias when you keep harping back to your 25-33 to back everything you say up...you are hugely BIASED towards a piece of research which could be utter nonsense...

stop going on about the 66%, as i said it was used in relation to villa, not for all players which the tone of your last post suggested...

re the 10% margin of error...yeah of course it can go both ways...thats blatantly obvious but reality is in this context it won't decrease the 25-33 it will increase it...i watch matches clinically and don't let anything affect judgements/assessments on football...it is what it is..what happens actually happens...i am not one who lets perception get in the way of reality...top players do convert more 1on1s than they miss...i would say that over last 10-20 years...presently only david villa is a really clinical striker comparable with the greats of the past so i wouldn't be surprised if the current set of so called top strikers drag the average down...the likes of van basten, romario, stoichkov, ronaldo (brazil), raul (at peak) & baggio to name but a few all would convert more than they missed of proper 1on1s..

you were asking what figures should you use...you should try watching real life football and using that as evidence...over the course of next (REAL LIFE) 50 football matches you watch take note of how many (proper) 1on1s are converted...it's probably not a million miles from the 25-33overall..i never argued that (beyond the +10 max) but at top end of game it is definitely higher... and higher again for aforementioned players.

with regard to latest posts accepting 'facts' like this 25-33....wwfan..you are basing your whole argument on this and showing no capacity to see anything beyond...your inordinate bias towards this means your subjectiveness is beyond contestation...you are the one trying to score cheap points with some research that is not accessible to everyone else so who knows how it stacks up...anyone could claim to have empirical evidence but without backup what merit/credibility does it have...i think you should take a step back and look at the bigger picture...you seem to see stats but not their context...the percentage conversion rates of goals/shots on target in euro leagues provided by tingting are remarkably high your stats of 1 in 4 are skewed by shots by less accomplished finishers from further out no doubt...you shouldn't be obsessed with stats in the context of football...sam allardyce is a legend on football stats but has no real understanding of football at the highest level...he sees all the statistics and lets them guide his approach yet his approach is the anthitheses of barcelona...which is more successful at top level..certainly not sam allardyce approach...seriously just watch some football matches (and i would highly recommend outside england) and see for yourself the conversion rates of 1on1s...you do make sense in some points but are far from always making sense

on a lighter note...overall the game with match engine 10.1 was the best sim i've ever played..superb in how it enabled playing the beautiful game with slick incisive short passing on the ground but 10.2 has gone back to more patchy/less seamless transition play with more inaccurate passing and too many passes in the air from top class technicians (like barca players who just don't do it IRL) which has taken away from the enjoyment...not even talking about the 1on1s thing : )... or the memory crashes...the 1on1s is the least irritant...i've switched back to 10.1 again - it's quality - and just hope SI sort out ME/memory crashes ideally before late FEB date i've seen

anyway, enough about all that...i'm with lavezzi...it's Christmas Eve so everyone have a good Christmas and enjoy FM...have a good one...you too wwfan

[supersaint]

[Almondo]

wwfan apart from a few of us who want to have a reasoned debate about the game etc not many people are going to read your post and say "Hey you know what wwfan actually knows more about this than I do." they're more concerned with saying "I don't care what anyone says SI have put superkeepers into this game." This is due to them taking too much notice of the CCC's instead of the other stats like Shot's on and off target, blocked shots etc.

In my opinion we should all just be grateful for a great game which I will admit does have some flaws in it. also SI does it's best for us with patches etc and listening to any complaints and issues we may have with the game. I understand that some people have seen the opposition keepers save shots that couldn't be saved in real life but this is the ME's way of keeping the score lines down to a reasonable limit.

Anyway all that's left to be said is Merry Christmas to all at SI and here on the forums.

[Ohanzee]

So I'm playing with Man Utd on the latest patch. Here's some great performances. By the opposition goalkeeper

vs FC Bayern - My favorite. We won 4-0 and Rensing is still MoM, cause we had 14 CCC!!!

vs Blackburn - 0-0 (3-0 CCC). Paul Robinson MoM.

vs Man City - 0-2 (3-1 CCC). Shay Given MoM.

vs Tottenham - 2-0 (3-0 CCC). Gomes MoM.

vs Tottenham #2 - 1-1 (7-0 CCC). Gomes MoM.

vs Tottenham #3 - 0-1 (4-1 CCC). Gomes MoM. HAT TRICK MoM!!.

vs Sunderland - 2-0 (6-1 CCC). Craig Gordon MoM.

vs Olympique de Marseille - 2-1 (3-1 CCC) Mandanda MoM.

vs Fulham - 1-0 (6-1 CCC). Mark Schwarzer MoM.

vs Birmingham - 1-0 (4-0 CCC). Joe Hart MoM.

vs Wolfsburg - 0-0 (2-1 CCC). Diego Benaglio MoM.

52 matches played. Opposition goalkeeper MoM in 11 of them. There's several other examples where I've had many more CCC than the opposition, and not won or marginally won, or lost, but the goalkeeper hasn't got the MoM as well.

Now I'm losing the league because Chelsea just happens to win almost no matter what. They got a 26-4-2 record. One of their losses came against me. How am I supposed to compete with that when I keep losing and drawing matches I deserve to win?

And don't bother replying the usual fanboy comment "No nothings wrong, it's your tactic". The game says I create Clear Cut Chances, so either the game is wrong and I don't really create CCC (aka the stat is flawed), or the game is compensating cause I create to many. And most of my CCCs are not straight through balls between the DCs, they are angled.

This is a game! It's main goal should be fun. The 10.2 patch is 20% fun and 80% frustrating. I'm going back to 10.1

PS! I'm especially pleased with the fact that one of the goalkeepers that make the most mistakes in the Premiership has managed 3 MoM against me

[FM1000]

If i read one more time that Messi or Ronaldo or Torres Eto Pato Henry are only scoring 1 in 3 one on ones i'm going to punch somebody.

One on ones IRL are rare and when a player of world class is trough on goal he definitely doesn shoot at the keeper and 60% of the time he scores.

In some matches there isnt even 1 one on one but when there is a world class player rarely misses..The SC usualy round the keeper or tries lob or a fake shoot or just places the shoot not passes the ball in the keeper hands.

[robbert_o154]

[off-topic]

WWfan, I'm intrigued by the figures you present re: conversion rates. A fair few people in this thread seem to assume that top strikers have higher than average conversion rates, but I'm wondering whether that's really the case because whilst being of higher than average quality themselves, they also face higher than average quality goalkeepers, so I actually wouldn't be all that surprised if the conversion rates in the Prem aren't all that dissimilar from those in, say, League Two. Do the figures you have mention anything about this? Cheers.

[/off-topic]

[Dr.Football1]

Problem of 'super keepers' do not really exist. There are simply too many 1 on 1 situations and i hope it'll be fixed in the next patch.That's all. Cheers.

[DeathSpawn]

[off-topic]

WWfan, I'm intrigued by the figures you present re: conversion rates. A fair few people in this thread seem to assume that top strikers have higher than average conversion rates, but I'm wondering whether that's really the case because whilst being of higher than average quality themselves, they also face higher than average quality goalkeepers, so I actually wouldn't be all that surprised if the conversion rates in the Prem aren't all that dissimilar from those in, say, League Two. Do the figures you have mention anything about this? Cheers.

[/off-topic]

you just hitted a key spot. in FM2010 it doesn't matter how bad the GK is, he will still save the same amount of goals as any world class keeper, i dont care if it's due to their positioning or flying like a bird, they shoulnd't be able to do it. i have ochoa and akinfeev and they are by far the best keepers in my league, even my rivals Gks can't compare to them and yet every gk in the league will perform in 1 vs 1 as good as my gks...hell even my 3rd keeper who is just average gk will save as much as them. and in case you're wandering who are my strikers: dzeko,cardozo,lukaku,babacar

[roseboy64]

Who is the GK facing though? A striker of similar ability? Scoring rates should be roughly the same as players will go up against players of similar standard. Put a Manchester United into the Championship though and they'll absolutely maul the division.

BTW the problem of the defensive marking which creates these chances was spotted in testing but as it would cause additional problems which wouldn't be able to be tested before release it's best just to leave it as is and fix for next patch. Much better this way than having bugs which are actually awful rather than frustrating.

[DeathSpawn]

Who is the GK facing though? A striker of similar ability? Scoring rates should be roughly the same as players will go up against players of similar standard. Put a Manchester United into the Championship though and they'll absolutely maul the division.

the only world class strikers in the league besides mine would be 2 strikers from each rival so that makes 4 strikers on same level as mine. surprisingly enough against my rivals my GKs seem to save more 1 vs 1 then normal... my complains atm are just when facing smaller teams/players

BTW the problem of the defensive marking which creates these chances was spotted in testing but as it would cause additional problems which wouldn't be able to be tested before release it's best just to leave it as is and fix for next patch. Much better this way than having bugs which are actually awful rather than frustrating.

imo that bug is the worst atm and wainting 2 months for a fix is too long. unfortunatly i forgot to backup my saved game and can't go 10.1 again...add that to the fact AI will most times score on their first 1 vs 1...

[roseboy64]

the only world class strikers in the league besides mine would be 2 strikers from each rival so that makes 4 strikers on same level as mine. surprisingly enough against my rivals my GKs seem to save more 1 vs 1 then normal... my complains atm are just when facing smaller teams/players

imo that bug is the worst atm and wainting 2 months for a fix is too long. unfortunatly i forgot to backup my saved game and can't go 10.1 again...add that to the fact AI will most times score on their first 1 vs 1...

Ah ok that's understandable then.

Trust me, there's worse.

[Law_Man]

Let's be clear on a few things here:

1. In real life a one on one is a clear cut chance. I think the FM match engine classifies it so as well.

2. If Managers in real life could engineer 5 one on ones in real life they would – they are regarded as a very good chance and training drills regularly reflect them and players practice to slot one on ones. Now, that's not to say that the conversion rate should be any more than 1 in 3, simply to say that they are regarded as a good chance relative to most other chances.

3. Managers in real life would not think ‘I can’t engineer 5 one on ones today as this is against football logic and would just be exploiting the fact that the opposition DCs can’t mark’. This goes completely against football logic.

4. It would seem that the reason in FM that a lot of users are seeing many one on ones per game is a bug with DCs marking.

5. Perhaps as a quick fix to this the GK/one on ones have been ‘nerfd’.

6. In real life, a striker who regularly scores 1 in 3 clear cut chances at the top level is gold dust, there are not many of them, neither has there been many in history.

7. If the top strikers in the world get 3 clear cut chances (whether one on ones or not) you expect them to slot one of them.

8. It would be rare in a top level match for a team to create/a striker to get 3 proper one on ones. However, if a top class striker did, you would expect them to slot one of them - that's afterall why they are regarded as a top class striker. That's why Michael Owne is/was Michael Owen, Solskaer, Shearer etc and not Jason Roberts.

9. I personally define a 'one on one' as an attacking player in control of the ball with no defending players between himself and the goal, and the attacking player approaching or inside the 18 yard box.

10. If a striker has a one on one where he is forced wide, then this is a less easy chance than if he remains central (unless the attacking player is wide, but cutting back inside on his strong foot). If the players remains more central he has a wider margin for error, in addition to being able to 'pick a side'. When the striker is forced wide, the angle is naturally narrowed, and his margin for error is naturally reduced. If the attacking player is wide but cutting back inside on his strong foot then this is also a good chance.

11. It would seem that from the FM stats that people are posting that in FM, if a top class striker gets 5 one on ones, he may not score any. On the face of it this is clearly wrong. Wrong that he is getting so many one on ones and wrong that he isn't converting one or two of them on a regular basis.

12. Now, let's talk about the sort of strikers that will score 1 in 3 one on ones. They are not necessarily pacey, strong, good in the air, good at dribbling, flair players. They are the players that can finish, keep a cool head, have decent technique that holds up under pressure/at speed and just have that 'knack'.

13. How is the modelled in FM? Well finishing, composure, technique and ppm places shots and probably one or two hidden attributes. So, if your FM 'world class striker' who has 16 finishing technique and composure and then a load of other good stats making him worth £20,000,000 and household name from RL isn't scoring 1 in 3 clear chances then don't be suprised, as the sorts of players scoring at that ratio in real life would have 18 finishing composure etc in FM.

14. Now, if the likes of David Villa (who from memory has very high finishing and composure stats in FM) isn't regularly slotting 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 clear chances then there is something wrong with the game.

15. If real life 'world class' strikers aren't being given the proper finishing and composure in FM that's another issue.

16. As an aside, the way FM classifies what constitutes a clear clut chance clearly isn’t perfect leading to perhaps an excess of faux clear cut chances registered in the match stats, compounded as ever by users who do not actually watch the game but review the match stats at the end. Furthermore, the graphical representation of a clear cut chance may also be misleading, compounding misinterpretation and frustration.

[wwfan]

[off-topic]

WWfan, I'm intrigued by the figures you present re: conversion rates. A fair few people in this thread seem to assume that top strikers have higher than average conversion rates, but I'm wondering whether that's really the case because whilst being of higher than average quality themselves, they also face higher than average quality goalkeepers, so I actually wouldn't be all that surprised if the conversion rates in the Prem aren't all that dissimilar from those in, say, League Two. Do the figures you have mention anything about this? Cheers.

[/off-topic]

Conversion rates don't vary all that much between all levels of professional football, so you'd be right to assume that the best forwards in each division have a similar strike rate.

Back to the David Villa argument.

From the stats produced above, we can posit that a top forward at the top of his game hits the target around 50% of the time, which is 10% better than average. They will also score between 40-50% of the time they hit the target, which is 15-25% better than average. However, career stats suggest most forwards only score 1 in every 6 shots taken (17%).

If we assume a one on one is a gilt edged chance, we can safely work on the proviso that the forward will hit the target 50% of the time and score from 50% of those shots. Thus, for every two one on ones he has he hits the target once. For every time he hits the target, he scores once. Therefore, he will score 25% of his one on ones. This is 8% better than career goal/shots stats.

Assuming he is better than the average, he might have a 10% advantage for hitting the target and beating the keeper. He now hits the target 60% of the time and the keeper only saves 40% of those shots. He is now scoring 36% of his one on ones. This is 8% better than the best strike rate any EPL forward has this season and 13% better than any career rate.

David Villa is scoring at a 36% ratio for every shot on target. We can safely assume that means he is scoring roughly 18% of his overall shots. Either of the above one on one scoring ratios can fit with those stats without severely warping the figures.

However, the competing assumption is that David Villa scores 66% of his one on ones. This means he has to hit the target 100% of the time and beat the keeper 66% of the time in such situations, stats which are not close to overall shot/goal ratios or his own scoring ratio.

This means that David Villa:

A: Hasn't had any one on ones this season

B: Only scores one on ones and misses all his other chances

C: Doesn't actually convert anywhere near 66% of his one on ones

I'm sorry, but these 60%+ figures deviate so far from reality they can't be treated seriously. For starters, they completely ignore keeper standard. Although the players mentioned are world class, they aren't facing useless keepers, but guys in the top 10% of their field. For the players in question to score at such great rates, the keeper save ratio has to drop by 40%+. That's without the player ever missing the target, which means their accuracy under pressure needs to be 100%. This just doesn't add up. These players are not better than twice as good as their peers, just respectively better.

[tak]

These types of one on ones are hardly ever created in real life.

This must be the funniest of all arguments ever heard in here to defend a game flaw: one on ones facing the goal directly are "incredibly" rare. Really?

It is not the first time FM fails to catch what is happening in world football because it (naturally) spends a lot of time watching what is happening at home. For example, even today (just a few days before 2010!) FM thinks a team should employ one tall and one quick attacker. "Target man" they are calling the tall guy and crosses should be directed on his head so that he can "flick the ball on". Medieval football.

But I will get back to the subject. A frustrated customer expressed his anger about superkeepers. What do you think was the answer? That through balls are "incredibly rarely" going through the two central defenders! Hahahahaha! Has the person who said that watched anything at all in global football in the last three years?

Anyway, it is everyone's right to think football is played with target men etc, that is not the point. The point is that a player develops a fantastic tactic that carves defences up only to be blocked by superman and he has to change it because the attacker has to come from the side, instead of through the middle, in order to score in this mad game! This is trully unbelievable.

I suggest this to the upset customer: patience my friend. You never know. Some day maybe a proper patch will be issued. You never know...

[Cinnabon09]

i don't think there are superkeepers in fm. i do think that there are way too many one on ones, and that the keeper saves too many of them. defenders marking ability needs improving, and goalkeepers one on ones success need to be toned down. that is the only way to balance out the issues as the goal ratio right now is about correct. i don't think that si can demand from us to accept that most one on ones will be missed because of some bug. at least not in the long run. i really hope this gets fixed for the next patch

[Kriss]

i don't think there are superkeepers in fm. i do think that there are way too many one on ones, and that the keeper saves too many of them. defenders marking ability needs improving, and goalkeepers one on ones success need to be toned down. that is the only way to balance out the issues as the goal ratio right now is about correct. i don't think that si can demand from us to accept that most one on ones will be missed because of some bug. at least not in the long run. i really hope this gets fixed for the next patch

Exactly my thoughts, I think FM creates too many chances/half chances of all descriptions and that's reflected in the misses.

Of course this is partly subject to the style of play people use and the actual quality of all the chances will always be up for debate.

[Almondo]

i don't think there are superkeepers in fm. i do think that there are way too many one on ones, and that the keeper saves too many of them. defenders marking ability needs improving, and goalkeepers one on ones success need to be toned down. that is the only way to balance out the issues as the goal ratio right now is about correct. i don't think that si can demand from us to accept that most one on ones will be missed because of some bug. at least not in the long run. i really hope this gets fixed for the next patch

Bingo. Finally someone has got around to saying what has needed to be said since the debate about so called "Superkeepers" has been going. (Not that wwfan hasn't been saying it)

[muncherdave]

It is very frustrating to see the 'goalkeepers too good at one on ones' / 'strikers poor finishing on one on ones' problem as discussed in this thread rear its ugly head on FM again. To me it makes it feel like the match engine is going through a never-ending circle of mediocrity, which sounds pretty harsh, but problems like this tend to negate all the actual good work that has improved the match engine for me. The most frustrating part about it is that the game's had this problem in the past, at some point it's been eradicated, but now it returns with a vengeance.

It just makes me question SI's decision making. Why has the decision been made to just let this problem go and let people experience this all over again? Do they even realise how much problems like this will annoy the hell out of people? If they really had no idea the patch was going to present this problem to people then it surely wasn't very well tested. These are all typical questions or statements I see from people I usually like to call 'whiners' on here, but I find myself in this boat right now and I don't like it

If I had any choice in the matter I would not be playing this patch, but because I am currently playing the game online with people I really have no choice but to use whichever version they decide to use. With the issues we're experiencing this year we are all hoping with every patch the game will be more stable for online play anyway. I only played one session with this patch so far and there doesn't seem to be any crashing so far, which is a bonus.

Ranting aside, everyone have a great festive season

[tingting]

they're more concerned with saying "I don't care what anyone says SI have put superkeepers into this game." This is due to them taking too much notice of the CCC's instead of the other stats like Shot's on and off target, blocked shots etc.

Never have i (or i believe akkm) said that there are superkeepers in the game. Back in 2008 (i think) there was this same problem and i had not said that there were superkeepers. The problem here is not "super keeper" but "stupid striker". There is no difference between a Fernando Torres or a Kevin Davies in the game. Both the strikers hit it straight to the keeper when having all the time in the world to place it well and both the strikers miss an equal number of chances. Then what is the difference between a striker who is being paid around 100,000 per week and if could easily be sold for 35 million when i can buy the same level of performance for just 3.5 million and pay him 25,000 per week. I have played almost three seasons worth of the game but i have never seen a striker (mine nor the opposition striker) try to lob the ball, place the ball or go round the keeper even if his PPMs suggest that it is his favorite move.

There is nothing wrong in concentrating on CCCs because it is the best chance in the game while blocked shot or a long range shot on target does not represent a chance. Imaging playing against a very good team in either the cup final or in a very important league game that could win or lose you the title. You create 4 chances but each chance is hit straight at the target while the opposition creates 2-3 chances and by some luck they convert it? I know this happens in real life but not every couple of games which is the case in the game.

I agree that the central defense is broken in the game...but rather than fixing it (even if it meant in the next version) SI have come up with a very poor substitute to tone down the scoring and thereby ruining the enjoyment for a lot of us gamers who are creating logical chances (it doesnt matter if the chance has been created due to a flaw in the engine) I would rather lose a game by not creating many chances than lose a game where i have created a number of chances (even if its thanks to an ME flaw) and see my 30 million striker behave like a 100k one.

[tingting]

Does anyone read what I write? Goals per shot on target are not the same as goals per shot. If I'm talking about goals per shot you can't disprove it with goals per shot on target. Of course the latter is going to have a higher conversion ratio.

Forget players on a clear 1v1 chance missing the target completely (i have rarely seen a player missing the target from just 6-8 yards out in the game) I quoted the shots on target ratio because my players are hitting clear chances straight to the keeper. That would mean they are hitting almost 95% of their chances on target of which majority of them are straight to the keeper.

Quality forwards unremarkably better both these statistics, as that is what they are paid to do.

That is not the case in the game as i have already said...i find no difference between a Kevin Davies, Welbeck or a Wayne Rooney, Berbatov.

However, as all your stats relate to goals per shot on target, they are irrelevant to the discussion.

Even if i admit that my stats are irrelevant..what about yours...you are trying to justify 15-20% 1v1 conversion ratio in the game with a 20% conversion ratio of all types of shots in real life???

I'm not sure where you have got your penalty conversion ratios from, but 30% and 23% are horribly low. 82% of penalties are converted. However, the rate of conversion fluctuates during a match, with higher ratios in the first half, falling as low as 70% in the last quarter of a match. You also have player biases, with some players converting 90%+ and others at 75%. However, given that players who miss penalties with any regularity aren't trusted to take them for long, the stats are relatively stable and narrow.

The difference in chances being converted could be quite high. Player A might convert 36% of his one on ones (slightly above the expected high end) whereas player B only converts 20% (slightly below the low end). That 16% difference is what you pay for and what wins football matches. However, most players in a division should fall in the expected 25-33%.

As i said..the ratio was provided in a "study" (i think it was before the Euro 2008) and the final number was the average of all the players in the sample (which i would assume included players whose conversion ratio was very high and players whose conversion ratio was very low). Regarding narrow stats...you mean to say that a penalty taker in the Conference league has a conversion ration within the same narrow band as a Premier League penalty taker????

you need to recognise that this type of one on one is not a good chance or realistic. If you think they are and keep on trying to create them, you will get hugely frustrated. I've written all the above to try and explain that so people might enjoy the game and read the ME better. However, there are so many people trying to score cheap points, not reading what I've written or posting irrelevant, opinionated or made up figures I don't know why I bother.

A) I (and many) do not believe that such a chance is unrealistic. B) What do should i do? Tell my playmaker midfielder not to try throughballs or my striker to not try and latch on to them?? If you have not noticed...this is football manager not FIFA 10 where i can control my players.

I think each and every post in the forum is opinionated (dont know about you..but the posts that i write are of my opinion alone and not others) Nor are the stats made up...if there is a video or dvd available which has captured each and every 1v1 chance of a world class player...i will guarantee that his conversion ratio is way higher. One final thing....i like cheap points....why get expensive points when you can easily get them for cheap:D

[tingting]

If we assume a one on one is a gilt edged chance, we can safely work on the proviso that the forward will hit the target 50% of the time and score from 50% of those shots. Thus, for every two one on ones he has he hits the target once. For every time he hits the target, he scores once. Therefore, he will score 25% of his one on ones. This is 8% better than career goal/shots stats.

I think the way you are representing the stats is misleading. 1 in 2 is very good even 5 in 10 is acceptable but 50 in 100?? You really want us to believe that a world class striker with not defender pressurizing him and with just the keeper to beat hits just 50 percent of his shots on target and manages to score just 25 goals in the process?? Because that is what happening in the game. A gamer can create anywhere between 50-75 clear chances in a season and no matter who the striker is...no matter what his stats are..he is able to convert just 20% of the chances at best.

Assuming he is better than the average, he might have a 10% advantage for hitting the target and beating the keeper. He now hits the target 60% of the time and the keeper only saves 40% of those shots. He is now scoring 36% of his one on ones. This is 8% better than the best strike rate any EPL forward has this season and 13% better than any career rate.

David Villa is scoring at a 36% ratio for every shot on target. We can safely assume that means he is scoring roughly 18% of his overall shots. Either of the above one on one scoring ratios can fit with those stats without severely warping the figures.

Once again you are getting confused...you are equating shots on target with one on ones..David Villa might be converting 36% of his shots on target but all of his shots are not one on ones. The complaint here is not low conversion ratio compared to shots on target...but low conversion ratio regarding 1v1 chances. Even if we agree to your stat that a world class striker manages to hit 50% of his 1v1 chances on target and manages to scored 50% of of them...that would mean 50% of his shots which hit the target when 1v1 with the keeper. But as i said early almost 95% of the chances are being hit straight at the keeper...so 50% of 95% would easily be over 47% which is clearly not the case here

I'm sorry, but these 60%+ figures deviate so far from reality they can't be treated seriously. For starters, they completely ignore keeper standard.

Not each team in the game has a Buffon, Casillas or Akinfeev. Apart from 3-4 teams the rest of the ingame keepers in each division are average at best.

Regarding your very early comment about the rest of attacking/defending area not having any problems...i am sorry...defenders (and i dont mean just central defenders) do not mark well, defenders walk away from loose balls....defenders do not close down aerial balls...central midfielders do not rush back when the opposition has the ball in the hole between the defenders and midfield...so actually the whole defensive area of the game is broken

[gyzmer]

this is evidence enough right there that something is completely out of place.

unless your stiker / AM's are complete rubish on their finishing or their goalie is a "superkeeper" there is no way in reality a team with 20 shots on goal vs. 1 (14 of them on target), and 7 clear cut chances vs. 0 is going to draw 1-1.

The only thing his screenshots proof imho is that he's using craptactics but whatever.

[Romanista.]

superkeeper or whatever you want to call it, there is definitely something not right. in my game the superman of superman's is diego benaglio. i dare you to score a one-on-one against this guy on 10.2. i just played ac milan(he is there), won 2-1 with 10 players being 0-1 down. but it was just amazing how many times he saved one-on-ones from villa(ST) and aguero(AMR).

plus why do they never pass to a team mate when they are one-on-one in a tight angle? they never ever pass. it should be implemented for 10.3

[mrmeee17]

i don't think there are superkeepers in fm. i do think that there are way too many one on ones, and that the keeper saves too many of them. defenders marking ability needs improving, and goalkeepers one on ones success need to be toned down. that is the only way to balance out the issues as the goal ratio right now is about correct. i don't think that si can demand from us to accept that most one on ones will be missed because of some bug. at least not in the long run. i really hope this gets fixed for the next patch

I think that is what people mean when they say superkeepers.

Call it what you want but the fact is, like you said, keepers are just ridiculously and unrealistically good at stopping one on ones.

[barry from eastenders]

wwfan stop making lame excuses

[Cinnabon09]

I think that is what people mean when they say superkeepers.

Call it what you want but the fact is, like you said, keepers are just ridiculously and unrealistically good at stopping one on ones.

what i meant was that keepers don't seem to overperform in other areas besides one on ones. i also think that the problem lies with the striker (and of course the defending as mentioned) rather than the keeper. strikers shoots straight at the keeper, and it hardly takes a good keeper to save these chances.

[wwfan]

tingting, you are really not getting it.

I'm not arguing that the one on ones in FM aren't unrealistic, bugged and too often hit straight at the keeper. They undoubtedly are. However, I am arguing that real life conversion rates are nowhere near as high as people believe them to be and that the chances are so unrealistic it is difficult to compare them anyway. I'm suggesting that accepting these facts so you can conceptualise a certain type of one on one as 'not a good chance' will make 10.2 far more enjoyable.

There is no evidence other than some subjective feelings that any player scores much more than one in three of his one on ones. Some of the arguments being employed to try and dispute this are ridiculous.

In order to defend the 'fact' that strikers only score a certain percentage of their one on ones, we have to believe that every top flight goalkeeper bar a chosen few are average and have little chance of stopping such shots. Only world class keepers can do it. Which is a load of rubbish. Top flight keepers are top flight keepers for a reason. They are not some chancer from the local pub.

We also have the same person stating that one on ones can be converted 66% of the time arguing that penalties, which are the most easily converted chance in real life, only get scored 23-30% of the time. So, it is twice as easy to hit a target when moving at pace and the person trying to stop you hitting the target is closing you down than it is when everything is stationary? Or is this only the case for a few 'world class' players who are twice as good as any other finisher that ever lived?

There is copious amounts of evidence that good forwards only score 1 in 6 of their shots. World class ones perhaps 1 in 5. An all time great perhaps 1 in 4. There is also copious evidence that these stats repeat through levels for players of relative abilities. All of these figures accept a one on one is a considerably better chance than average and has a far greater chance of being converted than other types of chance. But not at 66% for anybody, ever. That is simply too great a shift from any goal scoring/shot saving/shot on target ratio that anybody has ever posted. To score at that rate, the player can never miss the target and the keeper has only a 1 in 3 chance of saving the shot. That just doesn't and cannot happen.

If we look now at the very specific type of one on one that is causing the problems, we can also see it is difficult to even try and compare it to real world chances. In real life, centre backs rarely if ever drift away from each other enough to allow a through ball to bisect them near the box. This does not mean that there are no through balls being played into a box as some people seem to think I'm claiming, but that through balls into the box are invariably hit into the channels at an angle, with the forward going blindside of the DC when running onto it.

In FM, the type of one on one that is being easily saved comes from TBs that unrealistically split the centre backs. The result is an FC that has to quickly turn and shoot, shoot from about 18 yards out or sprint and shoot. He has to do things at pace as the DCs rapidly get back into position.

The problem is that these chances are invariably being measured as CCCs, which they aren't. Some are borderline CCCS, which research suggests puts them at 1 in 5 chance of going in. Some are far more difficult than that. Because the player is hurried and the keeper invariably in a good position, most shots from these types of range are saved. Based on knowledge of how often shots from these ranges/positions are converted, I'm arguing that this is not that unrealistic, although we cannot know for sure because it is so unusual to see these sort of chances in real life. I'd also make an educated guess that top quality FCs in FM score from these chances at a higher rate than less good ones (perhaps 1 in 5/6 rather than 1 in 7/8). I've certainly seen them converted, both for me and against me, and given that most of the top FCs in their divisions have a 20%+ strike rate, things are not massively out of synch.

My only argument has been that these types of one on ones aren't as good a chance as people contend they are. This has lead to an interesting discussion on how often people think one on ones are converted, which suggests huge perspective biases, as these posited conversion rates require players to perfectly cope with pressure, never miscontrol or misplace the ball, and for the keeper to suddenly lose 40% of his capabilities. Obviously, a belief that one on ones are/can be converted at this type of ratio increases personal frustrations, as the one on ones in the game are then conceptualised as being easier than they actually are. If you want to continue to believe that one on ones are almost unmissable, be my guest. You'll be wrong and they aren't, but if it makes you happy, so be it. However, if you want to appreciate and read the ME a little better, it might be a good idea to at least challenge your own perceptions. You'll enjoy FM more for a start, and you might even learn something about real football.

[tingting]

tingting, you are really not getting it.

In order to defend the 'fact' that strikers only score a certain percentage of their one on ones, we have to believe that every top flight goalkeeper bar a chosen few are average and have little chance of stopping such shots. Only world class keepers can do it. Which is a load of rubbish. Top flight keepers are top flight keepers for a reason. They are not some chancer from the local pub.

Surely you dont mean to say that Boaz Myhill is a top keeper. Now i agree that Myhill will save more 1v1 compared to "some chancer from the local pub" but he will definitely save less than a Petr Cech or a Edwin Van der Sar. If you look closely...both Myhill (Hull) and Cech (Chelsea) are in the top division of the English league...saying that the difference between the two is very less...that my friend is rubbish. Thats the reason Myhill is paid, i dont know, around 10-20000 per week compared to Cech who is paid 100000 per week. (Maybe Ferguson should buy Myhill once Van der Sar retires coz there is not much difference between the two )

We also have the same person stating that one on ones can be converted 66% of the time arguing that penalties, which are the most easily converted chance in real life, only get scored 23-30% of the time. So, it is twice as easy to hit a target when moving at pace and the person trying to stop you hitting the target is closing you down than it is when everything is stationary? Or is this only the case for a few 'world class' players who are twice as good as any other finisher that ever lived?

A few months ago i had written an article for a site where in a study was made which looked into the possibility of a player converting a penalty shot. The conclusion of the study was that if you hit the lower side of the ball then there is some 30% chance of converting the penalty but if you hit the top portion of the ball the success ratio fell to 23% or so...but we have players whose penalty conversion ratio is pretty high and we have players whose conversion ratio is pretty low. So the number they found out was an average of the whole sample which does fluctuate depending on the quality of the player

You gave an advice to someone in your earlier post so i will give you the same....Did you even understood what i wrote? I am not saying that only 23-30% of penalties is converted...a study was made which put forth a theory regarding chances of successfully converting a penalty when hit at a particular spot of the ball. In the next sentence..i say that there are players whose conversion ratio is very high and there are players whose conversion ratio is very low. Read it again (i have tried to be helpful by making the main points in bold so that you will not miss them) And i have never said that a world class striker converts 66% of his 1v1 chances. Even if i was going to tell this...i am not that much of an idiot to say that a striker who can convert 66% of his 1v1 will manage to convert just 23-30% of his penalties (seeing for starters that penalties is also a type of 1v1)

There is copious amounts of evidence that good forwards only score 1 in 6 of their shots. World class ones perhaps 1 in 5. An all time great perhaps 1 in 4.

Once again...the numbers are very misleading...please refrain from using 1 in 4 or 5 or 6 or 7. I consider Ronaldo (Brazilian) Zidane, Pele and Maradona as all time greats (i hope you do too) You mean to say that they scored just 25 of 100 1v1 chance? Ronaldo scored at least 50 goals when he had to beat just the keeper...do you mean to say that he missed 150 other chances??? Maybe it was his buck tooth that made Barcelona, Inter and Real Madrid to pay huge sums of money and buy the player while it is for the same reason that he is regarded as one of the best Brazilian strikers ever.

Even i will agree to the number 1 in 4 but saying that these legendary players missed even 35 of their 50 clear chances is a bit "ridiculous"

There is also copious evidence that these stats repeat through levels for players of relative abilities. All of these figures accept a one on one is a considerably better chance than average and has a far greater chance of being converted than other types of chance. But not at 66% for anybody, ever. That is simply too great a shift from any goal scoring/shot saving/shot on target ratio that anybody has ever posted. To score at that rate, the player can never miss the target and the keeper has only a 1 in 3 chance of saving the shot. That just doesn't and cannot happen.

Once again i will have to say you are getting confused...Even akkm did not say that 66% of goals scored by Villa were 1v1. He said that when clear through with just the keeper to beat...he will convert at least 66% of such chances...Now he might have just 5 1v1 chances through the season and manage to score just 3 goals while his overall goals scored might be over 20-25.

Regarding your point about keepers losing 40% of their ability....When a Ronaldo is put through with just Oliver Kahn is to be beaten...he will miss (or Kahn will save) a bigger amount of chances than when compared to a Massimo Taibi. The same goes to a Villa...when such a player faces world class keepers such as a Casillas...he is bound to miss a bigger amount of chances when compared to facing a keeper such as Zaragoza's Vallejo. So when Villa faces Casillas...he might convert just 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 chances...but when he faces Vallejo he will convert at least 4-5 in 6 chances. However the problem here is that he will not face a keeper with Casillas' ability in each of his 38 games...for every Casillas..for every Buffon...for every Kahn there are at least 5-6 Taibis or Vallejos...that is a fact.

If we look now at the very specific type of one on one that is causing the problems, we can also see it is difficult to even try and compare it to real world chances. In real life, centre backs rarely if ever drift away from each other enough to allow a through ball to bisect them near the box. This does not mean that there are no through balls being played into a box as some people seem to think I'm claiming, but that through balls into the box are invariably hit into the channels at an angle, with the forward going blindside of the DC when running onto it.

I suggest you watch Real Madrid against Barcelona, Zaragoza, Valencia and Almeria...you will find at least 6 such passes which bisect the central defenders (not so much rare if you get 6 in 4 games with 2 in Barca match alone) Also please watch Barca's 6-2 over Madrid last season...to be more accurate watch the 31st or 32nd minute and 52nd minute. You get the classic case of Puyol drifting wide while the through ball is played to Raul in the 32nd minute(though he manages to trap it rather than run through which is understandable due to his slow speed)

Such passes are rare (again on an avg) because you need an attacker who is intelligent enough to make space for himself and you need a passer who is skillful and intelligent enough to make spot such a pass. Watch Zidane's games..watch Barcelona or Real Madrid...such passes will not be rare in those games.

My only argument has been that these types of one on ones aren't as good a chance as people contend they are.

A world class striker is put through with no defenders (or one or two who are trailing behind) with just the keeper to beat and has the choice of: shooting to the left or to the right, placing the ball, lobbing the keeper or going round the keeper is not a good chance??? Wellll...i wonder what a good chance is then

If you want to continue to believe that one on ones are almost unmissable, be my guest.

Can you please point me out to my post where i say they are unmissable...i unable to find it....did i ever say that 1v1s are unmissable...no...my complaint is regarding your stats (which SI have implemented in the game) You say that a world class striker hits just 50% of his clear chances on target and converts just 25% of his chances into goal. But what i am saying is...world class strikers get almost 85-90% of their 1v1 chances on target and score at least 45-50% into goals...

The total might add up and it might be impressive over a number of seasons...but goals scored for a team counts for just one season. You might get a max of 10-15 clear chances every season. So if an expensive striker such as a Torres or a Drogba converts just 4-6 goals of his chances..while and inexpensive striker scores 3-4 goals in similar circumstances...most managers will opt for a cheaper option when there is no guarantee that the extra two goals will prove to be the turning point of the season. Barcelona create so many clear chances through the season..why do you think they paid 45 million on top of Eto'o for Ibrahimovic...because he is a better finisher than Eto'o thats why...

I want to ask you a question...do you know the type of chances that were considered in the research...were all the chances clear cut..with no defenders pressurizing the striker and just the keeper to beat? who took those chances? whether it was all world class players or was it a mix of some poor, average and great players...and who were those great players...because Rooney's finishing is far less than Van Nistelrooy's or Villa's or Ibrahimovic's and his conversion ratio might be 10% greater than average players but at least 15-20% less than great finishers but the avg will come down to just 15%. what was the ability of the goal keeper? was he a Oliver Kahn type whose reflexes were brilliant and had a stockier build or was it a Casillas type who though being comparatively slimmer is able to anticipate well?? Did a good finisher score more against a good anticipater or did he score more against a stockier keeper...what about morale (since it does play an important role)...did the striker get a bit depressed for missing his first chance or did the keeper become more confident on saving a chance? or did each player take just one chance...if yes then you cannot compare a great finisher to just an average finisher...There are so many permutation combinations...generalizing it is a very bad way of presenting things.

You'll enjoy FM more for a start, and you might even learn something about real football.

This has been the reason why the couple of versions (while best in the series) have been frustrating regarding finishing. wwfan...your's and a few others' viewpoint of reality is vastly different from actual reality. You know all the ins and outs of the ME and exploit it (even if you say it is logical) but when naturally your strikers score insane amount of goals..you all shout..ohh its not realistic for a striker to score 40 goals in a season. Ronaldo's goals read 23, 42 and 26 in his last three season at man utd and he has already scored 13 in 12 games....that is unrealistic for a winger...maybe he is a bug and all the spanish teams should demand that Madrid apply a patch on him.

You try to bring your reality into the game but the problem is that the game is not yet ready for your reality. While the ME is currently best in the market...it is not realistic...in fact it is far from it.

If defending in the game is broke...and SI was not able to solve it before the patch deadline...they should have left everything as it is instead of listening to some funny stats...when the defenders start behaving realistically, the strikers and their goal numbers will become realistic...First get the ME to be realistic...then try to apply realistic stats to it.

[Ezequiel_Lavezzi]

Originally Posted by Ezequiel_Lavezzi

You might want to read my post wwfan and make yourself feel better.

As stated before, I understand your frustrations but sometimes you just cannot "win" an argument, even when you are 100% correct.

I have read a lot of posts where you also had some altercations with my brother too about similar issues (My brother and I are two very different people) and sadly he too, just could not see past his point of view as do others in this thread.

All I can say is, you have fought your point, and unfortunately this talk will just go back and forth for an eternity - you just can't sway one's opinions when they are not open to listen to yours.

Merry Christmas mate, and thanks for the cool guides and the hard work you put into the game.

Interesting how you go on about people defending their arguments and how no evidence will make them change their mind and then you present your OPINION that one on ones in the game are fine and how there is no problem with goalkeepers as a fact.

I am sorry but that post makes absolutely no sense.

Why do I need to provide any evidence to my post?

I did not side with anyone, nor did I post my own opinion on the matter that required any evidence - I merely stated that it seems fine to me on a personal level because I tend to see the lighter side of things and see FM purely as a game not as something as important that needs to be discussed to the death like two astro-physicists trying to save the end of the World...

Every post I made here, merely stated that a lot of the evidence provided by either side of the argument were so extreemly negligible that it did not provide a strong case either way. People fail to remember that this is a game and you cant expect a piece of written code to match life exactly. That is all I said and there is no need to any evidence because my OPINION is basically based not on the actual issue but more inclined towards the actual debate, which I find interesting. (until it escalates into abuse)

I can understand some people get upset at the issue, and some people think the issue is not as bad.

From reading the entire thread, I can easily see that people are very quick to vent their frustrations and show their side of the story - but really do not try to understand the other persons point of view no matter how much evidence they bring to the table.

This causes a never ending cycle of "I rant" - "you rant" that in the end becomes boring and monotonous. I sure do not see myself posting numerous quotations in an essay form on Christmas day to make my point known - I am merely trying to just tell everyone to chill out, and maybe try and understand one another before starting a new post and just repeating the same aggressive post (sort of like the one you initiated towards me).

My post was meerly in reply to WWFAN's frustration that no one was reading his posts and you my friend, have proved just that factor.

During this whole thread, I have been enjoying the debate seen on either end and have not really sided with any one issue, and nor have I decided to add any evidence or facts regarding my game in any one way. I think you have managed to just once again prove wwfan's opinion that a lot of people here just love the confrontation and kick up a head of steam without really reading anyones post.

How you expect me to provide evidence on a point of view about people not listening to one anothers opinions is beyond me.

It is getting to a point where nearly every thread on this forum is becomming a personal attack on one anothers views.

Hope you all had a good Christmas and soon to be new year...(maybe we can all start fresh and not be so abusive to one another.)

[hotspur_move]

Ronaldo is respected by me cause when in one on one,i am quite sure that he will score of course

[Liam-Shannon]

Football manager is a joke everyone who plays it knows it is unrealistic the oppositions keeper gets MOM every game fantastic string of saves ********

[Liam-Shannon]

**** this game

[The Vet]

How did a bug this obvious surface in a fix patch?

[DirtyACE]

What I'm about to say is simply my opinion.

This whole situation can be viewed in the following way:

If you imagine the attack/defense phase in FM as being split into three variables which control the outcome. The three variables are, the goalkeeper, the defenders, and the opposing attackers. This is just a generalization, I'm sure there are more variables that are considered, but I'm simply looking at this from a very broad point of view.

Ok, so one of the variables is incorrect, it gives an unsatisfactory outcome. This variable are the defenders. The other two variables, attackers and GK are working reasonably well, however, they were working too well because of the first variable being incorrect. The attacker variable was as a result much more influential, hence many different strikers (of various quality) scoring many goals.

Now, as per usual pattern, SI always releases a patch just prior to Christmas. Well, to correct the defenders is probably a bigger endeavor than what many may think or realize, and so SI was not able to implement a full, proper fix. Perhaps it was due to time constraints or something else, but it simply wasn't done. A short cut was taken of sorts instead, a compromise. The two variables that were working well were altered instead in order to compensate for the defensive inadequacies of the match engine. To minimize the frequency of goals being scored that were created by through passes, which in turn became the 1 on 1 situations.

The newly altered variables (strikers and GKs) are now behaving differently. The GKs are obviously more effective at saving certain type of chances, which are the direct 1 on 1s, where the striker has a lot of room, due to the defenders being abysmal in their execution of even some of the basic concepts of defense.

The strikers themselves are also behaving differently. I'm not sure how many of you have noticed, but now many strikers, even the truly world class ones, are doing things that are odd more often. For example shooting wildly from 20 yards or so while having a ton of room to take their time, move forward closer to the goal and then shoot. Well, this is kind of a way to also compensate for the defenders. If a striker is suddenly finding himself in so much room on a regular basis, then he would be scoring too much. It would simply be too unrealistic. But of course the reason why they're finding themselves in so much space, and so often is because of the defenders. So it all circles back to the main culprit, the defense.

Just to conclude, I simply think that SI, for whatever reason, were not able to implement a proper fix for the defense system and so had to compensate for it. Hopefully this is just temporary, but we wont know at least until the next patch.

[Rista]

I am sorry but that post makes absolutely no sense.....

Sorry if my post sounded 'abusive' because I didn't mean it that way. I was just referring to your previous post, not that one I quoted, where you said:

No argument or evidence in the World will sway one or the others opinion on their own argument.

Sadly people fail to realise that this one on one issue isn't that huge of a deal and the percentages are negligiable.

There are no super keepers, there is not a huge bug with one on ones - it is not perfect but it is not totally broken to a point where it is not playable or glaringly a game breaker.

That to me sounds like presenting your opinion as a fact.

As for people not reading wwfan's posts. Just because I disagree with what he says doesn't mean I'm not reading what he writes. Besides, quite a few people are screaming there are no superkeepers without actually understanding what is meant by that term.

You are right the ME is better than in other games, you are right it will never be perfect but if it wasn't for threads like this and people 'moaning' about 'non issues' like this, it would never have become as good as it is now. The one on one issue does not render the game 'unplayable' to me either but I can see why it is frustrating to so many people and why many find it to actually be a big of a deal. If what wwfan says is true, ie those kind of chances are very rare IRL, then I'd say it is a big of a deal considering there are numerous chances like that being created in literally every single match in FM.

[Scab]

DirtyACE, I think that theory is a bit much to be honest. I see no reason to doubt that SI did their best to fix the issues that were reported (defender marking in particular) and that this is an unintentional consequence of those changes. Unexpected results is an everyday occurrence in software development and testing of even rather basic applications, that's just the nature of the beast. Bear in mind that computers essentially just crunch numbers and perform very rudimentary logic operations; to translate this into a simulation of something as undefined and in many instances subjective as "the game of football", or perhaps more specifically "striker movement off the ball in the build-up phase" etc, with all the different team/player/external variables that are in FM is anything but basic logic and it will have bugs. It's frustrating for us players, but no testing and dev team in the world would pick up every single glitch in a system like this. I don't think it's wrong for us players to speak our minds, quite the opposite, but I sympathize with anyone trying to come up with bug fixes based on the hyperbolic and unspecific claims that tend to fill this board, especially when people start theorizing that he's intentionally replacing one problem with another whenever the fix does not work as intended, or just have a go at the dev/testing team rather than talk about the issue. :/

Anyway, my impression is that it's been acknowledged that there is an issue with DC/GK that is affecting one-on-ones in an unrealistic way, so I think it's pretty safe to assume that this will be addressed in a patch next year once the exact cause(s) are analyzed and the tweaks coded and tested. Also, not to have a go at anyone, but the 1-on-1 conversion rate debate seems rather endless without hard numbers. You can't really conclude that it's wrong (or perhaps equally important how wrong) without showing a comparison between stats from the game and stats from reality.

[Ezequiel_Lavezzi]

Look, I just tried to calm everyone down and did not really take sides. I can understand peoples frustrations, I see them happen at home with family members who also play FM.

One thing that this thread needs clearing up.

People keep taking many of wwfans comments out of context. My main concern is how people quoted him stating that he said one on ones are rare in real life or that are rarely scored. wwfan never said this in the context people have been quoting him on.

WWfan did not say that one on ones are rare in real life, nor did he say that there is no bug.

He clearly stated that the match engine does have a problem where a through ball can unrealistically penetrate the defence leading to a one on one.

This is what he said IS RARE IN REAL LIFE. He did not say that through balls are rare, he did not say that one on ones are rare.

The match engine currently has an issue where a certain type of throughball can break a central pairing of defenders in an unrealistic manner.

Now what I SAID is that the percentages shown by parties from either side of the argument are very negligible. People are fighting over 1 or 2 percent compared from real life to a game. In reality you wont even notice the differences, especially if you played an FM match, lets say once a week. We as a gamer see things in a lot more congested manner and thus a lot of issues come to the fray.

We also might make errors with our tactics and other minor issues lead to a lot more one on ones. This also is accumilated with the fact that the engine tends to allow more one on ones than usual.

So why all the fuss.

Wwfan has worked with SI. He has acknowledged the fact that there is NO SUPER KEEPER but there are such a large number of CENTRAL one on ones, leading to a lot more saves by the keeper. If the keeper did not save these added one on ones, I would guess there would begin to be wide spread chaos on these forums, crying about strange scores or losses because of one on ones.

SI have also acknowledged in the bugs forum to be aware of this issue - in the time being the goalies will seem to save more central one on ones as these are the slightly "unrealistic" chances created.

I am sure SI will work to rectify this issue with the engine and we can all enjoy this game and refrain from getting upset online.

[billy2shots]

I have recently come back to FM having not bought the last couple due to being so let down by Fm05 and 6. I played every version of championship manager untill the split a few years ago. I remember when you had to buy the German/Italy etc leagues as an add on because you only had England and Scotland as part of the game. Although not an expert i think after around 14 years or so of playing these games i have seen alot.

The superkeeper theory has been around since the dawn of the game and while the description might not be 100% accurate i believe it is present. Now before someone with a million post count shouts me down, im not saying that that all keepers turn into Buffon for 90 mins. I and maybe others see 25 shots on goal aswell as 9ccc and still see no goals scored by my team, now sometimes the other teams keeper gets a 9 or 10 and sometimes i have three goals dissalowed and sometimes my forward are just rubbish but these all go under the heading of superkeeper.

1.Now to try and keep this simple what i have seen for myself is that there was/is a bug that allows the cb's to be split to easy.

2.Now there seems to be a bug that too many good oppotunites are missed.

Now if SI have created 2 as a fix to 1 then they need their heads tested. What ever happened to 2 wrongs dont make a right.

It is obvious to anybody that the ME isnt working as they intended it to but to make it worse just to keep the scores realistic is just crazy.

This is just my point of view but the ME's have never worked properly on any version of the game and could always be exploited by certain tactics (Diablo cm03/04). If they cant make one that works then dont make one, just show me detailed stats at the end of the game with me scoreing 2 goals from 9 shots on target. Instead i have to watch as my world class forwards score 0 or 1 from 25 shots on target with 10ccc.

SI are trying to fix a problem, but its a problem they have created for themselves.

All this talk of keeping things realistic about cutting in from an angle etc etc is just guff, the only thing that is realistic is the goals scored but that it seems makes everthing else very unrealistic.

Just my 5 eggs and i will now leave FM again and go back and play Roma save on 03/04 (in my 50th season now).

[PaulC]

In case anyone is interested this is my position on these issues:

- Goalies. I believe keepers have too much reach on shots at close to point blank range, which manifests itself in some one on one situations. This is to be addressed in 10.3. However, I also believe that a keeper is in quite a strong position when faced with a one on one as he can engage the attacker and close the angle. This isn't a possibility for him with the majority of shots he will face.

- wwfan is correct about the DC's being split too readily. This is also something I intend to address in 10.3.

- A player at high speed will find it harder to shoot efficiently, and this also plays a part, rightly IMHO.

All constructive feedback is, as ever, appreciated. Most of us want the same thing; an ever more realistic football simulation.

[Blaupunkt]

I have to LOL at this thread and some of the people posting in it.

wwfan has provided an explanation of what the problem is and why its happening which if fair enough IMO, it might not be ideal and in sure everyone would like it fixing!

He then goes on to provide "real world stats" to back up other parts of his argument which then get thrown back in his face by people with them choosing to believe what they imagine to be true rather than anything that is factual.

People might claim to watching a lot of football but how much of this is live and how much just the highlights, if you watch a lot of highlights then you will not see as many missed chances as there might have been in game XYZ, also just picking out 1 or 2 games where a lot of a certain type of chance was created and/or scored is not conclusive proof, because in the next 10 games player X no matter what level he is playing at might miss all those types of chances IF any where even created and score with a header or 3yrd tap in.

just because YOU believe a player would score X amount of chances does not mean he does or will.

To all those people who keep saying wwfan's stats are wrong, what you need to do is go and find real evidenced of this, real life stats, not ones you imagine to be true because you have seen player X score XYZ on the TV, then come back here with your proof and post your findings, also remember to include any links to any websites you used and any names of books and who wrote them .

IF you can do this then your arguments might hold more weight and people like wwfan and SI will look into these stats and take your arguments more seriously, im also quite sure that SI will take make any changes they need to based on the new evidence you have provided.

[Liam-Shannon]

i just had 6 CCC's against newly promoted boro torres and aguero couldn't score one against federico villar he put on a keeping clinic (AGAIN) people who deny goalkeepers aren't super over rated are lieing to themselves torres will not miss 5 one on ones in one game ever fullstop the end.

[Rista]

In case anyone is interested this is my position on these issues:

- Goalies. I believe keepers have too much reach on shots at close to point blank range, which manifests itself in some one on one situations. This is to be addressed in 10.3. However, I also believe that a keeper is in quite a strong position when faced with a one on one as he can engage the attacker and close the angle. This isn't a possibility for him with the majority of shots he will face.

- wwfan is correct about the DC's being split too readily. This is also something I intend to address in 10.3.

- A player at high speed will find it harder to shoot efficiently, and this also plays a part, rightly IMHO.

All constructive feedback is, as ever, appreciated. Most of us want the same thing; an ever more realistic football simulation.

Good to see SI are aware of the issue and are working in it

Any chance of players sometimes trying to round the keeper when in clear one on one situations with no pressure from defenders instead of shooting every time? I'm yet to see that in FM10 and I could swear it was there in previous versions of the game.

[Smikis]

players who have above 15 or 16 finishing and composure shouldn't really be shooting directly at the keeper, imo - thats why you pay them more than 100k a month.

if the keeper is good and on ocassion manages to stop a one-on-one with these strikers is another issue.

but it happens all the time.. i have strikers with 18-20 composure and finishing..

while keepers doing some awesome bs while keeping clean sheet , biggest problem is imo that strikers cant finish after 10.2... yet to see single one on one where striker shoots to corner.. or lobs the keeper.. ah i saw pato lobed once.. when i was managing brazil

most strikers wont even agree to learn to lob.. learn what? i seriously hate those playing moves.. were they even in fm09 ? how can you be third best striker in the world.. getting paid over 100k a week AND DO NOT KNOW HOW TO LOB?

**** i never played football, well apart with friends on the grass in summer, many years ago.. and i could lob a ball.. maybe i couldnt score but i could.. but when profesional striker cant.. cuz its not in his move list its ridiculous..

[cf]

- A player at high speed will find it harder to shoot efficiently, and this also plays a part, rightly IMHO.

I'll add to this bit that in my (albeit limited) experience of 1 full season in the EPL with 10.2, that even if the striker is through on goal with time and space they don't often try anything other than to shoot from near the edge of the area. I've not seen them slow down and try to lob the keeper, place their shot or try to go around the keeper.

[Smikis]

yep the first attack they have after i had 7 ccc's they score.... i couldnt believe it

i can post few screenshots even more extreme than this.. started ssing my every game where i make about 30 attempts yet score 1 or 0 goals ..

gonna make a post soon enough when i feel i have enough of those

biggest problem is th strikers not the keepers.. they cant finish.. no matter how good they are.. supposedly nerfed and non existent long shots are still twice more often than my best striker in the world scoring.. but oh well

btw props for using same striker ^^ ( and no hes not the best in the world, but hes quite beast when he reach age of 30~, my main striker is twice of him tho )

[Blaupunkt]

there was a huge thread last year regarding a very similar thing so what you have posted in your screen shot smikis, i am not going to tell you its your tactics or anything but thats what it boiled down to last year, people exploiting a bug in the game sometimes with out even knowing and the chances not actually being as good as people believed them to be.

i can tell you people might ask you to upload some pkm's of these games also so they can see exactly whats going off and provide you with a more detailed report than any screen shot can give.

[roseboy64]

As was said before, the problem was spotted before the patch was released but it only manifested itself late so not enough time to put in a fix and properly test it before patch release.

[Viquitor]

However, the superkeeper was on my side

[Smikis]

there was a huge thread last year regarding a very similar thing so what you have posted in your screen shot smikis, i am not going to tell you its your tactics or anything but thats what it boiled down to last year, people exploiting a bug in the game sometimes with out even knowing and the chances not actually being as good as people believed them to be.

i can tell you people might ask you to upload some pkm's of these games also so they can see exactly whats going off and provide you with a more detailed report than any screen shot can give.

rofl.. thats not even my ss.. there are no diablo/bug tactics in fm10.. and its not my tactics.. take a hike jerk