Football Manager 2014 - Update 14.3.1 Update FEEDBACK THREAD

[cipriang80]

super keepers are a myth

Well, i am living a dream then. Lucky me.

I know team building and tactics play a big factor in the strikers efficiency, however the amount of missed chances is just ridiculous from my point of view.

[DrIgz]

Are you planing to release a transfer bug fix or no?

It really annoys me, as I'm coming to more and more players that I can't buy because of it.

How often would you say it happens?

I'm currently way down in the lower leagues but want to start a save a bit closer to the top divisions where the transfer market if crucial and want to know how much of a hinderance the issue is, as it is unlikely to be fixed.

[Svenc]

Well, i am living a dream then. Lucky me.

I know team building and tactics play a big factor in the strikers efficiency, however the amount of missed chances is just ridiculous from my point of view.

Problem is, if all you can back this up by is "gut feeling" rather than fact and data, it won't do you any good and will rightfully be ignored by the authorities. Some of the stats in the match engine have always been off (tackling success ratios), others just slightly, and there's also a lot of misconceptions going around. Such as how many direct free kicks are actually converted in real football (no matter what FIFA Soccer tells you or how TV stations celebrate Ronaldo's run-ups to his kicks in dramatic close-ups: very very few). But how many clear cut one on ones are converted too (about less than 40% on average, with only a selected few strikers hovering around the 50% mark or even topping that).

So part of the problem is that FM is always going to be a flawed attempt at mimicing a real football match by very definition: It's not the real thing and won't ever be, and even if it were the real thing, despite even top level punditry clinging onto disproven myths ("You have to win Zweikampf", you have to keep possession, you have to this and that) there is no consensus as to what really makes it "tick" or a team eventually win (other than scoring goals, naturally), and scientific research has only come very recently into it all. That is part of its attraction, actually and is fueled by its extremely low scoring nature being completely at odds with almost any other team sports out there. But another part is also that SI cannot go by people's gut feelings, but rely on facts and real-world data themselves instead. Some of those makes for frustrating experiences rather than fun ones. And football can be a very frustrating game comparably often: http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/716938/Live, looking at matches overall, the correlation between a team winning and getting more shots going than its opponent is no more than about 70%, something that just wouldn't happen in Handball or Basketball. But the target is real football, not Pro Evolution Soccer.

However, it all goes both ways, that is you as well as the AI team. Just as you can easily find match stats being at complete odds with the result by looking at teams who always attack (Dortmund:http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/723796/Live) or dominate their league (PSG, see above), you will find the opposite of those with teams that are outplayed or sit back and hope for the best if you look at the stats of matches that still the sides in question turned out winners or managed to get a draw. Such as Dortmund's/PSG's opponents in the linked to matches, if you will.

[daoan]

One day we will play a great football manager simulation. One day, but not today.

[sporadicsmiles]

Many improvements over previous patch, however the finishing is infuriating to say the least. I imagine SI is trying to create an intense experience during the matches to where there are more than 2 highlights, but keep the scores under control, to where we don't see a lot of 5-5, 7-4 results.

The fact that your striker will most times try to remove the opposition goal keeper's head, with a powerful long strike, regardless of his "finishing", "composure" and other vital attributes, is frustrating me to where as much as i love this game, i can't play it anymore.

The supper keepers are back with a vengeance... I hope there will be a fix to this issue soon.

So, too many goals are being scored, and there are super keepers? Does that not sound a little contradictory to you?

[milnerpoint]

Problem is, if all you can back this up by is "gut feeling" rather than fact and data, it won't do you any good and will rightfully be ignored by the authorities. Some of the stats in the match engine have always been off (tackling success ratios), others just slightly, and there's also a lot of misconceptions going around. Such as how many direct free kicks are actually converted in real football (no matter what FIFA Soccer tells you or how TV stations celebrate Ronaldo's run-ups to his kicks in dramatic close-ups: very very few). But how many clear cut one on ones are converted too (about less than 40% on average, with only a selected few strikers hovering around the 50% mark or even topping that).

So part of the problem is that FM is always going to be a flawed attempt at mimicing a real football match by very definition: It's not the real thing and won't ever be, and even if it were the real thing, despite even top level punditry clinging onto disproven myths ("You have to win Zweikampf", you have to keep possession, you have to this and that) there is no consensus as to what really makes it "tick" or a team eventually win (other than scoring goals, naturally), and scientific research has only come very recently into it all. That is part of its attraction, actually and is fueled by its extremely low scoring nature being completely at odds with almost any other team sports out there. But another part is also that SI cannot go by people's gut feelings, but rely on facts and real-world data themselves instead. Some of those makes for frustrating experiences rather than fun ones. And football can be a very frustrating game comparably often: http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/716938/Live, looking at matches overall, the correlation between a team winning and getting more shots going than its opponent is no more than about 70%, something that just wouldn't happen in Handball or Basketball. But the target is real football, not Pro Evolution Soccer.

However, it all goes both ways, that is you as well as the AI team. Just as you can easily find match stats being at complete odds with the result by looking at teams who always attack (Dortmund:http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/723796/Live) or dominate their league (PSG, see above), you will find the opposite of those with teams that are outplayed or sit back and hope for the best if you look at the stats of matches that still the sides in question turned out winners or managed to get a draw. Such as Dortmund's/PSG's opponents in the linked to matches, if you will.

Great post!

[Eric_Cartman]

How often would you say it happens?

I'm currently way down in the lower leagues but want to start a save a bit closer to the top divisions where the transfer market if crucial and want to know how much of a hinderance the issue is, as it is unlikely to be fixed.

In my first season and a half, I bought about 10 players. In searching for these players, I came to about 5 of that transfer bugs.

[TIR669]

I'm loving the game. It's absolutely fantastic and as realistic as it gets. My goalkeeper gets a yellow for walking with the ball outside the box, then whilst he is returning to his goal, the opposing team takes the free kick and scores.

Here are some of my last seasons' games which I either drew or lost. Stats in 5 out of 6 games I've lost are tremendous.

http://i.imgur.com/3PxCCBn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/uETwetu.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/FiQ4k2o.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XzhlrPf.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/wpgzqjZ.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/uVNFGxz.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/zxuvkdM.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/S3wsm9B.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/MmY3jPU.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/NJlKbSf.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/mks2T4N.jpg

This years' finest:

Note that these are four out of six league matches I've played so far. My focus is attacking movement. My team's MP is 3rd place. And yet this happens two years in a row.

[milnerpoint]

Why do you blank out your scorers names?

[TIR669]

Yeah, that's the point here.

Because it's a joint LLM challenge on another forum. LLM rules clearly state no downloaded tactics or player naming is allowed.

[milnerpoint]

Ah fair enough!

[Mikrofonija]

This too:

Look at CCC

[forameuss]

This too:

Look at CCC

Except most sensible people accept that the CCC numbers are pretty pointless when looking at them in isolation. But aye, feel free to continue your sarcastic applause.

[Svenc]

Here are some of my last seasons' games which I either drew or lost. Stats in 5 out of 6 games I've lost are tremendous.

[snip]

Unless I'm missing something, in all of those there's two, at best three that are fairly remarkable as far as I'm concerned. In those posted as screenshots, there are actually none to me. You could take a look at the real-world statistics of any good side, similarily be so selective as to pick the matches it has merely drawn or lost, and come up with similar. Such as Ajax, in this case.

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/719729/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/719547/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/719578/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/776586/Live

Or let's go through City's failings of the current season.

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/719914/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/719991/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/720149/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/720717/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/720735/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/790670/Live

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/808996/Live

Even if you dominated each and every match statistically, that wouldn't guarantee you a thing. If you did, going by real life statistics, there would still be a good numbers of games you would come out not winning. Whilst some of your matches are a bit out there, overall that's just football. Additionally this can be naturally be skewed by user tactics too, most notably risky specific marking jobs, lack of holding players or lack of movement (not arguing this to be the case here, mind!).

[BiggusD]

Note that these are four out of six league matches I've played so far. My focus is attacking movement. My team's MP is 3rd place. And yet this happens two years in a row.

Your shot/shot at goal ratio is roughly 3/1 in these matches. That is poor, and explains why you were losing points. If you played well and created truly big chances, your ratio should be around 2/1 or better. Your screenshots only shows that you failed to create big enough chances to win those matches, and that's either a team building problem, tactical problem, a motivational problem - or a combination of those three. Tactics, team building and man management are the three main aspects of this game, and you're failing at at least one of them.

Just posting screenshots in here of statistics alone won't do much good. Instead, focus on what the AI does in an attempt to rule out personal errors. If the same issues happen to the AI, then you have a case. If not, it is something you do. Next match, try to focus on whether the AI has the same problems as you do and post a .pkm of the match with a list of incidents happening to the AI, and times, showing what you mean are ME shortcomings.

Edit: this is not to say that the Tactics of 14.3 are not still too "narrow" in terms of which combinations are acceptable. I know they were in 14.2.

[Mikrofonija]

Except most sensible people accept that the CCC numbers are pretty pointless when looking at them in isolation. But aye, feel free to continue your sarcastic applause.

You always talk on this forum about how important are CCC in this game when somebody have 30 shots on game but have small number of CCC. You always say that number of CCC was little. Now talking is different.

This game was for winning league versus team who has alredy out in 2nd division.

And this is not a first time that this hapend.

I wasn't looking CCC never until this series beacouse I never had a problem with scoring this much. And when I first time asked everybody start talking about CCC. So I was started looking at that.

Sorry about bad English, it is not my first language.

[forameuss]

You always talk on this forum about how important are CCC in this game when somebody have 30 shots on game but have small number of CCC. You always say that number of CCC was little. Now talking is different.

This game was for winning league versus team who has alredy out in 2nd division.

And this is not a first time that this hapend.

I wasn't looking CCC never until this series beacouse I never had a problem with scoring this much. And when I first time asked everybody start talking about CCC. So I was started looking at that.

Sorry about bad English, it is not my first language.

"You" being me, or just generally? Because I've said nothing of the sort. CCC SHOULD be a good measure, but they're not at the moment, as if you actually look at the chances, rather than just looking at the number of getting the flaming torches, then you'd see that a lot of them aren't actually clear cut chances.

[Svenc]

You always talk on this forum about how important are CCC in this game when somebody have 30 shots on game but have small number of CCC. You always say that number of CCC was little. Now talking is different.

This game was for winning league versus team who has alredy out in 2nd division.

And this is not a first time that this hapend.

I wasn't looking CCC never until this series beacouse I never had a problem with scoring this much. And when I first time asked everybody start talking about CCC. So I was started looking at that.

Sorry about bad English, it is not my first language.

To a sensible extent. When all things work well, a CCC is by Opta definition "A situation where a player should reasonably be expected to score usually in a one-on-one scenario or from very close range." Even by Opta standards, it is thus by no means a guaranteed "sitter". This is about classifying chances: A CCC is meant to be one that has a higher chance of being converted than a normal shot. However you don't need any CCC to score a goal. It's just an attempt at classifying chances. There is an important catch in FM: The algorithm or rather the in-game definition of a CCC and the conditions needed to be met makes it so that this doesn't apply all the time. For whatever reason many CCCs are nowhere near Opta stat's definition. Match play like this gets flagged as CCC too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmj6thag7qI&list=UU7GXmzjFp1RPI4kRILODvFQ You will see it in the analysis tab, when you click on situations flagged as clear cut chances and click on the little dots to watch the actual play. If you think this to be bad, I fully agree.

As an attempt at classifying attempts, it remains a subjective stat in real football too though. Plus clear cut chances aren't all the same themselves.

[...]The data is very subjective as their a lot of variables involved when measuring a clear cut chance and Opta do not distinguish one clear cut chance from another. For example, both a penalty and a one on one with a goalkeeper are recorded as clear cut chances and the distance away from goal is not taken into consideration.

Being a subjective statistic it is hard to get many valid conclusions from the data provided as the definition of a clear cut chance is up for interpretation[...]

With that in mind, let's look at some real-life statistics of the current Premier League season. http://eplindex.com/47486/clear-cut-finishing-analysis-suarez-aguero-giroud-rooney-compared.html It is thus established that a lot of top strikers have a CCC conversion rate of 30% or even less, and due to the failings of FM's CCC stat, the number should realistically actually be lower. And even if all of your 5 CCCs were genuine, unless it's happening time and time again there would be nothing inherently wrong with none of them going in. The chance of conversion doesn't magically go up when you already missed two or three. In the same sense, 25 or more shots full stop have never been a guarantee for scoring even a single goal for any team in the history of the game. Along that line of thinking lies the pits of logics hell. Or Charles Reep, who sometime in the last century found that teams on average would score a goal from X attempts, and thus developed wonderfully bizarre theories on teams being "goals in deficit" for coming games as well as mixing up cause and effect by encouraging teams to get as many shots going as possible then, as for a goal they'd need those X attempts, obviously.

In the end, it's all mere numbers. Stuff, passes and shots that someone adds up, or in FM's case, an algorithm. It can be immensely useful when not abused. But beneath it all lies the actual play – or in particular in a low scoring sports such as football that one penalty missed that has the power to crush and destroy and **** you off, drawing everything all wonderful going before it completely redundant.

[Coolcup]

Does FM Classic use the same match engine as the full version? That is to say, if I have developed a very good tactic on the full version, will it play in a similar fashion in FM Classic?

Also, does FM Classic have a dark skin like in the full game or is it only the default skin? The default skin hurts my eyes.

[forameuss]

Does FM Classic use the same match engine as the full version? That is to say, if I have developed a very good tactic on the full version, will it play in a similar fashion in FM Classic?

Also, does FM Classic have a dark skin like in the full game or is it only the default skin? The default skin hurts my eyes.

1) Yup, same match engine across both versions, but obviously morale and teamtalks don't count in FMC. You should be able to take a good tactic from the full and play fine in Classic, and the other way around should be possible too, but obviously morale takes an effect then.

2) FMC has its own skin - not as light as the original white one, but it's not really a dark skin. Probably best to have a look yourself to see if you feel it's alright. Personally I think it's one of the best interfaces they've ever produced.

[Kriss]

FMC is it also has instant results

[HUNT3R]

FMC is it also has instant results

RTH got to you too

[RTHerringbone]

RTH got to you too

Damn straight

Edit: Actually, Kriss sets the trends that others follow

[Guest El Payaso]

With that in mind, let's look at some real-life statistics of the current Premier League season. http://eplindex.com/47486/clear-cut-finishing-analysis-suarez-aguero-giroud-rooney-compared.html It is thus established that a lot of top strikers have a CCC conversion rate of 30% or even less, and due to the failings of FM's CCC stat, the number should realistically actually be lower.

Doesn't these statistics also show that the game has far too many clear cut chances compared to real life (as I've stated for many times?) It's a common situation that you get over 5 CCCs in one match and over 5 HCs also and you usually get even more. Based on those real life statistics strikers are getting much less than one CCC per game, has anyone counted how many a big team's striker gets in FM, maybe 2-3 per game atleast? And once again some might say that all of the CCCs really aren't CCCs at all but like I've said: I think that it works both ways as many of easy chances are counted as HCs or not even that.

[themadsheep2001]

Doesn't these statistics also show that the game has far too many clear cut chances compared to real life (as I've stated for many times?) It's a common situation that you get over 5 CCCs in one match and over 5 HCs also and you usually get even more. Based on those real life statistics strikers are getting much less than one CCC per game, has anyone counted how many a big team's striker gets in FM, maybe 2-3 per game atleast? And once again some might say that all of the CCCs really aren't CCCs at all but like I've said: I think that it works both ways as many of easy chances are counted as HCs or not even that.

Not necessarily. Its already noted that some of the chances being marked as CCCs are not CCC. It doesn't necessarily follow that its the other way to. It could be, but you can't yet make that assumption. If you think there are half chances, and other chances, not being marked correctly, then certainly raise them.

[Svenc]

For the total number of CCCs per game, here are the totals after half the last PL season 2012/2013 (stats by January 2013): http://eplindex.com/24818/team-creates-converts-clear-cut-chances-stats-analysis.html According to this, United created the most with about 3 CCCs per match, as defined per Opta (striker clear on goal), and Sunderland the least with about 0,8 per match. Here's also the conversion ratio by March 2013 sorted by team, rather than by players: http://eplindex.com/27890/how-well-does-your-team-convert-chances-premier-league-stats-comparison.html I don't think it's coincidence that teams from the bottom of the table have some of the best figures here. The nature of a lot of their play means they're pinned back and snatch one on the break rather than battling against teams sitting deep and being forced to find space in the first place. They might create very few chances of calibre, but when they do, they often find themselves in lots of space. The average CCC conversion remains less than 40%.

I don't find this impossible at all that chance creation in general would be off, it's a game with many faults. But realistically, it needs to be compared to real-world data then, as real-world football is SI's target and has always been. Problem is that FM doesn't provide a whole lot statistics on this, there isn't even one for CCC conversion or chance type/creation of any kind, and the stats back-end isn't always reliable on everything. And evidently, a player's "gut feeling" on many things can be wildly off the mark and isn't a wholly reliable source of feedback.

edit: Unless I've miscalculated, the average number of CCCs of the human team per game from the big picture post on the last page is exactly 3 per game (all 15 games counted). Bearing in mind how loose FM's definition of a CCC can be and that these aren't stats from the entire season, but hand-picked draws and losses from different seasons that doesn't hint at at being as far off the mark as that gut feeling and frustration that usually goes along with it would suggest, however understandable that frustration is.

[Dave9ffc]

Not sure if it's maybe been noted but numerous times the ball clearly goes out for a throw but a corner is given. Not a big deal and possibly to do with graphics or such but does look stupid.

[TIR669]

Your shot/shot at goal ratio is roughly 3/1 in these matches. That is poor, and explains why you were losing points. If you played well and created truly big chances, your ratio should be around 2/1 or better. Your screenshots only shows that you failed to create big enough chances to win those matches, and that's either a team building problem, tactical problem, a motivational problem - or a combination of those three. Tactics, team building and man management are the three main aspects of this game, and you're failing at at least one of them.

Just posting screenshots in here of statistics alone won't do much good. Instead, focus on what the AI does in an attempt to rule out personal errors. If the same issues happen to the AI, then you have a case. If not, it is something you do. Next match, try to focus on whether the AI has the same problems as you do and post a .pkm of the match with a list of incidents happening to the AI, and times, showing what you mean are ME shortcomings.

Edit: this is not to say that the Tactics of 14.3 are not still too "narrow" in terms of which combinations are acceptable. I know they were in 14.2.

Yes, the ratio is quite poor, I agree. However, don't you think there's a tiny possibility it is so poor because I'm playing in Iceland and in a league where strikers with finishing and composure 12+ are rare. I think there is.

My screenshots prove nothing but the fact that the game is still broken, even after three major patches. No, I didn't come here to only say that because I still believe you all understand that is the case here and I certainly didn't come here with screenshots of exactly those matches I had lots of CCC's but all of them from bad positions so I could badmouth the game. No, it's nothing like that.

All those games were realistic with marking chances as CCC and HC, but there is TOO. MANY. CASES. where the AI scores from their first major opportunity whereas the player misses two, three or four of them.

It's also funny how I concede goals far more often from my players' mistakes as opposed to the goals I score. The opposing team often plays with a couple of 17/18yo players in random positions to fill in, and more often than not, they play best games of their career. A debut goal from an 18yo striker is very frequent.

I concede goals mostly from balls played behind my LB. Opponents' MC/AM dwells on the ball and waits until

a) my LB comes rushing towards him leaving empty space behind (even though I instructed him to close down less and to hold position), or

b) the opponents' RB/RM runs past my player, gets the ball and scores most of the time, regardless of his poor finishing, composure, technique and off the ball attributes.

Either that, or there is a corner kick, or a mistake and in least cases, a realistic goal from play.

I have nothing to say if results like this happen once in a while, or several times during the season, but this is simply too much. The last two seasons are the same - I play extremely well in the start, then I lose out for one game and that's it. There is no way to win two in a row after that. And it happens again and again.

And please don't copy whoscored links as relevant. As many of you have already said, the game records far too many CCC's, but still not too many you could say that all are irrelevant.

[Svenc]

And please don't copy whoscored links as relevant. As many of you have already said, the game records far too many CCC's, but still not too many you could say that all are irrelevant.

whoscored.com doesn't track CCCs, just shots. Without going into your recent qualms, which may be justified or no, it was merely an attempt at questioning the logics in the prievious post, to which FM will never apply. You have to accept that or you don't. Matches you posted happen regularly in football, you don't have to look for them, and that is a fact. That is due to the very low scoring nature of it all, and the fact that dominating statistics doesn't guarantee a thing. (Coincidentally or no a common source of frustration in FM, all dating back to the advent of download tactics which were all about dominating a few key statistics all season, and the players thus assuming everything was awesome just because of that).

[TIR669]

They may happen commonly in RL, but they don't happen to the same team that many times in a row.

[mhaffy]

In FM14 do clubs get compensation when their players are injured on international duty? Wilshere was injured in the recent international friendly and his wages are apparently being paid for under FA insurance policy. Just wondered if FM14 reflected this.

[Svenc]

They may happen commonly in RL, but they don't happen to the same team that many times in a row.

You stated that only the last couple of screenshots provided were from a recent sequence of matches, though.

Out of those there was only one match were the statistics were really at odds with the actual result, which was the match against Stjarnan. The other matches there was neither side truly dominating the other judging by the numbers. Which is why I personally was initially not 100% sure what this was supposed to be about in the first place... Not even the apparently dreaded woodwork statistics looked super worrysome.

[ErwinFm1992]

By this message i want to thank SI Games for the great fun there game has brought me in the last years. But now i have decided to stop. FM 2014 was not that great from the begin and it never got above a 5 as rating... But now really what where you thinking with this patch ?? i understand the transfer update but why Change a ME who already was not that great.. But now it pure ****. So many mistakes, your opponent always score easier while you need 5 changes for 1 goal even when you are Barcelona.

I am realy curious to 2015 because i hope you will go back to the way things for before the failure named FM 2014.

Adios.

[llama3]

By this message i want to thank SI Games for the great fun there game has brought me in the last years. But now i have decided to stop. FM 2014 was not that great from the begin and it never got above a 5 as rating... But now really what where you thinking with this patch ?? i understand the transfer update but why Change a ME who already was not that great.. But now it pure ****. So many mistakes, your opponent always score easier while you need 5 changes for 1 goal even when you are Barcelona.

I am realy curious to 2015 because i hope you will go back to the way things for before the failure named FM 2014.

Adios.

We are happy to hear what your concerns are RE: FM14 but can you please post in a constructive manner, otherwise your comments will be ignored.

[TIR669]

You stated that only the last couple of screenshots provided were from a recent sequence of matches, though.

Out of those there was only one match were the statistics were really at odds with the actual result, which was the match against Stjarnan. The other matches there was neither side truly dominating the other judging by the numbers. Which is why I personally was initially not 100% sure what this was supposed to be about in the first place... Not even the apparently dreaded woodwork statistics looked super worrysome.

opponent / my CCC+HC / their CCC+HC / in total / result

vs. IBV - 3+4/0+3 - 7/3 - drew 1:1

vs. Stjarnan - 4+6/1+1 - 10/2 - drew 0:0

vs. FH - 2+4/4+1 - 6/5 - lost 0:1

vs. Breidablik - 4+7/3+3 - 10/6 - lost 1:3

in total: 13+21 / 8+8

That's 34 chances created by my team and 16 from my opponents. In four games I scored 2 goals compared to 5. Won two points.

I'm not even asking for an explanation regarding lots of CCCs and HCs created, but I can't help to notice how AI gets much, much better results when the player is the better side in a match.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Not sure if it's maybe been noted but numerous times the ball clearly goes out for a throw but a corner is given. Not a big deal and possibly to do with graphics or such but does look stupid.

Someone else mentioned this in the last update, and I've still never seen this once myself, nor have I saw an uploaded video of such an instance. I'm genuinely curious to see what it looks like.

[santy001]

Someone else mentioned this in the last update, and I've still never seen this once myself, nor have I saw an uploaded video of such an instance. I'm genuinely curious to see what it looks like.

With the default camera angle the shadow of the ball seems to suggest the ball is slightly closer to you than its shadow (when the ball is in the air of course) I have seen numerous times the shadow goes out for what looks to be a throw in while the ball is in the air, but then a corner is given. Not sure if that's the issue but I've put that more down to it being the fact I play the game in windowed mode and sometimes the resizing can have effects.

[Dave9ffc]

There's been maybe 5 or so I've had now and I'm just finishing my first season. Mainly it comes from a block or clearance and you can clearly see the ball roll the wrong side of the flag. I actually windowed as well but it happens when the ball is rolling not in the air otherwise I wouldn't notice. I'll try and save a clip if it happens again.

[Cougar2010]

Not sure if it's maybe been noted but numerous times the ball clearly goes out for a throw but a corner is given. Not a big deal and possibly to do with graphics or such but does look stupid.

Someone else mentioned this in the last update, and I've still never seen this once myself, nor have I saw an uploaded video of such an instance. I'm genuinely curious to see what it looks like.

There's been maybe 5 or so I've had now and I'm just finishing my first season. Mainly it comes from a block or clearance and you can clearly see the ball roll the wrong side of the flag. I actually windowed as well but it happens when the ball is rolling not in the air otherwise I wouldn't notice. I'll try and save a clip if it happens again.

I see it on a semi regular basis, maybe say once or twice a match on average. It has to be a graphical glitch which is a minor annoyance but nothing really more than that.

I play on the elevated camera and it as Dave says the ball rolls the wrong side of the flag but it gets given as a corner - A thought might be that pitch size might have something to do with it, if people have changed the length of the pitch maybe that has affected the graphics?

[Yohann88260]

Value 12.5 millions

Sold 5 millions

Why?

[Dave9ffc]

That's not even nearly enough info for anyone to say anything Yohan. Bought by you for 5mil or someone else? Sold by you? Transfer listed?

[Yohann88260]

Yes I sold him(it) 5 millions because no offer in its just value... Before that walked(worked) well and many clubs to buy...

[HUNT3R]

So you offered him out?

[Yohann88260]

I sold him(it) 5 millions proposed in 13 millions...

[HUNT3R]

Yes, I get that you sold him for 5m. You've said that 3 times now. What I asked is, did you offer him to the other clubs? Also, did you transfer list him?

[Yohann88260]

Yes I proposed it in the others club and yes he(it) was on the list of transfers...

[MTM1977]

This is probably not a bug, so i'll write it here.

Sometimes it's hard to grasp the logic in some of the decisions in this game.

My current team is União Madeira in Portugal.

We got promoted to Portuguese Premiership. I didn't ask for parent club, but during the summer break board decided to get one. That's fine for me.

Our parent club is Chievo in Serie A. I got the report showing players which would be available for loan (they are in Chievo reserves).

There were couple of players which would have been good additions to my squad, so i tried to loan them. Chievo agreed.

However, the players declined to join us for loan.

Why would a player decline the chance to play in Portuguese premiership and instead stay in the reserves squad? Serie A teams reserve squads don't even play in any league. So, they rather stay there and play no competitive matches than join us... Weird i would say.

[HUNT3R]

Yes I proposed it in the others club and yes he(it) was on the list of transfers...

You're telling other clubs your really don't want him anymore. There's no way they will submit offers as large as his Value then.

Next time, just set an asking price. See if there's interest. If nothing happens, try listing him. Only as a last resort should he be transfer listed AND offered out.

[Yohann88260]

All right thank you but before 14.1 that walked(worked) great well...

[TIR669]

You're telling other clubs your really don't want him anymore. There's no way they will submit offers as large as his Value then.

Next time, just set an asking price. See if there's interest. If nothing happens, try listing him. Only as a last resort should he be transfer listed AND offered out.

Nothing WILL happen. EVER.

Because the transfers are also as buggy as they get. It's almost impossible to sell majority of players for anywhere near their values.