Jump to content

[England Premier Division] Data Issues


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, UTT said:

Is that 9th fastest with or without the ball? 

Without. But he’s even slower on the ball. Like I’ve never seen him sprint past anyone and I’m not exaggerating. He’s genuinely fairly slow

 

7 minutes ago, Rags89 said:

At least go look at the data from last season and see what evidence there is for him to get an increase in those stats. A cursory browse suggests a grand total of zero assists and a bang average passing accuracy of 83%. For context that's lower than any Arsenal midfielder in the 19/20 season. 

Thank you. Now you have shown me you completely misunderstand partey’s profile and role within atletco’s team. Laughable that partey has 13 passing but Xhaka has what 18/19? Come on now.

Link to post
  • Replies 881
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

@fredo14 You have to base attributes over a credible consistent period of time, otherwise you could change them after every match theoretically. I am sure Partey could easily retain his form but the sample of c5games is simply too small, so there is every chance he should get a boost after the transfer window. I'm jumping on one player because there was only one player we were talking about?!  Again its not about a 'sloppy approach' it's absolutely about opinion, rightly or wrongly.

Link to post
Just now, _mxrky said:

Without. But he’s even slower on the ball. Like I’ve never seen him sprint past anyone and I’m not exaggerating. He’s genuinely fairly slow

 

Thank you. Now you have shown me you completely misunderstand partey’s profile and role within atletco’s team. Laughable that partey has 13 passing but Xhaka has what 18/19? Come on now.

Really frustrating - I want to develop Nketiah and Martinelli but Lacazette is way too good in comparison to drop

Link to post
2 minutes ago, fredo14 said:

Right, you honestly do not believe that French League 1 players that play well don't get a 'League 1' penalty because of the quality of the league? The only way these players can get their attributes bumped is by either being incredibly hyped (Camavinga) or move to PSG or abroad. It's irrelevant how often a Lille researcher sees a Lille player because there will always be this penalty applied.

Nonsense, he was coming up against the likes of Neymar, Mbappe, Ben Yedder, Aouar etc last year, and would have been set accordingly.

Link to post
Just now, johnhughthom said:

Nonsense, he was coming up against the likes of Neymar, Mbappe, Ben Yedder, Aouar etc last year, and would have been set accordingly.

Gabriel has been a top 3 cb itl this season. The game at the moment does not reflect this Hopefully he’ll get a january upgrade because he is literally far better than all of our other defenders.

 

Link to post
Just now, diddydaddydoddy said:

@fredo14 You have to base attributes over a credible consistent period of time, otherwise you could change them after every match theoretically. I am sure Partey could easily retain his form but the sample of c5games is simply too small, so there is every chance he should get a boost after the transfer window. I'm jumping on one player because there was only one player we were talking about?!  Again its not about a 'sloppy approach' it's absolutely about opinion, rightly or wrongly.

Of course you don't. This is just a rule you've decided to come up with. How do we judge break out young players' attributes? Just give them all 10 in everything? I completely agree that I don't want to see Partey get 20 for long range shots if he smashes one in from distance at the start of the season, that'd be absurd. But his stats from last season are clearly unrealistic - just look at the fella. You can tell if a player is quality in the 5 games he's been 'released' after performing great in a highly rigid Simeone side. If it was one player then I'd suck it up, but Saka, Lazacette, Martinelli, Maitland-Niles?

Link to post

Gents, passion is good, rudeness is not. 

Not intended to be throwaway line, but the Editor is a great facility to tweak your opinions into the game. I use it myself in the same way.

This thread is to highlight thought out suggested changes/errors to the data not to question the effort that Researchers and SI put into the game. 

Link to post

Can we please stick to reporting legitimate data issues, everyone? This isn't a data discussion forum and, while we are very happy for everyone to have their voices heard, the primary function of this topic and forum is to report issues to be corrected for a future database update. That task is made much harder for the whole research team when significant chunks of each page are devoted to squabbling about what amount to small changes based off personal assumption, preference, bias, whatever. Whether you're right or wrong isn't really up for debate there; when the editor is released, you can change things to be however you want them to be, but convincing a committed and hard-working research team to make minor adjustments to their work isn't always going to be possible. Please do not denigrate any other research team when making your case; criticism of the Lille researcher above, for example, will lose you any credit you're trying to build.

Thank you to everyone who continues to engage with the data, particularly the logging of things that indisputably require fixing. If we can refine the approach in here towards the full purpose of the forum, that would be great.

Link to post
2 hours ago, diddydaddydoddy said:

@pamfGot all of those already in the DB thanks. Jacobsen is working until the end of the season albeit remotely from Germany.

You’re right about Keogh guessing he’s AI generated

Great! Is Krawietz and Ljinders both assistant managers aswell?

Link to post
Just now, _mxrky said:

I understand that the team can’t respond to every suggestion, but it seriously feels like some of us are being completely ignored even when we give opinions backed by data 

 

Every post is read and considered.

Changes are made where appropriate. 

The key word is 'opinions'. Ultimately, and this is something that is a fact of FM life, there are hundreds of players in the Premier League, and people have different opinions of them. We're not here to change Lacazette's finishing to 19 just because 'goonerrrr2020' posts in here asking for it, only to change his finishing to 6 the next day because 'spursareace111111' posts in here screaming that the player is worse than his nan. 

Now users like goonerrrr2020 and spursareace111111 are free to post in here. they may even make a valid point somewhere along the way. 

Everyone disagrees about players - we are never going to have universal agreement on every player. I am sure I would have different opinions than Sean about some Man City players. I am sure that there are sensible City fans who have different thoughts on KDB than Sean has, or Swansea fans with different viewpoints on their players than swansongs has. That's football.

What we are going to do is consider the differences, consider all suggestions, and update them as fairly and as best we can. That's all we can do. And we'll come back in here and find someone moaning that their player hasn't been changed as per their demands, or that we've changed Bernie Bignutz's agility but not changed Johnny Smooth's agility. We won't find anyone else coming in here praising us for setting things correctly. That's the way it is, we know that.

We could have every player rated by the most respected judge in football history, and 'bestfaneva0123456789' would come in here saying we know nothing and are biased etc.

In summary, yes we are looking at every post. We haven't got time to reply to every point in every post because it's quite busy. Sorry about that.
 

Link to post

 

6 minutes ago, Philip Rolfe said:

Can we please stick to reporting legitimate data issues, everyone? This isn't a data discussion forum and, while we are very happy for everyone to have their voices heard, the primary function of this topic and forum is to report issues to be corrected for a future database update. That task is made much harder for the whole research team when significant chunks of each page are devoted to squabbling about what amount to small changes based off personal assumption, preference, bias, whatever. Whether you're right or wrong isn't really up for debate there; when the editor is released, you can change things to be however you want them to be, but convincing a committed and hard-working research team to make minor adjustments to their work isn't always going to be possible. Please do not denigrate any other research team when making your case; criticism of the Lille researcher above, for example, will lose you any credit you're trying to build.

Thank you to everyone who continues to engage in discussion, particularly the logging of things that indisputably require fixing. If we can refine the approach in here towards the full purpose of the forum, that would be great.

Right so my arguments are invalid because I suggest that the ability of Lille players, and their relative standing in the game is not given as much consideration as say PL teams? 

We have flagged that there are some clear inconsistencies with Arsenal players, and as I said while a few attributes on a couple of players is fair game, there clearly needs to be a review of the team because it's unrealistic. Convince me that Saka is worse than Reiss Nelson and i'll say there's nothing to bother about here.

Edited by fredo14
Link to post
6 minutes ago, Dean Gripton said:

Every post is read and considered.

Changes are made where appropriate. 

The key word is 'opinions'. Ultimately, and this is something that is a fact of FM life, there are hundreds of players in the Premier League, and people have different opinions of them. We're not here to change Lacazette's finishing to 19 just because 'goonerrrr2020' posts in here asking for it, only to change his finishing to 6 the next day because 'spursareace111111' posts in here screaming that the player is worse than his nan. 

Now users like goonerrrr2020 and spursareace111111 are free to post in here. they may even make a valid point somewhere along the way. 

Everyone disagrees about players - we are never going to have universal agreement on every player. I am sure I would have different opinions than Sean about some Man City players. I am sure that there are sensible City fans who have different thoughts on KDB than Sean has, or Swansea fans with different viewpoints on their players than swansongs has. That's football.

What we are going to do is consider the differences, consider all suggestions, and update them as fairly and as best we can. That's all we can do. And we'll come back in here and find someone moaning that their player hasn't been changed as per their demands, or that we've changed Bernie Bignutz's agility but not changed Johnny Smooth's agility. We won't find anyone else coming in here praising us for setting things correctly. That's the way it is, we know that.

We could have every player rated by the most respected judge in football history, and 'bestfaneva0123456789' would come in here saying we know nothing and are biased etc.

In summary, yes we are looking at every post. We haven't got time to reply to every point in every post because it's quite busy. Sorry about that.
 

I really appreciate you taking the time to reply to this message. As I’m sure you understand as customers we  want to feel like our opinions are being valued and actually having some influence on the game.

I’m not suggesting to have universal agreement about a player, but the way certain players attributes have been distributed (Partey and Lacazette in particular) do misjudge the profiles of players they are. They play very different on fm (Lacazette is a prolific speedster, poacher  on the game and Partey is a jack of all trades master of nothing) as they do in real life which is my main objection. So I do believe quite serious changes are needed to their attributes and have provided some suggestions. I’m not particularly worried about individual attributes being changed by 1 or so.

Link to post
7 minutes ago, fredo14 said:

 

Right so my arguments are invalid because I suggest that the ability of Lille players, and their relative standing in the game is not given as much consideration as say PL teams? 

We have flagged that there are some clear inconsistencies with Arsenal players, and as I said while a few attributes on a couple of players is fair game, there clearly needs to be a review of the team because it's unrealistic. Convince me that Saka is worse than Reiss Nelson and i'll say there's nothing to bother about here.

Nobody said your arguments are invalid, but "and Gabriel presumably being based on some random researcher for Lille?" is not an acceptable way to reference someone else's hard work.

And, without giving specific details about the database away, Saka is not worse than Nelson. There are naturally some attributes where Nelson fares well because he's a good player in his own right, but Saka is currently the better player as far as the database is concerned.

Link to post

Apologies if this is already been posted but I feel there are some issues with attributes for some chelsea players. 

Reece james: although his crossing is a respectable 16, his technique is only 13. The way he crosses and the quality of his crosses should see a boost here. To 17 crosses and at least 15 technique

Ben Chilwell: Ben Chilwell crossing is 11 which seems very unfair. Shouldnt be as high as James. But should be 14 or 13 at the least

Hakim Ziyech: another one to do with crossing, but 14 for him is criminal. His crossing should be 18 at least. Although he does have 16 passing, this should be at least 17 or 18 and his vision should be 18/19. The amount of assists he has had over the past few years and the quality of them should be evidence enough of this. 

Timo Werner: he seems underrated in almost all attributes. When doing a side by side comparison between him and Tammy, Tammy edges almost every technical and pretty much ever mental attribute. For someone who has scored 44 league goals in 2 seasons, 16 finishing, 13 anticipation, 13 composure, 10 decisions all seem very very harsh. Even off the ball and work rate which are both 16 feel low. 

Edited by dnic1990
Link to post
35 minutes ago, Philip Rolfe said:

Can we please stick to reporting legitimate data issues, everyone? This isn't a data discussion forum and, while we are very happy for everyone to have their voices heard, the primary function of this topic and forum is to report issues to be corrected for a future database update. That task is made much harder for the whole research team when significant chunks of each page are devoted to squabbling about what amount to small changes based off personal assumption, preference, bias, whatever. Whether you're right or wrong isn't really up for debate there; when the editor is released, you can change things to be however you want them to be, but convincing a committed and hard-working research team to make minor adjustments to their work isn't always going to be possible. Please do not denigrate any other research team when making your case; criticism of the Lille researcher above, for example, will lose you any credit you're trying to build.

Thank you to everyone who continues to engage with the data, particularly the logging of things that indisputably require fixing. If we can refine the approach in here towards the full purpose of the forum, that would be great.

Hello Phil, 

yesterday or day before that I have posted (not in the nicest manner, for which i apologize(d) ) about West Ham's Souček, whose CA/PA and stats like work rate, stamina, heading and natural fitness, which I'm sure we can agree, are his "trademark" abilities, are far too low. I have tried to back it up with some data in links. 

Now I can see this thread has turned into full chat mode. I have seen WHU researcher to answer to some other submits after that, but not to mine. Should I presume he has overlooked it in the kind of mess we have here and repost? Or what is the correct way to make sure we can open a discussion on Souček topic. 

Thanks in advance, have a nice Sunday. 

Cheers

Edited by krajcik38
Link to post
17 minutes ago, Philip Rolfe said:

Nobody said your arguments are invalid, but "and Gabriel presumably being based on some random researcher for Lille?" is not an acceptable way to reference someone else's hard work.

And, without giving specific details about the database away, Saka is not worse than Nelson. There are naturally some attributes where Nelson fares well because he's a good player in his own right, but Saka is currently the better player as far as the database is concerned.

Hi, I'm guessing the database has them quite similar on CA. I know that the potential a player can reach is based on the save, but I don't believe there should ever be a save where Nelson is regarded as having more potential by team coaches than Saka. The difference in quality is too big, as demonstrated by Saka's significant first team inclusion and recent England caps and recognition.

In-game the two players are very similar on key stats, so much so that this is quite suspicious and there has been no real individual assessment of the players.

Notably, Nelson has higher dribbling, first touch, passing, technique, pace. Saka has higher crossing, anticipation and acceleration and general very slightly higher mental attributes from the start of the save. My save is regarding Nelson as having more potential than Saka for improvement. 

Whilst indeed Nelson is regarded as a good prospect, he has so far not really demonstrated this in league games or been trusted by the manager to make an impact. Saka is lightyears ahead in what he has produced for Arsenal (assists, appearances, international caps) so it should not be close at all between the two in terms of current ability and potential. Saka is considered one of the brightest young England prospects, is making a regular impact in the first team and his current ability / potential clearly are not reflective of this. I get that there are hidden attributes, but from playing out my save so far and having played many many years of FM - something feels off here, and Saka seems less of a prospect than in last year's game.

Link to post
9 hours ago, diddydaddydoddy said:

Højbjerg's attributes in the main will have been set by the Southampton researcher who will have seen him play far more than the THFC researcher. Think he played his first game mid-September and has only played c12 times. So not a massive sample to justify making sweeping changes.

That's fair but yesterday I read on the forum somewhere that Fofana of Leicester has had an update signed off. 

As you said: "Think he played his first game mid-September and has only played c12 times. So not a massive sample to justify making sweeping changes." Can't be one rule for one and one for the other. Fofana has played 4 PL games, and 7 overall for Leicester. 

Also, I have given supporting evidence on my OP on page 8. Hojbjerg marking (10) is less than Winks, Sissokho, Ndombele. That's not right. 

Link to post

What are people like on here? Change this by 1 and amend this by 1. Really?  What difference does this really make? When you see somebodies crossing ability is 16 how do you relate this to real life ability. It’s tough to do. But if you just think of the numbers where minimum is 0 and maximum is 20 then 16 is very high so presumably means said player is a very good crosser of the ball. To complain it should be 17 instead, what difference do you think this makes in game. And in your own head, in real life football, what does s 16 crosser do differently to a 17 crosser. 
 

it’s all a bit weird if you ask me. Just get the editor if you’re that bothered, and let the guys crack on with dealing with real issues. 

Link to post

Think Elliot Anderson at Newcastle should have a bit of an upgrade. He's now training with the Newcastle first team (regularly in photos on their website), has been on the bench in the Carabao Cup and is one of the best players in PL 2 Division 2, all while still being eligible for their U18s team. He clearly has a lot of potential and Newcastle rate him highly so this should be reflected in the game. He's also a Scotland U19 international.

He's also signed a new contract until 2024, probably on a first team wage now. More proof of how highly he's rated at the club too.

Source: https://www.nufc.co.uk/news/latest-news/teenage-midfielder-elliot-anderson-signs-new-long-term-deal/

Link to post
27 minutes ago, tobybilton1 said:

That's fair but yesterday I read on the forum somewhere that Fofana of Leicester has had an update signed off. 

As you said: "Think he played his first game mid-September and has only played c12 times. So not a massive sample to justify making sweeping changes." Can't be one rule for one and one for the other. Fofana has played 4 PL games, and 7 overall for Leicester. 

Also, I have given supporting evidence on my OP on page 8. Hojbjerg marking (10) is less than Winks, Sissokho, Ndombele. That's not right. 

The key phrase I used was ‘sweeping changes’ which a few were seemingly wanting. At no point was it insinuated that there was ‘one rule for one...’. After a dozen or so games, minor tweaks could be deemed reasonable - the odd +1/-1 or so’ not +4 or 5/-4 or 5. And any minor tweak is at the discretion of the Researcher/SI as to whether they agree with it. 

Link to post
2 hours ago, _mxrky said:

Without. But he’s even slower on the ball. Like I’ve never seen him sprint past anyone and I’m not exaggerating. He’s genuinely fairly slow

 

Thank you. Now you have shown me you completely misunderstand partey’s profile and role within atletco’s team. Laughable that partey has 13 passing but Xhaka has what 18/19? Come on now.

Correlation doesn't = causation. Sure, it may be DS tactics causing the zero assists and poor pass accuracy, and Partey may post better figures under Arteta but until we have the data that's speculation. 

Link to post
3 minutes ago, Rags89 said:

Correlation doesn't = causation. Sure, it may be DS tactics causing the zero assists and poor pass accuracy, and Partey may post better figures under Arteta but until we have the data that's speculation. 

So you only go off stats to judge a player now? Is the eye test not enough to conclude that partey is not 13 for passing. Because on fm he is hardly any better than elneny.That Lacazette is not fast and does not deserve 16 pace and 16 acceleration. 

 

Edited by _mxrky
Link to post
8 minutes ago, Rags89 said:

Correlation doesn't = causation. Sure, it may be DS tactics causing the zero assists and poor pass accuracy, and Partey may post better figures under Arteta but until we have the data that's speculation. 

I'm sorry but how many assists would you expect a central defender to make? The stats of a player have to be taken in the context of the team they play in to assess the player's attributes. Would you give a League 2 top scorer 20 finishing? The default position in FM is that first the overall ability rating of a player is established (CA) which is why you end up with unrealistic players like Harry Kane having 18 passing, 16 crossing, 15 leadership, because they have to fill attribute spaces. Have you seen Harry Kane's team talks?

Simeone's teams play with a central midfield that drops and screens the CB's. They get the ball quickly to the front four (who are also fairly deep) who break at pace. Partey is obvious quality and anyone who has seen him play knows he is a step above Xhaka and Elneny. Just because he didnt spray diagonal passes for Simeone because it wasnt in their game plan, or assist because he is not part of the front four breaking away, doesnt mean he can't do either and is not evidence that he cannot. 

Again, how many players stats are based off seeing 'evidence' that their passing is 16 and not 13? How would you measure a players' passing to be 16? It's all intuition, and largely shaped by the assessment of the players current ability. 

Link to post

Good afternoon, 

 

A small change for Sheffield united again. The owners own a umbrella of teams called 'United World' which has 3 other teams in

 

Al Hilal and Beerschot VA are already listed as affiliates in the game, however there is another club Quartz fc (India) was bought and rebranded to FC Kerala United. It looks like this should be listed the same as Al Hilal as a 'mutually beneficial relationship'

https://www.goal.com/en/news/kozhikode-quartz-fc-indian-football-kerala-sheffield-united/1r8n8ywgeqvta1kudm0g9euuik

https://sportsgrasp.com/football/quartz-fc-set-to-be-renamed-as-fc-kerala-united/ 

 

Matt Prestridge, is listed as head of sport science, however he also doubles up as a first team coach

 

https://trainingground.guru/staff-profiles/sheffield-united-staff-profiles

 

In the boardroom there should be a couple of changes: 

 

Mousa'ad Bin Khalid Al Saud - Chairman https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/musa-rsquo-ad-bin-khalid-al-saud/profil/trainer/83364

Abdullah bin Yousef Alghamdi - Director https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/abdullah-alghamdi/profil/trainer/83370

Reem bint Abdullah Al Saud - Director https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/reem-bint-abdullah-al-saud/profil/trainer/83369

 

I have previously wrote about Jan Van Winckel not having the role of Technical DIrector, I have found his linked in which states he is a board member at sheffield united and technical director at United World. I believe this should be a tweak to take him away from the technical director role. https://www.linkedin.com/in/jan-van-winckel-8418864/?originalSubdomain=sa

 

Without sounding like a broken record from previous posts from other teams fans i believe Hassan Ayari could have a higher potential (he had a viral youtube video at 6 year old dubbing him the little messi after all haha)

As of 7th November the last games he played he has 10 goal, 5 assists in 9 matches, including 4 freekicks as well as been involved in the first team training regularly both this season and last season. From all accounts he sounds like him and Hackford are two of the brightest prospects for a long time. 

I don't expect him to become a world beater or even a premier league player, however for the rep and performances for the U18's plus pushing the first team in training maybe this could be something the SUFC researcher could look at? I know on the forum Sheff Utd S24SU there is a dedicated person who follows the academy and hardly misses a match, he puts him up there with the best products the academy has has in the last 10 years.  

I dont know his potential rating, however when i start a game he is a 2.5 star, this seems a little low for someone who has performed so well for the academy teams, scoring goals etc and regularly participating in the first team training

Link to post
3 hours ago, Philip Rolfe said:

Can we please stick to reporting legitimate data issues, everyone? This isn't a data discussion forum and, while we are very happy for everyone to have their voices heard, the primary function of this topic and forum is to report issues to be corrected for a future database update. That task is made much harder for the whole research team when significant chunks of each page are devoted to squabbling about what amount to small changes based off personal assumption, preference, bias, whatever. Whether you're right or wrong isn't really up for debate there; when the editor is released, you can change things to be however you want them to be, but convincing a committed and hard-working research team to make minor adjustments to their work isn't always going to be possible. Please do not denigrate any other research team when making your case; criticism of the Lille researcher above, for example, will lose you any credit you're trying to build.

Thank you to everyone who continues to engage with the data, particularly the logging of things that indisputably require fixing. If we can refine the approach in here towards the full purpose of the forum, that would be great.

If this isn't the place to discuss players data/attributes, where then is the place, or can one be created?

I'm not going to suggest new attributes but there definitely seems inconsistency.  The Leicester researcher admitted that Fofana has been changed as they've saw him play in PL.  Why can't the same be done for other players? 

Edited by Come on ye pars
Link to post
2 hours ago, diddydaddydoddy said:

After a dozen or so games, minor tweaks could be deemed reasonable - the odd +1/-1

Thanks for the reply, my original post suggested exactly that, specifically to the marking of Hojbjerg. Not asking for him to be made into peak Makelele, but just suggesting he should be looked at.

As another has mentioned in this thread, Spurs were looking to sign replacements for him in the first summer of the save, literally the summer that he joined. 

It's clear that Hojbjerg is already key at Tottenham and will be for some time. Hopefully the game will reflect that. 

Edited by tobybilton1
Link to post
3 hours ago, dnic1990 said:

Ben Chilwell: Ben Chilwell crossing is 11 which seems very unfair. Shouldnt be as high as James. But should be 14 or 13 at the least

This is unchanged from when I set it - Ben Chilwell's crossing throughout his final 18-24 months at Leicester City was nothing short of abysmal, and until he joined Chelsea I was firmly of the belief his actual crossing technique was entirely wrong. We are talking about a guy who could seemingly only get the ball above knee height if he rolled it with the sole of his boot and leaned back, and even then would generate virtually no power nor the desired direction. 

I do acknowledge that his general play suffered last season because of some now apparent mental health struggles, but I couldn't alter attributes based on something I'd not seen in the flesh. I'm sure Philip will be looking at crossing and all of his attributes going forward, especially given the strong start to the season he has had.

2 hours ago, tobybilton1 said:

That's fair but yesterday I read on the forum somewhere that Fofana of Leicester has had an update signed off. 

As you said: "Think he played his first game mid-September and has only played c12 times. So not a massive sample to justify making sweeping changes." Can't be one rule for one and one for the other. Fofana has played 4 PL games, and 7 overall for Leicester. 

Fofana is likely to be a rare and special case - I asked the French research team for a significant upgrade when he first signed, knowing he would be well ahead of Morgan (and Amartey, Fuchs) in the pecking order given the alternatives we looked at included players of significant ability such as James Tarkowski and Jonathan Tah. They were not prepared to back me (and I don't blame them given a small sample size of games for St. Etienne). The difference here was that I have not seen, in twelve seasons of following City, a player have such an instant impact in half a dozen games like Fofana. Clearly we cannot have that kind of special talent being offered for loan by the AI.

Whether that can be applied to a well-established PL player in Hojbjerg, I'm not so sure.

Link to post
46 minutes ago, Come on ye pars said:

If this isn't the place to discuss players data/attributes, where then is the place, or can one be created?

I'm not going to suggest new attributes but there definitely seems inconsistency.  The Leicester researcher admitted that Fofana has been changed as they've saw him play in PL.  Why can't the same be done for other players? 

I discussed this a few posts above your post...

After a dozen or so games, minor tweaks could be deemed reasonable - the odd +1/-1 or so’ not +4 or 5/-4 or 5. And any minor tweak is at the discretion of the Researcher/SI as to whether they agree with it. 

Edited by diddydaddydoddy
Link to post
6 minutes ago, diddydaddydoddy said:

I discussed this a few posts above your post...

After a dozen or so games, minor tweaks could be deemed reasonable - the odd +1/-1 or so’ not +4 or 5/-4 or 5. And any minor tweak is at the discretion of the Researcher/SI as to whether they agree with it. 

I'm not wanting to have a go at you as you seem very reasonable, but you mention a dozen or so games, Fofana has played 7 games.  Partey for example (as people have mentioned him) has played 5 (although one as a sub).  I'm just thinking that there seems to be some inconsistences

Link to post

To an extent, people are going to have to live with the appearance of inconsistencies because you're never going to get the full picture.

Here's the general jist though:

- Our general guidance, as researchers, is to use the ratings of the player as provided by the researcher who has seen more of them after they transfer

- If a player changes, at this point, its because there may be feedback during testing from SI or a strong feeling from the researcher that something is amiss. Usually it takes a bit of convincing and well thought-out reasoning with our head researcher to do this.

- If a player doesn't change, its because the researcher doesn't feel it necessary. 

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

Ultimately it comes down to this one point:

- The research is done on a voluntary basis, there is no onus on researchers to share their full decisions on how they came to rate a player a certain way. Some researchers, like myself, will naturally enjoy a discussion about data and research more than others. However, this thread has a limited life-span in terms of useful, factual, changes it can bring in before the data lock. 

Link to post

Gareth bales loan contract to Tottenham is not correct. There is no option to extend the loan for a second season. Also he is massively underated. I find it hard to believe all these others strikers that are better in most areas. His mentality is to low, his vision is Miles better in real life, his technique should be second to none and his attacking should be better. For someone world class he has got terrible ratings.

Link to post

In addition to Santy's post, I think the Fofana/Partey supposed inconsistency is a very easy one to explain. Fofana is 19 and didn't even have a full season behind him before his move, you can understand the researcher(s) covering ASSE being cautious (they haven't even seen that much of him) but when he's made such an impression after the move and you've got the game pushing him out on loan, there's a lot of justification for making some changes. Partey's 27 and was at a big club in a big league for a long time - it might be that Arsenal fans (and others) disagree with how he's rated in certain areas but the research team in Spain have had a lot of time and opportunity to assess him and refine his profile, plus he's rated as one of the best players in the Premier League in his position so there is no pressing need to hastily overrule the previous research efforts.

Link to post
On 14/11/2020 at 12:52, Simon Tipple said:

Yes, I have played the game. I have also watched every game he's played for the Albion. 

As I've already said, his CA makes him one of the very best in his age group. 

I inherited his positional data from our Chelsea researcher who has seen more of Tariq than any of us. The positional data you have is only a "starting position" and doesn't reflect how a player may have changed positions during a game.  

I'm totally open to potentially reviewing that again at some point in the future but it's not something I feel needs urgently changing.

He's a really fun player to watch and he has tremendous potential. A huge part of his game is based on exploiting his tremendous Acceleration and getting the team up the pitch.  It's fun and exciting and I love watching him play. 

I've already tweaked him a little bit, and I'll look at tweaking a little bit more, but we're not going to see significant changes. It's so early in his career and his game involvements are so specifically about getting the team up the pitch, taking on the full-backs, getting in behind, there simply hasn't been a huge amount of evidence to support significantly higher mental or technical attributes at this stage. 

@Brighton123 - Thanks for the detailed feedback. I'll get back to you when I've had an opportunity to sit down and take a proper look at your suggestions. :thup:

Cheers!

Link to post
7 hours ago, _mxrky said:

Also funny how Greenwood is vastly superior to Saka on this game (despite the later having much better performances against bigger sides) But can’t complain about too many things at once !

Greenwood was outstanding last season as an 18 year old for a side that came 3rd, Saka was promising but nowhere near as impressive in a side that came 8th, claiming Saka is better based off a handful of games this season is daft.

 

 

Link to post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...