What sendings off reveal about the ME

[SimonHoddle]

I’m really curious about what happens to the ME when a players gets SO in FM.

IRL you score goals by playing wider, overloading and then switching play. In FM the 11 man team often wins but, a lot of the time, through set piece goals etc. set pieces should not be a vulnerability when down to 10 men.

So…is the ME calculating more attribute values for one team versus another, then saying there should be a 10% greater chance of victory for the 11 man team, then saying give them a 10% greater chance of scoring in any situation? 

keen to understand a little bit more. This would probably reveal a lot about the ME and how it operates.

 

[Dagenham_Dave]

Personally, I don't want to know how the 'ME operates' as that's akin to pulling back the curtain on the 'wizard of oz'. 

And trust me, that way madness lies. 

[Prej]

2 hours ago, SimonHoddle said:

In FM the 11 man team often wins but, a lot of the time, through set piece goals etc. set pieces should not be a vulnerability when down to 10 men.

Is it really so? I mean, that's just your anecdotal claim, do you have any proof for that?

[rp1966]

I'm not sure whether the goals come from open play or set pieces really matters that much in a versus 10-man situation.  Conceding lots of set pieces is a sign of a team being under pressure and you'd expect that to be the case in an 11 vs 10 situation.  So it may just be that you see more set piece goals because there are overall more set piece chances being created - not that 10 men are significantly worse at defending them.

Would need stats gathering and experimental saves to see what the truth actually is.

 

 

[SimonHoddle]

1 hour ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

Personally, I don't want to know how the 'ME operates' as that's akin to pulling back the curtain on the 'wizard of oz'. 

And trust me, that way madness lies. 

Haha. Fair comment. Aren’t you a little bit curious what’s behind the curtain though?

[SimonHoddle]

50 minutes ago, Prej said:

Is it really so? I mean, that's just your anecdotal claim, do you have any proof for that?

No proof ofc. I can only refer to my own experiences. But it’s something I feel is happening - I may be wrong. Just strikes me that a sending off is something that shines an awkward light on the ME.

[SimonHoddle]

32 minutes ago, rp1966 said:

I'm not sure whether the goals come from open play or set pieces really matters that much in a versus 10-man situation.  Conceding lots of set pieces is a sign of a team being under pressure and you'd expect that to be the case in an 11 vs 10 situation.  So it may just be that you see more set piece goals because there are overall more set piece chances being created - not that 10 men are significantly worse at defending them.

Would need stats gathering and experimental saves to see what the truth actually is.

 

 

As above. I understand your point. My comment is purely anecdotal. But, I do feel the ME doesn’t respond well to a SO. IRL tactics against 10 are well rehearsed. Move ball quickly, side to side, gaps will appear and chances created. There could be more corners but fewer FKs as the team with fewer players stops pressing and hard tackling. 
I don’t feel anyone agrees so I’m probably in minority here.

[phnompenhandy]

5 minutes ago, SimonHoddle said:

Haha. Fair comment. Aren’t you a little bit curious what’s behind the curtain though?

I'm not. I prefer to create a narrative in my head whereby I'm a football manager managing a football team.

"Is this real life, or is this just fantasy?" I'll take the fantasy.

[rp1966]

7 minutes ago, SimonHoddle said:

Haha. Fair comment. Aren’t you a little bit curious what’s behind the curtain though?

Virtual monkeys rolling dice - that's what's behind the curtain. 

[SimonHoddle]

2 minutes ago, rp1966 said:

Virtual monkeys rolling dice - that's what's behind the curtain. 

Ha. I’m with @Dagenham_Davei don’t want to know anymore 

Edited November 30, 2023 by SimonHoddle

[enigmatic]

4 hours ago, SimonHoddle said:

So…is the ME calculating more attribute values for one team versus another, then saying there should be a 10% greater chance of victory for the 11 man team, then saying give them a 10% greater chance of scoring in any situation? 

No. The tactical changes logic is calculating that the team with a man down will go a bit more defensive and (if not losing by a small margin) waste lots of time, and the team with an extra man will go more attacking.

 

Then the ME plays it out in exactly the same way as before. Which has been explained dozens of times as individually making decisions for each player based on attributes and tactics several times a second whilst updating their positions on the pitch or touches of the ball accordingly.

 

A consequence of this is that an attacking team against a defensive team which is lacking an out ball to the forward will create a lot more final third pressure situations, many of which will be set pieces.

[SimonHoddle]

6 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

No. The tactical changes logic is calculating that the team with a man down will go a bit more defensive and (if not losing by a small margin) waste lots of time, and the team with an extra man will go more attacking.

 

Then the ME plays it out in exactly the same way as before. Which has been explained dozens of times as individually making decisions for each player based on attributes and tactics several times a second whilst updating their positions on the pitch or touches of the ball accordingly.

 

A consequence of this is that an attacking team against a defensive team which is lacking an out ball to the forward will create a lot more final third pressure situations, many of which will be set pieces.

Appreciate the explanation. If not the dozens of times before comment 🫶🏻. I dont really have the time to read through 10 years of forum history! Thank you for shedding some light. It’s a healthy curiosity on my part 

[enigmatic]

Just now, SimonHoddle said:

Appreciate the explanation. If not the dozens of times before comment 🫶🏻. I dont really have the time to read through 10 years of forum history! Thank you for shedding some light. It’s a healthy curiosity on my part 

Fair enough  

I'd be the first person to agree SI should put some of this stuff in a manual. I just see a lot of people very convinced that SI is fixing results (usually against them!) by forcing one side to score to match their win probability rather than actually simulating the whole match, and some of them really don't like being told otherwise

[SimonHoddle]

Thanks for understanding:-)!

im really not a fixer theorist and I trust SI when they ask for us to believe them about the authenticity of the code. I am curious about some of the little anomalies and there are a few (inevitably - this must be massively complex). So that’s why I ask.

[Jack Joyce]

Full detail matches are played out decision-by-decision (of which there's 4 per second per player), whatever happens happens, we don't have anything like X % chance of winning that gets adjusted.

So when there's a red card, we just play out the match with 10 v 11 and see what happens. It might be that the team with 10 sit back a bit more which can make it a bit harder to create open-play chances depending on your system and team.