[FM23 > Semi Professional Club with Amateur Players can only offer Non-Contract]

On 02/11/2023 at 18:03, drajen said:

Did you get the answer for that? My problem is that I also can't register NC players for the league! I only can do this for amateurs, so do others team. It results in the way, that other teams are playing only with grey players, because no one can register no player, but youngsters youth contracts

I didn't get a reply here until yours, so I reported it as a bug and it was marked as "under review": 

I don't know if it is still occurring in FM24.

Cheers,

TE

[[Suggestion] Data Hub > Make Player Performance interchangeable between Defender, Midfielder or Attacker groups for versatile players]

Hi,

 

I have a few versatile players in my squad in National League South, for example:

1. A D(RC), DM, M(C), described as a "veteran midfielder", natural in DC and DMC - grouped with defenders in data hub, even though I only play him at DM.

2. A D(C), DM, M(C), described as a "defensive midfielder", natural in DMC - grouped with defenders in data hub, even though I only play him at DM

3. A M(C), AM(RLC), described as an "attacking midfielder", natural in AMR and AMC - grouped with midfielders in data hub, even though I only play him at AMC or AML

4. A M/AM(RL), described as an "experienced winger", natural in MR, AMR and AML - grouped with attackers in data hub, which reflects where I play him at AML

 

I want to be comparing my defensive midfielders with other midfielders in that group and my attacking midfielder with the other attacking players, such as the winger I refer to, who are all in the forwards group. But there is presently no way to change how these players are grouped by the data hub.

 

This matters, because it is much harder to, for example, compare the relative tackling ability of my midfielders when two of them are on a different scatter graph. Moreover, some of the scatter graphs are different for different groups, so I can't check "passing progression" for the two midfielders and I can't compare the "movement" of the attacking midfielder with the other attacking players, because those aren't available for defenders and midfielders, respectively. I am not sure why movement wouldn't be a relevant statistic for a midfielder, in any event?

 

Arguably, there should be separate Player Performance groups for full-backs and centre-backs and wingers and midfielders, as the expectations under those roles can be quite different.

 

Cheers,

TE

[[Suggestion] Match Highlights > Comprehensive > Stop showing every offside]

Hi,

I raised this issue several versions ago and I saw that someone had this reviewed more recently in 2020, but I see it's still happening in FM23: the comprehensive highlights are dominated by non-controversial offsides for both teams. It makes comprehensive highlights so tedious in many matches, certainly at the LLM level that I play at. It's hard to imagine Match of The Day being reduced to a showreel of nondescript offside calls?!

I do not understand why it is necessary to show all of these for both teams in preference of other potential highlights (e.g, another poster mentioned that we see free-kicks but rarely the foul that led to them - that would be more insightful and entertaining)? Offiside data can be useful, but I can get this information from the statistical breakdowns available during and after the match.

I might even set my team up to try a high-risk strategy of breaking beyond the opponent's defensive line, thereby resulting in a lot of offsides, but compensated for by clear cut chances when the strikers do get through. In that situation, the offsides would be expected as part of the game plan. I still don't wish to see them all though. Even if I have a more cautious/deeper-lying formation, which doesn't seek to test the opponent's offside trap, I then find myself watching footage of a succession of offsides by my opponents instead.

Hopefully someone can take a proper look this time: all you need to do is play/watch a few matches (LLM, but maybe its the same at higher levels?) on comprehensive setting and try staying awake then you will see exactly what I mean!

Cheers,

TE

[FM23 > Semi Professional Club with Amateur Players can only offer Non-Contract]

Hi,

I started a new save unemployed where I applied for and was accepted for a job at Banbridge Town in the third tier of Northern Ireland.

The existing squad are all on amateur contracts (£0) apart from a part-time player/physio (£40/w), two teenagers on non-contracts (£20/app) and one on a youth contract (£0). The board gave me a wage budget of £54, but this is already wiped out by the small wages/fees from the PC/NC players.

I can basically get away with signing one player on NC terms with fees, which typically takes me to around £50-60 over budget, after which the board impose a £1 limit on any appearance fees, effectively shutting down any further NC deals.

This wouldn't be a problem if I could continue to sign new/replacement amateur players whom won't command any fees. However, that no longer appears to be possible due to the club's semi professional status. Not only that, but if i try to renew an existing player's amateur deal in order to discourage them from joining another club trying to poach them, I can only offer them non-contract terms, whereby they demand an appearance fee.  At best, I can only afford to offer this to one existing player and only if this happens before I sign anyone else.

All of the other third tier clubs have mostly amateur players as well. When one of them poached one of my midfielders I saw they had to offer him a NC, so it appears they are all in the same boat. However, I don't know what their budgets are, but if they extend into three figures, this would give them a lot more scope to maintain and improve their squads than I have.

As it stands, I am going to periodically lose amateur or NC players from my squad to other clubs and then be unable to replace them, even with inferior players. The only exception to this appears to be loan signings, where it appears I can sign as many as I like, but they can only join in the transfer windows and remain for the whole season.

 

Is this really what is intended for squad building at this level or is this a bug that I should report?

 

Cheers,

TE

[FM 2023 > Data Hub > Versatile Players > Player Performance not interchangeable between Defender, Midfielder or Attacker groups?]

Hi,

 

I have a few versatile players in my squad in National League South, for example:

1. A D(RC), DM, M(C), described as a "veteran midfielder", natural in DC and DMC - grouped with defenders in data hub, even though I only play him at DM.

2. A D(C), DM, M(C), described as a "defensive midfielder", natural in DMC - grouped with defenders in data hub, even though I only play him at DM

3. A M(C), AM(RLC), described as an "attacking midfielder", natural in AMR and AMC - grouped with midfielders in data hub, even though I only play him at AMC or AML

4. A M/AM(RL), described as an "experienced winger", natural in MR, AMR and AML - grouped with attackers in data hub, which reflects where I play him at AML

 

I want to be comparing my defensive midfielders with other midfielders in that group and my attacking midfielder with the other attacking players, such as the winger I refer to, who are all in the forwards group. Is there a way to to change how these players are grouped by the data hub?

 

This matters, because it is much harder to, for example, compare the relative tackling ability of my midfielders when two of them are on a different scatter graph. Moreover, some of the scatter graphs are different for different groups, so I can't check "passing progression" for the two midfielders and I can't compare the "movement" of the attacking midfielder with the other attacking players, because those aren't available for defenders and midfielders, respectively. I am not sure why movement wouldn't be a relevant statistic for a midfielder, in any event?

 

I hope the above makes sense. If I am not missing something, I am not sure if this would classify as a "bug" that needs "fixing" or whether it is a feature request for a forthcoming update or FM24?

 

Cheers,

TE

 

 

[The Art of Numbers, not attributes - A journey extracting the best out of my players]

On 13/10/2022 at 05:16, PatrickReynolds said:

Very interesting responses, would be keen to know if you can replicate this in another test. It matches what I would think of as clearances, but I also would never put money against Rashidi when it comes to how FM works!

I ran another test from an earlier save point. Here's the more 'cultured' centre-back 'A':

I used Genie Scout to find a realistic free transfer signing whom was OK at the core defensive attributes, but low in other technical and creative attributes, centre-back 'B':

So Test 1 has A set to BPD-De and B set to NCB-De, with A on the line above B:

And for Test 2, I replayed the match, but reversed the roles, so A is set to NCB-De and B is set to BPD-De:

Centre-back A makes more clearances when set to NCB than BPD and also goes for more headers. However, this time, the reverse is true of centre-back B, whom makes more clearances when set to BPD, but his headers attempted are the same, albeit he wins a few more. A attempts more passes when BPD, B attempts fewer, the %'s are similar. There's a lot fewer interceptions in the second match, so maybe some of the differences are as a result of variations in attacking approaches by the opponent between the two matches (although in both cases OCFC won with goals in the latter part of the second half, 0-2 & 0-1, respectively). This is the first game of the season and so it's probable that the ability to carry out a role is affected by an element of unfamiliarity and it would probably need repeating once players are established. However, the reaction of A to the tactics hasn't altered my belief.

 

Maybe the ideal test would be with defenders where they have traits that complement ball playing and no-nonsense defending, respectively.

 

Cheers,

TE

 

[The Art of Numbers, not attributes - A journey extracting the best out of my players]

9 hours ago, Rashidi said:

They haven't defined clearances in that blog, but its not the same as the statistic that is being used in the game. Clearance in the game of FM is not about kicking the ball away from danger, in FM its about bringing the ball out of dangerous areas.. Two very different things. The more clearances a player has, the better he is at bringing the ball out of defence.

Thanks for your reply. Have SI stated this somewhere?

 

I just tried a test with Centre-Back A with First Touch 9, Passing 12, Technique 7, Composure 11, Decisions 14, Vision 13 and Pace 8, partnered with Centre-back B with First Touch 6, Passing 6, Technique 7, Composure 9, Decisions 9, Vision 7 and Pace 6 in the same save right before a match kicks off. In the first test I set C-B A to BPD-De and in the second test I set him to NCB-St. In both tests I left C-B B as CD-De.

 

Key (C-B A is on the bottom) (C... = Clearances):

Test 1 - As BPD-De:

Test 2 - As NCB-St:

 

C-B A recorded nearly twice as many clearances when in the NCB role compared with the BPD role. In both cases, C-B B, whom is much less comfortable on the ball, recorded more clearances, three times as many in his CD role as when C-B A was a BPD. The other noticeable shift is that C-B A is much more accurate with his passing in the BPD role than in NCB role, which was to be expected. It also appears that as a BPD, C-B A lets C-B B do more of the donkey-work, hence a far greater proportion of headers for C-B B in test 1, whereas they are closer in test 2 (although the stopper duty may be the bigger influence there).

 

This is just one example using two players instantly at my disposal. I will have to engineer one with two players where the attributes are more starkly contrasting, but for now I believe this supports my original view that it is more likely that the clearances in the stats represent the ball being hastily repelled forward rather than a defender carrying the ball up the pitch.

 

Cheers,

TE

 

[The Art of Numbers, not attributes - A journey extracting the best out of my players]

This is a really interesting thread.

I recall putting forward an argument an attribute-less FM a good few seasons ago on a 'wish-list for future versions' thread, where I suggested that players would just have to go on non-quantifiable comments from Scouts/Coaches alongside match statistics. It does seem that having this as an option is becoming closer to a reality.

 

The player below shows that statistics can trump attributes even in lower leagues:

Fans hated him:

and still do:

in spite of this Oxford City record - highest average rating:

overall VCS record:

and some polygons:

This does raise an example of where the FM22 statistical analysis appears to struggle to cope with versatile players and usually has to pigeon-hole them in a single position. For example, When I wanted to sign a player as a DR, I could only see their stats compared with midfielders. However, in Fernandes' case, FM can't make it's mind up whether he's a midfielder, winger or forward. On his individual polygons, he appears variously as a winger and a forward. On his individual scatter graphs, it loads the VCS forwards' graphs, but then doesn't plot him on any of them. On the main data hub page it bundles him in with 'midfielders', which is where all wide and central midfielders are collated. In a similar vein, full-backs are bundled in with centre-backs. I've also noticed that there is no 'movement' scatter graph for midfielders, whereas there is for defenders and forwards. It would be a very useful stat for wingers and attacking midfielders. Another anomaly is that 'goal output' doesn't appear for one of my strikers. He has 15 goals, but no assists. Evidently, he needs at least one assist, before I will be furnished with this data, because another striker with 2 goals and 4 assists does have goal output data.

 

On 21/08/2022 at 17:53, Rashidi said:

He had a low tackling ratio, his interceptions were good plus he has height. When the scout report came in, they said he had a competitive streak and I didn’t hesitate.

His very first game of the season, he tackles someone in the opponents third scores a goal. I love competitive steaks in wide attacking players.

You can account for attacking styles If your scouts send in videos of his performances, then you can make a rough judgement on how they are playing. And don’t forget not everyone might play the way you want so you are basically trying to build a profile of a player by stats alone so those videos do help a lot.

https://www.guidetofm.com/players/attributes/4/

Could be a big negative especially if combined with relatively high aggression and low tackling.

On 21/08/2022 at 23:32, PatrickReynolds said:

Hey @Rashidi, been following you YT series and love the spreadsheets. Makes me realize I need to have a deeper understanding of what each stat means .

One I've been trying to nail down is Clearances. I took note when you said that Clearances means the defender is good at bringing the ball out of defense. In my mind, clearances were defenders hoofing it anywhere out of danger. I tried to use the analytical data to show me where clearances occured during the game, and watch a highlight of said play. However, looks like while clearances are captured in the stats, they don't save them for viewing later in the detailed match analysis, unlike interceptions, etc. 

Just wondering if there is a better explanation of what constitutes a clearance out there?

https://www.guidetofm.com/tactics/playing-style-composition/

https://www.guidetofm.com/tactics/roles-duties-2018/

Definitely seems like a characteristic of a direct approach, rather than a short-passing game to me, something more suited to a NCB than a BPD.

 

 

I hope this hasn't unduly hijacked the thread, but wanted to add my tuppence worth from the limited experience I have of this approach to FM22.

 

Cheers,

TE

 

[Are green/red circles for roles and duties meaningless?]

6 hours ago, mrbrownsays said:

I think that the main issue is when it makes players look like complete lemons (red dots and barely touched circles) in a position they are sort of ok for stats wise.

Exactly. I have a midfielder whom is ranked "ineffectual" as a wide playmaker, even though his average of the key/desirable attributes is double figures at conference south level. I played him in that role anyway and in his first match he got 3 assists. How rookie players are supposed to figure this out is beyond me.

[Scouts not finding players]

2 hours ago, chestermike said:

I do know this is the issue. I had a message off S.I. Admin saying that there are less players found on assignments nowadays to encourage people to use the scout meeting function. .

But the scouting meeting is mostly generated by reports compiled by scouts during the course of their assignments.

[Scouts not finding players]

@FulhamFc14

I have been having scouting issues with lack of players being found, but this is at the LLM end of the scale, rather than the top end. If you have any saves of when you started the assignment and the end of the assignment with the lack of players, I suggest that you create a bug report thread in the scouting section of the FM18 bug reports forum and upload the saves to SI's public FTP site. There is more detailed advice in the bugs forum.

[Positional Familiarity is Wack]

7 hours ago, enigmatic said:

You beat me to it. I was going to say that the PPM would definitely steer me towards playing him as a right-sided inside forward. By playing him as AMC, he starts in a position where instead he ideally wants to be arriving there at full speed with the ball at his feet.

As for team averages, it is one of my historical pet hates that a team is underperforming in a match, but then score a goal against the run of play and all the ratings get a boost. Why should a player who creates three clear cut chances, but the striker fluffs them all, rate lower than one who creates two clear cut chances that are converted into assists by the striker. Admittedly, I haven't researched this thoroughly for FM18 - yet!

[Positional Familiarity is Wack]

5 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Some roles also "need" a minimum CA to be deemed "suitable".

That would explain why the game thinks my star player is ineffectual in the Conference South as a wide playmaker even though he averages almost 11 in all of the recommended attributes for that role and is accomplished as a right midfielder.

[Positional Familiarity is Wack]

@Weston

It seems like there are some low hidden attributes at work here if he under performs both as an AMR and AMC. What is his decisions attribute?

[Positional Familiarity is Wack]

3 hours ago, Weston said:

I just wish I knew why Suso (RW) was such trash when I played him at CAM for a season.

What are/were his attributes and how did his average rating compare at AMR with AMC?

[Positional Familiarity is Wack]

@Tiger666

How long did that take to go from zero to natural - I notice the player is the same age?

[Football Manager Early Access Beta *Official* Feedback Thread - 18.0.3]

On 28 October 2017 at 10:04, Cougar2010 said:

You now have a scouting budget as well (Shown at the top in the scouting centre) which money is taken out of monthly.  If you run out of money in the scouting budget it defaults to what you can afford which would be nothing.

I notice the scouting packages are paid for monthly, but is the scouting budget an annual or monthly one? So, if the desired surrounding leagues package is £2,700 and the budget is £2,900, does this pay for one month of access to more players (annual budget) or would it allow access for the whole season (monthly budget)?

Cheers,

TE

[Football Manager TV: Scouting]

16 minutes ago, kandersson said:

I was wondering if nation knowledge of individual staff members will still be relevant in FM18? e.g. if I have scouts from Brazil or Argentina do I get that knowledge even if I don't have that scouting package?

That's where Level 1 scouting should give you a crop of Brazilian and Argentinian players.

[Football Manager TV: Scouting]

14 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

The challenge is that it's usually the players who have been released from bottom tier clubs that are most likely to be of interest for a zero budget, relatively low reputation bottom tier club. You wouldn't expect many of these players' attributes to show up but you would expect their names to show up in search when you're looking at possible trial candidates. Same goes for players in different regional leagues at the same level or nearby players at the step below. If you can't find out these available players exist without buying a scouting package or manually scouting the club it's probably not a step forward in terms of realism

I'm a little more confident the new scouting system doesn't do ridiculously restrictive stuff like stopping you from scouting youth players from nearby professional clubs 

Exactly - it's the lack of free agents showing up in searches that I am concerned about. I am happy to wait the maximum period for information to be gradually revealed by scouting or on coach reports when taken on trial.

[Football Manager TV: Scouting]

18 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

I think you wouldn't need any scouting package fr lower leagues. Most of players that had played in the league you should already know to some extent. I guess you will have to rely much more on trials with new scouting system. 

'Level 1' with no paid for package relies on players being known by your staff. Hopefully this is all staff and not just scouts and will reveal any players your staff have worked with previously. This is likely to be limited to former players of your current club and players who were at other clubs at the same time as your staff. It would therefore be more effective if your staff are more experienced and have a 'busy' recent history.

[Football Manager TV: Scouting]

On 10 October 2017 at 22:11, tmpusr said:

Not sure I understand what you mean. The knowledge of the player is the box #1 in attached image. Box #2 shows how good the player is compared to the rest of my squad (in his position). The question I ask is whether box #3 is the scout's estimation of the player's CA (or PA), or something else.

Ideally box 3 should be the scout's opinion on how closely the player matches your specified search criteria, taking into account ability, potential, important attributes for the desired position and role and all of the pros and cons revealed in the scout's report. This would be consistent with the statement in the video that the % in box 3 would change as the % in box 1 increases.

[Football Manager TV: Scouting]

This is promising.

I have, however, identified a concern for Lower League Managers. This is that most bottom division clubs have no transfer budget and rely on free transfers. In order to discover free transfers, you would have to at least pay for the 'Level 4' current nation scouting package.

The cheapest 'Level 2' package revealing players in your division is not going to be very helpful as these clubs rarely sell their best players to a rival and loan players suitable as first team regulars tend to come from higher division teams. You might be able to get access to appropriate loan signings from 'Level 3' but it also looks like players from unplayable non-league divisions, another main source of signings  source will only be discovered from 'Level 4'. 

Are bottom division clubs going to be able to afford the nation package?