Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About akkm

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2,351 profile views
  1. What is your definition of long range there...25 yards+, 30, 40 or what ? Also just checking on whoscored there in premiership last season chelsea scored 14% of their goals from outside the box...so not 20-25% as you say Overall in the premiership last year 11%/12% of the goals were scored from outside the box Coutinho scored 42% of liverpool goals from outside the box so that's almost 40% not almost 50%. Those stats you're giving are misleading Outside the box doesn't necessarily constitute 'long range' either
  2. That first video in isolation you could say..yes ok he took the shot...but for decison maker with fabregas vision and his proclivity to pass it...the strong likelihood is in the real world he would have slotted in the right full back who had run into a terrific position into space where rb could have cut back to forward player...so really it was poor decision making to go for a shot...a situation like rb in that space running into pen area is the type of one the likes of fabregas plays to exploit. fabregas body shape was towards that run of rb so it was in his vision Also fabrgeas body shape when he took shot was he facing away from goal...so was another bad decision to take a shot with that body shape...technically the biomechanics of that is way off. Of course one could argue it's graphics issue misrepresenting the situation but then the shot ended up more or less going the direction his body was facing so...the direction of the shot mapped the direction his body was facing so go figure The goretzka one similarly is poor...who moves 6 yards backwards and unleashes a shot from that distance...the momentum would make it difficult to generate that power as per that shot in FM. So on that basis alone its a bad decision...then add in the angle of the defender going to close him down...also goretzka is RIGHT footed. So all those thing make it a crazy decision to shoot in that instance. So really its the decision making to shoot in these instances which is a bigger deal than the wildness of the shoot...that's not to say the wildness of the shot is not an issue in itself and irritating, as it is (one thing though is real world there's some really wild shooting as well perhaps not as prevalent for top players but certainly its there). I think adding 'curl' would tone down the visual effects of even some of the less wild shots. As @herne79pointed out there are factors of movement/set ups etc which can be a factor in players taking pot shots in FM but there are many many instances in FM where it's simply bad decision making where there ARE other options and just to take shots where they shouldn't be. The ball should be recycled more if there are no options for through balls or whatever rather than an 'out' of a shot...it's too prominent within FM that a long shot is used as an 'out' getting close to the pen area which is essentially bad decision making especially when trying to play through the middle
  3. still a lot of quality chances though I guess Also in screenshots 70% of assists from out wide...are these goals coming from a team which dominates possession/most games and faces deep lying defences in general. What adjustments is the AI making to counter your play from out wide the way AI adjusts against teams playing centrally ie if user controlled team is dominant attempting to play through the middle the AI will generally play deep lying defence with low block and central midfield blocked off with deeper lying (often defensive mid) roles giving further defensive support to clog the middle...which makes sense. Assuming you're using width in your formation getting majority of assists from wide areas what is the AI doing to cope with this the way it blocks play through the middle ?
  4. In your screenshots above 37% of opposition goals were assisted inside penalty area...the AI is more or less doing that
  5. i know what you mean The flip side though is anyone using that exploit to get enjoyment and hold it on a pedestal as a result is the reason you dismiss it as folly...so the reality is both you and whoever got enjoyment from that exploit are forming an opinion of the match engine based on a specific element of the engine...so your conclusions are drawn by exercising confirmation bias which is overriding rational assessment of it on the whole...the bias just falls either side of it There was a lot more to it than that exploit...it's as simple as that
  6. Nonsense. It was very easy to not exploit it Your confirmation bias against FM12 escalates by the post...what did it do to you...you seem to have FM12 trauma in how you react to it
  7. By 'from range' what do you mean ? From whoscored last year messi scored 23% of his goals from outside the box...that doesn't necessarily constitute 'from range'
  8. Just for clarity here on the real world numbers... The current assist rate from the premier league of 34%...does this include corners/free kicks...on Whoscored I had a quick check and got a number of 32% from premier league but this includes corners/free kicks ?
  9. In a thread on this in 2015 I looked at figures from whoscored for I think the EPL for 5 seasons (don't think 15/16 was full season) and the 30%-40% you're throwing out there is a number which seems to include goals scored from crosses from corners and free kicks as well as open play crosses so in the totals from real world actually ranged from 29-35%...goals from open play crosses over the 5 seasons I looked at ranged from 19-26% so that figure you quote of close to 40 is likely double counting. I've not come across anything suggesting real world assists close to that number. So that suggests that FM numbers in original post are actually high Vs real world
  10. That's the case alright but to give it context... It's also the case the crosses are down in the same period from 442 per game to 408...so number of crosses are also down which to a point suggest the through balls haven't been replaced by any play being pushed out wide from an attacking point of view displacement wise...ie both are actually down...also the number of passes per game from that year to the other is not significantly changed either...so its not necessarily that teams are passing it around more either...they might be just attacking the penalty area in another way than crossing/through balls. Either way they're absolute numbers...in terms of % of goals scored from 11/12 to now... Goals scored from open play crosses dropped from 26% to 24%...when you include corners then all crosses have gone from 34% to 35% If you look at through balls assists % of goals scored...its actually jumped from 14% of total to 16% So efficiency of through balls as a means to score has actually increased despite deeper defences (of course crossing should be easier defend too with more numbers in the box) Perhaps EPL reluctance to play more through balls reflects a drop in skilled/creative/players with vision to actually play them as well as the effect of deeper defences as a deterrant. Also of course passing in the final third to score involves more than just through balls
  11. I've seen that quoted before but in fairness haven't seen the source for that stat but I've seen a few articles online which suggest those numbers are off/may have changed ?!! Even the closest I can see is whoscored...however the 29%-35% odd percent who scored suggest are from crosses includes corners so the 40% appears even further off. Also whoscored seems to be missing a large proportion of actual goals scored so that could skew those crossing stats enormously. Looking at 3 years they only give assist breakdown for about two thirds of goals scored. Even assuming those percentages stack up pro rata with unknown goals just to note the following Open Play All Crosses Crosses (includes corners/free kicks) 2011/12 26% 34% 2012/13 23% 31% 2013/14 19% 29% 2014/15 22% 31% 2015/16 24% 35% See attached as well suggests it a fair bit lower from study done on epl from a few years sample I think it was 09-13…23% of goals scored from crosses including set pieces (corners and free kicks)…with only 15% from open play and 8% from set pieces. It also shows the inefficiency of crossing http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2225728
  12. Way to deal with something that proves you're wrong well !!! I'm not dealing with opinion at all here Dave...just hard facts/real life statistics...if you want to back up your own opinions with your own perceptions then terrific...knock yourself out...something tells me it wouldn't be the first time you've done that to avoid a reality which exposes your view of things Lots of thing are ambiguous if you don't understand them...there's plenty of context there in those articles...one from wall st journal...i'll post another one from frankfurt school of finance and management...all real world information which all more or less say the same thing ! You either get it or you don't so we'll leave it at that
  13. Yeah that was what I was saying…it’s more an issue of the position of the assists rather than just from actual crossing itself Re the crossing thing I was just correcting the false perception/impression that ‘It's also an extremely common way that goals are scored in real life too’…as its not ! It’s interesting that you now say ‘so what’ to real life information where it doesn’t back up your original impression where you were using real life to actually back up/reaffirm what happens in FM…so while you thought you were right you were happy to say real life extremely common crossing assists for goals but then say ‘so what’ when you find out its not !!! I do agree on everyone’s save is different which is why I wouldn’t go on anything other than what I’m seeing myself. The point is it’s nothing to do with perception at all as the information of real life IS what happens in real life…they’re actual real life statistics…and they’re average for all styles so if a style in FM designed to play through the middle deviates more the wrong way against real life averages then that suggest there’s something amiss ! So comparing the stats takes the perception element of it out of it !!! Lame attempt Dave to try and dismiss it with a throw away comment on putting your money on whatever…I’d suggest though keeping your money in your pocket based on your perception of things in this conversation… You’d have lost money on… - crosses an ‘extremely common was goals are scored’ - West Ham Vs Liverpool on crossing - any ambiguity in those articles of which there was zero Also just on your own stats there…the whoscored you pointed out has an element of double count on crosses (it includes corners) so your own scoring from crosses Vs that is 38% of all your goals with 49% of the goals you conceded coming from crosses…both of which are higher than the norm (obv both of which can of course can deviate from the average for individual teams). Its interesting again what you hold up on FM to say you’re seeing things better than real life is actually worse than real life statistically…taking perception out of it…and yes ok if you’re playing wide but you’ve been kind of alluding you’re playing a more patient approach which shouldn’t tap so much into assists from crosses…so when you say you’re not seeing it in your tactic…you actually are, you just haven’t realised it ! I’d be interested to see your screen shot of assists locations as well Just to also say I’m not saying it’s a huge issue at all and I think FM16 match engine is the best I’ve seen yet and by a good distance. I was mainly piping up about the misperception about crossing…it wasn’t personal to you just when I saw you saying its extremely common/and a bandwagon issue I just had to point out that both of which are fundamentally incorrect !!