Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About akkm

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2,112 profile views
  1. 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period from 442 per game to 408...so number of crosses are also down which to a point suggest the through balls haven't been replaced by any play being pushed out wide from an attacking point of view displacement wise...ie both are actually down...also the number of passes per game from that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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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 !!
  5. I'm basing it on the ‘goals analysis’ from my own save not on anyone elses/everyones/AI...and the reason I'm saying its an issue is that that's with a team playing narrow/work ball into box and with just full backs as width...crosses knocked off...essentially all instructions to encourage play through the middle yet there's a disproportionate amount of assists coming from wider areas than should be...even more so compared to real life stats. The articles have no ambiguity whatsoever in establishing that what’s actually ambiguous is people’s perceptions of effectiveness of crossing . Even more so if they don't get that from the articles themselves ...seriously though...the articles are very clear...there's zero ambiguity in them !!! http://thepowerofgoals.blogspot.ie/2012/08/the-case-for-crosses.html Also that article is not ambiguous at all...its not goals in the final third and its actually goals from PASSES in the final third so that excludes crossing...it was very specifically making the distinction between crosses and passes so completely takes the ambiguity out of it. So the 'final third' goals will not be 'also crosses' at all...nothing even close to that I'm afraid Dave...the final third passes are specifically from passes as that was the purpose of the actual article...it specifically distinguished between crosses and passes http://www.wsj.com/articles/are-outdated-soccer-tactics-a-cross-to-bear-keeping-possession-is-the-way-to-goal-1402007011 zero ambiguity there also…it was specific to crosses http://analysefootball.com/2012/08/30/passing-in-the-final-third-and-goals-epl-2011-12-mcfcanalytics/ The key point on that article is that it supports the view that Liverpools use of crossing being highly inefficient source of goals. All articles support what the point of ‘which brings into question people’s perception of crossing in football and the inefficiency of same and also the passing game’s superiority as a means for scoring goals.’ was The real life evidence back that up Ill post the thing on assist locations where appropriate on the forums
  6. Are you being serious ? That's tenuous at best. where you say... You'll see crosses are far more common than any other assist type apart from the mysterious 'other' You can’t draw a conclusion based on unknown information…that’s ridiculous. Also I went into the website. Only c65/66% of all goals scored that season are accounted for by whoscored in that assist breakdown. So you really can’t draw conclusions from that…there’s another c380+ goals unaccounted for…I know you could think well percentages but even from your data alone and pro rata for unknowns then crossing accounts for c30% of goals which debunks your claim that crosses are an ‘extremely common way that goals are scored in real life too’. They’re simply not. Also…your conclusion on Liverpool vs West Ham…whoscored stats show Liverpool attempted 17 crosses per game Vs 25 per game by West Ham..so that would suggest the opposite of your conlusion I guess depending on your take on what natural width is or how width is used within a tactic…ie is it nominal width positionally like Barca use or is it width used to get crosses in like West Ham for example?!! Interestingly West Ham had the most crosses per game that season…so that suggest they like to get crosses in. I guess the difference in goals conversion hints at more efficiency/quality by Liverpool Vs West Ham I’ve re attached article http://eplindex.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/1001.jpg there which shows from 2011/12 EPL only 15% of goals were scored from crosses made from both wings. Seeing attached http://thepowerofgoals.blogspot.ie/2012/08/the-case-for-crosses.html suggests that 21.5% of goals in 2011/12 epl come from crosses (I guess crosses as well not just from wings). That article also suggests that c40% of goals are coming from passes in the final third so again that completely debunks the impression goals from crosses are extremely common The original article Vs assist location in FM also shows FM is a bit off in where assists come from location wise…ie more assists come from central locations in real life (and a lot more than what people think) where too many come from wider areas in FM Vs real life in latest build anyway. There was good variation in assists prior to it See attached also which brings into question people’s perception of crossing in football and the inefficiency of same and also the passing game’s superiority as a means for scoring goals. http://www.wsj.com/articles/are-outdated-soccer-tactics-a-cross-to-bear-keeping-possession-is-the-way-to-goal-1402007011 http://analysefootball.com/2012/08/30/passing-in-the-final-third-and-goals-epl-2011-12-mcfcanalytics/
  7. But crosses are not an extremely common way goals are scored in real life at all...that's actually a common misconception See attached http://eplindex.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/1001.jpg
  8. Thanks Kubi...I just mean without having to do that Is there any way of ensuring player specific loads rather than having to do a nation/reputation etc
  9. Is there any way of ensuring a player will show up in the game ? ie without uploading a massive database is it possible within the pre game editor to 'tick a box' or something to ensure a (relatively) obscure player will show up in the game itself
  10. I read Gary Neville say something similar and the two aren't mutually exclusive. I know what he meant in that he was saying players didn't get level of detailed training he alluded to receiving himself...ie what way to face/foot and body positions defending certain angles/crosses etc and that time spent wasn't the same. That's not really why its happening anyway to be fair. There is a drop in standards across the board in football...it seems like it is almost accelerating too. Look at the dearth of top quality strikers around...there's also a shortage of quality dribblers/shortage of quality creative players...so if the level of technical training was affecting defensive basics to the detriment of defending then you'd expect not to see a drop in quality technically and even a potential improvement...this is not happening..despite the focus on technical training. If you watch a game of football you'll see the basics are being done at a lower level these days...it is common place to see poor touch/control/players unable to make simple passes/players turning the ball over more easily and more frequently. The one thing which has advanced is the fitness of players and that side of things and arguably the level of professional preparation. It's not down to pressing or the physicality of the game either which is affecting the technical side of things as there are far too many instances of players in isolation and under no pressure not being able to do the basics at good or even competent level. Re the focus on technical coaching again. Take Italy for example...by all accounts you read of italian football they still have a high focus on the tactical/defensive way of things yet the standards of defending are poor there these days and compared to its heyday defending is actually dreadful Looking back to the heyday of Baresi and Maldini etc...the level of technical players such as donadoni/savicevic/boban/van basten etc was far higher than it is now despite there being a higher focus on technical training now !!!
  11. On the shots issue. I've posted on this several times and there are some good posts above and some of the issues mentioned are certainly valid. Some of what is seen in FM tho indicates there are other factors at play. I tried one game using Barca Vs Bayern Munich using contain tactics with barca and still had circa 30 shots. So this was against Bayern Munich...that simply shouldn't happen. Its definitely more prominent with higher quality attacking players despite instructions which should discourage taking shots. Overall the shot count is not a result of striker always getting isolated and taking a pot shot it isn't always a result of AI deep tactics either. Its certainly a combo of things to a point. A bigger factor tho given certain instructions...essentially which would encourage a patient approach trying to enable the mental/technical qualities of high end technical/creative players players/teams should not be taking so many shots as a course of action in games. That they still do is indicative of other factors coming into play such as of a lack of patience/decision making/passing options/ineffectiveness of skilled players to maintain possession in the top third/ineffectiveness of attacking highly technical and creative midfielders high up the pitch/players & teams lacking the inclination/propensity to recycle possession. I'm not saying none of the above happens of course just that they don't happen with the continuity/persistence that they should given instructions/quality of players at one's disposal. To be honest even without quality players I think it should at least be attempted (ie a patient/probing approach) more often with instructions regardless of the actual success...ie as a course players should be trying it if asked to do so if tactical set up should enable/encourage it. Certainly though for the likes of Barca, those players simply won't shoot so often resulting in an off the wall shot count...given instructions if they don't succeed so be it...just try, try and try again !!!
  12. Thats an excellent post re the essence of defending. Look back at the likes of Maldini, Baresi, Cannvaro...it was their anticipation/reading of the game/positioning/concentration which effectively closed down space/passing lanes preventing tricky situations arising in the first place and elevated them above most other defenders...that is pure defending. After that the individual's traits get utilised to help defend certain situations/players by heading/speed/tackling/leaning on them using strength etc/pressing. If you look at currently why standards of defending have dropped off significantly it is because the elements of anticipation/reading of the game/positioning/concentration are lacking in defenders now...take kompany for example last year and even at his peak...he relies on his pace/power a lot to defend situations and players rather than the purer elements aforementioned. The majority of defenders not even able to call on kompany's power and pace are in an even worse situation these days. I'm talking about individual defending primarily there.
  13. Yeah I'd agree its easier to set a team up to defend which is why you need all the ingredients fully functional from an attacking point of view. What do u mean exactly re attributes changing the editor values. I'm just saying that regardless of attributes the control/first touch/agility are not up to scratch in themselves...i'm not even going into the relative depiction of attributes Re finishing..yes at an overall level they're fine. I've posted on this before but it would be useful to show the the same grid of where goals are scored for assists and also actually from a conversion point of view it would be useful to see same grid for that...then you'd see where shot conversion is at its highest/most efficient...that would be a good guide to sections of pitch where conversion is up to scratch or not