themadsheep2001

It's not tonight's games under threat. It's the weekends

We were told 5:30pm. But it could have slipped again. Was supposed to be 4pm

@arenaross was it you mentioning that your wife was in emergency meeting? Same happening at BT sports over programming. Think the news is about to finalized

The BBC always do as they are central to the announcements.

Yeah, either it's happened or the BBC have been told to expect it to happen.

Go to is always Bennacer, but once I can entice them, de Jong and Bellingham are incredible

Fair play for revisiting your opinions, it has to be said.

This. And it's always been the case.

There's no bait at all. Just a observation on each time. No one has ever called the game perfect, nor will the game ever be perfect, so perhaps beside the point at little here. There is a common theme on assumptions on how the game work, hence me making the point, like I said, worth thinking about. And youre taking my help for bait I'll leave it at that

Bustthenet is probably the best source outside of SI, along with Cleon. As they have both done bits with SI, and get their information verified, so its as close as you'll get to SI saying more often than not. Don't think anyone outside of SI knows the match engine in particular, as well as these two.

it's (arguably too) easy to create chances in FM, but that doesn't stop you finishing them if you're creating good ones, as shown by my goals and rates of finishing above, nor will chances being tightened up suddenly mean you start finishing them, which was your initial issue. I get caught out over the top, once every 4-5 games. Which is considerably less than a side like City. So it's entirely possible, and we've had this discussion before. If I can do it, you can do it too. I'll leave you to think about, but you had the same sorts of issues before, and you're likely to run into them again if you're running the same courses of action. Might help with your frustration if you take a look at the information lots of people have give you in the numerous threads you've made.

The ME is not trying to convey a problem in the most slapdash way, this really isn't how it works. When you say missing multiple chances, what's their conversation rates and Xg? And the Xg of the shots they are missing. Players will miss more big chances than they will score. That's why a clear cut chance is rated at 0.4, and good chance at 0.2. How are you playing? All of these these are relevant and contextual. The one thing I've noticed from everyone of your posts is that you're extremely quick to decide that the ME is the issue, which if that was the case, everyone should have the same issues more or less, which I'm not sure is the case. A lot of people are trying to get you to not assume so much and get better at reading the game.

There's an awful lot of information missing from here: What is your tactical setup? How many shots are they missing? what is their overcall conversion rate? What's their shots on target ration Whats their Xg compared to actual goals scored Is your match Xg showing decent chances (0.15 or better per shot) or lots of poor ones? This is my side in 2024, as you see the entire front 4 hit their xg or better And the team punches well above xg The key for me has always been 1) are we making good chances? If we're not, we need to reassess how to break down the current defence 2) if we are making good chances and missing, is it one player or multiple? 3) if its multiple, are we playing at too high a tempo and forcing players take on good chances too quickly? whats the current body language - is my side being complacent?

This. If I'm managing fitness, I might rotate a couple of players and if I'm in control of the ball, look to retain safe possession as much as possible. Or look to pick off a team trying to play more aggressively, get a third goal and watch them collapse.

Why is it intuitive? You're already in control. What is the reason for changing here, other than it's something you thought you should do? Not only that, shutting up shop in the way you describe it is not the only way to take the sting out of a match and slow it down. My personal view is that it can be a terrible decision to give the ball back to a side who are looking to attack, particularly when your original plan is working and you're not sure your changes will. It's not a case of never, no one is saying that so avoid making this assumption. But I'm not sure you're playing what's in front of you. Not only that, once they got the first goal and it was obvious your change hadn't worked, why didn't you change it back? Just because you attempt to shut up shop, does mean it's actually the right call. Doesn't always mean it's the wrong call either. But in this case it wasn't working, the fact you could see them steam rollering you should have been sign it was the wrong option. They aren't programmed to attack on the 70th minute either, but they do get desperate late on, depending on manager settings (or even earlier again dependent on manager settings ) The issue here is as Draakon says, less to do with mentality and a series of decisions based on assumptions rather than necessarily playing what's in front of you. A comprehensive manual probably wouldn't have prevented what happened here tbh.

I didn't say anything other than balls over the top are a threat from both end (defensive line, quality of defender Vs attacker) and supply (line of engagement, time, space and options for player on ball, quality of marker vs player on ball). That's pretty much all I work to in FM, and I rarely concede balls over the top, regardless of how high or low up the pitch I play. I apply the same concepts from football to FM, that's pretty much how I have played for the last 10 years. I don't really overcomplicate FM beyond that. Its not one or the other, both in real life or FM. And that goes for every aspect, they are all interlinked, both in real life and in FM.

"I think the FM algorithm/ programming acknowledges a change in momentum but creates the wrong chances and goals to replicate this. That is what I find particularly annoying. " This isn't how it works, for what it's worth. "iii) when you go defensive and deeper in 22 (or at least when I go deeper and defensive in 22) I seem to concede a lot of goals through balls over the top." This sounds directly related to you saying how you back off. A lot of people think defending balls over the top is about getting deeper. But its also about stopping the supply as well. And you say you can't make defensive tactics properly, but what do you mean? Because you can make both deeper defending tactics and tactics using the lower mentalities. And they aren't necessarily the same thing .

I'd place Guardiola at Barcelona in this category, and definitely Spain 2010. They can be horribly boring systems, especially if you get your patterns of attack wrong.

Again, Ive said this? Sorry but if people are going to respond to me, at least read what I've already said. You're literally telling me things I already believe and as I said, have been saying for the last 5 years

Well yes, as I've stated above in both my posts, you could build low risk attacking football if you wanted to, as long as you've got a clear idea of the type of chances you want/can create (i used to build Pep's Guardiola from counter, and once built a replication of Spain 2010 from defensive). I'm really not sure what you want at this point tbh, as my view of it is really as simple as my two previous posts

I mean I literally just explained it in very simple terms, right above your reply to me...

Personally, I've been wanting them to change how they describe it for about 5 years. But if you speak to any tactical mod they'll probably tell you the same thing: view the mentalities as levels of risk, rather strictly attack to defence. Yes some mentalities might tend to lean better into certain types of play, but particularly around the middle ones; counter, balanced, positive; they are extremely malleable when it comes to attacking or more defensive football and should really be seen as what kind of risk you want to take in your football.

Defensive mentality means risk adverse football, so you need to think about the kind of chances you create/football you expect to play when doing so. Defensive mentality isn't necessarily defensive football.

Yeah, this seems like quite the flaw in the experiment?

Attenborough and it's not even a contest.