Boring, Boring Crossing Manager Simulator

[Dave1990]

I just finished my first year career with Athletic Bilbao, where I used a tactic very similar to what I used on FM 17. And to judge the variety of the game, I recorded all kinds of goals scored and against in all the 66 official matches of the season. The result is this:

 

GOALS FOR

From crosses: 49 goals
From corner (direct and indirect): 17 goals
From free kick (direct and indirect): 9 goals
From throw-ins (direct and indirect): 14 goals
From penetrative pass: 22 goals
From normal pass: 9 goals
From long shot: 6 goals
From long pass: 4 goals
From defensive mistake: 3 goals
From penalty: 4 goals

GOALS AGAINST

From crosses: 17 goals
From the corner (direct and indirect): 4 goals
From free kick (direct and indirect): 3 goals
From throw-ins (direct and indirect): 7 goals
From penetrative pass: 5 goals
From normal pass: 3 goals
From long shot: /
From long pass: 6 goals
From defensive mistake: 3 goals
From penalty: 5 goals

My tactic is this: 

It is a tactic that doesn't want to abuse crosses and in fact, wants to build the action centrally, with a great ball possession.

Considerations of my experience: FM18 is very similar to FM17, which did not differ much from FM16. And in fact, from three years I see almost the same things with every kind of tactic, where crosses make the part of master. I have an average of 37.3 crosses per game, and all this with a tactic with just a flanks-man. Sincerely, I was hoping this year to see a very different match engine, at least from this point of view. And then, if I continue to see these things on average once every two games (and also consider them as a key actions), sincerely the desire to play passes me fast.

https://gyazo.com/3b1d94f83f4080ecc9c30827e0e8d612

In addition, there are the same bugs in individual closing down already present on fm16, it's not nice to see them ignored for 3 consecutive years... There are so many other things that have been reported last year that weren't fixed, but I don't make the list because I would be taken for one who criticizes without construct... And considering that this year I find the game much more cumbersome and less orderly than the previous chapters, as far as the match screen concerned above all , I find difficult to enjoy it as ever before.  

 

 

[Hootieleece]

With Wingbacks on Support and Attack you have players whose jobs are to cross the ball...........try Defensive Fullbacks on Defend if you don't want crosses.

[Dave1990]

1 hour ago, Hootieleece said:

With Wingbacks on Support and Attack you have players whose jobs are to cross the ball...........try Defensive Fullbacks on Defend if you don't want crosses.

Obviously, but I did not complain about the fact that there are crosses. I have complained about the general trend of the Match Engine and the fact that this tendency is disproportionated with regard to the number of crosses. Full backs are set in this way because, apart from crossing, they have to open the opponent defense with their movement and provide support to midfielders, especially in a tactic with only a man by flank like this. 

[Cougar2010]

2 hours ago, Dave1990 said:

I just finished my first year career with Athletic Bilbao, where I used a tactic very similar to what I used on FM 17. And to judge the variety of the game, I recorded all kinds of goals scored and against in all the 66 official matches of the season. The result is this:

 

GOALS FOR

From crosses: 49 goals
From corner (direct and indirect): 17 goals
From free kick (direct and indirect): 9 goals
From throw-ins (direct and indirect): 14 goals
From penetrative pass: 22 goals
From normal pass: 9 goals
From long shot: 6 goals
From long pass: 4 goals
From defensive mistake: 3 goals
From penalty: 4 goals

GOALS AGAINST

From crosses: 17 goals
From the corner (direct and indirect): 4 goals
From free kick (direct and indirect): 3 goals
From throw-ins (direct and indirect): 7 goals
From penetrative pass: 5 goals
From normal pass: 3 goals
From long shot: /
From long pass: 6 goals
From defensive mistake: 3 goals
From penalty: 5 goals

 

 

IRL somewhere between 30% & 40% of goals come from crosses.

Goals for your team: 49 out of 137 came from crosses = 36%

Goals against your team: 17 out of 53 came from crosses = 32%

 

Both fall within the levels you would expect to see.

[Dave1990]

26 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

 

IRL somewhere between 30% & 40% of goals come from crosses.

Goals for your team: 49 out of 137 came from crosses = 36%

Goals against your team: 17 out of 53 came from crosses = 32%

 

Both fall within the levels you would expect to see.

It's correct, but you have to consider that many of those goals scored from corner, and indirectly from free kick and throw-in, however comes from a cross, so the percentage rises even more. In practice, more than two-thirds of the goals scored in the season come from a cross or from a development of set piece, it seems to me too much. And it is the same for the goals against (67.9%).

[Cougar2010]

Just now, Dave1990 said:

It's correct, but you have to consider that many of those goals scored by corner, and indirectly from free kick and throw-in, however comes from a cross, so the percentage rises even more. In practice, more than two-thirds of the goals scored in the season come from a cross or from a development of set piece, it seems to me too much. And it is the same for the goals against (67.9%).

You match stats vs stats.

Corners, free kicks & throw ins are not crosses therefore shouldn't be counted against the RL stats.

[MBarbaric]

35 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

 

IRL somewhere between 30% & 40% of goals come from crosses.

Goals for your team: 49 out of 137 came from crosses = 36%

Goals against your team: 17 out of 53 came from crosses = 32%

 

Both fall within the levels you would expect to see.

 

The number of crosses per match is bigger problem here.

Average team in La Liga takes 13 crosses per match (3,5 connecting). This number in the game is vastly superior.

[Cougar2010]

15 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

The number of crosses per match is bigger problem here.

Average team in La Liga takes 13 crosses per match (3,5 connecting). This number in the game is vastly superior.

I suspect its a knock on effect of teams defending the middle more like they have in the last couple of versions.  The use of one/two DMs + narrower defensive tactics means the space is out wide for the more attacking teams.

Also we don't see teams keep the ball enough, IRL we see more sideways/backwards passing as teams keep possession and recycle it whereas in FM once the ball goes into the final third teams look for a cross/pass/shot more quickly.

[MBarbaric]

15 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

I suspect its a knock on effect of teams defending the middle more like they have in the last couple of versions.  The use of one/two DMs + narrower defensive tactics means the space is out wide for the more attacking teams.

Also we don't see teams keep the ball enough, IRL we see more sideways/backwards passing as teams keep possession and recycle it whereas in FM once the ball goes into the final third teams look for a cross/pass/shot more quickly.

well said. lots of things in the ME pushing the play in wrong directions atm. hopefully that rumourous 2020 ME will be a step forward.

[kandersson]

Yes, average might be ok but overall number is - and feels - way too high.

Also, I don't have stats for this but I'm pretty sure that in real life a much higher number of goals is scored from headers, while in FM this is still a relatively rare event. With the ultra high number of crosses in FM this feels even less realistic, as the typical goal from cross in FM usually involves a (supposedly very difficult) volley or first time shot.

[Cap'nRad]

2 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

IRL somewhere between 30% & 40% of goals come from crosses.

Does this number include cutbacks? Because I believe fm considers those as passes, while I'm not sure what real life considers them as. And with most bigger teams with more diminutive forwards preferring this method of delivery, it's something to consider.

[Dave1990]

2 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

You match stats vs stats.

Corners, free kicks & throw ins are not crosses therefore shouldn't be counted against the RL stats.

Sure, but I did not say this.  Anyway, I re-calculated the count, omitting the goals from throw-in, and that is this:

GOALS FOR

From crosses: 54 goals
From corner (direct and indirect): 16 goals
From free kick (direct and indirect): 7 goals
From penetrative pass: 23 goals
From normal pass: 16 goals
From long shot: 10 goals
From long pass: 4 goals
From defensive mistake: 3 goals
From penalty: 4 goals

GOALS AGAINST

From crosses: 20 goals
From corner (direct and indirect): 4 goals
From free kick (direct and indirect): 3 goals
From penetrative pass: 5 goals
From normal pass: 7 goals
From long shot: /
From long pass: 6 goals
From defensive mistake: 3 goals
From penalty: 5 goals

39,4% of goals scored and 37,7% of goals against came from crosses. In my opinion, it is a very high percentage, and if we look the goals from set-pieces, we reach a very close percentage of 60%. All this was achieved with a tactic with two offensive midfielders, which undoubtedly increased the chance to score more goals with penetrative passes. For example, with a 4-3-3 I think this percentage can rise further, even if we set a tactic that takes advantage of midfielders off the ball movements.

[lemeuresnew]

4 hours ago, Dave1990 said:

It is a tactic that doesn't want to abuse crosses and in fact, wants to build the action centrally, with a great ball possession.

 

ignoring if your stats are high or low for crosses, 2 things

1 - look for overlap will intentionally look for your full backs, and choose this over more immediate attacking options. if you aren't looking to 'exploit' crossing, or as i prefer to think of it, tell your players to hold up the ball and wait for a full back to get forward and make a cross, don't select this.you also have a slower tempo, with narrower shorter passing encouraging this action. t leasst 4 team instructions thhat encourage your style of play and effect your findings

2 - whipped crossing. this in itself encourages crosses that are either shots or deflections for a corner. not seeing much heading, knock downs or hold ups? probably because you are telling your team to put in crosses that make these things pretty damned hard to do...

now, im not defending the game in any way. this is the worst released fm game for at least 5 years in my opinion, and i will not be purchasing the game in advance EVER again. if a demo impresses me i will buy the full, sure. but the days of fm getting my money blindly are over. but if you have a problem with those number of goals, there are at lkeast 7 team instructions you can remove to make it more to your liking mate

[Dave1990]

5 minutes ago, lemeuresnew said:

ignoring if your stats are high or low for crosses, 2 things

1 - look for overlap will intentionally look for your full backs, and choose this over more immediate attacking options. if you aren't looking to 'exploit' crossing, or as i prefer to think of it, tell your players to hold up the ball and wait for a full back to get forward and make a cross, don't select this.you also have a slower tempo, with narrower shorter passing encouraging this action. t leasst 4 team instructions thhat encourage your style of play and effect your findings

2 - whipped crossing. this in itself encourages crosses that are either shots or deflections for a corner. not seeing much heading, knock downs or hold ups? probably because you are telling your team to put in crosses that make these things pretty damned hard to do...

now, im not defending the game in any way. this is the worst released fm game for at least 5 years in my opinion, and i will not be purchasing the game in advance EVER again. if a demo impresses me i will buy the full, sure. but the days of fm getting my money blindly are over. but if you have a problem with those number of goals, there are at lkeast 7 team instructions you can remove to make it more to your liking mate

But mine problem isn't the tactic, because I still got excellent results (second in Liga two points from Barcelona, I won the Copa del Rey defeating Real in the final for 5-2 and the Europa League against Arsenal). The problem is that I've seen the same thing for 3 years now, and that a lot of game data doesn't get close to real ones (kms runs per game, lost and recovered balls, etc.) 

Concerning the tactical question on point 1, I selected "look for overlap" to make the most of the offensive thrust of the full-backs, even though it may be a nonsense because the overlap shouldn't exist because there is nobody ahead to full-backs. But with a slower tempo it should work fine as the midfielders wait for the full-backs to get up and give them an extra pass option, which should help hold the ball more than the "retain possession" option that I only use when I have to fall asleep the match. 

About point 2, I believe that whipped crosses are the hardest to intercept for defense and that's why I'm used to them.

[akkm]

3 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

 

IRL somewhere between 30% & 40% of goals come from crosses.

Goals for your team: 49 out of 137 came from crosses = 36%

Goals against your team: 17 out of 53 came from crosses = 32%

 

Both fall within the levels you would expect to see.

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

[lemeuresnew]

54 minutes ago, Dave1990 said:

But mine problem isn't the tactic, because I still got excellent results (second in Liga two points from Barcelona, I won the Copa del Rey defeating Real in the final for 5-2 and the Europa League against Arsenal). The problem is that I've seen the same thing for 3 years now, and that a lot of game data doesn't get close to real ones (kms runs per game, lost and recovered balls, etc.) 

Concerning the tactical question on point 1, I selected "look for overlap" to make the most of the offensive thrust of the full-backs, even though it may be a nonsense because the overlap shouldn't exist because there is nobody ahead to full-backs. But with a slower tempo it should work fine as the midfielders wait for the full-backs to get up and give them an extra pass option, which should help hold the ball more than the "retain possession" option that I only use when I have to fall asleep the match. 

About point 2, I believe that whipped crosses are the hardest to intercept for defense and that's why I'm used to them.

yes, im sure the tactic works fine. my point is, that it is heavily built to work on crosses. same as the whipped crosses, they are crosses designed to be put in the net. all great stuff, glad that building a tactic like that has worked for you. my point is, that it is built on crosses being the main ball in to the box, and being surprised that your stats are heavily cross based seems illogical to me

end of the day, it is a game. they wont get the stats exactly right, but setting up to focus on crossing will put you higher to that scale. very few people design a tactic to be 'realistic' because they dont really want that. they want to win

[enigmatic]

FM16 and FM17 were very different for cross effectiveness; I haven't played 18 yet but I don't imagine it's exactly the same either. FM17's most effective/overpowered tactics involved actively reducing crosses (I won a treble with less than 10% of goals originating from crosses). 

But ultimately, if you ask your team to play possession based football and ask your players to look for the wingbacks, and ask your wingbacks to whip crosses in, a lot of your goals are going to come direct from crosses, especially with someone like Aduriz up front. 

Your number of crosses attempted might be very high, but there's a nice chart on this link which suggests your goals conceded from crosses and corners are more or less exactly in line with 2015/16 La Liga averages http://www.goaldentimes.org/tale-europes-big-five-numbers-statistical-review-2015-16-season/ 

[Svenc]

Both sides have points. Calling the game "crossing manager" may not see you getting much listened to from experience, though.

1) Obvious limitations. For instance, traditionally a lot of space and time to engage in crosses. Once FM has sussed the basics of proper zonal defending / defending as a unit proper, entire passages/patterns of play may be different all by themselves.

2) Tactics/systems too.

I can assure you you won't find anything remotedly like the following in football in any league or side, not even approaching it.

On FM it's traditionally been possible to build complete fantasy sides though both in terms of player traits/ability as well as building a tactic that encourages such. So the 1) point is a nuisance. Without the 2) though I think the game would lose lots of its appeal, and of course you have some influence over goals via crosses scored/conceded too. (If only AI was that creative, which is traditionally oft part of the "problem" too -- any opposition tactics that would clogg the middle may see advancing wide backs naturally being passed to, when in real football an opposition manager would adapt to it some if opposition backs would spam and arrive into space time and time again to some degree). Speaking about AI, narrow formation AI managed Bayern on a current FM 18 run have scored 8 of their 30 goals from crosses as of the in-game stats, the lion share (15) from through balls [narrow/no angled through balls in particular still hardly handicap the keeper, whilst a cross/angled ball successfully connecting does, in particular from the first touch -- there is frustration attached to the former for reason, and that is justified]. As I have already seen weird AI stuff though, such as them keeping both backs entirelly for matches throughout even off narrow formations, see also AI limitations/shenanigans, that may also mean only this much.

[Dave1990]

11 hours ago, lemeuresnew said:

yes, im sure the tactic works fine. my point is, that it is heavily built to work on crosses. same as the whipped crosses, they are crosses designed to be put in the net. all great stuff, glad that building a tactic like that has worked for you. my point is, that it is built on crosses being the main ball in to the box, and being surprised that your stats are heavily cross based seems illogical to me

end of the day, it is a game. they wont get the stats exactly right, but setting up to focus on crossing will put you higher to that scale. very few people design a tactic to be 'realistic' because they dont really want that. they want to win

Exactly, but as I said before, tactics should not have a strong preponderance for crosses at the expense of exploitation of central spaces only because I chose "look for overlap" and "whipped crosses" instructions. Crosses are an important part, but not the most important one as it imposes this match engine. In facts even the opponents score goals primarily by crosses, this has been going on for 3 years. Before I win, I'm interested in having fun, and I believe that if I win always seeing the same things I dont find much fun.

 

11 hours ago, enigmatic said:

FM16 and FM17 were very different for cross effectiveness; I haven't played 18 yet but I don't imagine it's exactly the same either. FM17's most effective/overpowered tactics involved actively reducing crosses (I won a treble with less than 10% of goals originating from crosses). 

But ultimately, if you ask your team to play possession based football and ask your players to look for the wingbacks, and ask your wingbacks to whip crosses in, a lot of your goals are going to come direct from crosses, especially with someone like Aduriz up front. 

Your number of crosses attempted might be very high, but there's a nice chart on this link which suggests your goals conceded from crosses and corners are more or less exactly in line with 2015/16 La Liga averages http://www.goaldentimes.org/tale-europes-big-five-numbers-statistical-review-2015-16-season/ 

But one thing is the percentage of completed crosses, another thing is the percentage of total crosses. FM16 definitely had a higher percentage of completed crosses, but on FM 17 the total percentage of crosses has remained the same as FM16 and on FM18 we are on the same track. I have found from whoscored other data related to this year, which confirm that in principle the number of crosses in the game is disproportionate to reality. And among other things, the game several times does not score low crosses, so the number is even higher than we can see in the game stats.
 

[HUNT3R]

You shouldn't expect differently when you leave your flanks as open as you are doing. You're very attacking, so use of space can become an issue in the middle, leading to more flank assists and you leaving your own flanks so open will lead to a high % of cross assists against you.

[Dave1990]

10 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

You shouldn't expect differently when you leave your flanks as open as you are doing. You're very attacking, so use of space can become an issue in the middle, leading to more flank assists and you leaving your own flanks so open will lead to a high % of cross assists against you.

 And in fact, I'm not surprised by that and you're right. But the tendency to suffer for the most goals on crosses exists in any case even by deploying with a 4-3-3 or 4-5-1 and covering the flanks very well. The ratio of goals scored (or against) to cross in comparison to goals scored (or against) with a through ball is in practice two and a half times higher. And as I said, you don't have to focus only on the number of goals on crosses but on cross attempts per game. 
 
And among other things with certain tactics, it is impossible to give up the offensive propensity of the full-backs, otherwise tactics will be split into two parts.

[Mitja]

use work into the box, AI will use it too especially if you do. not perfect but still better than having 100 crosses per game..

[HUNT3R]

10 minutes ago, Dave1990 said:

 And in fact, I'm not surprised by that and you're right. But the tendency to suffer for the most goals on crosses exists in any case even by deploying with a 4-3-3 or 4-5-1 and covering the flanks very well. The ratio of goals scored (or against) to cross in comparison to goals scored (or against) with a through ball is in practice two and a half times higher. And as I said, you don't have to focus only on the number of goals on crosses but on cross attempts per game. 
 
And among other things with certain tactics, it is impossible to give up the offensive propensity of the full-backs, otherwise tactics will be split into two parts.

It doesn't exist if you don't want it to exist. I conceded fewer than real life and scored fewer or the same than real life via crosses in FM16, FM17 - and this with a narrow formation. Haven't really taken too much note in FM18, but as my setups are still basically the same, I don't expect this to have changed.

[Mitja]

also playing narrower will only expose more space on the flanks for you and AI likewise. the 4321 formation should be played Wider not Narrower.

your tactical setup is crossing magnet I bet your right FB ends almost every attack with a cross. you would see much more plesent football using the 433 or 4231 formation.

[Luk's95]

I just want to explain my game experience, look my situation, it's like this with all the tactics.

Right now i'm using a Knap's tactic, 442. Similar to Inter's 4231, based on crosses by Perisic and Candreva. Why i'm crossing 3x time more than Inter (best % of crosses for WhoSchored with Fiorentina):

  

Here the situation of my save:

14% 8/55 vs Aberdeen
17% 11/64 vs Aberdeen
9% 6/64 vs Sion
7% 4/57 vs Udinese
8% 6/68 vs Sion
11% 5/45 vs Fiorentina
8% 8/57 vs Crotone
15% 6/38 vs OM
13% 6/46 vs Napoli
12% 6/50 vs Torino
16% 13/79 vs Sampdoria 
10% 5/47 vs Vitesse 

12 matches, 670 crosses , medium of 55,83.
 

Spoiler

[Dave1990]

1 hour ago, HUNT3R said:

It doesn't exist if you don't want it to exist. I conceded fewer than real life and scored fewer or the same than real life via crosses in FM16, FM17 - and this with a narrow formation. Haven't really taken too much note in FM18, but as my setups are still basically the same, I don't expect this to have changed.

The problem is that there is no balance. Because if I set up the full-backs to defend or support, they can't support the midfielders and can't take away an opponent who has to follow their move, if I leave them as now the cross number isn't real. The problem is that there is no middle ground, or too many crosses, or too few if you choose to deliberately give up, with a more defensive setting or with the inverted full-backs, but with this line-up you would overburden the central areas too.

 

55 minutes ago, Mitja said:

also playing narrower will only expose more space on the flanks for you and AI likewise. the 4321 formation should be played Wider not Narrower.

your tactical setup is crossing magnet I bet your right FB ends almost every attack with a cross. you would see much more plesent football using the 433 or 4231 formation.

Not necessarily, if I want to develop a style of ball possession and short passes, it is better to have a narrow width where the players are closer to each other. The full-backs, on the other hand, should be concerned with giving wide width, that is why they are set in this way

[themadsheep2001]

I don't know where you've learned that if you put a full back on support, he cannot take away an opponent.

Moreover, pulling away an opponent does not mean your full back needs to cross.

[tajj7]

1. Those numbers do not look that problematic to me, they would be in line with what I would expect IRL, especially if teams played like that. Just look at Man City right now, whoscored.com doesn't count there goals as crosses per say but they are scoring a huge amount of goals from the wide areas and often the opposite wide player is scoring them.  I'd count those as crosses, they are balls played from wide areas into the box. 

2. I'm not seeing this in my game, even where I played a 3-5-1-1 formation with no fullbacks, the goals I conceded from the wings were not that high and I have been playing a formation with two attacking wide players, and one attacking full back and most of my goals still come from central areas. 

The only issue with crosses IMO is the silly ones that show as highlights where the keeper tips them round the post/bar. 

[herne79]

19 hours ago, Dave1990 said:

It is a tactic that doesn't want to abuse crosses and in fact, wants to build the action centrally, with a great ball possession.

No, it's not.

14 hours ago, Dave1990 said:

I selected "look for overlap" to make the most of the offensive thrust of the full-backs, even though it may be a nonsense because the overlap shouldn't exist because there is nobody ahead to full-backs. But with a slower tempo it should work fine as the midfielders wait for the full-backs to get up and give them an extra pass option, which should help hold the ball more than the "retain possession" option that I only use when I have to fall asleep the match. 

Look for Overlap doesn't do that.

Honestly all this "crossing manager simulator" stuff is not much more than a click bait attention grabbing title to make us think back to the great FM16 myth of overpowered fullbacks.  If we want to set things up to make lots of crosses we can do so (and you have).  If we want to set things up so that through balls are the main stay, we can do that as well - including in FM16 when all this nonsense started.  I even wrote about my FM16 4-4-2 that demonstrated that.

If you tell your team to play narrower, with an already narrow formation, where do you think the space is going to be?  And if the fullbacks and mez are the only ones positioned to run into that space, what do you think they'll do with the ball when they get there?  Then combine that with using team instructions that you clearly don't understand and you get this end result.

The game is not perfect.  There are bugs, there is room for improvement.  But just shouting "boring boring crossing manager simulator" and therefore purely blaming the game when you have your own shortcomings that you don't realise is not the way to go about getting constructive help.

[Svenc]

36 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Moreover, pulling away an opponent does not mean your full back needs to cross.

Wasn't the case on FM 2012 already (for some Golden Oldieness :D) .  However, by default, most of the wide roles are "cross often" roles. Which I reckon impacts AI too. I somehow severely doubt that they are particular apt here, considering that FM 2018 shows it still has problems with the duties right at the very top... :/ To me it's never been hugely an issue as a cross ball has been part of my "arsenal" to unlock a defense ever since forever. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't any issues, which are connected to some limitations. I fail to see how somebody doesn't see a difference between say FM 16 and 17. On FM 16 advancing backs would pretty much arrive unmarked at the boxes, and you could have passages of play where the ball was switched from flank the flank easily, which looked odd. Purely statistically, the difference may not have been big. But yeah, in a sense, until FM has sussed teams shifting as units on defending, such measures taken in between releases arguably will always be like patching a few limitations/rough spots. If that kills the game for somebody, so be it. Pretty confident/hopeful that this is eyed in the long-term anyway, much beyond a purely statistically level, as the engine is play, not stats (FM's are mostly too simplistic anyway).

 

[Dave1990]

19 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

I don't know where you've learned that if you put a full back on support, he cannot take away an opponent.

Moreover, pulling away an opponent does not mean your full back needs to cross.

I explained badly, I meant that with a more defensive approach (and therefore with full-back to defend or support rather than wing-back to support or attack) you lose a lot of offensive propensity and the midfielders have a lower pass option. 

On the other hand, there are many more crosses, often unnecessary. It is not said that it always happens and in every situation, but very often, it happens. As somebody said before, this is intrinsic in the ME, who reads the movements of the full-backs in this way.
 

[Dave1990]

25 minutes ago, herne79 said:

No, it's not.

Look for Overlap doesn't do that.

Honestly all this "crossing manager simulator" stuff is not much more than a click bait attention grabbing title to make us think back to the great FM16 myth of overpowered fullbacks.  If we want to set things up to make lots of crosses we can do so (and you have).  If we want to set things up so that through balls are the main stay, we can do that as well - including in FM16 when all this nonsense started.  I even wrote about my FM16 4-4-2 that demonstrated that.

If you tell your team to play narrower, with an already narrow formation, where do you think the space is going to be?  And if the fullbacks and mez are the only ones positioned to run into that space, what do you think they'll do with the ball when they get there?  Then combine that with using team instructions that you clearly don't understand and you get this end result.

The game is not perfect.  There are bugs, there is room for improvement.  But just shouting "boring boring crossing manager simulator" and therefore purely blaming the game when you have your own shortcomings that you don't realise is not the way to go about getting constructive help.

But on FM16 the many crosses weren't a "myth", but reality. Douglas Costa made 24 goals in 34 games with 10 in finishing, all goals with a cross to the second far post, but it is a "myth"...

The problem is that in the game, when I create a control tactic or offensive and I would like to make decent use of the overlaps of full-backs, the number of crosses grows exponentially. Normal? I wouldn't say... Because we see that in reality, a team that bases its game to many crosses (like Inter) makes it 25 crosses per games, maybe exaggerating there will be the game with 40 crosses, exaggerating... In the game the exaggeration allows you to make 70 crosses per game, last year it happened that summing my team's crosses with those of the opposing team came to 90 total crosses, in practice one per minute. All this with FM17, what in theory had fixed the crosses problem... 

[themadsheep2001]

52 minutes ago, herne79 said:

No, it's not.

Look for Overlap doesn't do that.

Honestly all this "crossing manager simulator" stuff is not much more than a click bait attention grabbing title to make us think back to the great FM16 myth of overpowered fullbacks.  If we want to set things up to make lots of crosses we can do so (and you have).  If we want to set things up so that through balls are the main stay, we can do that as well - including in FM16 when all this nonsense started.  I even wrote about my FM16 4-4-2 that demonstrated that.

If you tell your team to play narrower, with an already narrow formation, where do you think the space is going to be?  And if the fullbacks and mez are the only ones positioned to run into that space, what do you think they'll do with the ball when they get there?  Then combine that with using team instructions that you clearly don't understand and you get this end result.

The game is not perfect.  There are bugs, there is room for improvement.  But just shouting "boring boring crossing manager simulator" and therefore purely blaming the game when you have your own shortcomings that you don't realise is not the way to go about getting constructive help.

Yeah, this is absolutely not a play through the middle set up. You've removed all the space in the middle, and actually channelled much of the play wide through your TIs 

[herne79]

30 minutes ago, Dave1990 said:

But on FM16 the many crosses weren't a "myth", but reality. Douglas Costa made 24 goals in 34 games with 10 in finishing, all goals with a cross to the second far post, but it is a "myth"...

The problem is that in the game, when I create a control tactic or offensive and I would like to make decent use of the overlaps of full-backs, the number of crosses grows exponentially. Normal? I wouldn't say... Because we see that in reality, a team that bases its game to many crosses (like Inter) makes it 25 crosses per games, maybe exaggerating there will be the game with 40 crosses, exaggerating... In the game the exaggeration allows you to make 70 crosses per game, last year it happened that summing my team's crosses with those of the opposing team came to 90 total crosses, in practice one per minute. All this with FM17, what in theory had fixed the crosses problem... 

Until such time as you accept your tactical settings and lack of knowledge are the primary cause you'll continue to struggle and make threads like this.  The game can't fix that.

[themadsheep2001]

7 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Until such time as you accept your tactical settings and lack of knowledge are the primary cause you'll continue to struggle and make threads like this.  The game can't fix that.

This has actually made me want to create a Christmas tree setup for the first time in years. Might do that tonight if I get time 

[Cap'nRad]

11 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Until such time as you accept your tactical settings and lack of knowledge are the primary cause you'll continue to struggle and make threads like this.  The game can't fix that.

A bit harsh imo, I don't remember him saying anything about struggling, just complaining about overcrossing. My view, without looking at stats, is that players simply don't recognize through ball opportunities most of the time, and struggle to stay onside unless the ball is wide.  Also doesn't help that wide players usually have cross more often by default, so they spam them once they get anywhere near the area. Ultimately it's workable though, I'm sure you can almost eliminate crosses if you choose.

[themadsheep2001]

1 minute ago, Cap'nRad said:

A bit harsh imo, I don't remember him saying anything about struggling, just complaining about overcrossing. My view, without looking at stats, is that players simply don't recognize through ball opportunities most of the time, and struggle to stay onside unless the ball is wide.  Also doesn't help that wide players usually have cross more often by default, so they spam them once they get anywhere near the area. 

His entire setup predicates a bias towards crossing. If you are trying to play through the middle, it's a horrible choice of TI's. 

[Geordieboy52]

If you factor in 38 crosses per game, times 66 games that is 2508 crosses.  Yet you only scored 49 goals from them, which approximately equates to you scoring from 2% of your crosses.  I wouldn't say that is a massive success rate would you?

[Cap'nRad]

1 minute ago, themadsheep2001 said:

His entire setup predicates a bias towards crossing. If you are trying to play through the middle, it's a horrible choice of TI's. 

I can understand that. I think the intention was to use the wingbacks for width mainly, the problem is, attacking wingbacks cross more often by default so it's hard to avoid without changing other aspects of your setup. So sometimes you can feel cornered with the crossing.

[themadsheep2001]

2 minutes ago, Cap'nRad said:

I can understand that. I think the intention was to use the wingbacks for width mainly, the problem is, attacking wingbacks cross more often by default so it's hard to avoid without changing other aspects of your setup. So sometimes you can feel cornered with the crossing.

I'm not home so it will have to wait but I'll hopefully demonstrate creating width without an overreliance on crossing this week. Failing that @Rashidi might already have something up his sleeve 

[Geordieboy52]

I currently play with an IF (Malcolm) and an AP (Xadas)  in wide positions with a defensive fullback (Kolasinac) and fullback (Mbemba) behind them.  I rely more on our pace of attack from breakdown to chance than over-reliance of crossing.  It is possible.

[Dave1990]

46 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Until such time as you accept your tactical settings and lack of knowledge are the primary cause you'll continue to struggle and make threads like this.  The game can't fix that.

It does not seem to me that I say that this tactic don't work, it is practically identical to the other Christmas tree that I published months ago for FM17. Explain to me where there is a lack of tactical knowledge when I say that crosses, whether it are completed or not, are too many, whether I use this tactic or other tactic systems. But if you accept an inverted wing-back / defend that has "hold position" and "roam to positions" at the same time, nothing surprises me anymore. 

 

29 minutes ago, Geordieboy52 said:

If you factor in 38 crosses per game, times 66 games that is 2508 crosses.  Yet you only scored 49 goals from them, which approximately equates to you scoring from 2% of your crosses.  I wouldn't say that is a massive success rate would you?

In fact, it is the confirmation that it is unrealistic, and that's what I say for a year to this part.  They decreased the percentage of completed crosses, but they would had to decrease the total number of crosses.

[stoned_assasin]

18 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

I suspect its a knock on effect of teams defending the middle more like they have in the last couple of versions.  The use of one/two DMs + narrower defensive tactics means the space is out wide for the more attacking teams.

Also we don't see teams keep the ball enough, IRL we see more sideways/backwards passing as teams keep possession and recycle it whereas in FM once the ball goes into the final third teams look for a cross/pass/shot more quickly.

This hits the nail on the head for me and has been an issue ever since the 3D engine came out. Don't get me wrong i thoroughly enjoy the game but you have to be very carefull to not lose your imagination in building real life tactics because the ME acts quite a bit different to what real life football does. To get similar results to real life you have to play far too conservative which if you are a big team or a team on a good run the ME will punnish you if you try as it expects you to be more gun ho.

[themadsheep2001]

9 minutes ago, stoned_assasin said:

This hits the nail on the head for me and has been an issue ever since the 3D engine came out. Don't get me wrong i thoroughly enjoy the game but you have to be very carefull to not lose your imagination in building real life tactics because the ME acts quite a bit different to what real life football does. To get similar results to real life you have to play far too conservative which if you are a big team or a team on a good run the ME will punnish you if you try as it expects you to be more gun ho.

This really isn't how the  ME works.

[Mitja]

1 hour ago, Dave1990 said:

But on FM16 the many crosses weren't a "myth", but reality. Douglas Costa made 24 goals in 34 games with 10 in finishing, all goals with a cross to the second far post, but it is a "myth"...

The problem is that in the game, when I create a control tactic or offensive and I would like to make decent use of the overlaps of full-backs, the number of crosses grows exponentially. Normal? I wouldn't say... Because we see that in reality, a team that bases its game to many crosses (like Inter) makes it 25 crosses per games, maybe exaggerating there will be the game with 40 crosses, exaggerating... In the game the exaggeration allows you to make 70 crosses per game, last year it happened that summing my team's crosses with those of the opposing team came to 90 total crosses, in practice one per minute. All this with FM17, what in theory had fixed the crosses problem... 

there's defenetly a problem in wider areas and with crossing but there is a workable solution to many of your problems.  modern football has evolved from typical crossing game too. also in game you don't need to use wingers and all other cross often roles.  as we told you your tactcs is a crossing magnet, use work ball into box like all teams in spain do , change formation to something normal and don't  mess with the width if you don't know what you are doing.  

[herne79]

12 minutes ago, Dave1990 said:

Explain to me where there is a lack of tactical knowledge when I say that crosses, whether it are completed or not, are too many

Already have.

1 hour ago, herne79 said:

If you tell your team to play narrower, with an already narrow formation, where do you think the space is going to be?  And if the fullbacks and mez are the only ones positioned to run into that space, what do you think they'll do with the ball when they get there?  Then combine that with using team instructions that you clearly don't understand and you get this end result.

Yet according to you this is "boring boring crossing manager simulator" ie., it's the game's fault.

You're not getting it dave.  You have set up your tactical system that promotes crossing, but you think you haven't because as you say:

22 hours ago, Dave1990 said:

It is a tactic that doesn't want to abuse crosses and in fact, wants to build the action centrally, with a great ball possession.

It is a tactic that wants to abuse crosses.  But you don't believe that and so the game is just crossing manager.  I'm not trying to be mean or call you out here and I'm certainly not just trying to defend the ME, but you're blaming the game for something that is within your power to control.

[stoned_assasin]

28 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

This really isn't how the  ME works.

I hope so and after many years i still have alot to learn i guess, i do very well in my saves but i admit my teams rarely play the football i would like of them.

[Mikke]

It doesn't surprise me that there seems to be too many goals from crosses. At least in my case, however, you really need to look at how the goals actually happened.

My team has scored about one third of goals by getting my two quick strikers on 2 vs 1 or 2 vs 0 situation. In most of these cases my target man runs with the ball a bit wider, and then crosses from the edge of the penalty box to my poacher who is usually completely alone at that point - easy finish. Statistically that assist counts as a cross, but with that kind of cross I don't have any problem.

[Dave1990]

 

49 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Already have.

Yet according to you this is "boring boring crossing manager simulator" ie., it's the game's fault.

You're not getting it dave.  You have set up your tactical system that promotes crossing, but you think you haven't because as you say:

It is a tactic that wants to abuse crosses.  But you don't believe that and so the game is just crossing manager.  I'm not trying to be mean or call you out here and I'm certainly not just trying to defend the ME, but you're blaming the game for something that is within your power to control.

I don't agree, this is exactly the point. Because, as I said before, on FM just it's enough put a offensive full-back and maybe "look for overlap" and you easily abuse crosses. In reality, however, with similar instructions there are certainly crosses, but in a much more normal way.. And repeating what I said before, there are no half-measures in the game. With "look for overlap" I would like a constant thrust of full-backs and obviously crosses, but not 37 per games, much less. Another user showed that he has an average of 57 crosses per game, which with any kind of instruction, remains totally unrealistic. That is why I complain essentially with ME.

[MBarbaric]

I feel like Dave has a point here. It isn't about tactics, there is an excess of numbers of crosses per match in FM for at least three versions (just like the number of offsides). I am not talking about human teams, but AI.

If you take Barcelona as an example, we can all agree they play with very aggressive full backs. They move forward and hug the line in order to stretch the opposition in the attacking third. They aren't there to cross but to provide more space for the winger. In FM though, these aggressive full backs are inherently destined to cross. So far this season Barcelona has the least number of crosses per match in La Liga (7, average for league is 13). I don't have FM 18 but it would be interesting if someone went into team stats in his save game to see the average crosses per match that ME produces.