First Half Goal Bias

[toysattic]

Not really a big Issue in general but I have noticed especially in the last 2 versions of the game that most goals are scored in the first half of games, not just the matches that I am playing but in general. When I look at the results on a match day its not uncommon for 17 or 18  of the 20 goals in all the matches to be scored in the first half. Also if I am 4-0 up at half time no matter what I say to the team at half time it always finishes 4-0 , even if I tell the team to keep up the performance or even go more attacking nothing seems to happen. just wondered if I am the only one to have noticed this. like I said it isn't a big issue, I just find it slightly annoying as the real life ratio isn't like this. 

[..Valhalla..]

22 minutes ago, toysattic said:

Also if I am 4-0 up at half time no matter what I say to the team at half time it always finishes 4-0

This is the only part I can definitely agree with, although people will say something about it being hard to motivate the team to keep going when you are so far ahead by half time. Rarely do we score any more goals in the second half when the first was so good.

[Spurs08]

31 minutes ago, toysattic said:

Not really a big Issue in general but I have noticed especially in the last 2 versions of the game that most goals are scored in the first half of games, not just the matches that I am playing but in general. When I look at the results on a match day its not uncommon for 17 or 18  of the 20 goals in all the matches to be scored in the first half. Also if I am 4-0 up at half time no matter what I say to the team at half time it always finishes 4-0 , even if I tell the team to keep up the performance or even go more attacking nothing seems to happen. just wondered if I am the only one to have noticed this. like I said it isn't a big issue, I just find it slightly annoying as the real life ratio isn't like this. 

It's pretty unlikely this is anything except confirmation bias. It'd be very clear in testing if this was happening and even obvious to users through the graphs showing what period of the game you score in. As for the 4-0 thing that's pretty realistic - seldom do you see a team 4-0 up at half-time win 8-0, as they bring on young players, try experimental systems and focus on avoiding injury or fatigue, all of which is much more valuable than the goal difference or avoiding the tiny risk of losing such a large lead.

[FrazT]

6 hours ago, toysattic said:

 Also if I am 4-0 up at half time no matter what I say to the team at half time it always finishes 4-0 , even if I tell the team to keep up the performance or even go more attacking nothing seems to happen. 

4

This has always been an issue for me.  I have partially resolved it by saying what is, in essence, a bit illogical.  Praising the team at halftime, regardless of how well they have played, appears to have them turn off.  Telling them not to get complacent in an assertive way appears to have a much more positive effect.

[Svenc]

If there's anything producing patterns (if they'Re there), it's much more likely a repeat pattern in AI approached to matches rather than anything from my experience. IIRC it's been in the game for ages that upon shipping goals, AI can change their match approach to something that keeps them from further harm, like keeping things even tighter if still possible. After all big losses tpically rub off on morale too etc. Sometimes that can happen right upon shipping the first goal/s, like an AI switching both the full backs to defend and dropping further off, in essence keeping half the team plus behind the ball, which I can testify to (can be much tougher to to break that down :P)  But typically the big switches at HT are much more common. There's old patch notes about this, so likely one for @Seb Wassell.

Whilst players may "switch off" on the occasion, it's not engine or game inherent or anything that second halfs remain calm, as when you take over two teams yourself and make them go all gung-ho and open, goals in general fly in no much matter the minutes passed. (I'ver personally also reported several AI matches in the past where illogical AI switches at HT made for really crazy second halfs -- like one AI in the lead switching to something far more attacking as if chasing an opposition lead -- and the other AI going gung-ho itself as, well it was actually chasing a lead!).  This is similar to when you edit AI managers to have huge attacking or defensive bias in the db (including editing their prefered formations), preferably also leveling their club's starting reputation. This immediately rubs off on the overall amount of goals scored immensily (most notably in the goal differences), as they all play ultra defensive or ultra attacking from the off. However, there should be a slight influence on the man management / pep talk front. As stated many times by SI staffers, it tends to be a bit overrated though to the extent that everything happening in a match is getting attributed to it. Team talks don't influence whether teams are actually attacking / keeping things tight for a start, which has a much much higher influence on the ebbs, and eventually scores, of a match than anything -- my2c.

[MrPompey]

the % improvement it makes is quite small and also for a limited time. As the defensive team if you go in at half time 4-0 down then you are likely to park the bus completely if you can as damage limitation

[WorcesterLegend]

A lot of top teams irl normally score in the first half, unless the other team parks the bus and playing well defensive wise, now, in most 1-0 games the only goal is normally scored at mins 60-90 since by that time, the attacking team has found a way to get past the bus or the defensive team got the attcking one way too up in a counter

 

Keep in mind that unless both teams are equal or similar in quality of players the goals will most likely be scored at the first 30 mins unless the weak team somehow dominates the game or park the bus the right way

[WorcesterLegend]

Edit: double posted by accident

[Snorks]

It's a commbination of many factors I think.

4-0 up at half time - I usually 'expect' to finish at 4-0, 5-1 or 4-1. 

a) Whatever you say, players ease up at 4-0 ahead. Yes the half time team talk (the Complacency one is the one I found to be best as well) can help.

b) Opposition  tighten up even further, making it harder to break down - doubly so with your players dropping a gear.

c) Opposition drop their defensive approach and go gung-ho - pressing you back and pinning you down.

 

I'll be honest though, if I am 4-0 up at half time I would sub off my best/most tired players anyway. Switch from 4231 to 4123DM perhaps. I play a high tempo, high press tactic, so would ease off a bit anyway to conserve energy.

 

Although once this season, I was 4-0 up after 8mins in Europe.  Finished the game at 8-0.

[Andrew_Goats_Gruff]

The 1st half sets up your team talk/tactical changes to give you the illusion of a football manager. 2nd half goals can be more frequent if you *manage* your side well, I find match stats are the most important thing on the game, everything I do is based on them and the result I expect to gain. Don’t really think their is a firsr half bias in goals but their is in a management aspect.

[DamianJMcGrath]

I had to win a game 6-0 once to get through in Europe, after a particularly bad first leg. I was 4-0 up at half time and it finished 4-0.

 

I hope there wasn't an artifical setting activated where my players took it easy, instead of recognising the situation! 

[HUNT3R]

27 minutes ago, DamianJMcGrath said:

I had to win a game 6-0 once to get through in Europe, after a particularly bad first leg. I was 4-0 up at half time and it finished 4-0.

 

I hope there wasn't an artifical setting activated where my players took it easy, instead of recognising the situation! 

As said higher up, the opposition would have shut up shop completely after half time. Nothing artificial. They wouldn't have expected the comeback, but realising at half time that it's quite possible, they would have gone really defensive to protect that lead.

[themadsheep2001]

25 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

As said higher up, the opposition would have shut up shop completely after half time. Nothing artificial. They wouldn't have expected the comeback, but realising at half time that it's quite possible, they would have gone really defensive to protect that lead.

I genuinely wonder how many people realise this, and then react accordingly. Most of the time, I'm quite happy when this happens as I can then play really low low risk football and conserve my teams energy. But when I do want to score and account for this, I've ended up handing out several 7 or 8 nil batterings by adjusting to keep going for the jugular. 

[DamianJMcGrath]

7 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

As said higher up, the opposition would have shut up shop completely after half time. Nothing artificial. They wouldn't have expected the comeback, but realising at half time that it's quite possible, they would have gone really defensive to protect that lead.

That's fine if they go more defensive. I expect that. I just said I hope my players don't take it easy just because the game thinks the match is won. There might be loads of reasons I want to keep scoring so I hope the game recognises this and my players stay at a high level. I'm expecting an opposition change. I'm not expecting my team to try less! 

[HUNT3R]

Just now, DamianJMcGrath said:

That's fine if they go more defensive. I expect that. I just said I hope my players don't take it easy just because the game thinks the match is won. There might be loads of reasons I want to keep scoring so I hope the game recognises this and my players stay at a high level. I'm expecting an opposition change. I'm not expecting my team to try less! 

You're the manager. Manage their motivation levels. It's your job to make sure they don't relax.

[DamianJMcGrath]

Just now, HUNT3R said:

You're the manager. Manage their motivation levels. It's your job to make sure they don't relax.

Of course. And I'll give them an appropriate team talk. My point was, I hope there isn't an artifical piece of code that makes my team go easy, or preserve energy, despite my team talk asking them to keep it up, and despite any tactical changes I might make to counter their defensive style. I hope the code doesn't overwrite that by saying "you're winning easily, let's take it easy now". That was my point. 

[HUNT3R]

Just now, DamianJMcGrath said:

Of course. And I'll give them an appropriate team talk. My point was, I hope there isn't an artifical piece of code that makes my team go easy, or preserve energy, despite my team talk asking them to keep it up, and despite any tactical changes I might make to counter their defensive style. I hope the code doesn't overwrite that by saying "you're winning easily, let's take it easy now". That was my point. 

There's nothing artificial, as I said. Certain personalities will think that though and start taking it easy, so you'll have to be on them.

[DamianJMcGrath]

Just now, HUNT3R said:

There's nothing artificial, as I said. Certain personalities will think that though and start taking it easy, so you'll have to be on them.

What personality type will be 4-0 up in a game they have to win 6-0, and decide to just take it easy? Just so I can be on the lookout for players that shouldn't even be playing football. 

[HUNT3R]

1 minute ago, DamianJMcGrath said:

What personality type will be 4-0 up in a game they have to win 6-0, and decide to just take it easy? Just so I can be on the lookout for players that shouldn't even be playing football. 

You say that like it's "if x then y". It isn't. Not only personalties, but their overall morale and motivation is important as well as how you've handled it. Some players get complacent easily.

[MrPompey]

Professionalism will be one. However lets face it, irl there is often a visible drop in work rate and intensity even if they wish to extend what is already a comfortable lead

I would imagine the manager would want to warn about complacency. Remember that each player in a team is an individual so a team talk may refocus some players or cause others to be disinterested.

Additionally how high are you respected by the team - some players may not be that interested in what you have to say anyway. Its good to check on  a squad's dynamics

 

 

[Snorks]

Professionalism, determination etc etc - all n the personality.

I have Naby Keita in my squad. Quality player. If we go 4-0 up early on, he becomes 'Complacent'.  If I bring him on as sub, he is nearly always 'Complacent' unless we are behind. If he starts, he is usually 'Motivated' until we go 2 or 3 up then slacks off to Complacent again. 

Team talks are how I try and manage it, warn against Complacency even if miles ahead. 

[Svenc]

On 17/09/2018 at 04:50, Andrew_Goats_Gruff said:

The 1st half sets up your team talk/tactical changes to give you the illusion of a football manager. 2nd half goals can be more frequent if you *manage* your side well, I find match stats are the most important thing on the game, everything I do is based on them and the result I expect to gain. Don’t really think their is a firsr half bias in goals but their is in a management aspect.

As a warning, the simple stats FM provides are deeply flawed, in particular if you cannot interpret them in a meaningful way. The in-game media itself doesn't either, nor do the assistants.

This is actually also very relevant as of the topic at hand, considering the aforementioned tactical switches made by AI that try to prevent further goal leakage when they are about to lose big. Some AI tactical switches can be very short-term -- like an AI going gung-ho for but 10 minutes of a match and getting and equalizer from that --and then switching back. That simply won't show in the stats. As in football, it is the play making those stats, not the other way around. On the topic, if the AI in the 2nd half sits 10 players behind the ball, that will be tougher to break down, visually. Sometimes they may pack the centre, sometimes they may pack the flanks, and each approach may be considered in a different way. That is second by second what's happening, and the stats are derived from that. You can be hugely successful in lots of ways -- some do so by not even paying much attention to anything come match day! However, if you simply manage by FM's stats, that's a route to additional frustration -- at the least in isolated matches. At the very least, you will never fully understand what is going on. But then there's no manager in football that manages by stats alone too.

[DamianJMcGrath]

I'm still struggling with the question of "what footballer, no matter what stats, motivation, morale, personality etc would get to 4-0 up, in a game where we have to win 6-0, and then take it easy?". 

Its not as if the win is confirmed. Its not a one off game. There's a bigger picture. 

Every single footballer on earth would give it his all until the team was winning. 

[HUNT3R]

3 minutes ago, DamianJMcGrath said:

I'm still struggling with the question of "what footballer, no matter what stats, motivation, morale, personality etc would get to 4-0 up, in a game where we have to win 6-0, and then take it easy?". 

Its not as if the win is confirmed. Its not a one off game. There's a bigger picture. 

Every single footballer on earth would give it his all until the team was winning. 

In that specific situation, you might be right, but it also depends on the actual motivation levels already, what you said and what their personality is. There might be people who switch off if already high on confidence and you excessively praise them.

Even so, in your case, the most likely (by far) explanation is the change in approach by the opposition.

[MrPompey]

50 minutes ago, DamianJMcGrath said:

I'm still struggling with the question of "what footballer, no matter what stats, motivation, morale, personality etc would get to 4-0 up, in a game where we have to win 6-0, and then take it easy?". 

Its not as if the win is confirmed. Its not a one off game. There's a bigger picture. 

Every single footballer on earth would give it his all until the team was winning. 

I wonder if this is a potential ME issue.

Had it been say a 2 leg match then with the ME detailing the aggregate score on screen I assume it may be aware that an overall "win" is based on the aggregate score, rather than the score/result of the 2nd match

For say a group match where goal difference is the key say 2nd v 3rd final game in champions league where you are 3rd and need to beat 2nd place 6-0 to qualify in 2nd to reach knock-out stage then I suspect the AI logic / in game player AI logic is not advanced enough to recognise what is obvious to you as a human manager looking at table and potential results

However as I mentioned above I do feel the opposition will be risk adverse when 4-0 simply due to damage limitation second half. Perhaps even the AI will think the approach well we may not win the match but lets not lose the 2nd half and instead try to win that. 

I expect we need insight into the ME. This is where I miss the Paul C questions / answers

[Svenc]

17 hours ago, MrPompey said:

For say a group match where goal difference is the key say 2nd v 3rd final game in champions league where you are 3rd and need to beat 2nd place 6-0 to qualify in 2nd to reach knock-out stage then I suspect the AI logic / in game player AI logic is not advanced enough to recognise what is obvious to you as a human manager looking at table and potential results

AI tactical picks in Europe, in particular two legged ties, used to be pretty interesting in general on older releases. Back then patch notes used to be super detailed, giving a few hints of how things work here and there, as every tiny little thing adressed saw a line, including AI reworks (<- link as an example under the "Match engine version history" header in particular). Following such, it became apparent that back then anyways AI prior to their picks work out "expected scorelines" they target. IIRC there was an issue with such in particular in two legged ties encouraging comebacks. Let's imagine AI A (Barcelona) had a heavy win in the first match. The AI calculation for the "expected scoreline" for the 2nd leg thus was a 0-0, as that was all for AI A needed to progress.

Thus Barcelona would shut up the shop completely inviting the OP team in its half, whilst the other AI B went all attacking (its "expected score" calculated was a big win, as else it couldn't possibly progress). It's something that was noted by human players likewise, how extreme things could get e.g. http://www.fm-base.co.uk/forum/football-manager-2016-discussion/358243-why-barcelona-playing-defensively-against-me.html (as a side note, that's 22 Liverpool corners... Basically a corner for every 3rd minute the ball is "in play". In the abscence of added statistical feeedback, I'd watch those shots and whether they aren't primarily headers under pressure off of those corners, which aren't tap-ins and likely never be converted anywhere close no matter the player, but I disgress). So it's very well possible that the internal logics for how AI work out what they need in a group stage in the last game could be some faulty too -- or at least, produce curious picks. It's even possible that the Goal Difference isn't even much a factor.
 

 

 

[sporadicsmiles]

I think if you are 4-0 up after losing the first leg 6-0, then the AI is going to completely try to shut up shop on you, and play defensive football with a lot of time wasting (and probably many fouls to break up the flow of the game). One thing I have not read people saying here is that they go completely gung-ho looking for the remaining two goals. If the AI has changed it's tactics (and it most certainly will have done), then you cannot expect to have similar results in the second half by doing the same thing. You need to be extremely aggressive in response to the much more defensive outlook and absolutely hunt the goals down. You can see that the AI does this when hunting for goals, I can remember numerous times where I try to see a game out and the AI gets extraordinarily attacking to push for the goals it needs. You absolutely have to change things up in response.

In regular matches when you are winning by a large number of goals, you will also see the AI going more defensive when it knows the game is gone and just wants to finish without conceding more and get the game done. The same things apply, except there is little point in going gung-ho here, and players often will just leave things the same, bring on subs (who will not have motivation since the game is won), or change so they are also just seeing the game out.

I'm not sure if there is a bug here, so much as people do not understand what the AI is doing tactically, and hence are failing to respond properly.

[MrPompey]

39 minutes ago, sporadicsmiles said:

I think if you are 4-0 up after losing the first leg 6-0, then the AI is going to completely try to shut up shop on you, and play defensive football with a lot of time wasting (and probably many fouls to break up the flow of the game). One thing I have not read people saying here is that they go completely gung-ho looking for the remaining two goals. If the AI has changed it's tactics (and it most certainly will have done), then you cannot expect to have similar results in the second half by doing the same thing. You need to be extremely aggressive in response to the much more defensive outlook and absolutely hunt the goals down. You can see that the AI does this when hunting for goals, I can remember numerous times where I try to see a game out and the AI gets extraordinarily attacking to push for the goals it needs. You absolutely have to change things up in response.

In regular matches when you are winning by a large number of goals, you will also see the AI going more defensive when it knows the game is gone and just wants to finish without conceding more and get the game done. The same things apply, except there is little point in going gung-ho here, and players often will just leave things the same, bring on subs (who will not have motivation since the game is won), or change so they are also just seeing the game out.

I'm not sure if there is a bug here, so much as people do not understand what the AI is doing tactically, and hence are failing to respond properly.

I think you mis-understand the issue. It wasn't that the opposition shut up shop, I think we understand why this may happen.

The issue was the complacency in the Human's manager's team at 4-0 not realising that they need a 6-0 win to progress etc and instead cruising with a 4-0 win. It was thought that the options to encourage the team to push on in the half time talk were not having the right effect on the players / players not seeing the bigger picture:

Player - but we are winning 4-0, why keep the gas pedal right down, we are going to win

Manager - 4-0 win is not enough, we need to win 6-0 else we dont qualify / progress

[Snorks]

Another option:

MANAGER: 4-0 win is not enough, we need to win 6-0 or we don;t qualify

PLAYER: FFS boss, we have given everything and only scored 4, it's never gonna happen.

 

As I said earlier, I have noticed more goals in first half than second - but only when winning by a decent margin. I have always put this down to a combination of AI reacting, me reacting, player motivation/professionalism and other general 'footbally-type' stuff going on.

I have no idea how the ME calculates during a two-legged tie, with a big win needed by one team although I have turned over a couple of 3-0 first leg defeats, but they were both when I scored four in the first half.

[DamianJMcGrath]

That's exactly my point. 

If I scored 4 in the first half (chasing 6 in total), and the opposition changed their tactics and I fail to adapt, that's totally fine. I accept that as part of the game and I'm fine with that. 

However, if, at half time, winning 4-0, the opposition don't make changes and basically everything else stays the same BUT some artificial code dictates that my players should lose motivation and should rest and take it easy, then I have a problem with that. 

The first is in my control to overcome. The second isn't, and is just the game putting some arbitrary overlay onto the match which isn't in my control and isn't properly reflective of the situation.

 

That's the question I need answered. 

[FrazT]

I dont know if the code has changed for FM 18, but for sure in previous versions, the ME had difficulty interpreting 2 leg matches and often commented and reacted as if they were individual ones and not taken together over 2 legs.  I suspect, in your second case, that this may be what is happening and so it could still be a bug.

[HUNT3R]

The team talks usually take into account the aggregate score over the 2 legs, so I'd be surprised if the players didn't.

 

@DamianJMcGrath As said before, there isn't anything artificial going on.

[Svenc]

Re: possible perception bias, something that may be worth considering here: Scoring lots of goals in one half, let alone two, no matter which, is something rather unusual and oft requires oustanding shot conversions that aren't sustainable over a season, let alone a match.Exclusively looking at big wins where the majority of goals were scored in the 1st half may only auto-confirm your observations due to the fact that scoring loads is against the odds, no matter when. Think of it like you rolling the 6 on a six sided dice thrice in a row -- you wouldn't expect that to continue likewise -- and it more oftenly won't. I'm not sure about your experience. But from mine as well as looking through various story sections, it seems obvious that not all big wins are caused by a landslide of goals in the 1st half. About shutting up shop: Luckily the AI isn't able to do such the way we are anyway, or else the perceived difference between halves wouldn't be a possible perception bias, but straight in your face.

Aside of the tactical choices, which obviously influence goal spreads and goals scored in a huge way -- reckon SI must also look at what is actually going on in football. Whilst teams may "switch off" some in the 2nd half -- in tendency more goals are scored in the 2nd as in the 1st half. Something oft attributed to fatigue kicking in, and additionally errors. Likewise, teams are naturally more inclined to go "gung-ho" when the clock is running out too, increasing the likelyhood of scoring and conceding alike. Additionally, first halves tend to kick off mostly at a scoreline of 0-0 -- mostly.  :P 2nd halves rarely do, oft forcing one team to do something or risk of going bust with a similar effect: Space becomes available on both ends of the pitch, and thus increases the likelyhood of witnessing goals. Statistical analysis for observing the effects of such is talking about changing "game states". SI likely balance and simulate this likely on how AI manages matches either way. For every AI that shuts up shop at half time, there is another AI that is visibly coded to go more aggressive, as it would risk losing that AI vs AI game -- a bit like the stuff that tends to happen in football.

[llDracoll]

I think it's more of a complacency issue. A large early lead almost always makes players go easy because there's no hurry to keep scoring goals, so unless the difference in quality between teams is massive, they won't score much more.

If you sub a player in and you notice his body language becomes "Looking complacent" or "Looking uninterested" almost as soon as he gets to the pitch, then you are having the complacency issue. I consider it to be a team-wide situation - the advantage is so big they are pretty much napping during the match.

There are not many ways to avoid it. If a sub manages to do something good such as scoring a goal then they might be motivated to keep scoring. I'm not sure up to what extent the "Demand More" or "Push Forward" shouts work, but they seem to try a bit more under their effect.

[mightypvfc]

This is incorrect. In my current game, I've just been involved in a 7-2 game with the score 3-1 at HT. The losing side scored their first goal in first-half stoppage time.

I'm convinced that this made a game of it in the second half which really blows the OP theory out of the window. Mental stats play a big part in determining if heads drop or teeth grit in the face of a big deficit.

[sporadicsmiles]

On 19/09/2018 at 11:35, MrPompey said:

I think you mis-understand the issue. It wasn't that the opposition shut up shop, I think we understand why this may happen.

The issue was the complacency in the Human's manager's team at 4-0 not realising that they need a 6-0 win to progress etc and instead cruising with a 4-0 win. It was thought that the options to encourage the team to push on in the half time talk were not having the right effect on the players / players not seeing the bigger picture:

 Player - but we are winning 4-0, why keep the gas pedal right down, we are going to win

Manager - 4-0 win is not enough, we need to win 6-0 else we dont qualify / progress

I do not misunderstand at all. Team talks are not important enough to make that much of a difference to a performance, and unless one of the devs (or someone who knows) tells me that players are unaware of a match situation, I will find that difficult to comprehend. 

The AI changing how it plays, and the player not responding adequately is far, far more likely as a cause here. If you are trying to convince me that the AI, after losing 4 goals of a 6 goal lead is not going to absolutely shut a match down any way it can in the second half of a match, I honestly think you are flat out wrong. Tactical changes made by the AI (or the player) are more important than anything you can say in a teamtalk. Not to say I do not think there should be something specific you can say in such a situation ("Come on lads!! We are still in this!! Go for the win!!"), I just think too much emphasis is being put on team talks in general. 

I mean, you can see this in matches all the time. You have complacent players in the second half, and you go on to get another goal and often complacency disappears a little. Or you have a bunch of nervous players, but after you score they are no longer nervous. Hell, you even have players becoming nervous during the match because they do not have a goal (or whatever reason they have). The motivation of players is dynamic, and so whatever you say at a team talk is only really going to affect stuff just after you say it. 

Also, going back to the original post on most goals being scored in the first half. My results tend to indicate confirmation bias at play, or just brains not being good at grasping stats when presented not as actual numbers. I tallied up when every goal has been scored in the first 7 games of my league season (for all teams in my division). There have been 97 first half goals, and 91 second half goals. Assuming goals obey Poisson statistics (they probably do not, since they are not really independent), these numbers are not statistically different. I will carry on doing this, but so far it seems at least for my game there is no difference in when goals are scored. 

[MrPompey]

Yep, I think the game AI needs to improve how it / teams understand and react to positions in group tables perhaps and the variation potentials of results and what is required. Likely quite complex

Goals per half stats. From these stats irl it appears that slightly more goals are scored in the second half:

https://www.bettingwell.com/sports-betting-guide/football-bettors-guide/when-are-most-goals-scored-football

I'm not sure for the human manager if this information is available as a stat but I'm sure the SI guys will have this info

[Svenc]

 

3 hours ago, MrPompey said:

https://www.bettingwell.com/sports-betting-guide/football-bettors-guide/when-are-most-goals-scored-football

I'm not sure for the human manager if this information is available as a stat but I'm sure the SI guys will have this info

I don't think it is, however, you can do it for your own team on any save (screenshot I posted above). It shows such goal times under team stats. edit: You can check the AI teams goal times too if you scout them in the same screen. Naturally, it may be a bit influenced by management -- the reason that my team (nor the opposition) scored much in the 2nd half was that every time I was up, I went into "protect the lead" mode. This involved playing keep-ball in a way that a) not much shots for my team went off (barely any players were pushed forward) and b) not much shots from the opposition went off either (they didn't much get the ball back anways).

I'm not surprised that this piece comes from a betting site! Similar to football people and the analyst linked to above, those people are looking for information that is valuable. I still don't think you'll find much if you only look at big wins where most of the goals are scored in the first half (what about the other big wins?) Not merely due to AI at HT then oft going into "keep damage to a minimum" mode. But as mentioned before: Lots of goals scored require shot conversions that aren't sustainable, no matter when they happen. After all, if FM has it correct, even most of the biggest chances excluding penalties or tap-ins can be roughly compared to a coin toss. How many times does the coin land heads in a long sequence if you flip it?  Half of the time, patterns seemingly spotted are the result of human brains fooled by randomness either way.