I've never had an injury to my goalkeeper before, but that's no longer the case
Have others already had one?

image](https://i.imgur.com/OWW8OJP.jpeg)

Personally, this is the 1st time I've done this...

Idem never seen that means if mine gets injured I'm in trouble

Was he injured in training?

The 9% physique doesn't help either, I think

he slipped on the ball :)

Yes, it must have been in training.
Then, when you're injured, your physique always goes down to 0

I've never seen 9% because he's injured. Otherwise, I don't see how a keeper can be so out of shape

lens59: Jamais vu 9% car il est blessé sinon je ne vois pas comment un gardien peut avoir peu de physique

A goalkeeper is capable of playing more than 5 games in a row and staying at the top of his game, but this is a disaster

Injury in training, which takes the physical down to 0%
Like almost all clubs, I have only one goalkeeper and I'll have to play several days with a free goalkeeper

Training started just after the end of the cup match against Estac. He had withstood the opposition's onslaught for 90 minutes and won the duel on penalties.
#match?mid=5943223
He was injured during the post-match warm-up because he had drunk too much Champagne in the changing room :)

There's still room for an emergency warden

The fact that the goalkeeper gets injured in training doesn't seem incongruous to me.
In matches, the goalkeeper is a player who's a bit 'out of his depth', never injured, never cautioned, never sent off, whereas in reality he's a player who gets booked quite often.

But in training, where injuries are based on pure chance, why should he be invulnerable?
So if you've got 30 players in your squad and the game's algorithm has decided that you're going to have an injured player, it's not illogical that your goalkeeper has a one in 30 chance of being targeted.

In any case, this example puts paid to the rumour that the more tired a player is, the higher his % chance of getting injured, because when you start training just after a match, your goalkeeper is less tired than the outfield players, but that doesn't make him immune to injury, whereas his outfield colleague, who was 3 times more burnt by the match, won't get injured. So if a player gets injured, he's not automatically the most tired of the bunch.

Injuries are random and disconnected from the player's physical level, but don't get me wrong if the player's physical level falls below a certain threshold (I don't remember which one) then the injury is automatic, but that's more a question of the % chance of getting injured because it's an automatic injury.

I still remember Grégory Coupet's injury at the end of the 2000s... just goes to show that on VF goalkeepers don't need mutual aid... except during training ^^

myforsans: Le fait que le gardien se blesse à l'entraînement ne me semble pas incongru.
En match le gardien est un joueur un peu "hors sol" jamais blessé, jamais averti, jamais expulsé alors qu'en réalité c'est un joueur qui fait assez souvent l'objet de cartons.

Mais pour les entrainements où les blessures sont basées sur l'aléatoire pur pourquoi serait-il invulnérable ?
Donc si tu as 30 joueurs dans ton effectif et si l'algorithme du jeu a décidé que tu aurais un blessé, il est pas illogiqu

A lot of things are wrong. First of all, I've seen players finish games at 0% fitness and not get injured. So it's wrong to say that below a certain threshold injury is automatic.

Secondly, it's match injuries that are affected by fitness, not training injuries. I've never seen anyone say that training injuries are linked to fitness.

No, there's nothing wrong with that.

1. If your physique becomes negative, injury in a match is automatic. Try it and see 😃
2. We shouldn't listen to, or rather read, the same people.
   There are those who claim that the injury rate rises with a drop in physical fitness (match or training) and who think that if a player is at 100%, statistically he'll get injured less often than at 30%
   But as far as training is concerned, it seems to me that I've already seen a message saying So-and-so missed training because of physical fitness. So, by hypothesis, that means there's no risk of injury.

We don't have to read the same people. Everyone will make up their own mind.

Demi-cerveau:

Effectivement, nous ne devons pas lire les mêmes personnes. Chacun se fera son opinion.

My last injuries were a tough FD injured 2 times in a row (physics higher than 95 at the start) and another MD injured in the 11th minute when starting the match at 100% physics
It's either random or it's the way the match is going which has a role to play

Let's just say that playing below 20% physical fitness increases the risk of injury, but like Akram, most of my recent injuries have occurred at the start of games when players are around 70%

After that, if when Aymeric says: "physical fitness has an impact on the risk of injury" you mean "fit players don't get injured", you might need to rethink your reasoning.

Demi-cerveau: Après, si quand Aymeric dit : " la forme physique impacte le risque de blessure" vous comprenez "les joueurs en forme ne se blessent pas", il faut peut être revoir votre raisonnement.

That's not what I mean, but because it's logical, the risk of injury is high at -50% physical fitness, but to have recurring injuries and lots of others who have injuries at +90% physical fitness proves that there's a random side or a factor that we don't know about

Akram: Ce n'est pas ce que je veux dire mais car c'est logique le risque de blessure est élevé a -50% de physique mais d'avoir des blessure récurrente et plein d'autres qui ont eux des blessures à +90% de physique sa prouve que y as un côté aléatoire où un facteur qu'on ignore

One doesn't preclude the other and, fortunately, if it didn't, nobody would be playing below 50%, to use your example, and there'd be no need to invest in an infirmary.
It's good that there's a management part, logical that everyone can manage, but it's also good that there's an element of the unknown in every action you take in the game.
And to come back to the goalkeepers, it's clearly not common and it would still make the game more interesting, especially for the big teams who would be obliged to have 2 good goalkeepers just in case (if we assume that it will remain fairly rare)
The others will have to make do with a free agent or a clown.