Hello ,

Here you can discuss all the matches played and that you would like to understand (or for others to complain), to talk about the match you just have to put the link and ask for explanations.

All the other subjects of debate of match will be closed in order to have only one, in the same way any comment of attack (of club, agreement, personality, success ect ....) will be sanctioned without additional warning.

Enjoy the match debates with all due respect for each other's opinions.

Personally, I haven't complained for a long time about 4 to 6 inconsistent results per season, it's part of the acceptable randomness.
But what annoys me most about matches is that the slightest change (tactics, instructions, player substitutions) causes your stats to drop drastically.
Even if it's temporary, it's unbearable.
Swap an MDG and an MDD and you're down 100 stats for 10 minutes!
Frankly, it doesn't encourage you to follow the matches actively.
The worst thing is to look at the opponent's collective instructions for a few seconds and sometimes you're down 200 or 300 points. What a load of rubbish!
If there's one thing we urgently need to change, it's that. As for the rest, we can live with it.

Yes, I also get some pretty inconsistent results, 4 to 7 times a season I take them into account. Indeed, what seems to me very inconsistent are the changes of players even stronger than the one replaced you lose a lot of stats between 50 and 100 points or you get a goal. I think something needs to be changed here because I don't make changes or even change tactics any more.

Effectively, the excessive loss of stat points during the slightest change of players or tactics is staggering and as myforsans said above, sometimes you lose more than 100 stat points just by looking at the opponent's style instructions for a few seconds, which is really inconsistent and absurd, Aymeric Si tu passe par là stp fait quelques choses pour cette partie tactique du jeu car ont à plus envie de toucher à quoi sa que ce soit tellement ont peur de ce faire contré pour quelques secondes passé à gérer sa tactique est s'organiser pour éviter à l'adversaire d'avoir le dessus sur une partie du jeu.

Back then the problem was guys who were 'too into it' and moving every minute, now it's the other way round.

Personally, I don't think it's a bad idea, because if you're going to move, you have to move well.
What's more, if you cause problems for your opponents, they too will have to change something and lose stats.

Personally, I change tactics depending on the opponent.
If the opponent is afk, once you've found the right tactics, you can't touch them.
If the opponent is present, if he moves, he also suffers the loss of stats so ... it's the same thing.
If the opponent is present but doesn't touch anything, then as with an afk, you need to take control and not touch it again until the opponent moves first.

As far as I'm concerned, the mdm has been totally broken for a long time now, and the results are the fruit of chance. I'm convinced I'm right and it's been obvious for a long time, no need to be blind.

Ced90: A l’époque le problème était les mecs « trop à fond » qui bougeaient toutes les minutes, maintenant l’inverse

Je trouve personnellement l’idée pas mal car si tu dois bouger, il faut le faire bien.
De plus, si tu poses problème à l’adversaire alors lui aussi devra modifier quelque chose et perdre des statistiques

And when you have a burnt-out NG 80 player who's down to 50 in rating and you replace him with a fresh 80 player, you lose points in stats, if you have time you'll explain the logic to me.

Besides, even if a manager moves every minute, why penalise him? At least he's active and having fun.
Right now, most of the time you're better off playing sumo and not moving a toe.

So of course you're going to tell me that in a real football match when a substitute comes on he doesn't (let's say sometimes but not always) immediately find his feet with his team-mates, but you're not going to make me believe that the way the game is set up with this brutal drop in stats is to stick as closely as possible to this supposed reality :) :) :)

That there's a slight impact is fine, but then it would have to be smoothed out substantially (I think 90% or 95% of the game's participants agree with me, but of course you're entitled to disagree).

Speaking of changing stats... here's the thing about changing from light PH to normal PH:

And here's the compensation:

I think it's really fair for such a small change!

After that, I'm not complaining... but, for a minor change, the drop in stats is crude!
But if it's intentional, I understand, but it's still a hard drop!

What might be interesting is to show us the overall stats for you and your opponents:

• just before your tactical change.
• just after your tactical change.
• just after what you call "regulation".

That way, we could measure the real loss linked to this tactical change, during this match. Personally, I think that overall it's zero, or almost zero. But it will be clearer if you give us the figures.

It was this match #match?mid=6744838
On my screens, his values are displayed... but yes, not the front one, I admit.

After that, it's the drop in def that I don't understand, compared to the middle (PH light to high as already)... in short, I understand that it can destabilise several managers... even if I've noticed that compensation also has a negative impact on opposing teams (not on my match though).

There's one thing I'd like to understand about matches: the 30/40 minute gaps.

Again in my game today, lots of chances at the start, nothing for 40 minutes and then chances again at the end.

#match?mid=6686207

Sometimes you just get the impression that the game is buggy because there are too many games on at the same time, but in the end this phenomenon happens every hour.

Ced90: A l’époque le problème était les mecs « trop à fond » qui bougeaient toutes les minutes, maintenant l’inverse

Je trouve personnellement l’idée pas mal car si tu dois bouger, il faut le faire bien.
De plus, si tu poses problème à l’adversaire alors lui aussi devra modifier quelque chose et perdre des statistiques

Yeah, I completely agree with that. In the end, it's always less of a penalty than a bad tactic. It encourages you to make the right choices.

Against an afk it's a false debate because you're not going to have to change tactics often (unless you screw up).

Against an active player, the latter will also have to adjust if our tactics are the best.

Skyz: Moi j'aimerais bien comprendre un phénomène pendant les matchs : les trous de 30/40min

Encore sur mon match aujourd'hui, pleins d'occasions au début, rien pendant 40min puis retour des occasions à la fin.

#match?mid=6686207

Des fois t'as juste l'impression que le jeu bug parce qu'il y a trop de match en même temps mais au final ce phénomène arrive à toutes les heures.

I totally agree, and I think you're right, because sometimes the news is only 5 minutes and 15 seconds long.

Skyz: Moi j'aimerais bien comprendre un phénomène pendant les matchs : les trous de 30/40min

Encore sur mon match aujourd'hui, pleins d'occasions au début, rien pendant 40min puis retour des occasions à la fin.

#match?mid=6686207

Des fois t'as juste l'impression que le jeu bug parce qu'il y a trop de match en même temps mais au final ce phénomène arrive à toutes les heures.

Perhaps it was simply your opponents who had a fair amount of possession, and given that their attack was outnumbered by their defence, they could have had 0 chances.

mick3829: Pour moi personnellement le mdm est totalement cassé depuis bien longtemps les résultats sont le fruit du hasard j’me fais plus chier avec sa. Je suis persuadé que j’ai raison et puis sa se voit depuis longtemps pas besoin de faire l’aveugle

I agree with you, not necessarily for several seasons but I have the impression that this season something has changed. I don't know if Aymeric hit the mdm at the start of the season but the results are really strange. I'm spending less and less time on vf.
My last 3 league games and my last ie...

It's not often that you can string them together like that...

ManuM: C'est rare de les enchaîner comme ça...

I assure you it's not rare at all

You have to stop looking only at the XGs, the XGs only represent part of the match (I'm not saying it was deserved or not).

Galywat: Peut être simplement ton adversaire qui a eu pas mal d'actus de son côté (vu sa possession c'est pas improbable) sur cette période, et vu que son attaque était dépassée par ta défense, ça a pu faire 0 occasion.

Gaps happen all the time, regardless of possession, tactics or the presence of the opposition.

Brutus: C'était ce match #match?mid=6744838
Sur mes screens, ses valeurs sont affichées... mais oui, pas le avant, j'avoue.

Après, c'est cette baisse en déf que je n'ai pô compris, en comparaison au milieu (PH léger à haut comme déjà)... bref, je comprends que cela puisse déstabiliser plusieurs managers... même si j'ai remarqué que les compensations impacte aussi en négatif les équipes adverses (pas sur mon match par contre)

I took a look at your game and looked at the stats between the 30th and 39th minute, to make sure it was before your tactical change.

At that point, the overall difference in stats between you and your opponent was 43 points.

If I look at the screen after the compensation you posted, the overall difference in stats is again 43 points.

There was a half-time interval in between. There's also stamina to take into account, so I'm not going to say that the difference is exactly the same before and after the change. But it's still minimal. Then, of course, when you move, there's a drop in stats, and it takes a while to get back to normal. But overall you're back to where you started if you don't touch anything else.

Obviously, if we move every minute against an opponent who doesn't move for 90 minutes, we'll be penalised by the drop in stats over the whole match, and he won't be. But if you move every minute against an opponent who doesn't move, you have a serious problem analysing the match data.

Marcus Aurelius: Les trous ça arrive régulièrement ; indépendamment de la possession, de la tactique ou de la présence de l’adversaire.

It happens a lot less in games with big tactical differences.

Galywat: Ça arrive quand même beaucoup moins sur les matchs avec de forts écarts tactiques.

(Ce qui ne veut pas dire qu'il n'y a pas de bug, ça reste une possibilité, mais une explication sans lien avec un quelconque bug existe aussi, et n'est pas moins plausible)

Bug or no bug, personally, I don't really care.
It's just that on a game you're there to have fun; but if for 40 minutes it's nothing, if it happens regularly whatever the conditions, that's a problem.

Very interesting subject. I think that the loss of stats is a very interesting factor to take into account, it makes the matches more interesting and plays on the anticipation by putting the emphasis on the pre-match. Including a tactical change at half-time with no loss of stats would be just right.
On the other hand, phases of 20 to 40 minutes where there's a bug and nothing happens; in a game, that's forbidden. Not a single foul, not a single shot, not a corner, not even a comment on the domination... we're talking about a 10-word sentence... when will that be?
Honestly, not a word about the opposing club, its star player or its top scorer, the standings and titles of each... even the simplest stuff: "the two teams are neutralising each other"...
You have to fill in the blanks a bit when nothing's happening, it's just text and as it's already not nirvana when the match is live... at least 20 news items per match including the start, half-time and end of the game would be acceptable.
In my opinion.

Of course, sometimes matches without updates or actions can be frustrating, but as some people have noticed, the number of goals has increased since A45 was changed.
I could be wrong, but I find the MDM more relevant and punishing since this change. Before, in an 'improbable' match, coming back from 1/1 down was already pretty good.
Now you can really make some big comebacks.
What's more, if the IE ranking points record falls this season, I could be wrong but it's no coincidence. If I'm right, hitting 250/260 will happen faster than you think, and it won't be because of the overall level of the players.

aloisio: Certes parfois les matchs sans actualisation ou actions peuvent être frustrants mais comme certains l’ont remarqué, le nombre de buts s’est accru depuis la modification d’A45
Je peux me tromper mais je le trouve plus pertinent, plus punitif le MDM depuis ce changement. Avant dans un match « improbable » revenir à 1/1 était déjà pas mal
Actuellement tu peux vraiment faire des grosses remontadas.
D’ailleurs, si le record des points en classement IE tombe cette saison, je peux me tromper mais c’...

The average point/IE before and after is more or less the same.

Do you have the details for the LR?
After that, we remember that he changed his MDM at the start of the season, so we're not immune to the fact that the goal / domination setting was changed at the start of the season, even if he's changed another parameter in the meantime and it's "invisible" to us. Only the boss knows!

We'll see next season if you manage the 260 again!

It's precisely the RL that I'm talking about, as it's the only agreement that can match the fact of breaking the record.
There was no permanent change at the start of the season.

#match?mid=6694568 beautiful little carrot 🥕

Carlos Soler: #match?mid=6694568 belle petite carotte 🥕

The xGs no longer mean anything.
All chances have the same probability of going in. 0.01 or 0.27 = 1 chance in 4 of scoring.

Personally, I think a simple patch has been applied. Increasing the chances of scoring. Except for the cleats, which have remained in place.
But that's a personal theory, based solely on my feelings and an analysis of quite a few games.
It's like a race to the bottom.

In any case, I see a lot more 'blue' for low-yield opportunities, and just as much blue as before (so not enough, in my opinion of course) for ultra-dominant opportunities.
I'm warming up Azby, mishatte and Val' on the subject ❤️

Magpie: Perso, je pense qu'un simple patch a été mis. Augmentant les probas de marquer. Sauf pour les taquets qui, eux, sont restés en place.
Mais c'est une théorie perso', basée uniquement sur mon ressenti, et une analyse de pas mal de matchs.
Comme un nivellement par le bas.

En tout cas, je vois bien plus de "bleu" pour des occaz a faible rendement, et autant de bleu qu'avant (donc pas assez, selon moi bien entendu) pour des occaz d'ultra domination.
Je chauffe Azby, mishatte et Val' sur le sujet ❤️

It's even worse than before because now you can get 2 goals at 0.02xG and it's almost impossible to recover as nothing happens in the games 🤣

Yes, we need to talk about it now, the data will be out soon, but the xGs are nothing but fluff.
No matter how good the chance, you have a 25-28% chance of scoring, even with a 0.01xG chance.

Let's take a simple example, this friendly match dominated by a large margin BUT, 5 chances to 3...
On paper, yes, I have a 68% chance of winning (and he has a 3% chance... lol) because of a fairly substantial xG delta.
But that's not the reality, given that all the chances are the same and given that he had 3 of them out of nowhere.

So I'll leave it to you to imagine the lottery in tight matches

image](https://i.imgur.com/nMAa8cZ.jpeg)

In short, if a 40-metre shot has as much chance of going in as a penalty, we've got to do something about it!
All the more competitive managers in this game have noticed that something strange has been going on for several weeks now.

Hilarious conceded goals, like this one on the left while nothing was happening for me the whole match by over-dominating all areas.
image](https://i.imgur.com/NPSDsOZ.png)

The game as it stands makes absolutely no sense.
At least we had a good laugh on discord. 😂

Ced90: Il faut en parler oui maintenant, les datas vont bientôt sortir mais les xG ne sont que du flan.
Peu importe la qualité de l’occasion tu as entre 25 et 28% de chance de marquer, même avec une occasion de 0,01xG

Prenons un simple exemple, ce match amical dominé très largement MAIS, 5 occasions a 3…
Sur le papier oui j’ai 68% de chance de gagner (et lui 3%.. lol) car un delta de xG assez conséquent.
Mais ce n’est pas la réalité vu que toutes les occasions se valent et vu qu’il en a 3 sorties ...

Not really. It's just that he had a lot of success generating 3 chances with so few xG. (And even then, he didn't score).

It's not the xGs that are rubbish, it's your interpretation of an opportunity that's wrong. The only thing an opportunity (or at the very least a goal) can say with any certainty is to give the team that had the action in its favour.

The quality of the chance as displayed in the live text doesn't really make sense on VF.

The more xG an event generates (based on match stats coupled with probability) the more likely it is to generate an opportunity/goal (of some kind), but that's as far as it goes.

It's no more of a lottery than it used to be.

Galywat: Pas vraiment. C'est juste que là il a eu pas mal de réussite pour se générer 3 occasions avec si peu de xG. (Et encore, il n'a pas marqué)

Ce sont pas les xG qui sont du flan, mais ton interprétation d'une occasion qui est erronée. La seule chose que dit une occasion (à la rigueur un but) avec certitude c'est de donner l'equipe qui a eu l'actu en sa faveur.

La qualité de l'occasion telle qu'affichée dans le live texte ça n'a pas vraiment de sens sur VF.

Plus une actu génère de xG (selon ...

So what's the point of xGs if 0.01xG has the same probability of scoring as 0.27xG?
We've analysed everything with the CPs and 0.01 or 0.28 = 1 chance in 4 of scoring a goal.

Skyz: A quoi servent les xG alors si 0.01xG a la même probabilité de faire but que 0.27xG ?
On a tout analysé avec les CP et 0.01 ou 0.28 = 1 chance sur 4 de faire but.

A partir de là déjà ça n'a aucun sens

0.01xG does not have the same probability of scoring a goal as 0.27xG

Galywat: 0.01xG n'a pas la même probabilité de faire but que 0.27xG.

Source? Because we've had the data back since the MDM change actually 🙂
And it's 25-28% scoring whatever the occasion.

And so for the xG = goals in the data there is a huge rebalancing done on some matches.

Skyz: Source? Parce que nous on a récupéré les données depuis le changement du MDM en fait.
Ce qu'on dit c'est factuel. 🙂
Et c'est 25-28% de marquer quelque soit l'occasion.

Et du coup pour que les xG = buts dans les datas il y a un énorme rééquilibrage de fait sur certains matchs.

Yes, whatever the occasion. That's the bias in your analysis.

But generating 0.01xG will give you far fewer chances/goals than 0.27 xG.

Hence my previous message.

Galywat: Oui quelque soit l'occasion. C'est tout le biais de ton analyse.

Mais générer 0.01xG sur une actu te donnera beaucoup moins d'occasion / but que 0.27 xG.

D'où mon message précédent. Si le live texte n'affichait que les buts ça voudrait pas dire que 0.01xG génère autant de but de 0.27.

Not all the time, it's random 🙂
#match?mid=6692365

1xG = 1 opportunity
0.5xG = 4 occasions

So the 0.5xG team had more chances to win contrary to what the match analysis says.
Where's the logic 🙂

Skyz: Pas tout le temps, c'est aleatoire 🙂
#match?mid=6692365

1xG = 1 occasion
0.5xG = 4 occasions

L'équipe à 0.5xG avait donc plus de chances de gagner contrairement à ce que dit l'analyse de match.
Où est la logique si tout est biaisé ? 🙂

It's random in the sense that they're probabilities, yes. You toss a coin 10 times and it could very well come up heads 9 times. That doesn't mean it's not a rule of 1/2.

Galywat: C'est aléatoire dans le sens où ce sont des probas oui. Tu lances 10 fois pile ou face tu peux très bien avoir 9 fois pile. Ça veut pas dire que c'est pas une règle de 1/2.

Et non il n'avait pas dans ton exemple plus de chance de marquer. C'est pas parce qu'il n'y a pas d'occasion qu'il avait moins de chance de marquer.

Your example has absolutely nothing to do with what we've been saying all along.
Where is the logic in an opportunity at 0.02xG = a 1 in 4 chance of scoring? 🙂

Je sais pas les mecs vous voulez toujours être raison sans rien comprendre au jeu c'est hallucinant.

Skyz: Source? Parce que nous on a récupéré les données depuis le changement du MDM en fait.
Ce qu'on dit c'est factuel. 🙂
Et c'est 25-28% de marquer quelque soit l'occasion.

Et du coup pour que les xG = buts dans les datas il y a un énorme rééquilibrage de fait sur certains matchs.

If you have facts, show them. If one chance in 4 really has a chance of going in, and the xgs are nothing but fluff, it should show in the statistics.

Skyz: Ton exemple n'a absolument aucun rapport avec ce qu'on raconte depuis le début.
Où est là logique à ce qu'une occasion à 0.02xG = 1 chance sur 4 de faire but? 🙂

Je sais pas les mecs vous voulez toujours avoir raison sans rien comprendre au jeu c'est hallucinant.
J'arrête là parce que c'est une perte de temps.

Says the guy who does exactly the same thing. Anyway...

If you have 0.02xG that could very well mean you have a 5-6% chance of getting a chance and a 2% chance of getting a goal.

At 0.27xG, you have a 60-70% chance of a chance and a 27% chance of a goal.

In both cases, yes, you'll 'see' that the goal/chance ratio is roughly 25%.

That still doesn't mean that 0.02xG gives you as much chance of scoring as 0.2, and that's fortunate because there would only be random results, which isn't the case.

Demi-cerveau: Si vous avez du factuel, montrez le. Si vraiment une occasion sur 4 a une chance de rentrer, et que les xgs ne sont que du flan, ça doit se voir au niveau des statistiques.

We've got some sick people here who are tablephiliacs and who've launched a great study.
They're speaking in Chinese with a Martian accent (I've read terms like bias, variance, distribution, banging the neighbour, etc.), but the initial data seems quite edifying, especially on the number of low xG chances that have generated a goal. Because it would seem that the occurrences are as high as 'average' chances. In any case, there are definitely more actions that have resulted in goals with low xG than before (hence my initial theory, my 'feeling').
Now, I've read that they wanted to strengthen the study before exposing the whole thing. I think that's to their credit. And let's not forget that it will always be impossible to know whether other parameters influence the finality of an event (style of play, attitude, aggressiveness, value of a style, general attack/def ratio, etc.).
So it will always be difficult to draw clear conclusions.

But I look forward to reading their conclusions

I wasn't aware that we now had the ability to see what Xg each occasion generates. Given my competitive distance from the game to go and play with clowns as fellow players, I hadn't realised that.
If I'd had the inclination, I'd have done the analysis job! So I'm going to wait for the studies and above all the boss's response, because from the start, what A45 has been waiting for is factual contradiction!
If you've got the data, get it out there - it's your only chance of getting the game moving!
It's your only chance of getting the game moving (if it ever needs to!).

aloisio: Je n’avais pas l’info qu’on avait la capacité désormais de voir ce que chaque occasion génère comme Xg. Vu mon éloignement compétitif du jeu pour aller jouer avec des clampins comme compagnons d’entente, je n’avais pas capté
Si j’avais le goût, j’aurai fait le job d’analyse! Du coup je vais attendre les études et surtout la réponse du boss parce que depuis le début, ce qu’attend A45 c’est de la contradiction factuelle!
Les gars si vous avez les datas, sortez les, c’est votre seule
Chance de ...

The problem is that you can only see the evolution of xG on this file through new actions (goals / chances (and fouls I think but I'm not sure)), where you see the total xG at the moment.

So to get something reliable you have to rely on data from the very start of the match, which somewhat limits the data that can be fully exploited.

And here again, you only see these xGs when there's an opportunity or a goal, which limits the analysis even more, because there can be an increase in xGs without an opportunity/goal. And in that case you can't exploit anything at all because you have 0 information.

Hence my earlier messages.

I really hope that in time we'll have a more precise and therefore more usable indication.