Subject: Please explain...

How can you play with no keeper and win 6-2??????

Look at the line-up....

http://online.sokker.org/comment.php?matchID=18380363

Now I know he had better rating and all that stuff but common this is football not the Olympics.
There is a reason why in football if you have no keeper a field player will get in goal ...otherwise its clear that you will loose... I think the Match Engine needs to be adjusted so that a team with less 11 starting players should get penalised (like -10% player skills or something).
Is it the same in case of a red card? The team only looses a player on the field but no possession changes and so on?

I will also post in the bug section but here I want to hear my fellows English lads.

oh dear id agree i think thats just stupid

why it should affect the rest of the team - it is just gk position.

The problem i see here:

He played with his reserve team instead first team players
He played too defensive in attack it is why he scored only 2 times on goals and it is why he only scored 2 goals.

I am sure if he would play with his first team players and more offensive he would win 12-0 at least.
(edited)

Whether a reserve team played or not is surely irrelevant.

They had 11 shots at an empty goal.If my son's U11 team had 11 shots at an empty goal I'd expect them to score much more than 2 goals.

But if he misses 9 of 11 on empty goal than you can not expect that he will score more than 2.

If his players would score on goal and than something would save it that it is a problem, but something like this did not happened. It looks only like a rubbish striker and he should be happy that there was no keeper because maybe he would not even score anything.
(edited)

any team irrelevant of skill if played without a goalkeeper would lose if man utd played crystal palace and didnt have a keeper im pretty sure palace would win

I would expect that the game engine would spot no keeper, and so, the other team would shoot more often.

but as you see man utd did not have enough skills to score on empty goal.

I think maybe idea with more tries for long shoots would be better but in my opinion the first change should be that player no 2 became gk.

I'm sure if I put together a team of people with the same footballing ability as me against Man Utd, even with no goalie would still lose. I suspect they would win with about 2 players both outfielders!

Do I need to remind you that this is a league game ....and the winning team is trying to avoid relegation... if it was a first league team against league 3 ...maybe....but we are talking about teams from the same league and that league is not the last one.

What this ME is telling me is that a formidable striker (most likely a league 3 team would have that) cant hit an empty goal more then twice in 11 shots. (and I do agree to that ideea of more shots as well). While an outstanding striker (the difference in player stars was not that big in fact stars show that the loosing team had better strikers) scored 6 times with a keeper in front and 23 shots. You do the maths and see if its right.


(edited)

the players in sokker don't have common sense, so they don't realise there is no keeper, and play as they normally would, and only shoot when they normally would.

as for only 2 goals from 11 shots. the 11 shots were actually spread out, the main striker hit 2 on target from 4 attempts, and therefore scored 2. the rest were from wide players or midfielders, who probably have much lower striker, and are likely to have shot from further out or harder angles which is why they missed the target.
(edited)

but team that lost played reserve squad, you would not be surprised if manchester united would play in reserve squad with first team Volverhampton without keeper and would still lose.

Striker had 50% in shooting what is very good, especially distance shoots.

Can't really believe that a defence is being offered at all for this, Man Utd lose games with a keeper in goal so anyone suggesting that they would win without a keeper is deluded imo.

Getting on for 30 years since I last played seriously but I would fancy my chances of scoring with no keeper in. It's just a matter of passing and finding space until you get enough time to fire off a shot. In a real game shooting percentages are different from what they would be with no keeper in because players have to try and hit the corners of the goal with power so that the keeper can't save but that isn't a problem with no keeper in there at all.