Subject: Match Day

I saw some reallly neat first week results. Anyone want to talk about their match? Otherwise I will likely blab on about it. :D

those pieces of plywood infront of my goal really paid off. now that was an entertaining match. could have went either way.

Is there any more of that plywood available?

:)) hehe.

I would be interested in your comments about my match. T Syndicated beat me in ratings, but Real Hawkes, my team, won the game in a fairly convincing fashion.
I dont know if I was lucky in this game or did I somehow stumble into a tactical win? My experience has been that ratings are a good indicator of who will win.

ratings mean nothing. :)

Made an error in choice as striker.
Have given szoka the opertunity in the past with no success.
Took 6 shots and I think only 1 made it on goal.
Given up on him.
On TL now.

Javier Szoka, age 22
value: 289 200 C$, wage: 3 920 C$
good form


formidable stamina,
very good pace,
very good technique,
adequate passing,
hopeless keeper
weak defender
average playmaker
solid striker

I have notes from the Hawkes - T game.

Quality scoring chances favoured Hawkes 6 - 4.

T - defensive tactic a bit porous but ok.
Hawkes - look to be a really good passing team which directly contributed to 2 or 3 goals.
T - poor PM on defenders led to many throw-ins, allowing Hawkes more opportunities.
Hawkes - Stevenson a quality forward, the likes that T didn't have today.

In summary, the score was not entirely fair to T but the result was... a 3-1 or 3-2 game would have been justified. That of course assumes both teams have the same quality of striker. Biggest thing was the lack of flow in T's offense due to poor passing and Hawkes good flow due to good passing... plus some brilliant long passes into the 18, including the corner kick!

Thank you for the detailed analysis.
I am not sure that overall the Hawkes had better passing. The ratings favoured T with good passing over Hawkes adequate passing. (to Dagwood: ratings must mean something. how are they distorted? how do you know who the better player is?)
I am happy with Stevenson as a striker, but he must still be far from the quality of CPL strikers. Here are his stats:

Daniel Stevenson, age 22
value: 456 400 C$, wage: 5 800 C$
very good form


formidable stamina,
formidable pace,
good technique,
very good passing,
hopeless keeper
adequate defender
average playmaker
excellent striker

Szoka looks like a good striker. I would think that higher striker skill would be very valuable. His pace and technique, while at a decent level, is just slightly too low to cause any damage to Hawkes defence. Pace seems especially valuable to strikers ( and defenders ).

True enough on the overall passing, but the passing from your mids was key and T's mid passing did not seem as consistent. Defenders can really abuse the overall rating on passing. The mids on my team have an average passing rating well above the match overall ratings, but their passing contribution sets up any chances I have on goal. In this game, a few sublime passes led directly to goals. This in part is tactics as well though, as having your forward positioned to capitalize on a good pass is key.

From what I recall, fuzzy now, I would have thought Stevenson's PM and technique was higher but some of that could be relative to the specific defenders he faced. The pace is quite an asset too as you mentioned. Depending on what your focus is, lower pace on a forward can be compensated for with different tactics and high playmaking. For a long time I had low pace on my forwards but high PM and they would often outlet to my wingers who would then pass back into the 18 to my high technique forwards. At least that was the plan until long passes became too unreliable. But it is still a viable strategy that one of my forwards implements. Its also difficult to defend high PM players as there is no time to close on them for a tackle.
(edited)

I hadnt realized the value of high pm on forwards. That is an interesting strategy.

Its not that ratings are distorted. The ratings just don't tell the whole story.

Heck Pace, Tech and PM are not even listed and are every bit as important as the skills that are.

well, tech and pm are both considered in passing

and pace helps everything by getting the best player for the job in position to do it

I've never heard of that but its a mute point anyway.

Ratings are an average and thats all they are. They can give you an idea of some skills levels on some players but what relates to the pitch is an individuals skill set and how tactics are applied to your players skill sets.

Some interesting matches as the season winds down:

II.03 looks really tight. Two potentially entertaining matches there:

Hajduk Burnaby - Bonavista
Ben's Eleven - NK Duga Resa

And a clash between co-leaders in II.04

FC Lanciers - Pills United

In the CPL, the Valiant FC - Partizan 74 is always worth the price of admission.

Any other good ones to watch for?

(Edit: the links don't do anything now, but they should be fine once the match is run.)
(edited)