Injury bug

[Raikan007]

this is what I do!

I rest all of my main players whose condition is less than 82% after each game for a day at least

if below 75% then 2 days, if below that 3 days

always rest your key players after games, helps keep them fresh

see if that works for you

 

[Mike.]

after typing this I got 3 injuries in my game against Pool, 2 in the first 18 minutes, Frederick Mdijtso and Lallana, both could have continued however, Fredericks condition was 68% and Lallana's was 81% (I could have left Lallana on but my winger depth has been depleted due to the AFCON) Sarabia got injured around the 78 minute mark and had made all my subs so had to keep him on!

all players were at minimum 96% condition and all match fit prior to kickoff!

well looking back, I actually picked up 4 injuries, Samba had to be replaced in the 68th minute but he has not picked up an injury, he is just tired

Frederick has not picked up an injury post match, even though his condition was worse than Lallana's who picked up a 2-3 week injury

What do you define as a knock? Both green crosses and red crosses are counted as injuries (minor and major respectively)

 

[theinfinity]

Hopefully these images load... This was from a season I just finished the other day. Like the others in the few threads we've had here I've experienced a lot more injuries from matches since the last patch came out. Here's a particular example of what I mean, nearly every game someone carries a knock and more often than not needs to come off.

I have most players on Heavy training (which I have since I started FM13) and I played a slow tempo. Only 1 player (Henderson) is considered injury prone.

While the injuries that cause these players to come off aren't always bad, its frustraiting to not be able to make tactical switches if I need them.

Do my results look out of the ordinary or am I in just a run of really (2-3 seasons worth) bad luck?
View attachment 317080View attachment 317081View attachment 317082View attachment 317083View attachment 317084View attachment 317085View attachment 317086View attachment 317087View attachment 317088View attachment 317089View attachment 317090View attachment 317091View attachment 317092View attachment 317093View attachment 317094View attachment 317095View attachment 317096View attachment 317097

 

[Mike.]

If that is from an entire season, I wouldnt say that is actually particularly bad at all. Honestly have a look at the - PhysioRoom.com from week to week, scary how many players are injured at any one time.

Perhaps you should remove you players from heavy training? If your injuries follow a pattern, then there is usually something you can change about it.

 

[theinfinity]

That's just a snippet of consecutive games in a season, only 18 or so from the 50+ I played. I have since removed them off heavy training, it just seems out of the ordinary that, now several seasons in I need to change the way I've been playing. With the constant staff advice to put players on individual training its a shade of a annoying too. Hah.

 

[Mike.]

That's just a snippet of consecutive games in a season, only 18 or so from the 50+ I played. I have since removed them off heavy training, it just seems out of the ordinary that, now several seasons in I need to change the way I've been playing. With the constant staff advice to put players on individual training its a shade of a annoying too. Hah.

Its an interesting one though because I do actually have my players on heavy and my injury rates have actually been far too low. Admittedly my players tend to have high natural fitness, and i actively avoid anyone considered injury prone.

Personally if you suspect anything, you should upload your save game and details how you play and train to SI. If anything you might hear on why you get injuries that way.

But usually a regular pattern of something tends to point to something systemic.

I would say that SI dont believe there is an issue based on their own tests, but you can never have too much info on this.

 

[theinfinity]

After work today (I'm in the US) I'm going to try and upload my save to SI. We're only a mid table team right now so my players aren't that great physically, but any information for SI or insight for myself would be worth it hah.

 

[Rupal]

The point at issue surely is that a significant number of people find that the current long-term injury situation adversely affects their enjoyment of the game. I prefer managing in the lower leagues and a lot of the suggestions (better/more physios, better fitness coaches, squad rotation etc, etc) are simply not available if you manage a club in the BSS. Furthermore, an injury list of 6 or 7 players is extremely serious at that level, especially when so many of those injuries are long-term. Those fortunate enough to manage in the Premiership may well find their injuries annoying but at least they normally have an international or two in the club able to fill the gaps! I seriously wonder whether enough testing is done by SI trying to manage at lower league level? If their tests involve injury problems relating to Barcelona, Chelsea, Man U etc, etc rather than with Truro or Solihull Moors, they may well conclude that, indeed, there is no injury bug or issue but that isn't the experience of many of us who manage at a less elevated level! A case of rose-tinted spectacles, perhaps?

 

[Scotty98TR]

The point at issue surely is that a significant number of people find that the current long-term injury situation adversely affects their enjoyment of the game. I prefer managing in the lower leagues and a lot of the suggestions (better/more physios, better fitness coaches, squad rotation etc, etc) are simply not available if you manage a club in the BSS. Furthermore, an injury list of 6 or 7 players is extremely serious at that level, especially when so many of those injuries are long-term. Those fortunate enough to manage in the Premiership may well find their injuries annoying but at least they normally have an international or two in the club able to fill the gaps! I seriously wonder whether enough testing is done by SI trying to manage at lower league level? If their tests involve injury problems relating to Barcelona, Chelsea, Man U etc, etc rather than with Truro or Solihull Moors, they may well conclude that, indeed, there is no injury bug or issue but that isn't the experience of many of us who manage at a less elevated level! A case of rose-tinted spectacles, perhaps?

As I said in the other thread, I don't see how the size of the squad, or the ability for the club to fill the gaps, would affect how often or had bad a player get's injured. In fact, injuries are far more common at non-league level (In real life), as the players are not as good physically, nor mentally. Plus the state of the pitch and the general playing style in lower league's are much worse.

 

[RTvD]

I'm in my fifth season at Ajax, and I never had more than 3 injuries at once. I'm okay with the amount of injuries, what's concerning me though is the length of the injuries. All of the players who got injuries were out for at least three weeks.

 

[Mike.]

The point at issue surely is that a significant number of people find that the current long-term injury situation adversely affects their enjoyment of the game. I prefer managing in the lower leagues and a lot of the suggestions (better/more physios, better fitness coaches, squad rotation etc, etc) are simply not available if you manage a club in the BSS. Furthermore, an injury list of 6 or 7 players is extremely serious at that level, especially when so many of those injuries are long-term. Those fortunate enough to manage in the Premiership may well find their injuries annoying but at least they normally have an international or two in the club able to fill the gaps! I seriously wonder whether enough testing is done by SI trying to manage at lower league level? If their tests involve injury problems relating to Barcelona, Chelsea, Man U etc, etc rather than with Truro or Solihull Moors, they may well conclude that, indeed, there is no injury bug or issue but that isn't the experience of many of us who manage at a less elevated level! A case of rose-tinted spectacles, perhaps?

They explicitly test at all levels of the game for everything.

 

[Rupal]

But what I am asking is whether or not they try prolonged career saves at lower league level to see how issues of this sort might affect playability. I appreciate that they TEST but it's a question of how COMPREHENSIVE the testing may or may not be. Quite frankly, if they are unable to see the utter game playing nonsense of having a grand total of 9 available non greyed out players at the start of a Truro save and long-term injuring two or more of those in the first match then their testing is pretty worthless!

 

[Rupal]

As I said in the other thread, I don't see how the size of the squad, or the ability for the club to fill the gaps, would affect how often or had bad a player get's injured. In fact, injuries are far more common at non-league level (In real life), as the players are not as good physically, nor mentally. Plus the state of the pitch and the general playing style in lower league's are much worse.

You seem deliberately to ignore the point which various people have been trying to make. The issue is not whether or not a particular number of injuries and their severity is 'realistic'. It's whether or not a particular proportion of injuries makes the game nearly unplayable or, at the least, adversely affects enjoyment which is at issue here. Obviously, it's easier to cope with an injury list of 11 with Newcastle than it is to cope with an injury list of 11 with Chelmsford and it's of little comfort to the Chelmsford manager whose save has been thoroughly messed up to tell him or her that the figure is realistic!! As an aside, not all clubs outside the Premiership and Championship play on a ploughed field on the local rec. There are some very good grounds, pitches and facilities below those elevated levels! *Just to show you exactly the sort of frustration that makes the game ridiculous, I just started a new Truro save. First competitive match there were 2 injuries and a 'knock'. So on top of the five original injuries which Truro start with I now have a further three players out for a minimum of a fortnight and a maximum of 7 weeks. This is the FIRST league match. Quite honestly, I couldn't care less if this is 'realistic' or not. From a game playing point of view it stinks, it's as simple as that. It's not my training because I have had them on fitness and then balanced at light levels and they've been training for a very short time anyway. It's not my tempo (I set it to slow). It's not my closing down or tackling - they are on stand off and more cautious. It's not their overall fitness levels (all were at 95% plus which is as good as you can get with part-time training. Match fitness is another matter but that can't be sorted at the start of a save very easily). In other words it is not me doing something wrong (for once!! I am the first to admit that I often mess things up but here even I haven't had time to totally ****** everything up!), it's the programming! It's precisely this sort of thing that makes people whinge on about unplayability! Needless to say, this save will not be proceeded with!

 

[Scotty98TR]

You seem deliberately to ignore the point which various people have been trying to make. The issue is not whether or not a particular number of injuries and their severity is 'realistic'. It's whether or not a particular proportion of injuries makes the game nearly unplayable or, at the least, adversely affects enjoyment which is at issue here. Obviously, it's easier to cope with an injury list of 11 with Newcastle than it is to cope with an injury list of 11 with Chelmsford and it's of little comfort to the Chelmsford manager whose save has been thoroughly messed up to tell him or her that the figure is realistic!! As an aside, not all clubs outside the Premiership and Championship play on a ploughed field on the local rec. There are some very good grounds, pitches and facilities below those elevated levels! *Just to show you exactly the sort of frustration that makes the game ridiculous, I just started a new Truro save. First competitive match there were 2 injuries and a 'knock'. So on top of the five original injuries which Truro start with I now have a further three players out for a minimum of a fortnight and a maximum of 7 weeks. This is the FIRST league match. Quite honestly, I couldn't care less if this is 'realistic' or not. From a game playing point of view it stinks, it's as simple as that. It's not my training because I have had them on fitness and then balanced at light levels and they've been training for a very short time anyway. It's not my tempo (I set it to slow). It's not my closing down or tackling - they are on stand off and more cautious. It's not their overall fitness levels (all were at 95% plus which is as good as you can get with part-time training. Match fitness is another matter but that can't be sorted at the start of a save very easily). In other words it is not me doing something wrong (for once!! I am the first to admit that I often mess things up but here even I haven't had time to totally ****** everything up!), it's the programming! It's precisely this sort of thing that makes people whinge on about unplayability! Needless to say, this save will not be proceeded with!

Yet you seem deliberately to ignore the point that the majority of people don't have a problem. Therefore it is something you are doing.

And I didn't say all the grounds weren't high quality, but the general standard of pitch in non-league football is poor. (I had to highlight "non-league" as you seem to think I said anything about league 1 or 2, or that they all play in **** holes.)

Oh, and fitness training doesn't mean it will help your players recover or avoid injuries more, it means the players will focus on their fitness attributes...

P.S. if you want a dead easy game that isn't as realistic as possible, play the handheld game. Or better still, play FIFA Manager. You can't lose on that.

 

[Rupal]

Now this is getting really silly. Kindly explain what I could have done in the Truro save that I highlighted above to avoid bringing the misfortune down on my own head which you say that I have. I've told you what I did. What did I do wrong and what should I have done differently? Now is the opportunity for you to enlighten me! Should I have not played them because they were not fully match fit? At the start of a save that's not possible given the available time for matches and as the players are part-timers they aren't available enough to set up a load of friendlies anyway. So should I have altered the tempo? (Faster?!) Should I have altered the tackling and closing down intensities? (More closing down, tackle harder?!). I don't think that the team talk or half time talk which I gave encouraged my players to burst a blood vessel, they seem to be the ones that most people use under similar match circumstances, and I didn't do any touchline shouts apart from 'Keep possession' for the whole match (which I actually won).Those are the only things which I could have done differently as far as I am aware, so please let me know where you think my mistake was or if there is something else which I have overlooked. I am, of course, aware that fitness training won't help my players recover from or avoid injuries directly. However, if you are suggesting that their fitness level doesn't have an effect on whether they get injured or not then it presumably wouldn't matter if I played them at a starting fitness level of 75% or even less. This seems to be at odds with the advice which is constantly given not to play players below 95% fitness so presumably people who give this advice are wrong and squad rotation is a waste of time(???) But I take it that this is not what you mean! You are saying that this injury crisis has been brought about by my actions and not the programming in the game. Vaguely saying that I must be doing something wrong is dodging the issue. Details, please!! Incidentally, the remark about going off to play FIFA manager or the handheld version and the implication that I just want an easy game is, to be blunt, pretty cheap! Would I have tried a Truro save it I wanted it easy? Barcelona would seem to be a better bet!! I don't want a dead easy game I want one with a REASONABLE but challenging level of difficulty. NOT one where a huge injury sledgehammer is used to smash a very small nut of a club!!! It's very revealing how any criticism of this game is dealt with by its ultra loyalists!! FM is not the Holy Grail, you know, and it is just barely possible that SI might not have got everything right! 'Heresy!' I hear you cry!!!

 

[Mike.]

As I say every time. If you think something is a bug, flag at SI. The thing is, if you bothered to do this about injuries, you'd have found out that they actually run extremely detailed soak tests to check it. They are happy with injury rates, but are looking at seeing they can improving injury modelling.

As for the tests, they are about as comprehensive as you can get, a mixture of long term sack tests at every level, combined with play testing at each level, noting the number and type of injuries occuring during a match and over the course of seasons, not just for the play, but for the rest of the gameworld.

But as I've posted they are happy with the current rates of injuries.

Dont need more than one thread on this

 

[Dunc]

Wall of text alert.

**** my eyes.