I have just thought of this while thinking about the widespread agreement on the inclusion of some form of prozone in fm. I was just wondering if this feature of the match engine would affect this:

Many times, a user complains about a shot he made or a save by a goalkeeper, saying that it didn't look realistic (i.e. the goalkeeper couldn't jump that far, the player couldn't shoot from that angle, the shot was too soft, the pass was too accurate), this complaint is explained away by the reason that the picture is only a graphical representation of the match engine and therefore implying that it is not, and does not need to look realistic.

We can assume then that many "representations" of the picture can also not be exact i.e. positioning, runs, crossing.

If the picture does not look realistic, how useful would a feature like prozone be to the game overall? How would our interpretation of the prozone analysis do anything for our tactics at all, when the picture doesn't match the stats or whatever?

Please hardcore advocates of the prozone system I'd like some opinion on this matter because if what I said is true then prozone would not be necessary for this game...

Right i am not totally in the know with regards to prozone but my understanding is it details passage of ball, player movements etc. Whilst i agree that the systems use would be limited due to graphical and interprative constraints i still think that it would have a use.

For instance, if prozone shows me that the opposition are finding a lot of room to play in a certain area of the field and this is leading to shooting oppurtunities then i can still try and stamp this out. It would give me an idea of where the issues lie in my current tactics.

Basically i'm saying that the system won't be perfect but i can still see a use for it.

It is also entirely possible that i have completely and utterly misunderstood the prozone concept, if so feel free to ignore me.