I was wondering if there is a simple answer of who to pick in your team if you have a player that has better attributes and a player that gets better marks out of ten.

So, if Player1 has clearly better stats but averages 7 out of 10 and Player2 has weaker stats but averages 8 out of 10, who do you pick?

Match rating of players is not exactly absolute, but relative to the quality of opposition being played, since the last changes. (check the improvements forum, page no 8). Player rating is based on the quality of opposition you have faced. The better the quality of your opposition, the better valuation they get and vice versa…

But then a better value for a lower skill player is always desirable.
It is a difficult decision to make, but then common sense always says us to pick the better player…

But player selection is a tough job and would depend on Away/Home and opposition quality, + no of competitions you are entered in etc.
For eg,
in my case if i was playing “away” against an opposition whom i had no chance of winning, i would field the lower skill player ensuring they get match exposure, and if my opponent is someone who i can beat, i would play my best players, to ensure i get all the points. This might not be the best way, but then no one is sure which one is:)

OK thanks, that answers my question.

The player with the highest value attributes is going to be the better player and the marks out of ten are reflecting the players contribution to any given game based on many variables.

Also players playing in the center gets better ratings as opposed to players playing on sides. My M R avarages 6 something rating, when i put him in the center even he get penalized playing out of position he gets 9+ ratings.

There are games that I got trashed and my defenders were awarded MOtM, i am like thank god otherwise i d have lost 10-0 instead of 4-0. Also your attacker can score a hat-trick and his partner that didnt score in the same game can get better rating etc..