TheMKarmy wrote:
If these rules are enforced so heavily it will become that there are an established set of players that are generally accepted to be the best, once it gets to this point it makes absolutely NO difference who the manager is, because they HAVE to play the same players no matter, because if they don't play the generally accepted 'best' players they will be fired, just as you are threatening.
Analytically this is quite correct (apart from the aspects of formation and team talk), but it is not practically relevant. If a player is better in all attibutes can condition, then I cannot see how a manager can justify a decision to put him on the bench. Often, one can argue about which player is better. If it isn't to a large extent clear which player is better, you shouldn't expect us to interfere. Ask Eirik. He tends to get frustrated by that.
TheMKarmy wrote:
There is definitely a real life connotation to a manager playing his own players. For example, a real life NT manager might pick players he has managed at club level in the past because he is most at ease working with them and he has fullest knowledge of their abilities.
This point is only relevant when the quality difference of two players is unknown. Than you might want to prefer to line up the player you know. But if this uncertainty does not exists, then in my opinion the fact that you know a player cannot justify the decision to line up a weaker player.
TheMKarmy wrote:
you need to leave some flexibility there, its not like the Israel manager is playing utter **** players, and at the end of the day HE WILL eventually pay the price for not playing the better players, whether it be now or in 4 seasons time.
It is rather crucial that the manager's own players are involved. If it is arguable that the own player is worse than an alternative played, I don't mind seeing him being lined up. I do mind when I know that he is worse since in this case I know it's a violation of a rule which a lot of managers can get annoyed about.
And to respond to playing utter ****: You can only know what is utter **** if you compare the used players to the other players with the same nationality. You can't make a judgement of the absolute quality of the player.
A wrote:
Being rude, provoking and and treaten to fire the manager if he doesnt play your players wont solve anything I hope you see this.
I agree that AJ could have phrased his message more politily, but it is my experience that many managers really don't care about rules when there are no consequences attached to unwanted behaviour. Hence I also sometimes repeat what possible consequences are, in an attempt to prevent the unwanted behaviour (and having to generate those consequences).
RobC wrote:
Also, are the mods going to check every team, or just the ones they have an interest in? If they're going to try and enforce this then it is only fair that all teams are treated equally.
No NT or manager is specifically targeted, so I don't see where the unfairness lies. Sometimes you notice an anomality yourself and sometimes another managers complains and that may lead to inquiries. There is not 100% check on every player, NT and match.
- AJ's point is that Claudio Cesare Prandelli refrained from answering the question what the logic was behind the decision to line up a middle aged team that also included 2 young players of one was certainly not among the most promising Israelis. I'm still interested in this issue.
[/quote]
And also, I'm just trying to see both points of view.
