In-Depth Ban Appeals (Discussion)

[Fer Fuchs Ake]

Right now in Football Manager you have the ability to appeal red cards and retrospective bans following a player's dismissal/retrospective ban. However, all you can do is submit an appeal and get it denied or accepted.

I think it would be a good idea if, like in board negotiations, you could have specific chat boxes to use in your appeal. 

Examples: “Player X meant no harm.”

“I feel the red card/ban was too severe.”

Thoughts?

[ortz3]

Yes, and the player's history when it comes to red cards should also have an effect

[ReggaeBwoy]

Great idea.

[Fer Fuchs Ake]

47 minutes ago, ortz3 said:

Yes, and the player's history when it comes to red cards should also have an effect

 

Yes, good idea.

[Weston]

This has always been a tricky grey area for me because in real life you can clearly see if a call is a good one or not and then appeal (or not) accordingly. In the game, however, it's impossible to tell looking at the simulation if it was a foul or not, so you're left basically guessing if it's something worth appealing or not based off of what the narration tells you, and even that's unreliable at best. Could there be a more clear way of the game communicating to us when a call is wrong? I don't know. I appreciate when it says "That looked like the right call," but feel silly when it tells me "That looked dubious" or whatever so I react and then the game comes back with "They found there was no basis for disputing this."

[isignedupfornorealreason]

12 hours ago, Weston said:

This has always been a tricky grey area for me because in real life you can clearly see if a call is a good one or not and then appeal (or not) accordingly. In the game, however, it's impossible to tell looking at the simulation if it was a foul or not, so you're left basically guessing if it's something worth appealing or not based off of what the narration tells you, and even that's unreliable at best. Could there be a more clear way of the game communicating to us when a call is wrong? I don't know. I appreciate when it says "That looked like the right call," but feel silly when it tells me "That looked dubious" or whatever so I react and then the game comes back with "They found there was no basis for disputing this."

Basically the clues are there, just they need to summarised into the appeal news item.

 

These are the clues:

 

1. Commentator's view (But you need to see it in the match, this should be copied to the news item)
2. Referee's rating post-match (This is from the media, so still open to being wrong but again should be in the news item)
3. The actual incident itself (You have to pick up on the context clues though, a lunge is obvious to see, but a push not so much.)
4. The media's post-match reaction (You need to watch out for the 'controversy' questions)
5. The Assistant manager's view - This is in the new items and seems to be three ways; A. Poor decision. B. Justified decision and C. I wasn't looking.

Bear in mind your assistant's personality *might* have an effect on how he views things, I'd wonder if a more outspoken person like Roy Keane wouldn't care if you went in with four feet and broke everyone's neck. Whereas a pro staff member will be more balanced and someone with a high degree of sportsmanship might be the other way and think every decision is justified. (I don't know if this is the case, so don't take it as fact.)

 

As it is, only the AM's view comes up in the news item, the other three need to be inserted, or maybe a staff meeting/panel should be available with the first team coaches giving their opinion. I'm sure IRL we might have the manager ask the rest of the backroom staff for their opinion on it anyway, especially once tempers calm down.

[Weston]

6 hours ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

Basically the clues are there, just they need to summarised into the appeal news item.

 

These are the clues:

 

1. Commentator's view (But you need to see it in the match, this should be copied to the news item)
2. Referee's rating post-match (This is from the media, so still open to being wrong but again should be in the news item)
3. The actual incident itself (You have to pick up on the context clues though, a lunge is obvious to see, but a push not so much.)
4. The media's post-match reaction (You need to watch out for the 'controversy' questions)
5. The Assistant manager's view - This is in the new items and seems to be three ways; A. Poor decision. B. Justified decision and C. I wasn't looking.

Bear in mind your assistant's personality *might* have an effect on how he views things, I'd wonder if a more outspoken person like Roy Keane wouldn't care if you went in with four feet and broke everyone's neck. Whereas a pro staff member will be more balanced and someone with a high degree of sportsmanship might be the other way and think every decision is justified. (I don't know if this is the case, so don't take it as fact.)

 

As it is, only the AM's view comes up in the news item, the other three need to be inserted, or maybe a staff meeting/panel should be available with the first team coaches giving their opinion. I'm sure IRL we might have the manager ask the rest of the backroom staff for their opinion on it anyway, especially once tempers calm down.

Interesting! Makes sense.

[tiago_wakabayashi]

On 10/08/2016 at 16:16, ortz3 said:

Yes, and the player's history when it comes to red cards should also have an effect

great idea +1

[Neil Brock]

Reviewed so locked.