Promises - absurd player responses

[Tonton_Zola]

So a newly signed player now wants to leave because he has been selected at left back in the default WB role rather than his preferred FB role…

Given the fine margins here, this stretches the boundaries of credulity doesn’t it?

Can you imagine a first teamer outside of a handful of global divas (Ronaldo, Mbappe etc) genuinely threatening to leave because of a minor tactical quirk. 
 

I would consider this a bug that needs fixing or rebalancing frankly. 

[Neil Brock]

From an article published two days ago - https://theathletic.com/4038309/2022/12/27/dean-smith-norwich-sacking/

Quote

Norwich’s Dean Smith sacking: Players questioning roles, recruitment problems and a lack of cash

Roles have become a much larger part of modern football. Would also wonder why you're making a promise to a player you have no intention of keeping? 

Appreciate that asking to leave is an extreme reaction, but isn't the reaction more related to the fact you've broken a promise with the player? 

[Tonton_Zola]

But Neil - context is important here.

if you’ve got a middling regular starter who’s new to the club and he’s playing DL (but WB not FB, which is fairly marginal), you can’t tell me it’s realistic for him to threaten to leave, have his morale destroyed etc. it just breaks any suspension of disbelief. 

i appreciate that it’s perhaps different if it’s James Maddison signing for newcastle and he’s playing box to box midfielder rather than advanced playmaker or whatever…

In sum, this is about the game taking into consideration context (in this case a marginal difference of role for a low level operator within an squad) and due proportion (perhaps a marginal loss of morale rather than a club career-ender).

[Lord Rowell]

5 minutes ago, Tonton_Zola said:

But Neil - context is important here.

if you’ve got a middling regular starter who’s new to the club and he’s playing DL (but WB not FB, which is fairly marginal), you can’t tell me it’s realistic for him to threaten to leave, have his morale destroyed etc. it just breaks any suspension of disbelief. 

i appreciate that it’s perhaps different if it’s James Maddison signing for newcastle and he’s playing box to box midfielder rather than advanced playmaker or whatever…

In sum, this is about the game taking into consideration context (in this case a marginal difference of role for a low level operator within an squad) and due proportion (perhaps a marginal loss of morale rather than a club career-ender).

With the egos of modern sports professionals these days, and add to that the increased expectation of people to get "exactly" what they want, it would not surprise me at all if this is reality.

Personally, when I enter a negotiation with a player, I almost never agree to a role / position / duty. At the end of the day I'm the manager and they have to adapt according to what's best for the team, especially if I need to change systems. Its about setting down the terms of the manager / player relationship from the start.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Lord Rowell
My absolutely dreadful sentence structure...