Whiny players and having strops about game time whilst also dying from overplaying...

[busngabb]

FM24 seems more like a spoilt brat simulator than a sports game these days. Whilst I get that there has to be an element of that in the game because Premier League footballers are largely overly pampered babies who have no idea what real life is like.

BUT, the game this year seems to be a battle between two key factors, namely players needing a rest and players kicking off about their gametime.

The game seems to programmed to make players kick off if they don't play x number of games, based on their squad status. So a star player will kick off if he isn't selected for a couple of games, then once you promise them the gametime, they then collapse into a raging fit if you say  'only' play them 80% or 90% of the following games.

In real life, no 'Star player' is going to have a meltdown because they were left out of a Carabao Cup game at Fleetwood, then left out of a Premier League game away to Bristol City. In real life your stars players would love that, they'd be on Instagram enjoying a posh hotel or on the beach somewhere. It's ridiculous in the game that you can't say to a player 'we're not going to play you against Plymouth or Bristol City, so that we keep you fit for the big games coming up' or 'I'm not playing you so I can give this kid a game because he's very high potential and we're playing The Dog and Dart in the FA Cup'. You can tell a player he's being rested, but do that more than a couple of times and they kick off about that as well.

I've got about 8 players in my squad who are in dire need of an extended rest according to the medical team and who's condition/health bar plummets to almost zero by half time, who are also crying about not getting enough gametime. It's ridiculous. Even if you tell them they are rested, they then demand a transfer if you then leave them out of any of the next 8 or so games.

It should be that players kick off if they are on the higher squad statuses and are repeatedly left out of the big games. They shouldn't ever kick off if their condition is poor, unless it's a critical game or a derby etc. The game should also take longer for the strops to happen, again based on their squad status but over a whole season, and taking their length of time at the club into account and the opposition. For example I signed Hincapie on a free. Season starts in late August, by November he'd demanded a transfer because he wasn't getting enough game time, then I left him out once after promising him it. He's not even in the top 3 centrebacks at the club and wasn't given star player status. He played 10 games in that time. A new player at a club irrespective of his status would not be kicking off if they played 10 games in the first three months at a new club in a new country.

[Zachary Whyte]

A player who's Squad Status is 'Star Player' will ideally be looking to play every minute of every game.

So I wouldn't recommend having multiple players with 'Star Player' status, but instead look to set them as 'Important Player' or 'Regular Starter'.

Normally when I play, I regularly look to adjust a players Squad Status as the season progresses and I figure out my team more and more. I've sometimes been able to take players who are 'Star Players' at the start of the season to 'Squad Players' at the end, without any complaints.

 

[MichaelNevo]

In fairness a lot of them are spoilt brats in real life, so I see it as very realistic from that point of view 

[XaW]

I've posted before on how I do it, and I very rarely get issues with playing times or angry players in general, other than the occasional player who want to join a better team.

Quote

1-3 star players
2-4 Important players (more if less star players)
4-6 Regular players
The bulk of the squad should be squad or impact subs. The older ones can be fringe, and emergency backups are mostly 4th choices or 3rd choice goalkeeper.
Other than that I try to keep as low expectation as possible for all players, and I twice a year look to reduce playing time (and if the agent don't indicate this will be an issue, I drop them). And I never give higher than I will actually give.

This is what I expect based on roles

Star players - Play almost all league matches, main cups, and continental matches they are fit for
Important players - Play almost as much as star player, but can be rotated a few times
Regular starters - Should start at least ~75% of matches
Squad players - Should start about 40-50% of matches
Impact subs - Should be subbed in regularly and start some matches, including 2nd tier cups and some unimportant matches.
Fringe players - Play every now and then, mostly from the bench.
Emergency backup - No matches unless needed.

 

[Lord Rowell]

The highest expectation I allow in my teams is "regular starter".

When I lower the expected playing time, I try to convince them with a friendly chat, usually on line of competion for places. Sometimes they throw their toys out of the pram, but later, as in the words of the late great Brian Clough, "we then agree that I was right all along".

[scythian12]

I also absolutely hate this mechanic, as there should be a balance about which games carry how much "weight" / rep, e. g. star players being OK with being left out of the league game before European ties. However, you can set most of your squad to squad player (or sometimes regular starter) with enough interactions with the players. Regular starters expect at least 50 % of all matches, so you can effectively play them in either the cups + Europe or the league and they will not complain. You can also regularly adjust playing time promises when relative ratings within the team (stars) shift. Usually 3-star players can easily be set to squad player.

 

Edited spelling mistake

Edited July 19 by scythian12

[Sinbad7104]

I find adding the 'Playing time happiness' colum to my tactics screen helps me keep on top of the playing time. Soon as anyone hits concerend they get a run of games. 

Not sure if its meant to but it also changes if you got a little mutini going on and shows who is with/against the main culprit 

[Xavin]

I agree with you it is very poorly modelled and highly unrealistic. Hopefully there is an easy fix. Whenever you have signed a new player or a new contract with a player that has a status higher than regular starter wait for the end of the season and change agreed playing time to something much lower like your star player to fringe for instance. 

The player will be mad but they get mad in any case so you might as well give them a reason. They will be unhappy for a while and then they will get over it. 

As a rule of thumb don't interact with the players unless you really have to, as most of the time you just have a range of negative outcome that makes it not worth your time. 

[Mike J]

This definitely seems like a situation where the game lacks a little bit of nuance. Players don't seem to understand that a home match against the league's bottom side is nowhere near as important as the CL semi-final three days later. There doesn't seem to be a way to tell them this via conversation. 

[NineCloudNine]

26 minutes ago, Mike J said:

This definitely seems like a situation where the game lacks a little bit of nuance. Players don't seem to understand that a home match against the league's bottom side is nowhere near as important as the CL semi-final three days later. There doesn't seem to be a way to tell them this via conversation. 

I have never had a star player strop in such a situation. Nor have I ever had to play a star player in poor condition for fear of them getting upset.

Managing squad fitness and player playing time is an absolutely pivotal part of managing a team and should take a large proportion of a manager’s time. We should be planning squad rotations 5-6 games in advance, making subs, managing training load and managing expectations.

It is also entirely realistic to have star players with certain personalities get arsey over playing time - see Salah last year for example. And players not playing as much as they want get upset and want to leave - see half the transfers in any window for example.

I get that this can be frustrating but for all my criticisms of FM, I think this is pretty true to life. I actually enjoy it, but then I am much more into player and squad management than (for example) playing the transfer market or training. If the man (micro) management aspects of the job aren’t your thing, then I can completely see how this would grate.

Edited July 22 by NineCloudNine

[busngabb]

On 22/07/2024 at 10:49, NineCloudNine said:

I have never had a star player strop in such a situation. Nor have I ever had to play a star player in poor condition for fear of them getting upset.

Managing squad fitness and player playing time is an absolutely pivotal part of managing a team and should take a large proportion of a manager’s time. We should be planning squad rotations 5-6 games in advance, making subs, managing training load and managing expectations.

It is also entirely realistic to have star players with certain personalities get arsey over playing time - see Salah last year for example. And players not playing as much as they want get upset and want to leave - see half the transfers in any window for example.

I get that this can be frustrating but for all my criticisms of FM, I think this is pretty true to life. I actually enjoy it, but then I am much more into player and squad management than (for example) playing the transfer market or training. If the man (micro) management aspects of the job aren’t your thing, then I can completely see how this would grate.

It does need to be part of the game, but it seems ridiculously basic at the moment. Players will kick off within the first few games of a season, then you promise them gametime, they'll play 7 in a row and be dying in terms of their conditioning and then demand a transfer because you broke a promise in not playing them. (Despite them playing 7 in a row after it). It's got to the point now where I start players with poor condition and sub them in the first half. They don't seem to mind this at all.

There needs to be more depth built into the game over this. Who the opposition is and in which competition it is and their condition and age should all have an impact. It's fine Salah kicking off if he's repeatedly rested for Premier League games and you end up drawing them and costing the team a run at the title, it's another thing entirely for an elite player to be having a tantrum because him not playing away to Stevenage in the Carabao Cup on a Tuesday night in January when there is a top of the table derby match on the Saturday meant he'd 'only' played 80% of the last 10 games..

I highly doubt you've never had any player complain about gametime like you make out. It's rife in the game. Conditioning seems to be a far bigger factor in recent years and players will decline in match fitness due to match load far quicker. It's now realistically challenging to keep players fit enough to perform well over extended runs of games. You pretty much have to rotate these days.

The game should be more like:

Star players - Expect to play in pretty much all the big games, derby games and finals and would expect NOT to have to play in the lower ranked cups, certainly against minnows or around big games. Wouldn't complain if rested for games against lesser ranked opposition in the league, unless perhaps if the game was unexpectedly drawn/lost and it threatened a targeted outcome.

Important players - Wants most of the big games, derby games and finals. Wouldn't mind being left out of the lower ranked cups or when not at peak condition etc.

Regular starters - Would only complain if missed a run of big games, derby games or finals.

Squad players - Wouldn't complain about missing big games, derbies or finals. Would be more likely to complain if not selected for lower ranked cups, especially against minnows etc.

There would still need to be some % based overarching happiness index, but it needs to be far more context sensitive and should take far longer to kick into play. They could even build personality and depth into that, for example the selfish, mercenary types like Ronaldo might kick off about missing minor home games if they are close to the top of the top-scorers list and want to stat-pad. Also, converse things should happen, you should have players moaning about having to play too many games or doing too much travelling. 'Expects to be rotated for the upcoming Rushton & Diamonds game due to playing 8 games in 3 weeks' and the like.

[NineCloudNine]

12 minutes ago, busngabb said:

I highly doubt you've never had any player complain about gametime like you make out. It's rife in the game. Conditioning seems to be a far bigger factor in recent years and players will decline in match fitness due to match load far quicker. It's now realistically challenging to keep players fit enough to perform well over extended runs of games. You pretty much have to rotate these days.

 

Just on this point - I said I had never had the problem the OP describes, ie a playing time strop from resting a star player before a big game, or just to maintain their condition. Nor have I ever had to play a star or important player in poor condition for fear of them stropping.

I have, of course, had players complain about playing time - when I played them less than I promised.

I don’t disagree that the player interaction modules are twitchy and often infuriating. They lack nuance and discussion options, escalate too fast and can be hilariously weird (eg I just had a player react well to a press question in which I had just said I wasn’t worried about squad harmony as a result of refusing him a new contract ).

However, I do think that keeping players happy with playing time while managing squad condition for big games SHOULD be hard. It’s a core part of the manager’s job. And there are tools to handle it, not least the advice elsewhere in this thread to be very careful about offering playing time above regular starter.

Edited July 29 by NineCloudNine

[busngabb]

16 minutes ago, NineCloudNine said:

Just on this point - I said I had never had the problem the OP describes, ie a playing time strop from resting a star player before a big game, or just to maintain their condition. Nor have I ever had to play a star or important player in poor condition for fear of them stropping.

I have, of course, had players complain about playing time - when I played them less than I promised.

I don’t disagree that the player interaction modules are twitchy and often infuriating. They lack nuance and discussion options, escalate too fast and can be hilariously weird (eg I just had a player react well to a press question in which I had just said I wasn’t worried about squad harmony as a result of refusing him a new contract ).

However, I do think that keeping players happy with playing time while managing squad condition for big games SHOULD be hard. It’s a core part of the manager’s job. And there are tools to handle it, not least the advice elsewhere in this thread to be very careful about offering playing time above regular starter.

I agree it should be hard, but it should also have context. And you should have the option to tell certain players to pack it in and stop complaining, i'e 'You've played the last 7 games lad, what on earth are you moaning about?'

As for the big about not offering regular starter, that's almost impossible. Once a player is world-class or elite, they aren't going to agree a contract unless the squad status reflects that. Some you can move down one rung, but if a player asks for star player you aren't getting him down to regular starter. Do you then sell all your players who won't accept 'regular starter' bar the odd one or two?