|
Post by garfy on Oct 15, 2016 8:54:07 GMT
Having read through all these threads and common theme exists in light of new managers.
They have all been pillaged by mostly the same teams. Can we make a decision one the question that was raised in April 2015 - can we make a rule about new managers?
Do we:
A) Impose a time limit on new managers transfers?
B) Appoint a transfer guru to each new manager? Who can't deal with that new manager themselves! (Scott, Rags, Bryn)
C) Fine a team £10M if a deal is overturned by Admin with a new team in their first month with EFL?
|
|
|
Post by Malky(Admin) on Oct 15, 2016 9:07:05 GMT
I think its a grey area, my rules were set up in the beginning thinking that new managers would start during a season and maybe neglected to look if a manager started pre season, its maybe unrealistic to say to a new manager pre season not to be able to do any transfers as this is the time squads change the most and any new manager would want to get involved
i'd maybe go down the line of attaching a 'experienced' manager with them for the first stages, someone they can talk to on Whatsapp etc and go over any deals they have received and to help with teamsheets etc?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2016 9:11:24 GMT
I personally feel that, if deals are questioned they absolutely should be investigated. At the moment, they aren't.
Put together 2-3 managers in a separate section to review whats raised. But they need to be proactive. No offence Gazza, you've been here years and I like you, but you try to keep the ship steady and please everyone, which is a great trait, but for this imo it needs to be somebody more critical.
Rags has been here forever so I would say him as one, maybe Bryn but he has lost his dummy over his gk, I dunno.
|
|
|
Post by Malky(Admin) on Oct 15, 2016 9:22:37 GMT
To be honest lads the buck stops with me, but and this is no excuse, what i had time to do ten years ago is not the same today, and with so much activity its hard to have an opinion on every transfer or check every teamsheet to see whos doing what, but again thats why we have administrators and moderators, again it might be time to review who holds these positions and see what there availability is like and what work load they can take on
its always a thankless task as your always going to be accused of having personal benefits in mind etc
so yes i agree with you Scott in that there should be a 'group' of experienced managers who deal with 'questionable' transfers and other issues, while im not around, i dont always have to have the final say, there should be enough experienced managers to make those calls
so if anyone can come up with an idea or who would like to be in this 'group' just post here and we can continue to discuss
|
|
|
Post by gazza on Oct 15, 2016 19:20:20 GMT
I am happy to be in a group of managers as you have suggested Malky, Scott no offence taken, but surely the ship should be steady, and we 'should' try and please everyone.
Any group set up should consist of managers who are active on a daily basis, therefore issues will be dealt with promptly, and collective decisions from the group would bring much needed clarity and transparency back into the game.
Either way, I am happy on the outside or inside, I just want to play the game and see the enjoyment come back and the good hearted banter return.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 13:34:17 GMT
Personally, I would suggest the following.
Pezza. Despite what happened, he knows his way around a deal and fair play to hi, when the shit went down, he stood up and took it. I also don't feel managers could influence his opinion.
Lee - Marseille. He doesn't make many deals, but he again is somebody who isn't afraid of standing up to people. Hes my best mate and how often does he call me out for talking shit. He has no allies, no relatives, and has been here a hell of a long time.
The third person should I believe be of course Malky. Its his game, he knows it inside out.
A separate whatsapp group set up with them involved solves the problem imo. Worst case scenario, a deal would be delayed a day if it warranted discussion, which, lets be honest, if it warrants discussion, a days wait is fine.
Again, apologies Gazza, but the very reason this has arisen is because of you putting through poor deals, usually involving your son, and then saying "If Malky doesn't like it he can reverse it." Which is impossible as by the time Malky sees the deal, numerous other deals involving the players/finances have been carried out.
It needs unbiased, critical thinkers who aren't afraid to say no to a deal, especially with new managers. I would much rather more deals get refused than the farce that has occurred this preseason.
|
|
|
Post by gazza on Oct 17, 2016 13:58:03 GMT
Right were going round in circles a bit here, I am going to step out of rubber stamping transfers without further consultation, Malky had asked me to help, and has never raised issue with myself or the manner in which I have conducted myself so I have no qualms despite aspersions being cast.
I am happy to be in a group that can debate transfers, I suggest we get about 10 managers on board, and if we get a unanimous answer from as many of these managers over a 24hr period then the decision would come from the collective group or Malky.
Reply if interested.
It has to be very active managers to get this working.
|
|
|
Post by garfy on Oct 17, 2016 16:05:50 GMT
Gazza , 10 is too many. Can't manage by committee.
We need three people. We need guidelines as to what they can intervene with. Just because they don't like a deal it can't be altered. There should be a fundamental objection to it because it harms the game and the newer manager.
Established managers have a plan, sometimes flawed, but you can't put your values onto others.
Also I think it's very important that a manager is allowed to complete the deal if they understand the reasons it may be rejected. The idea is not to stop deals but educate
|
|
|
Post by andieglen on Oct 18, 2016 12:48:14 GMT
Any panel should have different types of managers in it, one who deals with youth, another who values older, double statted and skill that way any deals that are flagged can be looked at from all angles and discussed properly in private.
BUT I personally feel it's like a witch hunt ATM and you risk loosing more managers because of it.
There's definitely some one stirring the pot and pissing people off IMO that's why I just get on with it and don't bother with the forum or the app, but if honest I do a deal and check the forum to see who has a problem.
As far as doing deals is concerned one man's junk is another man's treasure And one sided deals are done to get what you want. We've all done that one deal we regret or felt hard done by, but for me it was a massive learning curve.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 17:09:36 GMT
Ive said my nominations.
To reiterate, Gazza shouldnt be included. A proven track record of authorising his sons transfer abuse of new managers is the last thing we need, hes already fucked the game over with this preseasons deals alone.
|
|
|
Post by Lee (Marseille) on Oct 19, 2016 6:49:48 GMT
Happy to help
|
|
|
Post by tone on Oct 19, 2016 7:50:24 GMT
If a deal has been flaged as suspect then all you need is 3 people on commitee with a simple yes or no answer majority rule no discussion as in past it goes on for ages then people get confused and you just have loads of comment and no one seams to get anywhere
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2016 10:47:23 GMT
Exactly tone.
Need to be totally unbiased 3 people.
|
|
|
Post by Adrian (Arsenal) on Oct 19, 2016 11:11:17 GMT
TBH I think we should put the following in place...
- a mentor for new managers to help them understand the game in the first 3 or 4 games. Someone from a different division.
- If there is a dodgy ish looking transfer Malky to put it to 3 managers of his choice to review. They debate it and make the recommendation.
|
|
|
Post by pezza @ Marseille on Oct 19, 2016 14:04:21 GMT
I'm happy to be involved if required.
|
|