A couple of player interaction/match performance questions

First question:

My team just won the last game 6-0, so I was understandably "delighted" (post-match team talk for all players).

My first choice right back, who was one of my star players the last two seasons is out injured. My backup right back has been doing OK, but hadn't really impressed. This game he got an 8.0 rating after a poor first half. We were 2-0 up at the interval, but he'd been the only one underperforming. I told him "I have faith", and he came out and played much better (feedback: "seemed motivated").

After the game, I thought the right back might might need a bit of general encouragement after reacting well and playing the best game of his relatively short career. So I told him that he'd performed well last game, and to keep it up. He said he thought he'd been pretty rubbish. We patched things up, and he feels we get on well. But I'm wondering, why did he think he was rubbish, if he got 8.0?

Was it because he wasn't the highest rated player that game? Hat trick hero got 9.6; my striker with 4 assists got 9.4; my DM got 8.9, LB 8.7 and CB 8.4. So the right back was only the 6th highest rated player.

Was it anything to do with my team talk? (Before the game, "I expected a win" from everyone. Overall half time talk was "encourage". I also told my star midfielder I was "pleased", as he was easily the best player in the half, and he went on to score a hat trick; feedback: "Inspired to a great performance. Seemed motivated. Morale boost. Happy". I've got another question on him below.)

Or is there another obvious reason, like personality traits?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second question: after scoring the hat trick, the commentary said that "Peruchini silences his critics". The media haven't been on his back, so I don't think that's the cause. He'd not been playing brilliantly recently, with pretty average ratings. As a key player, I expect him to contribute more to the team than the squad players, so I told him as much. He responded that he thought he'd been playing OK. Again, we patched things up. Was commentary line due to him reacting to my private chat (although the commentator apparently knew about it)?

Nobody? I thought the private chats had been in the game for a couple of version, so surely someone has more experience than I do. This is my first FM since 2006

It is to do with hidden personality stats - I'm not sure which though (professionalism perhaps?). It doesn't matter though - it's learning how each player reacts.

A players reaction to a comment is half the story, but the key thing is what happens to the players morale - which will either increase or decrease for praise/criticism. What I do is make a note of a players reaction (morale) and ajust accordingly next time round (if a player reacts badly to "decent" with 7 average, I'll criticise him next time round with that average) - for the longer term praise/criticism (i.e. over 5 games, see player 5 game form) this works fine, but may be a bit touchier with single game praise (it may be relative to team average rating for the match rather, I haven't tested last game praise really).

Finally:

Always praise a few days before a game, you want the morale boost to still be in effect on match day

Never praise or citicise players with superb morale - you have nothing to gain but morale to lose.

So basically, my right back's personality explains his reaction to my private chat.

And the "Peruchini silences his critics" commentary? Was that also the reaction to my criticism of his recent form in our private chat?

And the "Peruchini silences his critics" commentary? Was that also the reaction to my criticism of his recent form in our private chat?

I would guess so, the previous edition of FM had the interaction released to the media rather than "private chat" so the commentary problably hasn't been changed since, it is purely cosmetic this bit though so wouldn't worry.

personally i only criticise a player for playing a poor game if his average rating is below 6 and praise if it is above 9 and i have never had a single complaint. i've had players get a 6.4 and say they thought they played well despite being well below their average form and being the worst performing player in the team for that game (everyone else above 7.2) so i decided to play it safe

I only criticise in home matches or against really weak opposition. I also get rougher at half time so they respond to the critics in the second half, and if they still played badly I support them in the end of the match because you got to keep the morale as high as possible.

I've had a lot more positive interactions recently by using the analysis tab after a match. Once the news day has moved on (so you know you're definitely talking about his last match) revisit the match and check the analysis tab. I tend to praise the passing play of anyone with >90% passing and criticise anyone <50%. I'll also praise strikers with a high shooting accuracy (~>60%) and defenders with a lot of interceptions (>5) combined with a high tackle completion percentage (>90%).

So far i'm getting far more positive results than using the average ratings as a guide like I used to and it's really helping keep morale high. The percentages I'm using as guidelines for good/bad btw are based on a prem team, not sure if you'd need to adjust them for lower leagues.