Why don't staff get sick?

[joshpea4]

This only occured to me today, but why don't the staff ever get sick when the players do. For example if you're a lower league club and your only coach gets sick and is no longer able to take training player attributes would slide a bit.

[x42bn6]

Maybe we could have unprofessional staff as well, where they constantly call in sick for no reason...

Or injury-prone staff, who help with the players in training but pull hamstrings all the time.

Actually, scrap that, because SI will mess it up and have staff injuring themselves all the time, before telling us to make them train less harder.

[Elrithral]

Even if they did they could still do their job. There's a difference between a coach (who guides training) getting a cold and a player (who has to actually do the training) getting a cold. If I had a cold I could still tell people what exercise I wanted them to do, but I couldn't run around doing that exercise.

[erik86]

Haha some coaches would never come in if they had the chance to phone in sick, especially with me as a manager..

[given1legend]

Yeah but if a coach has a cold you wouldn't want him working in case others catch it.

Or the flu, not just colds they get. Or they may break their leg one day in which case they couldn't work.

[jayahr]

We don't really need this to improve the game, do we?

[x42bn6]

We don't really need this to improve the game, do we?

Given that there is no interaction with staff at all (unless a team comes along for his signature), a little interaction wouldn't hurt, right?

Staff can get sick an injured. Our old goalkeeper coach Tony Coton had dodgy knees so he could only work part-time towards the end of his coaching career. Staff could talk to players and players could talk to trusted staff to build up friendships. Sometimes your fitness coaches may need to attend training courses which means when flying over to Rome for a European game, you have no fitness coaches in Rome and this will impact your game. Or you might have Mike Phelan bursting balloons on the pitch which makes several of your staff dislike him.

[Neji]

We don't really need this to improve the game, do we?

Me feelings exactly. It would be logical but a pointless feature because it wouldn't add anything to the game.

[Pr0fes0r]

But it would, by all means, let's be fair to the idea. A sick AM means no team reports, a sick scout means longer or no scouting times, a sick coach means no training in the area assigned to him - especially at a small club, where the board allows only one to be employed! Your GK coach breaks a leg - it happens, you know - do you wait two months for him to come back, do you sign a temporary replacement, do you sack him and sign someone long-term in his stead, do you ask your shooting coach to take over? It's a minor point, sure, but not a wholly irrelevant one.

[given1legend]

It would improve the game. Realism would improve and it would make it harder at a lower league club.

Overall, would be a great addition to the game.

[Elrithral]

Why niot go the whole hog and let us get sick sometimes too?

I disagree that it should be added, would be pointless and irritating imo. Realism does not necessarily improve the game.

[Maran]

We don't really need this to improve the game, do we?

Yes, fair point but as others have said, it would improve realism and I think, ultimately, that is why we all enjoy the game so much, because of it's realism.

If this feature were implemented I would think it would be a rare occurance for a staff member to get sick, and if they did maybe other staff members could take over for a day or two in their place (which would increase workload etc.)

[PaulHartman71]

It sounds ridiculous imo, it wouldn't improve the game at all. All it will do is provide at least 100 new threads next year of people whinging and moaning at how stupid the game is because all of their staff have swine flu. You can't honestly say that anyone is going to see that their scout has contracted several diseases on his travels which will effect his progress, and be happy about it, nor can you say anyone will grin at the sight of a message saying that their first team coach has taken a week off sick after contracting a mild ear infection.

[given1legend]

You won't grin at that but do you leap with joy when your star player gets a rare injury?
When a goal is dubiously ruled out for your striker do you throw a party?

They don't make you smile but they are part of the games realism. Which is why we love this game.

[chopper99]

Why niot go the whole hog and let us get sick sometimes too?

I disagree that it should be added, would be pointless and irritating imo. Realism does not necessarily improve the game.

This.

Realisms great, but should never be included if it lowers the fun of the game. This feature would be pointless and frustrating, especially as you would have no control over it and it would just be random.

At least with player injuries you have at least an element of control through many things such as training, tackling, tempo during matches etc.

[Elrithral]

You won't grin at that but do you leap with joy when your star player gets a rare injury?
When a goal is dubiously ruled out for your striker do you throw a party?

They don't make you smile but they are part of the games realism. Which is why we love this game.

Just like the much lamented press conference, no?

[given1legend]

Just like the much lamented press conference, no?

No not like the overly repetitive press conferences. They are entirely different due to the restrictions on answers. You just can answer without reading the question!!!

Thats not realism, it needs improving.

Injuries to staff are not going to be something you just click the second most positive answer for are they?

[chopper99]

No, they would be even worse. It's right up there with players failing drug tests or being banned/jailed for fighting in nightclubs. These may happen in real life, but have no place in the game imo.

[Elrithral]

Injuries to staff are not going to be something you just click the second most positive answer for are they?

No, they'll be "coach#1 has the flu and will not attend for for X days/weeks". No variation whatsoever, and you cite repetitiveness as an issue with PC, but not staff injuries? Seriously?

I also disagree with this;

Thats not realism, it needs improving.

Managers are asked the same thing week in week out, usually with similar answers week in week out, irl. If anything PC are realistic in that sense, of course there is a certain lack of variety, the game cannot be infinite in size.

[given1legend]

You can't compare a coach getting a cold or the flu to players failing a drugs test.

Thats just ridiculous.

[Pr0fes0r]

At least with player injuries you have at least an element of control through many things such as training, tackling, tempo during matches etc.

With players coming down with flu or a viral infection you don't. Do you want these out of the game as well? What about board takeovers? You have no control over them whatsoever. And what about transfer embargoes - oh, these fun killers, let's scrap them, too!

[Neji]

AS stated, Realism does always not = fun.

Press conferences, player injuries, suspensions are part of the game of football and a perfect example of what realistic aspects should be included in the game. It would be realistic to have a new feature so I have to watch every second of every match - doesn't mean it would be good.

[Elrithral]

You can't compare a coach getting a cold or the flu to players failing a drugs test.

Thats just ridiculous.

I think he was comparing it re: what it adds to the game, both add nothing imo so they are comparable.

[Elrithral]

With players coming down with flu or a viral infection you don't. Do you want these out of the game as well?

You do, you can send them home or send to physio. You have all necessary control.

What about board takeovers? You have no control over them whatsoever. And what about transfer embargoes - oh, these fun killers, let's scrap them, too!

These happen once in a blue moon, irl you would absolutely no control, so it's a moot point i'm afraid.

[chopper99]

I came in to respond but I think my point has already been made.

[Elrithral]

I came in to respond but I think my point has already been made.

I'm inside your mind.

[chopper99]

Makes a change from where you ususally are you perv

[given1legend]

No, they'll be "coach#1 has the flu and will not attend for for X days/weeks". No variation whatsoever, and you cite repetitiveness as an issue with PC, but not staff injuries? Seriously?

I also disagree with this;



Managers are asked the same thing week in week out, usually with similar answers week in week out, irl. If anything PC are realistic in that sense, of course there is a certain lack of variety, the game cannot be infinite in size.

They could also damage ankle ligaments tripping over a ball, break their leg somehow, basically its a similar list to player injuries and again like player injuries you would have to make up for the missing coach. Like someone said, if your keeper coach gets an injury, you may have to put your striker coach on it or something. You would need a few versatile coaches.


And managers are asked questions which are more relevant than in game. And just generally there is less restriction in real life which i know would be hard to replicate but as yet it is not close enough.

[Elrithral]

Makes a change from where you ususally are you perv

It certainly does, there's far more room in here.

They could also damage ankle ligaments tripping over a ball, break their leg somehow, basically its a similar list to player injuries and again like player injuries you would have to make up for the missing coach. Like someone said, if your keeper coach gets an injury, you may have to put your striker coach on it or something. You would need a few versatile coaches.

On the subject of realism then, who was the last Assistant or coach, you heard about, that broke their leg or damaged their ankle ligaments. Sorry, but we started out with flu, which wasn't particularly interesting as an addition and now we've entered the realms of fantasy additions, in order to keep it interesting. Why bother?

And managers are asked questions which are more relevant than in game. And just generally there is less restriction in real life which i know would be hard to replicate but as yet it is not close enough.

True, but expecting too much imo.

[chopper99]

They could also damage ankle ligaments tripping over a ball, break their leg somehow,

Come on, this is just getting rediculous now. You get a message saying that your coach has tripped over a ball during training so will be out for a week or two?

What about physio's getting RSI?

I'm sorry, I don't mean to take the pish, I just think this is a daft idea. In real life I have never heard of one example of a coach being out and it affecting the team. So for that reason alone this should not be in the game.

[chopper99]

Damn you again Elrithral, stealing my thoughts and posting them quicker than me

[BenArsenal]

I don't think this will be a good idea, mainly because:

1) It doesn't happen that often IRL

2) As mentioned, you can still coach with a minor cold/flu.

3) We would be flooded with many complaints about "Staff falling sick!" in here.

The negatives outweigh the positives I'm afraid.

[Misodoctakleidist]

If you're going to demand this, why not demand that staff take time off for personal reasons. Maybe your physio is going on his honeymoon and you have to replace him with the dinner lady for a couple of weeks so she'd better be versatile.

When you sack coaches, they could take you to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal. Or maybe you'd get an angry email from their union.

Maybe sometimes your fitness coach could get stuck in traffic and arrive at work an hour late so your players wouldn't be 100% fit on match day. It happens in real life.

[Pr0fes0r]

You do, you can send them home or send to physio. You have all necessary control.

You can do the same with your coaches then - you'll have exactly the same degree of control.

These happen once in a blue moon, irl you would absolutely no control, so it's a moot point i'm afraid.

So? Coaches also get sick once in a blue moon. And the argument was "we don't want no sick coaches because we can have no control over this"; I'm merely showing you that there are plenty things in FM you have no control over and yet nobody is asking for their removal.

[chopper99]

The biggest argument against this is that, unlike board takeovers and some of the other things mentioned, this is not something that ever seems to actually happen in real life.

[Pr0fes0r]

Nah, you merely don't hear about it in the media - nobody cares if Chester's fitness coach has a flu, do they. Otherwise I would immediately become a coach to benefit from that wonderful coach immunity .

[chopper99]

So why include it in the game if there's no evidence for it?

Not only will it add very little to the game, but it will be something that most football fans will have no experience of.

[Elrithral]

Imo the biggest argument is, coaches can still do their job if they have the flu or cold, unlike a player, so it wouldn't affect anything. For those who say, "but they might spread it to the players", managers might too, when was the last time you heard about a manager taking time off for flu? Perhaps Fergie has just been very lucky over the last 20 odd years, I wonder what his diet is.

It's a non-starter, whether you send them to physio, send them home, whatever, it's utterly pointless. You're basically asking for a feature where, every so often you click a button to send a coach home or not, I don't see how that's something that needs to be in the game.

[SCIAG]

What if your physio got a disease that could be transferred via the blood whilst your star striker had a gashed knee? Eh? Haven't thought of that, have you?

It would add nothing to the game, not even realism, as so far we've had one example of a coach not being able to work because of injury or illness, and even he continued part time.

[Pr0fes0r]

We're not talking about flu alone, but about non-playing staff getting sick in general - try telling Liverpool fans Houllier's surgery did not matter for the team. These things (coaches and managers getting ill with all sorts of stuff) do happen, unfortunately; the fact thay you don't hear about them does not mean they do not exist but simply that - apart from the big names - they are not publicised. The potential for this feature has been listed above.

[BenArsenal]

Staff do take time off for medical reasons (Benitez, kidney stones anyone?), but those are personal. Like cars, houses and stuff.

To be honest, a coach being absent for a day or two isn't going to adversely affect anyone. The effect would be minor.

[BenArsenal]

We're not talking about flu alone, but about non-playing staff getting sick in general - try telling Liverpool fans Houllier's surgery did not matter for the team. These things (coaches and managers getting ill with all sorts of stuff) do happen, unfortunately; the fact thay you don't hear about them does not mean they do not exist but simply that - apart from the big names - they are not publicised. The potential for this feature has been listed above.

But would you like the game to tell you, "You had a heart attack. You will miss the next game."

I think that is a bit too personal to be honest.

[Neji]

It doesn't matter if they happen. If they add nothing in terms of gameplay to the game then there is no point. When features are added solely for the sake of realism, I'm afraid that's when I quit. All this would add is frustration, and for something that isn't really part of a manger's job - it wouldn't be worth it.

[Elrithral]

Staff do take time off for medical reasons (Benitez, kidney stones anyone?),

But nobody actually believed that and beard transplant isn't really an injury.

[x42bn6]

There could be a much higher level of dynamic interaction in real life between staff and the manager, which could be worth documenting.

Either way, staff injuries and sickness must be a lot less rare than player injuries. More often than not staff are non-essential personnel compared with players so if a staff member has a cold, they will simply not go to work but inform you that they are not coming. So there's no action on your part.

Other dynamics for staff should be explored especially since (fingers-crossed) training might be improved for FM10. Players naturally have favoured staff - so perhaps they train better with these favoured staff. Sticking a bunch of Spanish coaches and telling them to teach English kids *coughRafacough* will initially have a detrimental effect as they do not understand each other. Things like this are overlooked in Football Manager. Maybe it will be a lot less fun to look for English-speaking coaches, but then again, I believe coaches are a lot more than just getting a filter out to look for coaches with defending 20 and signing them for more money than your rivals.

I see nothing wrong with improving manager-staff relations.

If you don't want it, you could suggest that, through the Manager Options, assign this menial task to your assistant manager.

[Neji]

I agree on having more staff interaction but injuries and sickness isn't the way to do that. I believe that staff and players are already affected by the spoken languages, as are players with team mates.

[pyewackett]

Isn't it odd though if a player is in the team and is also a a coach as well they can still, coach but caren't play a match as they're injuried with a cold/flu/fatigued/etc/etc/

However, would it be a nice touch? In my opinion, no but more of a use to have some further interaction with staff. Such as maybe more with Physios none existant in what they actually do, they are kind of parked, to help speed up injuries. As that what it seems to me.

Assitant managers, I do feel I get more feedback from them, Scouts now it would be nicer, much nicer if you can have more control on when they scout a region they can scout more precisely.

[HHUK]

Why niot go the whole hog and let us get sick sometimes too?

I disagree that it should be added, would be pointless and irritating imo. Realism does not necessarily improve the game.

"You have fallen ill with a coma, you will be out for 36 months"

*game holidays forward 36 months without letting you do anything*

What the hell happened to my squad?!

[Smac]

Benefit of a game over reality: Abstract away the boring bits, thank you very much!