Parent/Feeder clubs within UK & Germany shouldn't be in FM2011 imo.

I just think it's a bit weird really, iirc there are rules in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany and Northern Ireland that state parent/feeder clubs within each Nation is not allowed. However it is still in the game, and more recently a feature has been added so when you are in the lower league's your board randomly decides to give you a parent club. It just seems a bit weird that something not allowed IRL is in the game. I don't think that the commercial ones should be abolished because I presume these sort of things do happen IRL, as I believe Arsenal have one with Colorado.

I may be wrong but don't the rules just prevent the old 'first option' type feeder clubs which don't exist in the game anymore?

Are you sure about this? I've never heard of it and anyway, why would they be banned?

I'm not 100 percent sure, but I am fairly certain that a financial exchange to the smaller club for letting you loan them younger clubs is against the rules IRL.

IIRC they're more like gentlemans agreements. Nothing official, but still there.

I'm not 100 percent sure, but I am fairly certain that a financial exchange to the smaller club for letting you loan them younger clubs is against the rules IRL.

The fee was the one thing I wasn't sure about, although in my game I do not pay my feeder club in the Championship anything.

im quite sure they are still allowed. if a club is happy 2 loan say 3 players to a club several leagues below on a regular basis then its of benefit to everybody.

the players need 1st team games and the clubs they go2 are more than happy to play them. plus they get a home friendly every summer. surely its a win/win situation

im quite sure they are still allowed. if a club is happy 2 loan say 3 players to a club several leagues below on a regular basis then its of benefit to everybody.

the players need 1st team games and the clubs they go2 are more than happy to play them. plus they get a home friendly every summer. surely its a win/win situation

There is definitely a rule concerning domestic links between clubs, I'm just not sure what it allows and doesn't.

I'm pretty sure that the loaning of players and the annual friendly is allowed as part of an 'unnofficial' link between clubs, but the payment of a fee could be against the rules. First options links with domestic clubs was definitely against the rules, but this was removed a few versions ago.

If anyone has a link to the actual rule, I'd be interested, it is something I've never been clear on.

There is definitely a rule concerning domestic links between clubs, I'm just not sure what it allows and doesn't.

I'm pretty sure that the loaning of players and the annual friendly is allowed as part of an 'unnofficial' link between clubs, but the payment of a fee could be against the rules. First options links with domestic clubs was definitely against the rules, but this was removed a few versions ago.

If anyone has a link to the actual rule, I'd be interested, it is something I've never been clear on.

The only rule I can find in the FA Rulebook is this one on page 94 (or page 4 of the above pdf):

(i) Nursery Clubs

Any Club which is under obligation to another Club, written or otherwise, by reason

of which it has not the sole and entire control of its own management, finances and

Players, shall be deemed to be a “Nursery Club” and is not entitled to be a Full

Member Club or an Associate Member Club.

Option agreements and other permitted arrangements

3 A Club is permitted to enter into an agreement with an Overseas Player whereby it acquires the option to employ that Overseas Player at a future date in consideration for a payment to the Overseas Player. All such agreements must be disclosed in advance to The Association in accordance with Regulation A.2. Clubs are reminded of their obligations to the player’s current club under the Rules and Regulations of The Association, relevant League Rules and under the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players in relation to approaches to players.

4 A Club is permitted to enter into an agreement with Overseas Club whereby it acquires the option to acquire a Player or Overseas Player at a future date. All such agreements must be disclosed in advance to The Association in accordance with Regulation A.2.

5 Subject to any requirements of the Rules of the relevant League or Competition, a Club is permitted to enter into:

(a) agreements to effect a loan of a Player to another Club or Overseas Club conditional upon the registration of such a Player with the Club;

and

(b) agreements granting a right of first refusal or matching right to another Club or Overseas Club (on such financial terms as the two Clubs agree between them) in the event that the Club subsequently wishes to transfer the registration of the player.

So as long as you are not in actual control of the feeder club it seems to be fine.

The only rule I can find in the FA Rulebook is this one on page 94 (or page 4 of the above pdf):

Whilst the Third Party Regulations (page 4) seem to allow you to have first option or loan rights on players at domestic or overseas clubs:

So as long as you are not in actual control of the feeder club it seems to be fine.

The FA rule on Nursery clubs is all there is and that is the problem for FM. You can have links as long as there is no loss of control. It's OK to loan players and have an annual friendly but not OK to have first option on players. Unfortunately, FM doesn't seem to differentiate between domestic feeder clubs and non-domestic feeder clubs.

I agree with the OP - English clubs should not be allowed to have domestic feeder clubs (not sure what the German rules are).

So as long as you are not in actual control of the feeder club it seems to be fine.

Thanks

That seems to suggest there is nothing wrong with the feeder club system in FM.

The FA rule on Nursery clubs is all there is and that is the problem for FM. You can have links as long as there is no loss of control. It's OK to loan players and have an annual friendly but not OK to have first option on players. Unfortunately, FM doesn't seem to differentiate between domestic feeder clubs and non-domestic feeder clubs.

I'm pretty sure FM does differentiate between the two, I don't think you can set up first option domestic feeder clubs, whereas you can with foreign ones.

I'm pretty sure FM does differentiate between the two, I don't think you can set up first option domestic feeder clubs, whereas you can with foreign ones.

Yes since the feeder club feature was introduced you've only ever been able to set up loan feeder clubs between english clubs. Though the new third party rules seem to OK setting up first option arrangements between domestic clubs unless the Premier League and Football League have banned it?

Yes since the feeder club feature was introduced you've only ever been able to set up loan feeder clubs between english clubs. Though the new third party rules seem to OK setting up first option arrangements between domestic clubs unless the Premier League and Football League have banned it?

When the feeder clubs were first introduced to FM (was it FM06?) you could set up first option domestic feeder clubs, which is why I think many people still think they shouldn't be allowed. I'm pretty sure that a version later these types of feeder clubs were removed.

Well, fair enough then! I always ignore the feeder club screen anyway (apart from terminating any current agreements).

Has anyone ever actually exercised their first option right?

Well, fair enough then! I always ignore the feeder club screen anyway (apart from terminating any current agreements).

I find it very useful, especially for gaining scouting knowledge.

This is an interesting thread. It is something I have often wondered about.

In real life, many non-League clubs have good relationships with Football League clubs which could be described as affiliations or parent/feeder relations. St. Albans City have such a relationship with Leyton Orient in recent years. We loan a lot of their players and play pre-season friendlies against them.

FM would seem to work this perfectly legitimately as far as I can see. All of the relationships I can see operating in England when flicking through the leagues are 'local relationships in which players are loaned' and involve an annual friendly plus the loaning of players. I'm not sure if there is a fee involved in these kind of relationships in FM. Anyone know?

Otherwise, they would seem to be perfectly valid and a fair representation of real life as far as I can see. I'm tentatively concluding that there isn't really any valid objection to using them in terms of realism. What are other people's opinions?

Regards,

C.

Has anyone ever actually exercised their first option right?

Nope. I have had the option many times, but if I want a player I go for him stright away, not wait for another club to go for him. Whenever another club does go for a player, I check him, se he is no good for me, and continue the game.

Well, fair enough then! I always ignore the feeder club screen anyway (apart from terminating any current agreements).

Why on earth would you do that? They are useful, especially for scouting knowledge, but also, if you have the yearly friendlies arranged it saves time on arranging them yourself!

I actually sometimes use the editor to give myself about 15 feeder clubs! A couple of lower league loan ones, and the rest dotted around the world. This means I have a vast scouting knolwledge and have no need for tools such as Genie Scout. It also means I have a feeder club in Poland, Belgium and Spain so I can send non-EU players there and avoid work permit problems.

I LOVE the feeder club system, and I remember being delighted when it was introduced in FM, even more so when we were given the option to add feeder clubs in the editor

I don't have access to the editor but doesn't it show several grades of feeder club?

My BSP club had the lowest, "friendly relations" or something like that with a couple of local teams.

FM would seem to work this perfectly legitimately as far as I can see. All of the relationships I can see operating in England when flicking through the leagues are 'local relationships in which players are loaned' and involve an annual friendly plus the loaning of players. I'm not sure if there is a fee involved in these kind of relationships in FM. Anyone know?

Otherwise, they would seem to be perfectly valid and a fair representation of real life as far as I can see. I'm tentatively concluding that there isn't really any valid objection to using them in terms of realism. What are other people's opinions?

I think the fee is the only unrealistic aspect of it as far as I am concerned. But it is usually such a small fee that it barely makes any difference anyway and it certainly doesn't prevent a club from controlling its finances as per FA rules. You could also argue that the whole FM financial model is fairly unrealistic and that this fee just provides extra income for small clubs that would normally be brought in from the club house and general fund raising plus other things like that, which aren't represented in the game as far as I know.

Otherwise, it seems perfectly fine to me. 'Local relationships in which players are loaned', which involve an annual friendly plus the loaning of players, are very important to non-League clubs in real life. Just look at Havant & Waterlooville and Portsmouth, for instance, who have very good relations in real life. Plus, St. Albans City definitely have this kind of link with Leyton Orient at the moment.

I would conclude that this really does need to be represented in the game and that the current system seems to do the job. I can't see a problem with it. It does make me wonder why the LLM guys are so dead against them? :confused:

Regards,

C.

They can cause massive benefits. If you got Man United as your parent club last year, you could get Macheda, Welbeck, Possebon, Petrucci, etc. That's OTT, which is why the LLaMas don't like them.

SCIAG - that's a good point, I didn't think of that aspect of it.

I tend to use my parent club in a realistic fashion when I'm playing in non-League. I will only accept what I deem to be realistic options based on geography. I also won't accept any loans which are unrealistic in my mind, where the quality of the player is such that he wouldn't come to a non-League club for instance. That's how I regulate it myself but that's just the way I like to play the game, I suppose.

I didn't realise that such unrealistic loans were possible to be honest. Has this been looked at by SI?

My view on this topic would be that parent and feeder clubs should definitely stay but that perhaps they should be re-evaluated slightly to come more in line with what happens in reality.

Regards,

C.

I didn't realise that such unrealistic loans were possible to be honest. Has this been looked at by SI?

I raised the issue a few versions ago and it was definitely looked at. I never take players on loan from my parent club anyway so I'm not sure how much of a problem it currently is.

What division would those Man Utd players sign on loan for with FM09? Is it still the case?

OP, that's rubbish, Arsenal are the feeder club to Barnet, and to many others. As Man Utd are to Bury and Royal Antwerp.

OP, that's rubbish, Arsenal are the feeder club to Barnet, and to many others. As Man Utd are to Bury and Royal Antwerp.

Not sure that is the right way round!

no fees involved any more is there?

i am Man Utd and my British feeder clubs do not receive a fee from me.

no fees involved any more is there?

i am Man Utd and my British feeder clubs do not receive a fee from me.

The fees are still there, I've just set up a link with another English club who I am paying £63k pa.

What's the club out of interest Dafuge?

C.

Why does Roma have first option on Real Madrid players?

What's the club out of interest Dafuge?

C.

Millwall, in League 1.

Millwall, in League 1.

At least it is a League 1 club. I was going to say, that's an awful lot of money for a non-League club otherwise!

I guess the only things I would worry about with the parent/feeder situation is:

1) Unrealistic advantage, for instance if a non-League team can bring in players well beyond the quality they should be able to bring in. I know this was a problem in older versions as I've read other people's updates and seen the type of players that they are signing. It was a problem on FM09 especially and not just for the human but also for the AI controlled teams who were able to bring in quality loans beyond their real life capabilities. I'm not sure how much of a problem this is on FM10 (I haven't noticed any issues yet) but I guess the answer to this is: cancel the links or don't use them if you feel that they are unrealistic.

2) Money being paid by the parent to the feeder, which doesn't seem quite right within English football. However, we can say that the financial model in FM isn't exactly perfect anyway and you are very unlikely to bring in a game changing amount of money through affiliate links.

I guess the answer for me is to just keep it realistic, as is my preference. Otherwise, my opinion is that the affiliate links actually reflect real life because many non-League clubs find good relationships with their bigger neighbours to be pretty important in terms of bringing in loans and playing pre-season friendlies etc.

Trying to keep things close to real life is basically my rule of thumb when playing this game.

Regards,

C.