Jump to content

GUTTED! help required!! 'untouchable' but sacked


Recommended Posts

have the enable in-game editor disabled and never used any editors so that wouldnt work but i've just got my 3rd back to back promotion into league 1 with salford and built a really good squad staff etc but now I've got a problem where even though my status is 'untouchable' and a new 2year contract just been offered i got sacked as i didn't fulfil the below promise;

"the board are concerned that there isn't much time to start introducing youth players into the first team"

i was stunned so went back to my last save and saw that message under promises for the chairman and it said 9 days left. tried to talk about philosophies etc but it doesn't come under that.

does anyone know a way for me to get out of this being sacked for this promise in 9 days or am i screwed? i could always add a new manager but then i wouldn't have all my history and relationships etc :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this considered as a bug? If the promise is to play youth players in the squad and you don't do it, you failed in some way. It might be harsh, but I have seen "untouchable" manager getting sacked for similar reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually found a way around it - went back to the previous save 2 weeks earlier before the last game of the season and played 11 youth players that was promise fulfilled

i'm not one to cheat and reload the game etc but 3 seasons of hard work to get sacked over a promise like that is ridiculous so i went back a month and now it's ok

i had said to play youth players in order to get facilities / networking upgraded but didn't realise it would need to be done so quickly!

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, KUBI said:

It might be harsh

Overly harsh imo.

The poor sod just got 3 back to back promotions and his own Board consider him to be "untouchable" to the extent that they've given him a new 2 year contract.  And then sack him.  The best thing we can say about that is they've stabbed him in the back (ok, not unheard of), but to get the club that success and then be sacked for not giving enough youth a chance is pretty lame.

Did he break a promise?  Yes.  Did he over achieve and exceed all expectations elsewhere?  Absolutely and should be taken into consideration.

Perhaps there needs to be better communication a lot earlier if something like this can happen despite all the success elsewhere, but being called "untouchable" plus given a new contract doesn't exactly help in that regard.

@mikep87 Glad you managed to get out of your hole :thup:.  If you're able to, please raise this in the Bugs Forum and upload a copy of your game save to let SI take a look.  And the next time you get offered a new contract (or ask for one) try to get rid of those nasty clauses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It really depends on the board/chairman. There are some crazy people in charge of clubs in real football. Why should that not be reflected in FM? :D

In terms of intellect, this is not correct, but not necessarily in terms of football.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Overly harsh imo.

The poor sod just got 3 back to back promotions and his own Board consider him to be "untouchable" to the extent that they've given him a new 2 year contract.  And then sack him.  The best thing we can say about that is they've stabbed him in the back (ok, not unheard of), but to get the club that success and then be sacked for not giving enough youth a chance is pretty lame.

Did he break a promise?  Yes.  Did he over achieve and exceed all expectations elsewhere?  Absolutely and should be taken into consideration.

Perhaps there needs to be better communication a lot earlier if something like this can happen despite all the success elsewhere, but being called "untouchable" plus given a new contract doesn't exactly help in that regard.

@mikep87 Glad you managed to get out of your hole :thup:.  If you're able to, please raise this in the Bugs Forum and upload a copy of your game save to let SI take a look.  And the next time you get offered a new contract (or ask for one) try to get rid of those nasty clauses.

@herne79 it wasn't even a philosophy - that i could understand, maybe, it was simply something said when making a board request for youth facilities, had no idea this could get me sacked as never had anything like that in any game every year since the original!

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Minuten schrieb mikep87:

@herne79 it wasn't even a philosophy - that i could understand, maybe, it was simply something said when making a board request for youth facilities, had no idea this could get me sacked as never had anything like that in any game every year since the original!

You made a request to improve the youth facilities. The board did agree but only if you are using the youth facilities and proving that you promote youth players into the squad. But you did not.

The only bug I could see in here is the time between the board request and your sacking, but not that you get sacked. This happen in real football too, when managers gets over confident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, KUBI said:

It really depends on the board/chairman. There are some crazy people in charge of clubs in real football. Why should that not be reflected in FM? :D

In terms of intellect, this is not correct, but not necessarily in terms of football.
 

Do you have any example from real life?

iirc another guy from the forum won the title with West Ham and got sacked under the same circumstances as TC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Minuten schrieb BigRoboCrouch:

Do you have any example from real life?

iirc another guy from the forum won the title with West Ham and got sacked under the same circumstances as TC.

I think there are various ones. Managers who are confident starting to try to change clubs policy, demanding more money for facilities etc. As I said, it should not happen every time, but considering the chairman it could happen. So, it's probably to harsh when it happens every time, but not if it happens 1/5.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really want to have such kind of "madness" in the game. It just might be more balanced, but it does reflect one part of the game: There is no job guarantee at all (if you don't manage Arsenal).

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been a recurring concern of mine for a few years now.  Boards ( and so by definition the game code) is too wrapped up in satisfying promises and clearly ignores the on field performances which surely should be the dominating factor in judging a manager's job security.  If you do brilliantly results wise, in my view there is no way that you shouldl be sacked under these circumstances- a warning to do better, perhaps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 7 Minuten schrieb FrazT:

This has been a recurring concern of mine for a few years now.  Boards ( and so by definition the game code) is too wrapped up in satisfying promises and clearly ignores the on field performances which surely should be the dominating factor in judging a manager's job security.  If you do brilliantly results wise, in my view there is no way that you shouldl be sacked under these circumstances- a warning to do better, perhaps.

Boards are "the bosses". You really should be care to make board requests. They usually don't like managers who go into there business. With a high reputation it should be easier and as I said, this kind of sacking should probably happen not that often, but it should. As you are trying to move the club into a new direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that the board is the boss and of course you , as manager, need to pay heed to the promises made and their demands.  My point is that if you are very  successful on the pitch you should never lose your job for this type of broken promise.  By all means, issue a warning that you need to waken up and keep the promise, or use it for justification for being sacked after poor results, but IMO, results should always take precedent over other issues in almost all cases.

I think that this module requires some tuning for later versions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BigRoboCrouch said:

Do you have any example from real life?

iirc another guy from the forum won the title with West Ham and got sacked under the same circumstances as TC.

When spurs sacked Harry redknapp he was doing extremely well. Essentially what happen is we stuck by him during his court case. The day he was cleared Capello quit the England job so he then started to flirt in the media for that job. He then of course didn’t get that and started talking quite a lot about how the players didn’t want the uncertainty of his future so he deserved a new contract. What most people don’t know is during this time chairman Daniel Levy was on America as his wife was unwell so this was one of the factors in his sacking. I’m sure there were other things as well. But it does help explain why a reasonably successful manager was given the boot. Also more proof that you don’t mess with Levy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KUBI said:

I think there are various ones. Managers who are confident starting to try to change clubs policy, demanding more money for facilities etc. As I said, it should not happen every time, but considering the chairman it could happen. So, it's probably to harsh when it happens every time, but not if it happens 1/5.

That's true but like with actual philosophies and expectations that you are judged on it should really be more balanced. So for example I won the title and got to the semi's of the carabao cup but lost in the 1st round of the fa cup and checkatrade trophy so they were disappointed with the last two but overall very happy and on other games on previous versions they've been disappointed that for example I didn't play possesion football but the overall performance meant they were happy. They gave me a new 2 year contract about a week before and the only reason for the sacking was the promise timing out - the facilities were still very poor and the quality of the youth team were poor but I only had 1 year to fulfil this promise so it is very harsh and strange but I'll know in future to keep an eye on the promises and time remaining!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On another note does anybody know how / when to get an under 23 team? This is my first ever game starting at non-league level so I've always had one before and am now going up to league one - but I've noticed that even some of the non-league teams have u23 teams so not sure where to go with that - that would obviously help with youth and reserve players as well./

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, KUBI said:

You made a request to improve the youth facilities. The board did agree but only if you are using the youth facilities and proving that you promote youth players into the squad. But you did not.

The only bug I could see in here is the time between the board request and your sacking, but not that you get sacked. This happen in real football too, when managers gets over confident.

How many seasons would it take for a player from the first youth cohort after the improvement to the facilities to be ready for the senior squad? Three, four, five years?

How many players from each cohort on average would have the potential to be good enough? One, two, three or more?

With these two inputs how many seasons would it take for the senior squad to show a heavy bias towards youth academy developed players? 

Of course the above doesn't matter here because just like the previous examples posted there was no contractual criteria/club philosophy to bring youth through & as per my comments in the West Ham thread if there was a philosophy then on field success which in this cause has been achieved with back to back to back promotions  means that failing to meet the philosophy should never result in losing your job. Worse case scenario is that the board do not provide a transfer budget to force the manager's hand in using academy players, that would require a change in the contract code so that signing bonuses & agent fees can still be offered along with a much improved level of interaction with the board & DoF on player recruitment strategy if SI really intend for these type of sackings to be possible FM.

Remember that FM is just a game & if this is intended behaviour within the code then the balance is way off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mikep87 said:

On another note does anybody know how / when to get an under 23 team? This is my first ever game starting at non-league level so I've always had one before and am now going up to league one - but I've noticed that even some of the non-league teams have u23 teams so not sure where to go with that - that would obviously help with youth and reserve players as well./

Not sure if you can get it before, but mine magically popped into existence in my first premier league season, at the moment the Checkatrade groups were drawn I think. I'm now in my second prem season and they're not participating in the u23 league, not sure when (if indeed ever) that will happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 06/01/2018 at 23:30, mikep87 said:

@herne79 it wasn't even a philosophy - that i could understand, maybe, it was simply something said when making a board request for youth facilities, had no idea this could get me sacked as never had anything like that in any game every year since the original!

This is what is more surprising, it is not even a club philosophy. I agree that it is just too harsh and should be more balanced. In real life, my club, Benfica, didn't renew the contract with Jorge Jesus after many successfull seasons, for a similar reason, he didn't want to play youth academy players. But I'm sure the board took under consideration many other factors, not only that one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 06/01/2018 at 21:57, mikep87 said:

have the enable in-game editor disabled and never used any editors so that wouldnt work but i've just got my 3rd back to back promotion into league 1 with salford and built a really good squad staff etc but now I've got a problem where even though my status is 'untouchable' and a new 2year contract just been offered i got sacked as i didn't fulfil the below promise;

"the board are concerned that there isn't much time to start introducing youth players into the first team"

i was stunned so went back to my last save and saw that message under promises for the chairman and it said 9 days left. tried to talk about philosophies etc but it doesn't come under that.

does anyone know a way for me to get out of this being sacked for this promise in 9 days or am i screwed? i could always add a new manager but then i wouldn't have all my history and relationships etc :(

Don’t know weather this helps but I avoided the sack by requesting a new contract and dicussed the philosophies removing the youth thing and am still in charge. So you could always ask. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/7/2018 at 04:24, FrazT said:

There is no doubt that the board is the boss and of course you , as manager, need to pay heed to the promises made and their demands.  My point is that if you are very  successful on the pitch you should never lose your job for this type of broken promise.  By all means, issue a warning that you need to waken up and keep the promise, or use it for justification for being sacked after poor results, but IMO, results should always take precedent over other issues in almost all cases.

I think that this module requires some tuning for later versions.

You can make counter arguments, but it would all be speculation as to what coding goes into the board. Since I do not know that, I will not make it.

For me, the thing that points this out as a potential bug is that he was offered a contract just prior to being fired for not keeping the promise. If the board cared that much, they would not have offered the contract. Whilst I am all for being fired for not meeting board expectations (how many times to people want to see real life managers fired for not playing the right style of football, for instance?), this should not occur after a contract offer because of some coded trigger being met. It needs to be dynamic. The board needs to provide you will feedback and as you say, warnings.

In real life, if I am not meeting some criterion for my job, I expect my boss to call me for a meeting to explain that I am not doing everything they expected me to do, and warn me that I should improve. If I am excellent at other aspects, I would expect a bit more leeway to improve myself to meet their goals. If I am not doing great in general, I would expect my boss to be more harsh (get better, or get out). This is what should be in FM for promises. Hell, if they make it a meeting, they can have you being able to respond; for example if you have to play youth, but have nobody good enough, you should be able to tell the board, and they may be understanding (or not, depending on the chairman). Hopefully, this is something that could be added going forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sporadicsmiles said:

You can make counter arguments, but it would all be speculation as to what coding goes into the board. Since I do not know that, I will not make it.

For me, the thing that points this out as a potential bug is that he was offered a contract just prior to being fired for not keeping the promise. If the board cared that much, they would not have offered the contract. Whilst I am all for being fired for not meeting board expectations (how many times to people want to see real life managers fired for not playing the right style of football, for instance?), this should not occur after a contract offer because of some coded trigger being met. It needs to be dynamic. The board needs to provide you will feedback and as you say, warnings.

In real life, if I am not meeting some criterion for my job, I expect my boss to call me for a meeting to explain that I am not doing everything they expected me to do, and warn me that I should improve. If I am excellent at other aspects, I would expect a bit more leeway to improve myself to meet their goals. If I am not doing great in general, I would expect my boss to be more harsh (get better, or get out). This is what should be in FM for promises. Hell, if they make it a meeting, they can have you being able to respond; for example if you have to play youth, but have nobody good enough, you should be able to tell the board, and they may be understanding (or not, depending on the chairman). Hopefully, this is something that could be added going forward.

This.  I remember particularly galling examples around tycoon owners.  They usually come with a desire to sign high-profile players, but in certain examples the side either doesn't have the financial muscle (despite being tycoon-owned) or simply isn't attractive enough to lure them in.  I remember a few cases of managing sides where the sack would come very suddenly due to that.  That promise is obviously rock bottom, so as soon as some of the others dip slightly lower, the cumulative effect kicks you out.  Always seemed far too trigger-happy.  

There are situations where I think being trigger-happy would be considered correct - a run of poor results and an erratic board, for example - but for promises, there absolutely needs to be a bit more flesh put on the bones.  If you're not fulfilling a promise, there should be a meeting with the board where they warn you about it.  If you then don't turn things around, then absolutely the board should be able to punt you, but it often comes out of the blue as it is now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/6/2018 at 22:57, KUBI said:

Why is this considered as a bug? If the promise is to play youth players in the squad and you don't do it, you failed in some way. It might be harsh, but I have seen "untouchable" manager getting sacked for similar reasons.

you said you seen untouchable managers been sacked for similar reason ..who?
similar reasons is not correct term ... for example, sacking Jose for playing ugly football when was Manager for Real is not same as not introducing more youth !!!.. fans  & board priority is the  result... then style.. then all other things ranked according to their importance .. am 46 years old .. I never seen a manager sacked for not promoting enough youth players for the first team more when he is producing great results  !!! why mods sometimes just tend to defend a game and acting like lawyers !! how a game can be improved if we don't say .. oh that was kind excessive ? need slight adjustment may be .. 
again , do you have a manager sacked for same exact reason IRL .. ?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a frustrating seeing a moderator defending a clear issue with the game...

This is the third time I've seen a topic like this and it quite simply isn't right. It is not realistic and 'football madness' is being completely mistaken for a problem with the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, forameuss said:

Why does it matter what a moderator says?  If you think it's a bug, raise it as such, and the developers will take a look and tell you either way.  Moderator's opinion - because that's what it is - doesn't really come into it.  

Fair point. It's frustrating whoever it is and it's an opninion that I completely disagree with.

I also don't think it's my place to report the bug as I don't personally have an example of it so would be unable to upload any save files or provide in depth details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Robioto said:

Fair point. It's frustrating whoever it is and it's an opninion that I completely disagree with.

I also don't think it's my place to report the bug as I don't personally have an example of it so would be unable to upload any save files or provide in depth details.

The attitude of "it's not my place to report" is much worse.  Granted you're using it because you don't actually have the example (that would be for the OP) but I've seen plenty use it.  Complain about a bug, then get all haughty when someone suggests they actually help fix it.  Again, not what you're doing, but while we're on the subject of things that are frustrating.  Certainly more than someone else's opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, forameuss said:

They usually come with a desire to sign high-profile players, but in certain examples the side either doesn't have the financial muscle (despite being tycoon-owned) or simply isn't attractive enough to lure them in.

Like Blackburn in FM18. I am currently managing them, and that is the one promise they want me to keep. I shall await my sacking for being unable to convince players to play in League 1 in Lancashire!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...