Opposition Manager Unhappy at loan deal

[JamieTC13]

I just want to know if this happens in real life or not but i can't think of any. So i loaned a player for 2 seasons and in that agreement there's was a clause to say i'll play him in jst the advanced forward role so i did and got promoted. So now i changed his role to a deeplying forward just to help out in the defensive part of a bit more considering we are up against stronger opponents and he has done very well as you will  see in the screenshot but somehow the opposition manager is unhappy that i am, not playing him in the agreed role, what i think is just beyond silly. If he is playing nearly every game and scoring nealy a goal a game would that really matter. So the opposition manager will come to talk to me tell me how unhappy he is but then will end up saying i completely understand i'm glad we resolved the issue but then for him to come back 2-4 weeks later with the same old complaining  

[forameuss]

Purely logically, I can see why a manager would want his player to play in a specific way while out on loan, because at the end of the day that player is theirs, and in a lot of cases they'll want to see him return and benefit their own club.

However, the way this has been implemented is near farcical with how rigid it is.  If someone at SI wants to come and say that they discussed with real managers, and they believe it happens exactly like this, I'll hold my hands up and accept it.  I'll still think it's ridiculous, but at least it'd be "realistic" at the same time.  But I just can't see it being like this.  Roles are essentially a construct brought in to the game, a front-end to settings that feed into the match engine.  It's not going to directly mirror real life and the way a real team would be set up (at least not in such simplistic terms.  As such, it seems a bit rich that so much is made of the difference between roles.  Positions...maaaaybe.  Although I'd argue the same applies.  But to constantly - and I mean constantly - complain that he's playing in a very slightly different role, despite getting regular football and excelling, seems too much.  It might be so bad if there was some leeway and logic in the decisions, but it's basically a random decision on how the opposition manager will react.  And I know it's a clause you can remove from a loan, but the reaction to it is just as ridiculous.  Don't want to be locked into a particular role?  We want 20% more of his wage paid.  I refuse to believe that's a realistic part of a negotiation in real life.

[cris182]

You made an agreement then changed it. Would you not be annoyed if someone did that? 

I dare say you signed a contract you then went against. That would be unacceptable 

[FrazT]

When a player is played in a different position that was initially agreed, I can understand the issue being raised.  When it is down to his role within a position, I think it has gone too far and SI have acknowledged that.  I have had an issue where a another manager has complained about me playing a DL as a complete wing back instead of a wing back as agreed.?!

Now, I make no promises at all apart from squad status when loaning a player

[priority76]

It's possibly the most stupid thing in football manager.  I severely doubt a real life manager would even know let alone care what 'role' one of their out on loan players is playing in.  Especially if they are playing regularly and playing well.  At least in FM23 it seems pretty easy to remove from the loan clause.

[forameuss]

16 hours ago, cris182 said:

You made an agreement then changed it. Would you not be annoyed if someone did that? 

I dare say you signed a contract you then went against. That would be unacceptable 

But it's not about the agreement being changed, it's about the agreement itself being nonsense to begin with, and the reaction to breaking it being excessive and far too rigid.  I'd be far more accepting of it being there if the conversation wasn't so weird.  Got a player playing in a role against the agreed and he's having a nightmare?  Owning manager should be a bit more bullish and blame that, even if it's a stretch. Playing in a different role but absolutely killing it?  There shouldn't even be a complaint, or at the very least he backs down as soon as you point out how well he's playing.  

And of course there's the eternal problem that the conversation options you're given don't really adequately cover the bases you need covered with this conversation, but that's an issue everywhere.

Edited January 12, 2023 by forameuss

[JamieTC13]

On 11/01/2023 at 17:22, cris182 said:

You made an agreement then changed it. Would you not be annoyed if someone did that? 

I dare say you signed a contract you then went against. That would be unacceptable 

No i wouldn't be unhappy about a role change, specially if he is top goalscorer in the division and playing brilliantly, and plus in the conversation with the opposition manager and he says "i understand thanks for clearing this up" but 3-4 weeks later complaining about the same thing we just sorted out. if that aint broke then i don't know what is.

[autohoratio]

On 12/01/2023 at 01:52, priority76 said:

It's possibly the most stupid thing in football manager.  I severely doubt a real life manager would even know let alone care what 'role' one of their out on loan players is playing in.

Meanwhile, if you change a player's role from e.g. BBM to Mezzala, you'll get journalists asking in the pre-match tunnel interviews "Why have you changed up this player's role? Are you throwing things at the wall and seeing what sticks?" as if they'd be capable of figuring out such a small tactical change from just the pre-match warmups 🙄🙄🙄 

[priority76]

Just now, autohoratio said:

Meanwhile, if you change a player's role from e.g. BBM to Mezzala, you'll get journalists asking in the pre-match tunnel interviews "Why have you changed up this player's role? Are you throwing things at the wall and seeing what sticks?" as if they'd be capable of figuring out such a small tactical change from just the pre-match warmups 🙄🙄🙄 

I wonder if it would make more sense to do away with the roles and just have player instructions.  I imagine that would be closer to how a real manager divulges his instructions to his players.

[rp1966]

29 minutes ago, priority76 said:

I wonder if it would make more sense to do away with the roles and just have player instructions.  I imagine that would be closer to how a real manager divulges his instructions to his players.

The thing with roles is they're a bit like music genres - meant to be descriptive, but used in a proscriptive way.  The ideal situation would be that role definition would be moved into training.  Each role would be made up of a set of player instructions and you'd have freedom to either use role templates (that would correspond with existing roles) or change them as much as you wanted; creating a new role label that you could then select in tactics.  That way you would tailor a role to a specific player, but then save that role if you wanted to mould a new player into the same role in your team.

As far as press conferences go - it makes zero sense for journalists to be asking about a changed role in pre-match interviews; all they'd know is the position.  Post-match they'd have been able to see the change in the way the player behaved so it would become a valid topic of conversation.

Edited January 15, 2023 by rp1966

[Justin Tomlinson]

I’ve had this…

l’ve loaned in a R/L Fullback - for which I need him as a L Fullback. Played most games, 7.28 average rating.  Looks like he will be recalled as they wanted him to play on the right.

Initially I was angry, but on reflection… When I loan decent players out it is because they aren’t quite ready for the first team, but I have signed them for a specific role.  So for example I generally have 2 players for each position, sometimes a future player is available so I’ll sign them as the 3rd option, but as game time is limited I loan them out. I would want them to play that position so they develop the strengths for that role, so they can slot in when they return (or not if they were rubbish in that role on loan).

[forameuss]

10 hours ago, Justin Tomlinson said:

I’ve had this…

l’ve loaned in a R/L Fullback - for which I need him as a L Fullback. Played most games, 7.28 average rating.  Looks like he will be recalled as they wanted him to play on the right.

Initially I was angry, but on reflection… When I loan decent players out it is because they aren’t quite ready for the first team, but I have signed them for a specific role.  So for example I generally have 2 players for each position, sometimes a future player is available so I’ll sign them as the 3rd option, but as game time is limited I loan them out. I would want them to play that position so they develop the strengths for that role, so they can slot in when they return (or not if they were rubbish in that role on loan).

But that would be position, rather than role.  Your example is fair enough, the difference between left back and right back, that's enough to actually have reason to complain about.  Left-back or left wing-back...maybe.  You could probably make an argument that there's a difference there.  But two left-backs playing in slightly different roles...that seems a bit excessive for the reaction we get.  I don't really have an issue with the complaints themselves, more the inflexibility of the whole thing.  There doesn't appear to be a lot of nuance, just a check-box function where the AI sees that the player isn't playing in specifically that role, and complains without taking anything else into account.  If you add more context into that but keep the functionality there, it wouldn't be half as bad.  Player playing on opposite flank but well?  Still complain.  Player playing in the right position, but in a role that's slightly different to agreed, playing badly?  Complain.  All that but playing well?  Maybe a note to the manager, or just nothing. That kind of thing.

[Baodan]

The complaints from the AI managers seems valid to me, despite the objections raised by some in this thread. If you make a promise when loaning a player, you keep it or suffer the consequences. 

You always have the option not to make promises you don't intend to keep it.

Edited January 18, 2023 by Baodan

[enigmatic]

On 11/01/2023 at 16:29, forameuss said:

Purely logically, I can see why a manager would want his player to play in a specific way while out on loan, because at the end of the day that player is theirs, and in a lot of cases they'll want to see him return and benefit their own club.

However, the way this has been implemented is near farcical with how rigid it is.  If someone at SI wants to come and say that they discussed with real managers, and they believe it happens exactly like this, I'll hold my hands up and accept it.  I'll still think it's ridiculous, but at least it'd be "realistic" at the same time.  But I just can't see it being like this.  Roles are essentially a construct brought in to the game, a front-end to settings that feed into the match engine.  It's not going to directly mirror real life and the way a real team would be set up (at least not in such simplistic terms.  As such, it seems a bit rich that so much is made of the difference between roles.  Positions...maaaaybe.  Although I'd argue the same applies.  But to constantly - and I mean constantly - complain that he's playing in a very slightly different role, despite getting regular football and excelling, seems too much.  It might be so bad if there was some leeway and logic in the decisions, but it's basically a random decision on how the opposition manager will react.  And I know it's a clause you can remove from a loan, but the reaction to it is just as ridiculous.  Don't want to be locked into a particular role?  We want 20% more of his wage paid.  I refuse to believe that's a realistic part of a negotiation in real life.

The bit that made me laugh is when a manager threw his toys out the pram and recalled a Backup player that was getting regular football in a variety of positions because only some of them were in his preferred position, whilst nobody bothered about all the other loans I had who were alienated because they weren't getting anywhere near as much football as expected...