Thanks for posting this, we have been taking a look in to it.
It simply looks like the players didn't play enough matches - when you make the initial promise to give youth players meaningful playing time in the first team it's on the 24/11 and there's 30 games left of the season (minimum) and they only play in 11 of those, so around 33% - the board expectation is to give 'meaningful playing time' to at least 2 young players (as shown in the tooltip), so the board are looking for the players to be playing over 50% of the available playing time, as that was the promise you made to them for them agreeing to your request.
I will get the refusing to upgrade when they have those visions looked into as it should make them more likely to accept the request, although given the stature of the club and where the facilities are right now they're about what the owner/board would expect them to be. When you're in league 1 they're not going to willingly spend millions on improving youth academies and coaching when it's already at a level either equal to, or above, nearly everyone else in the division. Appreciate you've got a fair bit of money in the bank, but all that (and more) is allocated as transfer budget so they're not going to consider those as funds they can use elsewhere.
Cheers,
Russell
Hi Russell,
Thanks for letting me know and giving me a detailed explanation.
Perhaps then the board needs to inform the manager of the playtime expected in that case from a numerical point of view as I felt I had given young players enough play time given none were good enough to play?
Promise Not Recognised : Got Sacked as a Result
in Club Vision, Supporter Confidence, Manager & Staff Appointments
Posted
Hi Russell,
Thanks for letting me know and giving me a detailed explanation.
Perhaps then the board needs to inform the manager of the playtime expected in that case from a numerical point of view as I felt I had given young players enough play time given none were good enough to play?