Knowing players in ways other than scouting

AndyProutchkine · 08-03-2004, 03:14 PM

Got this question, and decided to ask you, honorable LLaMas. What do you think on this issue?

Example.

My scouts are set to different tasks. They do crap. Nothing unusual. Then comes a message saying some guys have declared interest in certain player. From the same division as our team, in this case. Me, as a curious person, goes to see the guy's profile (*). He's pretty good. But my scouts didn't find him. Then, to be sure he's worth our attention, i offer a trial for him. Surprisingly his team let's him go. He's good. I bid for him. Now wait for reply.

So, is it LLaMy enough? I don't know English transfer specifics. Maybe there should be some scouting done before (*)? But trial is mostly the same...

I see that i can't take virtually everyone who gets on news top on trial. This time the initial impulse was the interest from another club. What do you think?

mkus · 08-03-2004, 03:20 PM

If it's frowned upon then you'd better make room atop that bonfire for me too.

Church · 08-03-2004, 03:23 PM

Oh Joy, a double heretic burning. I love the smell of roating flesh while the screaming mounts.

Church · 08-03-2004, 03:28 PM

That should have been, roasting flesh.

I quote from the guidelines:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Signing Players. All players should be first scouted before signing for an LL Club. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

However, as has been stated before; it is your game, play how you feel comfortable.
I personally think it is realistic enough to go after a player, from the same league, who has been the subject of news reports. I would, most of the time, try to scout him, but I will admit that if he fitted into my team and I could get him on trial, that would do me.

iajafer · 08-03-2004, 03:32 PM

On an occasion like that I reckon it's totally realistic, Andy. The guy was highlighted (in a media report?), you decided to trial him, I'm sure your coaches would give him a good going over during the trial (you did ask their opinion, I assume?).

Fine by me.

AndyProutchkine · 08-03-2004, 03:39 PM

Okay, i see the point.

Get scout's report, then offer trial (optional?), then decide.

But. In this certain issue. Trial offer accepted and the player is in our view. Isn't is the same as scouting (in this issue)? I mean, if trial offer declined - then, for sure, scout him.

Though for me trials give more info than scouting. This time the only function of scouting that was overriden is 'finding players', being replaced with news source. No player searching, no stuff of-the-like.

And, please, i beg you, do not refer me to 'play as you like', because i'm a bit confused here. In Russia all transfers are done after trials, our clubs have poor scouting systems or don't have any at all.

iamthequinn · 08-03-2004, 03:43 PM

Andy - if a player is with a team, then offering a trial isn't really an issue: your scouts will see him play (either for the first team or the reserves) and will make their call. However is a player is a free agent, then you really should take him on trial to assess him as a player. There are some exceptions: take the case of the Brazilian forward Bolton are interested in: his agent was shocked that they wanted to trial him as it was thought his reputation would speak for itself.