retired_holden

Yeah, if there was an inoffensive way or encouraging them to play better and not let their team-mates, their fans and their manager down in the most important game in the history of their club, I might use it instead of fining

retired_princess160

A player scoring a 5 or lower is playing, in my perception, below his capabilities. For that, he deserves to get a bollöcking (in game terms: an official warning), by my book. A player who does his stinking best will not score below par, I think.

Note, that the reaction to a warning for poor performance often is: 'sorry about that, boss, I had that coming. I'll do my best next time.' The players acknowledge that they played a bad game and that they are to blame!

So if I start fining them, after more bad performances, it's only logical. If the player isn't committed enough, he'll know about it. There are also players who simply don't cut it at the level we are playing at. They get fines, too, but simply can't do better. That may indeed be a tad unfair, but heck, it's a man's game. In the reserves and on the list they go.

retired_seabury

I find that a warning is good for a one-off poor performance, but a continued series of below par performances would suggest that the player isn't good enough for the standard you are playing at (as said by DJ above) - in these cases I wouldn't fine, but I would relegate the player to the reserves and transfer list him.

retired_emc580

Id probably still fine players even if there was better interaction players...i dont think something like 'now now (enter player name) that was a bad performance. can you please play better next time' issued to a player will do much in any case IMO

retired_blondielovespink

I think it's quite realistic, if one does the warning first. Why? Because a subsequent poor performance says they didn't take you seriously.

Now, in CM4, supposedly we'll be able to give unofficial warnings as well. And personally for the poor performance issue, I'll add that step into the equation.

KingsbayYHPE

Probably the strictest manager of his time in Scotland, Jim MacLean at Dundee United, used to fine players for poor performance, but it was so infrequent that it warranted reporting in the Press.

On one occasion his team had won 4-1, but he thought it was a shambles so he didn't pay out the win bonus

So, in answer to your question. No, I don't think it's realistic to fine players for poor performance most weeks. Although I warned a few earlier in the season when we lost 5-0 to the Arse

retired_mdibrell

Can you remember that foriegn manager that Dundee United had years ago, from somewhere in Eastern Europe, maybe Yugoland? Anyway, they did so badly his first game in charge, a 0-4 drubbing away to Hibs and he fined the whole team including himself a weeks wages! Hibs casuals were so happy that they wrecked a bunch of bars in the grassmarket and stabbed a doorman! :eek: What was his name? (the manager not the doorman)

retired_google

I usually let a '5' rating go without comment, because everyone can have a bad day.

A '4' or lower, now that's something different. And even then I usually only give an official warning. If more than 1 player made a right tit of himself that way, then I consider fines. (especially if the board expresses their displeasure after the match. Because then I figure I have the board's backing to lay into the playing staff )

retired_mdibrell

Welcome aboard Mr Pecker.
Really hard to read post Wood, no player naming means just that! They get really ärsie about that rule around here.