Go to page 1
| Forum » Doubts and questions » Why does the system push injured players in reserves? | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
830 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
I am absolutely sure that I have moved my injured player with substitutes because although he is injured and can not play he can still train. So why did the system pushed him out? | 13/05/2013 23:44 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Fiscal
3449 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Why would a real life coach put a player who is injured on the gameday roster? He can't play. Same thing here. An injury means the player has to be in the reserves. | 13/05/2013 23:53 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
830 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Few things, even if it makes no sense I as the manager should be able to do so, also no matter how many injuries happen in game there are only 3 players for each team that can be subed, there are 7 of them on the bench. And if you wish to compare it with real life decisions I remember when a player was recovering from strained muscles but was on the bench to see tactics that coach wanted him to notice for the next game. And most importantly, if I were to have only 18 players or less he would be with subs. So I don't understand why am I not the real manager of my club, but I guess it is how it is.... | 14/05/2013 00:09 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Fiscal
3449 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Well if you pulled your hamstring would you give 100% effort in practice as if you weren't injured? | 14/05/2013 00:23 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
830 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
True, it doesn't make sense that they train when injured, but since they do and since he would be with subs if I only had 18 players I think that system should not interfere. Especially considering how many times has my OM (last season) entered the game for different position, even though I had player on the bench with correct position. There is no logic there also, so this surprised me. Thanks for your response. |
14/05/2013 00:33 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
Go to page 1
1
