MSWL UNITEDMSWL U2 TMBL MSWL The Manager
Tuesday, August 14th, 2018 - 06:09:33 PM (gmt)
 
ball MSWL UNITED ① - Landing
 
Home Auctions Blog Forum History Login Rules Scores Stats Tables Teams
 
Coaches Directory Donate Guest Rankings Schedule Updates Waitlist Wall
 

Join
MSWL
UNITED!

Recent Entries

Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Mike Parnaby
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Tim Batth
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Rob Baptiste
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Brian Beerman
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Paul Cockayne
3 Comments
Paul Cockayne
3 Comments
Dave Dowson
4 Comments
Roy Rolsten
2 Comments
Dave Dowson
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Dave Dohm
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Brian Hayes
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Rob Baptiste
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Rob Peterson
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Graham Wilkes
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
19 Comments
Brian Beerman
20 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Andy Bate
1 Comment
Kevin Martin
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
21 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Graham Wilkes
1 Comment
Jose Freitas
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Dave Dohm
10 Comments
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Rob Baptiste
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Graham Wilkes
6 Comments
Graham Wilkes
5 Comments
Dave Dohm
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Rob Peterson
5 Comments
Brian Beerman
11 Comments
John Holden
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Kevin Martin
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
19 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Rob Baptiste
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Rob Baptiste
5 Comments
Mark Stretch
5 Comments
Jake Hanny
1 Comment
Andy Bate
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
25 Comments
Graham Wilkes
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Brian Beerman
7 Comments
David Blair
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
12 Comments
Brian Beerman
5 Comments
David Blair
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
18 Comments
Graham Wilkes
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Mark Stretch
17 Comments
John Holden
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Rob Peterson
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
25 Comments
Allan Sellers
30 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
15 Comments
Andy Bate
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Mike Cabral
4 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Kevin Martin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
26 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
23 Comments
Kevin Martin
6 Comments
Dave Dohm
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Brian Beerman
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
14 Comments
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
3 Comments
Dave Dowson
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
John Holden
4 Comments
Mike Cabral
9 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
23 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Simon Compton
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Abe Hamdali
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Roy Rolsten
6 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Roy Rolsten
2 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
20 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Andy Bate
7 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Andy Lewis
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Simon Compton
4 Comments
Kevin Martin
12 Comments
Simon Compton
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Simon Compton
1 Comment
Simon Compton
1 Comment
Dave Dowson
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Rene Wilkens
5 Comments
Trevor Taylor
3 Comments
Rob Peterson
17 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Trevor Taylor
7 Comments
Trevor Taylor
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
27 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Dan Fitzgerald
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Alon Atie
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Rob Peterson
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
 
Fitness Discussion
Posted by Simon Compton on Tuesday, Mar. 31st, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Can we have a discussion about the way fitness can be improved as one per level if he does not play any games is beginning seem somewhat low.

I mean my player Raoul is now is essence out of the game, he is a level 4 player has -4 fitness and there are 4 sessions left, in reality it will be really difficult to get him those extra games to qualify as a level 5?

Some thoughts if i may, when a player misses 1 game his fitness increases by 1, if he misses the whole session then it increases by say 2 or even 3, i would imagine that this probably makes the programme difficult to manage though?

could the fitness level be increased to 3 instead of a minimum 2 and then cap the programme so that a player on 1 for example who does not play will only rise to 3?

Or maybe with a Physio he rises a level plus when he does not play the whole session he rises a level, so in effect with the physio he gains 2 levels per session maybe this is the way it works now? If thats the case can by having two physios work on different injured players and is there a cap on the number of physios we can have?

Anyone know the exact answer to this Physio query please?

Cheers Simon

Readers Comments

91 PHYSIO
A physio lowers the fitness lost by any injury by one level. An injury which doesn't affect fitness, except in the current match, is cancelled altogether.

You may own multiple physios, but only one is effective.

10.2 COACHING PLAYERS

To raise a player by 1 fitness level costs that player's age in CPs (For youth players, the cost is 1 CP). A player
can only rise 1 fitness level through coaching in a session, although he can rise by resting at the same time (so it possible to
rise by 2 fitness a session if both apply.

Simon regarding your Apprentice Raoul

If you spend 1 CP on fitness & dont play him in any games in the next session he will rise by two fitness levels to -2

and will then be able to play in the next session!

I think you have missunderstood the fitness rules & as such over estimated your problems

Personally I think the fitness rule is working very well as it is

Cheers

Dave

Dave Dowson on Wednesday, Apr. 1st, 2009 at 12:08 AM
 

 I agree with Dave - I think the fitness rule is working out very well. You can use CP on Fitness (an SBY or APP only costs 1 CP for fitness), and by combining that with not having the player play in a given session, he will have his fitness raise by +2.

You can still use CP and Youth Coaches on any player, even if they do not play in any matches in the session. The theory is that the CP and Youth Coach are based on efforts the player made during the week at practice/training. I've been able to use this to my advantage twice now. In one case, one of my APPs was suspended for 2 matches in a 3 match session. This meant that I couldn't him into 2 games, and thus would not be able to maximize his potential. So, I played him in the last match and used my Youth Coach on him. In the other case, one of my SBY's was injured and had a -3 Fitness. I was unable to play him at all in the session. I used 1 CP on his Fitness and also used the Youth Coach on him. His Fitness rose to -1 at the end of the seesion and the Youth Coach was applied.

So, there are ways to work with the system. The injuries are in there not only to try to inject some realism, but also to introduce some measure of randomness and excitement to the league. Injuries can have a major impact, so it's interesting to see how people deal with them.

In the past session, I had my best MF lose 6 points to his Fitness due to injury. He currently stands at -5. His age is IV, so it will cost me valuable CPs in order to get him back to playing level. I have to weigh the pros and cons of spending at least 12 CP over 3 sessions to have him play, versus just letting him sit on the bench, versus selling him to a foreign league. I still haven't made up my mind.

But, I say, keep it the way it is - I like it.

Rob Peterson on Wednesday, Apr. 1st, 2009 at 1:49 PM
 

Or send him to the Backroom Rob!

Dave Dowson on Wednesday, Apr. 1st, 2009 at 8:06 PM
 

Simon does have a point I think.  A player who is badly injured could be out for many sessions which could scupper development plans which seems unfair for essentially a random event and one you have minimal control over.  Perhaps we should be able to coach fitness more per session?

Or (and I like this better) scrap the -2 minimum to play.  A player can play whatever his fitness condition.  So a player on -7 fitness can still play a game but obviously at  a very low (and possibly negative SL).  Youth player development is unaffected , although the team playing with the injured player suffers a heavy penalty.

J

James Tucker on Sunday, Apr. 5th, 2009 at 12:01 AM
 

You can spend CP to raise SL on an injured older player.  They don't have to play.  Development of the older guys is not a problem with Fitness lost.  You only miss out on being able to play them at all - which is the point of the random injuries in the first place as part of the game.

The biggest loss then is for Youth players.  An injured youth obviously misses out on the games they have to get in to qualify for the SL gain.  The bad luck that strikes down a top apprentice definitely hurts, as it prevents a player from ever reaching peak SL.  Even so, you are looking at the loss of only 1 SL.  Youth players all start at Fitness 2.  Due to playing only one or two games per session, they cannot lose Fitness due to use.  So only injury can cut them down.  The worst injury possible is -6.  So the lowest a youth player can get (unless incredibly unlucky and injured twice for large Fitness loss within 2-3 sessions of each other) is -4 Fitness.  Resting one session and spending just 1 CP gets the player to -2 and he can play.  For an apprentice, this means +4 SL on the season and not +5 SL, so he can afford to rest another session and get another CP and end up at Fitness 0 before coming back.  Schoolboys can miss a whole session and still get their +3 SL in due to only needing to play 9 of the 10 sessions.

Even if a Youth Player goes down with injury - they CAN still get qualifying points in through the Youth Coaches.  A team can have up to 2 Youth Coaches active, so it is possible for an apprentice to sit out a session and still be on track for max SL gain.  Or two schoolboys can be injured and the team won't be out games due to Youth Coaches picking up the slack.

Well, I should say that "in theory."  I haven't had two youth coaches myself, so can they both spend their point on the same player?  I don't recall seeing that in the rules or hearing of whether Rob has done that or not (or anyone else with 2 Youth Coaches).  If not, then an apprentice will lose out on one SL, though they can still get 1 QNL to protect against possible future injury loss as well.  That's the price of injury early in a career for this league.  A Schoolboy will not though, as they have the one session buffer built in and can also get max coaching from the Youth Coach in any session even when injured.

The net effect of having an apprentice injured can lose you 1 SL from the maximum possible for a player over the course of his career.  That's not a whole lot, given that the player would have to be injured to -3 or -4 in one shot before having a chance to be CP'd back to -2 Fitness.  If you have a Physio on your team, then there is only a 10% chance that any injury (which peaks at ~12% per match anyway) will cause the player to miss games.  Less than 1% combined odds per match on average is decent for such loss.  That means that a team such as Cardiff City which is playing 4 Apprentices up this season (8 matches per session) has an cumulative probability of 7-8% per session of having an apprentice injured, and 70-80% at max for the season.  So far, we've had one youth injury which will cost our top DF apprentice to miss out on one possible SL.  We also had one Schoolboy get injured, however we were able to cover that with our Youth Coach for that session he was out.  Each team playing youth regularly can expect one such injury per season.

One per season sounds about right for injuries having long-term impact on team strength, especially when that impact is in all likelihood only 1 SL on one player.  Teams playing more youth might see two go down.  If planning on doing heavy youth investment then first get 2 Youth Coaches and a Physio lined up so you won't have nearly as much to worry about or overcome.  If you neglect that area of resource management, then I guess you'll just have to live with being far more exposed to the effects of everyone's favorite random number generator, good ol' Olmec.

Kevin Martin on Wednesday, Apr. 8th, 2009 at 8:32 PM
 
 
 
Terms and Conditions