From The Pavilion

Currently, players in national teams are unable to play for their regular club while on tour, and the club receives money as compensation for their absence.

This poll is asking, in principle, would you support a change so that players on national duty are able to play for their club? The compensation would be removed, and international games would not affect the player's fatigue level for club games.

If you vote "Unsure," then please post explaining why you're unsure. All opinions are welcomed, but please be respectful. This is not a binding poll - I'm posting this as a user, not an admin - but I'm hoping it will give us as admins a fair idea of the community's view on this issue.

The context for the poll is this topic discussing international cricket, feel free to read that discussion and weigh in if you'd like to.

I think it works nicely the way it is currently.

I voted unsure/no opinion.

On the one hand, losing your players to national teams can be a pain but you do get compensation which can be very useful. Also you may lose players to national teams but your opponents might lose even more players or more important players. I generally see it as just an extra challenge as a manager and just part of the game. I mean there are other things in the season which can cause just as much of a problem such as teams choosing weakened sides due to concentrating on the MKMC or towards the end of the season when they've already achieved what the want and decide to give experience to youngsters; all just part of the game and something you have to deal with as a manager.

On the other hand, if national players can play for their club too then it would help managers unhappy with losing players and people would then have to adapt to not having the compensation. Some would say it's less realistic that you could have the same player playing in two places at once but there are plenty of unrealistic things in the game that are there to make the game better. Would it reduce the managerial challenge? Possibly, although some teams might find it more difficult if they're relying on big squads to compete on all fronts or might have more trouble finding a way to give younger players experience when they would normally play in the matches where national players were unavailable.

Either way, I'm not really bothered; I'll just face the managerial challenges that the game throws at me.

I also voted unsure/no opinion.

Agree completely with what Spark has said above.

Further to that, I see it in two ways:
1. Allowing players to play both club and nation would cheapen national competitions to be glorified friendlies in my opinion.
2. As a national manager I have seen the pain (directly and indirectly) that touring players can do to a club's league chances.

International games don't impact a players club fatigue level. Only form is impacted.