I think you raise an important point there in that there isn't a black-and-white dichotnomy of people who are fully invested in the international game versus people who don't want to be involved at all. As I said earlier in my text wall, I have no real interest in managing or getting seriously involved, but I am happy to have players in my squad who are international players and very open to requests from the national managers to train them in a particular way, as long as it doesn't diverge too far from what best suits my club.MOD-MrMoose wrote: ↑Sat Jul 05, 2025 2:51 amI don’t think the discussion needs to be moved. As long as everyone is respectful, it is an important topic to discuss and should be open to opinions from everyone (and not everyone is on the discord).
I feel the 10% figure is possibly diminishing those who have an active interest in the nat scene without a formal role. There are plenty of “silent” national supporters who recruit and train national standard players and care about their success at Nat level. These managers are crucial to the National communities as there simply wouldn’t be the talent pool without them.
I know this is a controversial topic, and again this is my personal opinion and doesn't necessarily reflect the admin team as a whole or the direction the game is headed. But I think it would be better if players were always available for their club and could play international matches concurrently with separate fatigue (and, perhaps, form). I know that is less realistic and would probably be very complex to code, but I think the fact that players end up unable to play matches for their club is the main source of annoyance some managers have towards the international scene - it intrudes upon their own club management too much. No amount of compensation is going to make you happy if, say, you lose a match that ends up deciding a championship or promotion/demotion because your best player wasn't available.