As a general point this is something I disagree with almost without exception – there are always exceptions! Sure a players on 14 IPs can get to 20 IPs and rise in skill through B International selection, but in reality this will take 2 full seasons even if they get selected for every B International. Some players may be lucky and get 6 games in a season, but how anyone can say this is likely is beyond me as every B side is even compared to another.

When you factor in the age increase for close to 2 seasons, the possibility of missing a game being pretty high through suspensions, injuries, poor form or just poor selection planning; it is a very risky strategy to accept a player like this will rise in skill through IPs.

Recently, I have rejected a number of deals where players such as this are included in a deal for a higher skill player. The justification that this skill 5 will go up seems to be the thinking behind the deal (many of you choose not to just the text comments section to help clarify your thinking on complex deals). When dealing risk is a factor, but you must have a good chance of coming out on top somehow – many deals are at best even over 2 seasons with one team relying on masses of luck just to get there.

While I do not want to discourage dealing, I do need make sure that deals are fair, with both sides able to get some sort of benefit which is tangible rather than fantasy.

In recent weeks a few sides have found themselves in this situation and rather than do something they just fail to submit either of their teams. Not only will you fail to receive the weekly 2 Youth Point bonus, but I will also sort the problem out for you. This could mean me using you valuable youth points or maybe even retiring a player in order to get enough youth points to sort the problem out. Not only will my actions cost you youth points and players, you will unlikely to get the sort of new player you really want.

Also, if I submit your team, I will not check internationals, players coming back from injury and suspension, so your best team is unlikely to play either.

It really is a lose lose situation doing nothing. You have been warned.

Constructing a deal can be a minefield when you take this into account when dealing with players of the same skill, but it gets so much more complicated when you are trying to trade players of different skill levels.

One issue I am hearing more and more related to the longer term worth of a player, especially for skill 7 players. It appears a massive misconception is entrenched in some minds that a skill 7 is no better than a skill 6 in the long term, especially if they will not reach the next international threshold before their WACS run out. Simply, this is crazy – a skill 7 is worth so much more than a skill 6.

In trying to illustrate this, I have drawn up a rough table which shows the relative scales between each skill level:

You will see the scale increases between each skill level; the difference between a skill 2 and a skill 3 is bigger than between a skill 3 and a skill 4. Likewise for the difference between a skill 4 and a skill 5 and so on. Surely the ultimate aim of Einnek Football is to win games, leagues and cups?

Dealing away a skill 7 who will not go up through international appearances because you cannot maintain the skill points by retiring him is a quick route to a lesser side. When dealing with higher skill players so much more must be considered than the players likelihood to go up to a higher skill. That is not to say dealing with such players is wrong, just that managers should consider all the options before selling players who are the stars of their side.

1. The maximum morale increase a team can get in any one turn through increasing players wages is 1.

2. Every time you opt to increase a player’s wages, the less chance moreale has of rising.

In real terms if morale does not go up after a couple of attempts then it is a worthless excercise trying any more until the next turn.