Performance related pay

[PistolPete]

how are you gonna get 16,000 people to vote in a timely manner.
it'll be abused
people will be inconsistent
if i watch live games i want to get caught up in the atmosphere (i.e. have a few drinks) not going to be at my analytical best
ratings don't average out in the way you think

I think a number of sites have player rating systems but usually end up dropping them as the results get so much criticism

....etc

I don't think you read all my posts.

In short, you have an app, you log in, you have 48 hours to vote with a code only you have. If you don't vote no-one will get upset...

[Sanguine]

It's just a shit idea, PP.

As highlighted, there are very tangible ways that some players contribute, less tangible ways that others do. A team should be rewarded for its success.

[PistolPete]

It's an interesting idea but I don't like the fan voting system. I'd prefer to have, say, 10 neutral experts at the game who rate the players themselves, and their average is the score the player gets and then the bonuses etc. could be applied. If a player is performing well I don't think he should get a lesser wage just becuase he is unpopular with the fanbase.

I like the idea of 10 neutral experts. However, I honestly believe that 'experts' at football rarely exist and the 'wisdom of crowds' (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wisdom-Crowds-Many-Smarter-Than/dp/0349116059) are superior. Furthermore, by giving the crowd a voice, so to speak, you bring the players and the fans closer.

Finally, so many seem to think 'ah, but this player is unpopular right now so it will be unfair' - why don't we question why that player is unpopular and that fans might be right!!

[Sanguine]

It's an interesting idea but I don't like the fan voting system. I'd prefer to have, say, 10 neutral experts at the game who rate the players themselves, and their average is the score the player gets and then the bonuses etc. could be applied. If a player is performing well I don't think he should get a lesser wage just becuase he is unpopular with the fanbase.

I like the idea of 10 neutral experts. However, I honestly believe that 'experts' at football rarely exist and the 'wisdom of crowds' (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wisdom-Crowds-Many-Smarter-Than/dp/0349116059) are superior. Furthermore, by giving the crowd a voice, so to speak, you bring the players and the fans closer.

Finally, so many seem to think 'ah, but this player is unpopular right now so it will be unfair' - why don't we question why that player is unpopular and that fans might be right!!

Because he waved his middle finger at the crowd. Because he is in a contract dispute. Because he once scored a critical own-goal. Because he is keeping a more popular member of the team out of the team. And so on.

Doesn't work.

[PistolPete]

It's just a shit idea, PP.

As highlighted, there are very tangible ways that some players contribute, less tangible ways that others do. A team should be rewarded for its success.

Happy to end up feeling my ida is shit, but going to defend it a bit more until I am forced to reach that conclusion

My idea supports the team contribution - the current system supports the individual!

Pogrebniak got paid 40k per year and got a 4k goal bonus. Why? Because he has a HISTORY and is the one who pokes the ball in the net. Noel Hunt was paid £10k per year and a £1k goal bonus. Is this fair?? Against Sunderland last season Pogrebniak committed ludicrous foul in the area and the back 5 lost their clean sheet bonus. Is this fair??

Ps, I think Pogrebniak will be great this season if we keep him, I'm not a hater!

[PistolPete]

It's an interesting idea but I don't like the fan voting system. I'd prefer to have, say, 10 neutral experts at the game who rate the players themselves, and their average is the score the player gets and then the bonuses etc. could be applied. If a player is performing well I don't think he should get a lesser wage just becuase he is unpopular with the fanbase.

I like the idea of 10 neutral experts. However, I honestly believe that 'experts' at football rarely exist and the 'wisdom of crowds' (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wisdom-Crowds-Many-Smarter-Than/dp/0349116059) are superior. Furthermore, by giving the crowd a voice, so to speak, you bring the players and the fans closer.

Finally, so many seem to think 'ah, but this player is unpopular right now so it will be unfair' - why don't we question why that player is unpopular and that fans might be right!!

Because he waved his middle finger at the crowd. Because he is in a contract dispute. Because he once scored a critical own-goal. Because he is keeping a more popular member of the team out of the team. And so on.

Doesn't work.

Critical own goal aside, all these reasons wrestle the power back from the players to the fans. Good thing all round.

Also, I don't believe that a players middle finger waiving for example will produce different results. We still used to say on this site, 'Good player - shame he's a cnut'. You really don't give the people enough credit!

[Sanguine]

And should have nothing to do with how well a player is paid.

[PistolPete]

And should have nothing to do with how well a player is paid.

?

[southbank1871]

It's an interesting idea but I don't like the fan voting system. I'd prefer to have, say, 10 neutral experts at the game who rate the players themselves, and their average is the score the player gets and then the bonuses etc. could be applied. If a player is performing well I don't think he should get a lesser wage just becuase he is unpopular with the fanbase.

I like the idea of 10 neutral experts. However, I honestly believe that 'experts' at football rarely exist and the 'wisdom of crowds' (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wisdom-Crowds-Many-Smarter-Than/dp/0349116059) are superior. Furthermore, by giving the crowd a voice, so to speak, you bring the players and the fans closer.

Finally, so many seem to think 'ah, but this player is unpopular right now so it will be unfair' - why don't we question why that player is unpopular and that fans might be right!!

Because he's black. I guess you think it's fair enough that he gets paid less anyway right?

[creative_username_1]

how are you gonna get 16,000 people to vote in a timely manner.
it'll be abused
people will be inconsistent
if i watch live games i want to get caught up in the atmosphere (i.e. have a few drinks) not going to be at my analytical best
ratings don't average out in the way you think

I think a number of sites have player rating systems but usually end up dropping them as the results get so much criticism

....etc

I don't think you read all my posts.

In short, you have an app, you log in, you have 48 hours to vote with a code only you have. If you don't vote no-one will get upset...

yeah it's dead easy to get loads of people to do exactly what you want exactly when you want it. You will get a tiny proportion of people who do this

[PistolPete]

It's an interesting idea but I don't like the fan voting system. I'd prefer to have, say, 10 neutral experts at the game who rate the players themselves, and their average is the score the player gets and then the bonuses etc. could be applied. If a player is performing well I don't think he should get a lesser wage just becuase he is unpopular with the fanbase.

I like the idea of 10 neutral experts. However, I honestly believe that 'experts' at football rarely exist and the 'wisdom of crowds' (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wisdom-Crowds-Many-Smarter-Than/dp/0349116059) are superior. Furthermore, by giving the crowd a voice, so to speak, you bring the players and the fans closer.

Finally, so many seem to think 'ah, but this player is unpopular right now so it will be unfair' - why don't we question why that player is unpopular and that fans might be right!!

Because he's black. I guess you think it's fair enough that he gets paid less anyway right?

I addressed that higher up the page. If that proves to be an issue the whole thing would be illegal.

[southbank1871]

Yep, it would be really easy to prove.

[PistolPete]

Great. idea wont work because Southbank has a hunch...

Anyway, who's to say NH or AZ aren't already making racially motivated business decisions?

[handbags_harris]

While I tend to agree with the sentiment the idea is completely unworkable. The problem you have is that fans are not experts of the game and so do not:-

1) necessarily understand the tactical and technical intricacies involved in the game. You have different formations which drastically alter the role of a particular player. Say we employ a back three for example, the roles of the individual central defenders changes in comparison to a back four. We have a three-man midfield for example, some people will not necessarily understand the specific roles of those central midielders. To give Adkins recent example in the friendly against Olhanense, we started with two back, one forward and changed to a one back, two forward system very quickly. How many people would have noticed...? No many I'd wager.

And secondly,

2) More importantly, neither will fans know what the manager has instructed his players to do. To give what I consider to be an excellent example, over the previous 2-3 seasons McDermott clearly instructed his players to perform tasks that effectively made games turgid affairs to watch, and clearly inhibited the on-the-ball talents of certain performers and Jem Karacan case in point. So many people said that he brought very little but energy to the side under McDermott but he was clearly instructed to be a break-up player, not a ball player, resulting in seemingly anonymous performances which led to many fans holding negative views about his performances. This fact has been confirmed by Karacan himself over the last couple of days. The result - he may have carried out his instructions to the letter and got a 10/10 from McDermott, but his pay suffers because the non-expert public decide he's been a bit sh*t. That, no matter how you dress it up, is not fair and I would envisage many circumstances similar across the country.

Then you start to get the individual battles. Who decides a star player, who decides a squad player? Fans again? Manager? The manager then has the same issue now potentially because he has numerous squad players who have played two 35+ game seasons and still remain "squad" players. Then what happens when a managerial change happens? Do the star players get their contracts reduced?

Performance related pay = nice idea but the example given = unworkable and grossly unfair.

[PistolPete]

While I tend to agree with the sentiment the idea is completely unworkable. The problem you have is that fans are not experts of the game and so do not:-

1) necessarily understand the tactical and technical intricacies involved in the game. You have different formations which drastically alter the role of a particular player. Say we employ a back three for example, the roles of the individual central defenders changes in comparison to a back four. We have a three-man midfield for example, some people will not necessarily understand the specific roles of those central midielders. To give Adkins recent example in the friendly against Olhanense, we started with two back, one forward and changed to a one back, two forward system very quickly. How many people would have noticed...? No many I'd wager.

And secondly,

2) More importantly, neither will fans know what the manager has instructed his players to do. To give what I consider to be an excellent example, over the previous 2-3 seasons McDermott clearly instructed his players to perform tasks that effectively made games turgid affairs to watch, and clearly inhibited the on-the-ball talents of certain performers and Jem Karacan case in point. So many people said that he brought very little but energy to the side under McDermott but he was clearly instructed to be a break-up player, not a ball player, resulting in seemingly anonymous performances which led to many fans holding negative views about his performances. This fact has been confirmed by Karacan himself over the last couple of days. The result - he may have carried out his instructions to the letter and got a 10/10 from McDermott, but his pay suffers because the non-expert public decide he's been a bit sh*t. That, no matter how you dress it up, is not fair and I would envisage many circumstances similar across the country.

Then you start to get the individual battles. Who decides a star player, who decides a squad player? Fans again? Manager? The manager then has the same issue now potentially because he has numerous squad players who have played two 35+ game seasons and still remain "squad" players. Then what happens when a managerial change happens? Do the star players get their contracts reduced?

Performance related pay = nice idea but the example given = unworkable and grossly unfair.

Great post, thank you.

I'd love to see my system given an experiment but I guess the upshot is that yes, tactical roles will taint the fairness of the voting system. Perhaps my final thought is whether the current system is better and I guess that varies from club to club...

[glass half full]

It's an interesting idea but I don't like the fan voting system. I'd prefer to have, say, 10 neutral experts at the game who rate the players themselves, and their average is the score the player gets and then the bonuses etc. could be applied. If a player is performing well I don't think he should get a lesser wage just becuase he is unpopular with the fanbase.

Have you ever picked up a copy of a newspaper, read the ratings and thrown down the paper in disgust?

[ZacNaloen]

Take out fan voting and you have the basis of a good idea.

The rewards metric could be built into the contract, and players should be given their own choice of how the want to reward to be calculated.

maybe for a defensive midfielder it can be tackles won/passes completed. For a striker goals scored, assists. For a winger crosses into a certain area, assists.

But the biggest bonus always comes from winning game.

More options obviously available, depending on where the player things their strength is.

etc etc

Criticise away.

[Sanguine]

If you incentivise individual actions too greatly, you risk affecting the team ethic, even if you do weight team results heavily.

No "I" in team, and so on.

[reading_fan]

PP, if you are interested in testing this theory (for the LOLz) why not pick two players for the Ipswich game on Saturday, say one who divides opinion eg McAnuff, and someone else e.g. Jem or Kelly or whoever, and post up a r8ing poll (ie vote options are 1/10, 2/10, 3/10 etc) for them on the Team Board, and see what the average r8ing for the player is. Then you could see if this wisdom of the crowd theory holds out with mong fans?

[southbank1871]

Sick burn to Maguire there.