I believe that there should be a mechanism to protect the players that he can contribute to a team.

I open this topic to formulate the idea and at the same time denounce this type of action carried out by User O.O, who has in his possession a player from a national team (in this case Rohel Jaspe ), and does not train or sell him, affected a whole country

date............................. player's last encounters
2022-07-16..............Venezuela ... - Eesti U21
2022-07-09..............México U21 - Venezuela U21
2022-06-25..............Venezuela ... - Crna Gora U21
2022-06-18..............Venezuela ... - Nederland U21
2022-06-08..............F.C MaÁCr... - Black Star F.C.

I understand that if he's on your team it's because I bought him and he has the right to him, but as for the national teams there has to be a mechanism that guarantees fair play.

A national team player after a certain time of not playing in his team can be put up for sale even though his owner is active

+1 and after 2weeks of no training is enough.

Completely disagree, if the player has been bought by a human team, he has the rights to decide how to train and form the player.

If the owner of the team got banned for fraudulent activity, then i completely agree with the idea, to protect NT players who are playing under a bot or life time banned manager.

yes , but if he decides to not train a NT player it is a lack of fair Play rules, must favorize another team that is forbiden in the sokker rules

yes , but if he decides to not train a NT player it is a lack of fair Play rules

Huh?
70% of NT players are not trained anymore!
For U21 players I can relate to the idea, however...there's still a big difference between a U21 player from Poland and from Singapore f.e....

-1 for the idea on my part. It's simply not realistic.

It is rubbish that from the little good that comes out of the schools of medium and low user countries, the users of the countries with great economic power take it away and these players do not train, affecting these small countries.

Example for poland, italy, romania, brazil this does not affect. but to other countries with less than 100 users it is a very negative impact

Ok, but you cannot oblige a manager to train a player when he bought him for a reinforcement of his team but doesn't have any free spots for training.

If a player can't see minutes despite there being 3 weekly games, then why keep him on his team and affect a country?
that it goes on sale and that's it, it's not free for the player to come out.

No team can be above a country

fair play

I guess I don't completely agree with this idea.

I would prefer to allow at least 3 direct transactions per season, obviously these sales must be at least at the value of the player (first we need changes in the value of the players, now the value is not real compare to the market price) for avoid cheats.

So we can make sure we sell the player to someone else who really trains him. Many times I agree a sale with someone for my young players and a daytrader wins the auction and the player loses completely.

You know Eden Hazard?
He made 82 minutes of play in the last season. Yet he played nearly all matches for Belgium...
Fair play?

I played against Singapore today...
average rating = 50 for them! NT... not U21!
Belgian U21 team has higher average rating than Singapore NT team.

Again...many factors play a role in this matter. You cannot make a general rule about this.
Fair play is also knowing the skills of the players. But the game doesn't show them to NT / U21 coaches.
In the end, the national teams are a side project, but does not matter in the core of the game.

If you want to protect the players of a country, make sure you have a group of managers behind you that are willing to invest in these players to be able to give them optimal training.

mix pears with apples. I simply ask for a mechanism where a national player is not receiving training in his team and he is released, so the country wins since his player goes to another team that does train him and the team receives a donation for the player he does not use for not have space in your current team.

And I'm saying such a mechanism is simply unrealistic!
Each individual situation is different.
The problem with this game is that players need to play in order for them to receive training, but U21 players are often not good enough to play at a certain level.
Say, the owner has him since last season and now he's playing on the highest level in his country AND he still competes for the national cup.
It might be so that this player isn't good enough to play him.

The game itself should have a separate U21 game play so these kind of players aren't supposed to play for the A-team but for the youth team f.e.
But it isn't...

It's like saying there should be a mechanism that obliges managers to give the skills free for national team managers when they sent a mail with the question to give the skills of a certain player.
The game in it's core isn't NT friendly. THAT is what should change...