Change

[Pabbers]

You're right. I should have said reward. My mistake

I was a bit harsh, must have been a bad day. Apologies pal.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

If they were only paid when they won I think this would soon change.

I'm not sure it would. Playing sport is largely autonomous. It's done subconsciously because it happens so quickly. It's widely believed for instance that the yips occur when athletes start thinking about what they're doing rather than just doing it.

Using money as a motivator suggests that the players have to consciously think about what they're doing on the pitch, and I don't think that's the case.

The win bonuses and that the players get for instance, aren't designed (imo) to motivate them to get the win, but rather to distribute the fruits of that success amongst those that achieved it.

 

[Steve Wigan]

Training etc has always been different in Europe. Apparently when Ravanelli signed for Boro he turned up at the ground at 9 a.m and couldn't find an open door to get in. Eventually he found a caretaker who said to him..'you're too early mate, no one gets here till after lunch'

 

[deipnosophist]

Circadian rhythm is a significant factor in sporting contests. In USA, East Coast teams travelling to play on the West Coast have a (statistically derived) advantage in kick offs later than 5pm (EST), but for games at 2.30, the reverse is true.
Now, I know that UK only has one time zone, but practicing for different kick off times can provide relative advantage (in my opinion)

 

[deipnosophist]

...doh!!...I mean't West Coast teams travelling to the East Coast

 

[deipnosophist]

...it takes me 6 months to recover from the start of daylight saving, and then, just as I am back in sync, they reverse it on me FFS!!

 

[Little Ralphy]

I'm not sure it would. Playing sport is largely autonomous. It's done subconsciously because it happens so quickly. It's widely believed for instance that the yips occur when athletes start thinking about what they're doing rather than just doing it.

Using money as a motivator suggests that the players have to consciously think about what they're doing on the pitch, and I don't think that's the case.

The win bonuses and that the players get for instance, aren't designed (imo) to motivate them to get the win, but rather to distribute the fruits of that success amongst those that achieved it.

While I agree in the main with what you are saying, I think the win bonuses are to try and create a heightened sense of consciousness in some players. Football and sport in general is mostly instinctive and played at a different conscious state (IMO) but not every player can achieve that state for each game. Some players need help, be it a cup game, or big match whereas others perhaps need some financial motivation to help them focus their mind. It can also help to motivate players in training, as a carrot if you like for them to aim for, which can improve their physical state to avoid injuries (I think this can also be the case with combat sports like boxing etc. as some fighters lose that hunger to achieve once the big money starts rolling in, whereas for others it makes no difference).


It’s no coincidence that when certain players find their contracts coming to an end that they suddenly look like world beaters (Pienaar, Gravesen, Kewell, Elmander, Nani). Obviously there are some players that have a desire to win deep down that you cannot replicate, and has likely come as a result of their upbringing or genetic make-up (Cahill, Keane, Rooney) and these don’t tend to need any motivation as the sheer will to win will help them achieve that level of consciousness more often than not.


I think this is why some players are just massively inconsistent and work better with certain managers. I guess the key to a good manager is realising what it is that each player responds to and tailoring your managerial style for the individual.