Bidding For Players Without the Transfer Budget

[StadiumRocker]

I've just watched an auction for a player (rated 46, aged 27yrs) that was sold for 17.7million and cost the successful bidder 55 tokens. Thankfully I opted out after only 2 tokens. The point is, the guy he ended up bidding against only had a starting budget of 5.49million yet was able to continue bidding for this player, because he had the tokens to do so, even though he didn't have the budget. He opted out at 17.5million and 54 wasted tokens. Surely, once you exceed your budget in an auction you should be out of the running to sign that particular player otherwise budgets mean nothing and it all boils down to how many tokens you have or how you've managed to acquire them. Some players will choose to 'buy' their teams/ success by acquiring tokens in whatever way but make auctions fair for bidders that have attempted to build up their teams and with a transfer budget to sign a player rather than allowing a player to go into the red just because he has the tokens to compete to sign a particular player.

[Raykco]

Allowing players to go into the red, is part of the game. If a manager does this, they have 7 days to repay the deficit, otherwise the game engine will start selling off their players, starting with the most valuable. In real life football, many clubs have money deficits.