Introduction

Given football’s team-oriented nature, players aspire to maximise their time on the field. This aspiration is fuelled by the potential rewards, including financial incentives and fame, that come with increased playing time, intensifying their competitive drive. Players aspire to maximise their time on the field [1–3]. However, when players’ expectations of playing time are unmet, they often experience dissatisfaction and may manifest these emotions in their interactions within the sports context. This is particularly pertinent to exceptional football talents on the global stage. Despite the universal desire among players to remain on the field for the entire 90-minute match duration, the actual allocation of playing time is at the discretion of the technical team and the coach.

Materials and methods

Analysis

Thematic analysis was preferred for analysing the data obtained in the study. A deductive approach was employed in the thematic analysis. The thematic analysis consists of six stages [41,42]:

1. Becoming familiar with the data and identifying potential relevant items
2. Generating initial codes
3. Searching for themes
4. Reviewing potential themes
5. Defining and naming themes
6. Producing the report

Following this sequence, the data were first read carefully. Then, the researcher sought answers to the research questions within the data. At this stage, the researcher became familiar with the data while simultaneously setting boundaries around the research questions. The key concepts related to the research questions were the reasons for not playing, the feelings associated with not playing, and the effects of not playing. The potential items to be coded within the data were read and identified within the context of these key concepts. In the ongoing process, the researcher listed the key concepts in the data. Listing these key concepts served as a roadmap for the researcher in the coding and codebook development stages. Based on these key concepts, a codebook was prepared, outlining the definitions of the codes and when they should be used. Identifying key concepts does not imply that the researcher engaged in deductive coding. This is because the emergence of codes occurs during the coding process. Here, the researcher only delineates an area where coding will be performed based on the research questions. Subsequently, notable expressions in the data were coded, and related codes were grouped and categorised. From this point onward, the researcher began searching for themes and subthemes. While reviewing and refining the themes, the coded data segments were revisited and verified that the themes were meaningful and consistent. Tables 1–3 illustrate identifying codes from participants’ statements, categorising the relevant codes, and developing themes.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 1. Thematic analysis process of the “attributions to being excluded” theme.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0325174.t001

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 2. Thematic analysis process of the “emotions that arise” theme.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0325174.t002

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 3. Thematic analysis process of the “effects of being benched or excluded” theme.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0325174.t003

Findings

In this dedicated section, the study comprehensively presents the thematic analysis results, elucidating the salient themes and codes that emerged from the data. The analysis offers a profound exploration of the nuanced experiences of football players who were observed to be inactive participants during the study. These experiences are encapsulated within three overarching thematic categories, each offering distinctive insights into the multifaceted nature of non-participation in football.

The first thematic category delves into the “Attributions to being excluded,” shedding light on the multifarious factors and circumstances contributing to a player’s non-participation in matches. This theme underscores the contextual and situational elements that influence a player’s presence on the field, encompassing team strategy, player performance, or unforeseen contingencies.

The second theme, “Emotions that arise,” delves into the emotional landscape of football players who find themselves on the sidelines. This theme offers a profound examination of the complex emotional states experienced by players when they are not actively engaged in matches. It seeks to understand the spectrum of emotions, ranging from frustration and disappointment to motivation and determination, that individuals may encounter during these periods of non-participation.

The third thematic category explores the “Effects of being benched or excluded.” It delves into the implications and ramifications of being relegated to the bench or not participating in matches. This theme unveils the broader consequences for a player’s career, team dynamics, and personal development, providing a comprehensive understanding of the impact of non-participation in football.

These themes, meticulously extracted from the data and supported by rigorous analysis, provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the intricate experiences of football players when they are not actively participating in matches. Thus, they contribute to an enriched comprehension of the dynamics and complexities inherent in professional football.

The attributions of the football players who participated in the study were categorised into two sub-themes (Table 1): “Tactical Reasons” and “Coach’s Personal Preferences.” Under the sub-theme “Tactical Reasons,” the players’ statements during the interviews were coded with tactical changes, tactical necessity, tactical preferences, changes in the game system, experimenting with a different system, and tactical decisions. Players generally reported starting the season well but later finding themselves excluded from the starting lineup without fully understanding why, attributing this to tactical reasons. Player 10’s statements support this view:

“I started the season well, even scoring in a few matches. However, suddenly, the coach began keeping me on the bench. After a few matches, I was completely excluded from the squad. I don’t believe there was a significant drop in my performance, so I found it difficult to understand this decision. Tactical explanations were provided, but I didn’t think it was a performance-related issue. That’s why I started considering other reasons for being benched” (Player 10).

As Player 10 emphasised, the players insisted that their exclusion was unrelated to their performance. On the contrary, they stated that they were not given playing time despite no decline in their performance.

“At the start of the season, I was in form and played the full 90 minutes in many matches. But after some time, I found myself on the bench. The coach made tactical changes and tried a different strategy, but in my opinion, the issue wasn’t tactical. My performance was fine, but I was suddenly overlooked. The coach didn’t communicate with me, so I struggled to understand the situation” (Player 16).

The second sub-theme identified as a reason for not playing is “Coach’s Personal Preferences.” The codes used for this sub-theme included not being preferred by the coach, personal reasons, not entirely tactical, individual or other factors, and seeking other explanations. Players expressed that their lack of playing time was not solely due to tactical reasons but also the coach’s personal decisions. Similar sentiments were echoed by Player 14:

“Initially, I was in good form and even played a key role in some matches. However, as the season progressed, I was suddenly benched. The coach said he wanted to try a different system and implied that there was no place for me in this system. But in my view, my exclusion wasn’t just about tactical changes. I couldn’t understand why I was benched for such a long time. I wasn’t physically unfit or injured, but with every match, I felt more and more sidelined” (Player 14).

All players participating in the study were asked why they were not playing and attributed their exclusion to external factors. They did not associate their absence with their own performance. Even Player 17, who had experienced an injury, stated that despite recovering and regaining his performance level, the coach still did not include him in the squad:

“Before my injury, I was playing regularly, but after recovering, I couldn’t reclaim my place. The coach gave me a few opportunities as a substitute, but I never returned to the main squad. This was very disappointing for me. I had overcome my injury and was physically ready, but I still lost my place. I couldn’t make sense of why I wasn’t playing” (Player 17).

The feelings of football players when they are not selected to play were examined under three sub-themes: Exclusion and Worthlessness, Uncertainty and Incomprehension, and Loss of Motivation and Self-Confidence.

In the sub-theme of Exclusion and Worthlessness, codes such as feeling worthless, feeling excluded, distancing oneself from the team, and not feeling like part of the team were identified from the players’ statements during the interviews. Players expressed that the prolonged time of not being selected made them feel disconnected from the team and excluded. Although they initially perceived this situation as temporary, the thought that it might become permanent led them to experience more negative emotions.

“I felt excluded. It was as if I was no longer part of the team. You work hard every week to earn your spot, but when you don’t see your name on the team sheet, it’s disappointing. At first, I thought it was just a temporary decision, but as the weeks went by, I realised it might be permanent, and that mentally drained me” (Player 2).

Some players even reported feeling worthless as the situation dragged on. Supporting this view, Player 5 shared:

“Not playing had a significant mental impact on me. As a footballer, you want to be on the pitch. Sitting on the bench is demoralising. Week after week of not being selected made me feel worthless” (Player 5).

The second sub-theme, Uncertainty and Incomprehension, encompassed feelings of ambiguity and a lack of clear explanation. Codes such as lack of clarity, inability to understand, and feelings of uncertainty were prominent. Some players stated that they were not informed why they were not being selected, leaving them unable to make sense of the situation. Player 6 expressed this sentiment as follows:

“At first, like every player, I thought being on the bench was a temporary situation. But as the weeks went on, and it became a long-term issue, my morale was seriously affected. What troubled me most was the lack of a clear explanation as to why I wasn’t being played. I was constantly told, ‘You need to be better,’ but it was never made clear what exactly needed improvement. This increased my sense of uncertainty. I felt excluded in a way, and being left out repeatedly also shook my self-confidence. I lost faith in myself, and my motivation dwindled” (Player 6).

The third sub-theme, Loss of Motivation and Self-Confidence, revealed that players experienced a decline in their drive and belief in themselves as the situation persisted. Codes such as low motivation, loss of identity, diminished confidence, feelings of inadequacy, and reduced self-assurance were identified. While players initially tried to stay motivated, the prolonged duration of not playing led to a significant loss of motivation, contributing to lowered self-confidence. Supporting this, players shared the following views:

“At first, I thought it was temporary. I tried to motivate myself, thinking it was just a one-match decision and that I’d be back soon. But as the weeks went on, things changed. Each week I was left on the bench, my morale dropped. I started to feel worthless and questioned my place in the team, which shook my self-esteem. After putting in so much effort, sitting on the sidelines was very hard” (Player 1).

“When you’re constantly on the bench, you eventually lose your motivation. I started to feel physically and mentally drained. I was still giving my all during training, but with every week that I wasn’t included in the squad, my self-confidence diminished. I stopped feeling like part of the team” (Player 8).

“Every week I was left out, I felt lonelier. I missed being part of the team, feeling the pre-match excitement, and fighting on the pitch. The longer I stayed out, the more I felt an emptiness inside that I couldn’t suppress. Feeling like I’d been pushed to the sidelines is every professional footballer’s worst nightmare. My self-confidence was shattered, and I constantly felt like I had done something wrong” (Player 14).

The responses from the football players to the question of how not playing affected them have been examined under three sub-themes: “mental effects,” “effects on physical performance,” and “effects on life outside the field.” In the sub-theme of mental effects, expressions used by the players during the interviews were coded using terms such as low self-confidence, low motivation, and self-questioning. It was observed that players who were unable to play were particularly affected negatively in terms of mental health. Even though they tried to do their best in training, they felt demoralised when they saw that they were not included in the squad or not starting. This led them to question the decision and themselves, ultimately negatively impacting their self-confidence. The following quotes support this view:

“It was a very tough process mentally. I was constantly questioning myself. I put in more effort in training, hoping to catch the coach’s attention. But as I stayed on the bench week after week, I began to feel that my efforts were in vain. I can say that this harmed my self-confidence. In the end, not being on the pitch is not only physically but also psychologically challenging” (Player 2).

Another factor affecting the players when they did not play, the second sub-theme, was the effects on physical performance. The codes used for this sub-theme included decreased interest in training, reduced training performance, and decreased physical performance. It was observed that mental effects were reflected in physical performance. Factors such as reduced motivation and decreased self-confidence led to players becoming less willing to participate in training, which subsequently had a negative impact on their training performance and, therefore, their physical performance. The following quotes support this:

“Not playing was a very challenging process, not just physically but also mentally. You don’t get the opportunity to prove yourself, and this seriously affects your morale. My self-confidence was shaken, and my interest in training decreased. While I used to enjoy being on the pitch, now every day felt like a struggle...” (Player 7).

The third sub-theme, which examines the effects of not playing, is “effects on life outside the field.” Codes used for this sub-theme included arguments with family members, tense living, negative impact on daily life, and feelings of distance from teammates. It was observed that the effects of not playing did not remain confined to the players’ inner worlds but also negatively affected their family lives and normal life outside of football.

“As I stayed on the bench, my self-confidence decreased. At first, I thought being benched was only temporary, but as this situation became permanent, my interest in training decreased. I struggled mentally, and when I couldn’t get the chance to show myself on the pitch, my desire to improve my performance also diminished. This reflected negatively on my life outside of football. I became stressed, and this harmed my personal relationships” (Player 12).

Particularly, issues with family and close circles were mentioned:

“This situation also affected my home life. I had tension in my relationships with my family because the joy I once got from football had completely disappeared” (Player 16).

Upon closer inspection, it is evident that all three sub-themes are interconnected. Mental effects trigger both performance and the effects on life outside the field. Some players mentioned experiencing significant psychological difficulties in this process and sought professional support. One such player stated:

“As I stayed on the bench, I started working even harder to improve because, at some point, I thought I would get back on the pitch. However, as I remained on the bench every week, my expectations began to fade, replaced by frustration. The decreased attention from the coach on me began to cause anxiety about my future. Mentally, I struggled a lot. I decided to seek professional support in this process because I realised, I needed help to overcome this situation psychologically. My life outside of football also began to be affected. My interest in training dropped, my performance in training decreased, and this further negatively impacted me” (Player 6).

Discussion

The findings from this study reveal insightful perspectives on the reasons football players attribute their exclusion from matches, the emotional impact it has on them, and the subsequent effects on their mental and physical well-being and their personal lives. The analysis uncovered two key reasons players attributed to their exclusion from the starting lineup: “Tactical Reasons” and “Coach’s Personal Preferences.” In both categories, players expressed that their exclusion was largely driven by external factors, rather than a perceived decline in their own performance.

The theme “Attributions to Being Excluded” revealed that players often struggled to comprehend their exclusion, attributing it to tactical reasons rather than performance-based issues. These players consistently reported starting the season in good form but suddenly found themselves benched without clear communication from the coach. One player noted that despite believing their performance was adequate, tactical explanations were given without a clear link to their actual performance, leaving them confused and questioning other potential causes for their exclusion. This finding aligns with previous research that suggests players may often feel sidelined due to changes in tactical strategies or the coach’s personal preferences rather than objective performance metrics.

However, there was also a notable subgroup of players who believed their exclusion stemmed from the coach’s personal preferences, further deepening the situation’s emotional impact. This aligns with the “coach-athlete relationship quality”, where the dynamics between coach and player can lead to exclusion based on subjective preferences rather than purely tactical or performance considerations. These attributions highlight a disconnect between players’ perceived effort and actual involvement, further exacerbating uncertainty and frustration.

The emotional consequences of exclusion were profound, as revealed under the theme “Emotions that arise.” Players reported a range of negative emotions, including feelings of exclusion, low self-worth, confusion, and a significant loss of motivation and confidence. As one player expressed, the uncertainty of not knowing whether the exclusion was temporary or permanent created a mental burden that gradually drained their morale. This sense of exclusion led to a loss of identity for some players, as they struggled to reconcile their self-image as athletes with their sidelined role within the team.

The findings suggest that exclusion from the squad, especially without clear communication, triggers a process of identity loss, where players begin to question their place within the team and the broader footballing community. These emotional responses are consistent with the literature, which identifies feelings of inadequacy and lowered self-esteem as common outcomes for athletes who face exclusion from play. The loss of motivation and identity, particularly when prolonged, can undermine not only players’ emotional well-being but also their future engagement in the sport.

The consequences of exclusion extended beyond emotional distress and had tangible effects on both players’ physical performance and their daily lives. The theme “Effects of being benched or excluded” highlighted the interconnectedness between mental and physical well-being. The mental effects, such as low self-confidence and decreased motivation, significantly impacted players’ physical performance, leading to reduced effort in training. This downward spiral is concerning, as it may hinder players’ ability to regain their position or perform at the required level when called upon.

Moreover, the exclusion process appeared to spill over into players’ personal lives, as tensions with family members and a general sense of disconnection from teammates were frequently reported. The mental strain from not playing seemed to affect players’ off-field relationships, highlighting the far-reaching consequences of exclusion in sports. In some cases, players sought external psychological support, demonstrating the significant toll that this experience can have on their mental health.

In success or failure cases, causal attributions reveal an essential link between motivation and emotions [25]. Studies show that athletes tend to use internal attributions when they are successful and external attributions when unsuccessful [44]. In the study, it was determined that the athletes considered not playing as a failure. Coach preferences were seen as the reason for this failure. Attribution theory suggests that outcome and attributional evaluations affect emotion formation. The outcome evaluation automatically assesses performance regarding perceived success and failure. Based on this performance appraisal, general positive or negative emotions, including happiness and sadness, arise depending on the outcome. Outcome evaluation is followed by identifying perceived reasons for success or failure, called attributions, which are considered primary determinants of discrete emotional experience [45]. Britton [46] found a relationship between the athlete’s attribution style and the coach’s behaviours. It was found that there is a negative relationship between internality and democratic behaviour and a positive relationship between stability and positive feedback. Athletes and coaches exhibit distinct responses to success and failure. Success typically breeds heightened self-assurance, while failure often triggers pessimistic ruminations [47]. Football serves as a vivid arena illustrating these emotional reactions. For instance, when a footballer wins a match, there’s usually an increase in self-confidence and joy derived from the team’s success. However, losing a match can instigate a cascade of negative thoughts and emotions within a footballer’s mind.

Coping mechanisms for failure encompass problem-focused, emotion-focused, appraisal-focused, and avoidance-focused responses, with athletes experiencing significant motivational shifts following failure [48]. Football, as a sport, exemplifies these coping strategies. After a defeat, players might engage in introspection, seeking solutions to rectify their performance, or they might channel their emotions through training harder or altering their game tactics.

Moreover, the concept of perfectionism magnifies the adverse emotions associated with failure. High levels of self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism predict increased feelings of shame and guilt in athletes [49]. In football, this can manifest when a player excessively fixates on their mistakes, leading to a diminished sense of self-worth or confidence on the field.

Fear of failure also substantially impacts athletes, influencing their well-being, interpersonal interactions, and overall performance. This fear prompts athletes to adopt various coping strategies [50]. In football, fear of failure might cause players to play conservatively, avoid taking risks on the field, or exhibit hesitancy in critical game moments, impacting the team’s overall dynamics and success.

In football, the reactions to success and failure provide a compelling narrative about the intricacies of human psychology and resilience, showcasing how these emotional responses can significantly influence individual performance and team dynamics. In this research, the attributions of football players toward the coach trigger devaluation, decreased physical effort, stress, and excessive anxiety. The prolonged periods of not playing and the fact that the coaches’ preferences were the most obvious reasons for these revealed feelings of anger and sadness later in the process. Studies have shown that outcome evaluations interact with causal attributions in distinguishing emotions such as pride, gratitude, and anger [51]. In addition, the lack of apparent reasons for not playing, that is, the coach does not give a satisfactory explanation, reduces the athletes’ efforts. Therefore, football players who do not understand the reason for not being on the team experience confusion and psychological unrest [52]. Conflict may ensue depending on the coach’s preference when there is no apparent justification for the athletes not playing—that is, failure. The most obvious reason for this conflict is the feelings that cause the athlete to feel worthless, inadequate, and excluded. Rejeski, Darracott, and Hutslar [53] suggested that the difference between coach and athlete attributions can lead to conflicts that “can be catalytic to negative consequences of an evaluative, motivational, and behavioural nature.” In one of the recent studies on attribution in sport, Prosoli et al. [54] examined the Croatian combat athletes’ attribution patterns for their successes and failures. They found that athletes emphasised psychological factors as key to both success and failure, with a larger focus on psychological aspects in failure instances compared to success.

Footballers become uneasy when they think there is an inconsistency between the coach’s decision and their beliefs (ability, physical and mental effort) that they have the necessary conditions to play. Cooper [55] stated that individuals might become nervous when they cannot consistently change their beliefs about the consequences of events. Therefore, football players began to doubt their abilities and sufficient effort, experience career and future uncertainties, and finally think they were devalued, depending on the causal attributions associated with the coach. According to Försterling [56], indecision about causal inferences is related to feelings of self-doubt, uncertainty, and worthlessness.

When the attributions of the football players are examined, it is seen that they refer to various emotions, they think about leaving the team, and they tend to make compulsory decisions regarding their careers. The obligation to make decisions regarding their careers may be due to the emotions triggered by attributions. In addition, it is seen that football players tend to reduce their physical efforts significantly. Rejeski and Lowe [57] stated that athlete emotions could affect career decisions, training methods, and competition perspectives.

Considering causal inferences of the football players, it is seen that they are willing to make realistic attributions about their current situations and environments. Before deciding about their failure, football players use the information they have obtained from the coach’s choice. For example, football players tended to evaluate their physical condition, trainer preference, and the performance of their teammates before deciding that they were unsuccessful. Försterling [56] emphasised that individuals are motivated to evaluate information rationally and use the information presented to them for causal attribution before deciding about the reasons for performance outcomes.

According to the attribution theory, there are three causal dimensions [25,26]: Locus of causality, stability, and controllability. The locus of causality is associated with whether the cause originates from the individual or a situation outside the individual [29]. The locus of causality in the players’ attributions was the coach. Therefore, most of the attributions were based on the coach’s decisions. Stability is related to the expectation that the cause will change or remain fixed over time [25,58]. Players who did not play for a long time and considered their condition a failure lost their belief that this situation would change over time and started to think that it had become a stabilised condition caused by the coach. They began to believe that they had to leave their environment. When evaluated in terms of controllability, related to the fact that the cause is due to a source other than the person making the attribution or the individual [45], the footballers initially believed they could control the situation with physical effort.

According to the players interviewed, their coaches do not have enough information about the current situation of these athletes. It is evident that the coach-athlete relationship has a vital role in the attributions of these athletes. Studies show that athletes and coaches have different attributions regarding situational factors [59]. This may be due to the possibility that athletes better evaluate their situation. The coach can make inferences about the athlete’s physical condition, but it is more challenging to predict mental conditions. The coach-athlete relationship can be a key factor in mediating the misunderstandings between athletes and coaches about the decisions that football players consider failures. Athletes may accept their coach’s decision when the quality of the relationship between coach and athlete is high.

Conclusion

Since a significant part of football players’ performance depends on the coach’s approach to the athlete, the relationship between the coach and the athlete is essential in keeping the performance of a football player who does not play at an optimal level. Because players’ motivation and performance will be affected by the coach’s attitude towards the athlete, interpersonal relationship processes and conflict resolution strategies [60] used within the attribution theory framework can offer serious solutions to the problems between the coach and these athletes. At this point, it should be noted that coaches can keep all their players mentally and physically ready by clearly explaining their preferences to their athletes. If the football players evaluating their performance do not have enough information and constantly make false inferences, that is, attributions, they will have a high tendency to experience learned helplessness. According to Prapavessis and Carron [61], tennis players experiencing learned helplessness gave internal, permanent, and repetitive scores in the attribution dimensions. Thus, it supports the suggestion that those with learned helplessness have low evaluations of their ability to control and change the factors contributing to poor performance. Maier and Seligman [62] stated that learned helplessness tends to increase when false attributions persist. Preventing false attributions may be possible by preventing athletes from misinterpreting the information. An explanation of the decision made by the coach can enable the athletes to understand the information and shape their attributions correctly. Rees et al. [24,63] stated that athletes might not perceive all the information presented to them by their coaches and teammates, ignore some of the feedback or distort the importance of the feedback.

Clear explanations to the athletes about their coach choices can prevent coach-athlete conflict. Encouraging communication between the coach and the athlete will not only enable the athlete to understand the coach’s preferences but also help the coach to understand the reasons for the athlete’s behaviour. Consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus information suggested by Rees et al. [24] can be used to overcome the negative impact of misattributions, which turn into behaviours or are common in the players participating in our research. Future research should examine the role of social interaction in formulating the attributions of football players. Social expectations are effective in the athlete’s attributions to coach preferences and failure. Since social effects will create attribution bias [64], the evaluations of the attributions shaped by family, manager, teammate, and fan expectations of football players are important in terms of team sports, where keeping the athlete’s performance at an optimal level contributes to team performance. Such research can provide important information to coaches and athletes, especially sports psychologists, in enhancing team performance.