Manwell Pablo Posted 9 July 2008 Posted 9 July 2008 Right as sort of manager and proffesional penalty misser I decree that whichever of these choices wins this week long pole ending at 11 am on Wednesday July 16th, will be how we pick the team for any future matches against other forums. So we don't end up having this discussion every time we play a game. Not that we will ever get 22 people turn up to play a game v another forum but there you go.
bigneville Posted 9 July 2008 Posted 9 July 2008 Some like OriginalRobboFox's idea in the other thread seems good to me. Foxestalk Attendances in profile.
allard7 Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 weres the option about bringin other people into the equation ?
Manwell Pablo Posted 10 July 2008 Author Posted 10 July 2008 weres the option about bringin other people into the equation ? The bottom four options are all options which would allow those that have not played before to break into the squad. It's not my fault they aint winning!
Finnegan Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 weres the option about bringin other people into the equation ? You're one of the few "new" people that seem fussed, from what I've read on the thread so far. You'll probably play, mate, chill beans.
Flynny Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 I went for option one, because it probably suits me better. I assume others have done the same with option two. If there was an option I thought was fair to everyone I'd have gone with that instead, but some combination of one and two would be the best idea, really. Or say no more people on the list, double check everyone can make the time and date and watch it drop down to 20 within days.
AoWW Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 How do I vote on behalf of 'new' people who haven't yet joined the forum and would be ruled out of playing in future games by options 1 and 2? (rhetorical question, by the way, don't feel you need to shoot me down in flames!) The bottom four options are all options which would allow those that have not played before to break into the squad.It's not my fault they aint winning! Just curious, how would you judge on 'talent' if you've never seen them play?
Finnegan Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 How do I vote on behalf of 'new' people who haven't yet joined the forum and would be ruled out of playing in future games by options 1 and 2?(rhetorical question, by the way, don't feel you need to shoot me down in flames!) Just curious, how would you judge on 'talent' if you've never seen them play? No offense, I think you've got the right idea n'all and it's touching (sorry if that sounds condescending), but you're championing a cause that just doesn't really need to be championed. The hype will die down in a week or less, likely, hell it seems to be slowing already - and from the ashes we'll be able to pick a squad. "New" people have joined in on pretty much every event so far and gotten along with people fine. Even relative forum "outsiders" like Foxhateram. You should probably name and shame whichever dickhead was griping at you so we can give his place to someone else, but beyond that I really think this has been a fat load of melodrama over nothing.
AoWW Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 No offense, I think you've got the right idea n'all and it's touching (sorry if that sounds condescending), but you're championing a cause that just doesn't really need to be championed.The hype will die down in a week or less, likely, hell it seems to be slowing already - and from the ashes we'll be able to pick a squad. "New" people have joined in on pretty much every event so far and gotten along with people fine. Even relative forum "outsiders" like Foxhateram. You should probably name and shame whichever dickhead was griping at you so we can give his place to someone else, but beyond that I really think this has been a fat load of melodrama over nothing. *sigh* Exactly. Look as far as I can see, we're all basically saying the same thing. Chances are when it actually comes to the game the numbers will have been reduced to such an extent that those that want to play can. What has bothered me all the way through is the 'me, me, me' mentality of some individuals who are ridiculously precious about getting their name on the list, fighting for the place they feel they "deserve" or "have earned" etc, etc. It's worse than a fooking meat market! Surely what we're left with when 'the hype dies down' is pretty much an open door policy of 'turn up if you're interested and you'll get a game'. I realise it was slightly different for the 6-a-side as teams needed to be sorted ahead of time, but that seems to have run very smoothly. I think, however, people do need to be upfront about the likelyhood of them actually being there for these 'inter forum' games. Sure, I accept that someone's always gonna have a situation where they find out at the last minute that they can't make it - that's fair enough, but at the Talking Balls game, for example, the drop out rate was high. To nick part of Hullfox's quote from the other thread: I don't envy whoever needs to sort this out but I'll happily remove my name from the ever growing list. Personally I'd have loved to be involved in the TB match but by time I saw it there were 23 interested so I didn't add my name, then it transpires only 17 turned up so that seems unfair to those who could have been there. He missed out on that game because of the way the numbers were looking and is now suggesting he takes his name of the list for the LTLFFC game for the same reason. I think what some people need to be a little more conscious of is that people like Hullfox, and others, who have further to travel need to feel that they can just show up and will get some decent time on the pitch. They're gonna pull out if it looks like lots of people are involved because it's not worth the time and travel costs of turning up on the off chance. Time and time again I'm reading 'you'll probably get a game', 'you might be able to play'. Try and put yourselves in their situation for a minute - would you really be that committed based on these kinda vague assurances when it already looks like there's a long list of the regular players? Threads like this that seem to be trying to dictate on ongoing policy for "how we pick the team for any future matches against other forums" just seem unnecessarily prescriptive in my opinion.
Manwell Pablo Posted 10 July 2008 Author Posted 10 July 2008 *sigh* Exactly. Look as far as I can see, we're all basically saying the same thing. Chances are when it actually comes to the game the numbers will have been reduced to such an extent that those that want to play can. What has bothered me all the way through is the 'me, me, me' mentality of some individuals who are ridiculously precious about getting their name on the list, fighting for the place they feel they "deserve" or "have earned" etc, etc. It's worse than a fooking meat market! Surely what we're left with when 'the hype dies down' is pretty much an open door policy of 'turn up if you're interested and you'll get a game'. I realise it was slightly different for the 6-a-side as teams needed to be sorted ahead of time, but that seems to have run very smoothly. I think, however, people do need to be upfront about the likelyhood of them actually being there for these 'inter forum' games. Sure, I accept that someone's always gonna have a situation where they find out at the last minute that they can't make it - that's fair enough, but at the Talking Balls game, for example, the drop out rate was high. To nick part of Hullfox's quote from the other thread: He missed out on that game because of the way the numbers were looking and is now suggesting he takes his name of the list for the LTLFFC game for the same reason. I think what some people need to be a little more conscious of is that people like Hullfox, and others, who have further to travel need to feel that they can just show up and will get some decent time on the pitch. They're gonna pull out if it looks like lots of people are involved because it's not worth the time and travel costs of turning up on the off chance. Time and time again I'm reading 'you'll probably get a game', 'you might be able to play'. Try and put yourselves in their situation for a minute - would you really be that committed based on these kinda vague assurances when it already looks like there's a long list of the regular players? Threads like this that seem to be trying to dictate on ongoing policy for "how we pick the team for any future matches against other forums" just seem unnecessarily prescriptive in my opinion. And I think you need to conscious of the fact that, if 40 people turn up, I can't gurantee that for him, or in fact, anyone. These things are literally nightmarish to run when you have anything more than 17 players (some people make it harder by not reacting well to being subbed sometimes which really gets on my nerves) which is why we can't really have more than 22. This, as has been said, probabley wont matter in the long run it just lets everyone know where the stand and stops bickering and discusion of how to get a team of 22 or less out of 30 volunteers. I'm really not bothred how this is done but it needs to be. Hullfox also said he doesn't envy those who have to sort this out and with good reason! EDIT: Sorry. I'd like to add, in Hullfoxs case, having played three times he would almost definitley get in the first 22.
Finnegan Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 (some people make it harder by not reacting well to being subbed sometimes which really gets on my nerves) No names mentioned, eh, Kilworth? Jamie?
Manwell Pablo Posted 10 July 2008 Author Posted 10 July 2008 No names mentioned, eh, Kilworth? Jamie? Thankfully I've never managed Jamie, but yeah Kilworth was quite bad for it in the 021/u21 game. Much better against Talking Balls, as he was knackered
OriginalRobboFOX Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 He missed out on that game because of the way the numbers were looking and is now suggesting he takes his name of the list for the LTLFFC game for the same reason. Yes but had Hullfox left his name on the list he would have played. I havent been to any matches yet when people, regardless of their location, have missed out. I can also guarantee that there will not be a match when 20+ people show up....
Finnegan Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 I can also guarantee that there will not be a match when 20+ people show up.... You mean like the three U21/O21 games or the six aside?
Manwell Pablo Posted 10 July 2008 Author Posted 10 July 2008 You mean like the three U21/O21 games or the six aside? I was gonna, having more than 22 people isn't actually that rare an occurance. Then again quite a few people will be off on their holidays this time of year.
OriginalRobboFOX Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 You mean like the three U21/O21 games or the six aside? For one team I mean.... Granted, there has only been one game against another forum. But what were peoples excuses for not turning up to that?? We had less than 20 then....
Manwell Pablo Posted 10 July 2008 Author Posted 10 July 2008 For one team I mean.... Granted, there has only been one game against another forum. But what were peoples excuses for not turning up to that?? We had less than 20 then.... Yeah but it were raining innit, and we already knew a load of regulars weren't turning up, it were the irregulars who let us down. Which is another reason why, in my opinion, we should have priority.
Finnegan Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 For one team I mean.... Granted, there has only been one game against another forum. But what were peoples excuses for not turning up to that?? We had less than 20 then.... I was taking the mick a bit really, but yeah I generally agree to be honest.
Dr The Singh Posted 10 July 2008 Posted 10 July 2008 A suggestion, do a points system, you get points for a: Each FT match you have played b: For the number of post c: Additional points for people who have played and travelled from a far d: Lose points for non attendance e: Footballing ability etc It's only a idea, i'm sure some one on the forum with loads of time could adapt it and make it useful!!! If it's a shit idea, ignore it!!!
Manwell Pablo Posted 10 July 2008 Author Posted 10 July 2008 A suggestion, do a points system, you get points for a: Each FT match you have played b: For the number of post c: Additional points for people who have played and travelled from a far d: Lose points for non attendance e: Footballing ability etc It's only a idea, i'm sure some one on the forum with loads of time could adapt it and make it useful!!! If it's a shit idea, ignore it!!! Shit....no....overly complicated.....yes.
Manwell Pablo Posted 11 July 2008 Author Posted 11 July 2008 How do I vote on behalf of 'new' people who haven't yet joined the forum and would be ruled out of playing in future games by options 1 and 2?(rhetorical question, by the way, don't feel you need to shoot me down in flames!) Just curious, how would you judge on 'talent' if you've never seen them play? Not relevent as it was never going to win anyway
Maybes Posted 11 July 2008 Posted 11 July 2008 Those that have played the most games? (Internal/external) .....what does that involve?
syston_fox Posted 11 July 2008 Posted 11 July 2008 Those that have played the most games? (Internal/external) .....what does that involve? The O21 v U21s, the tournament and the TB game
Hullfox Posted 11 July 2008 Posted 11 July 2008 Yes but had Hullfox left his name on the list he would have played. I havent been to any matches yet when people, regardless of their location, have missed out. I can also guarantee that there will not be a match when 20+ people show up.... I didn't realise that I'd actually taken my name off the list to be honest. As far as I am aware my post said that I'll happily remove my name from the ever growing list. i.e if it made things easier. Maybe one of the criteria should have been to give priority to those with fewest years left to play football, some of you guys have got 20 years to get a game in. Sadly with age expectancy in the North, that's not the case for me. I actually played in the three games that I have attended because it was a bloody good laugh and there are some top notch people around. It seems to have got too serious now and I'm not sure if it's much fun for the people who are expected to sort it all out - some people are going to be mighty upset.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.