Lynz took a knock just after halfway through the game and came off. Imran, who had been playing in an earlier game, and was still watching, came in for him. I've discussed it with both of them, and will apportion the payment $7 from Lynz and $5 from Imran. By doing so, it will also be recorded as a game played by Imran.
not that $5 is a substantial amount of money and the issue has apparently been discussed with both players involved so i have nothing to add to that. however, for future reference - why would imran be charged $5 in the above situation? he was nominated to be in the line-up and he volunteered to be goalkeeper, he then was benched by rajiv and after 40 min into the game he did everybody a favour by joining a losing team for the last 20 min. i think the principle of charging him for that is questionable.
if the idea is to avoid the full charge for an injured player then we could:
a) spread the cost for that player over all players from the team that fouled him b) spread the cost for that player over all players from both teams c) add the cost to the player that fouled him d) my preference - still charge the injured player the full amount.
Rainer, I've moved your post here, and added the passage you are responding to.
The general rule is that a player pays the usual amount, even if injured during the game.
In this case, Lynz went off with a knock and Imran came on in his place. I'm not sure if Lynz was fit enough to come back on, but he was fit enough to play again today. However, with Imran on in his place, he didn't come back on yesterday.
Imran had been playing the earlier game from 4 to 5 pm. As we were still one player short as at 2.51 pm:
I need to go down to Turf City either today or tomorrow. I can go down today, and since I'm there, I can play, so Imran doesn't have to play keeper.
If it had been a player we picked up at Turf City who filled in for Lynz, Lynz could have come back on for him. As it was Imran, Lynz didn't. No criticism of anyone, just a fact. In the end, as a one-off, I felt it was fair to apportion the cost, and both Imran and Lynz were ok with it. We played up to 6.15 pm, so Imran played at least 30 minutes to Lynz's 40.
There is no general principle to be drawn from this.
As there will be twice as many places available on Sunday as there are on Saturday, I need to encourage those who only want to play once over the weekend, but can play either day, to stick with Sunday for now. Therefore, from next week onwards, the price of the Saturday game will go up 50 cents to $12 while the price of the Sunday game will be cut by 50 cents to $11.
The Thursday night game at East Coast is now filling up reasonably well, in fact better than the Thursday night game at Khalsa. There is no longer any reason to keep the Thursday night game at East Coast cheaper than the Tuesday night game at East Coast or the Thursday night game at Khalsa, so from next week onwards, it will be $10 per player.
The Cage @ Kallang, the Premier Pitch @ Khalsa and the Premier Pitch @ Turf City have all put up their prices since December 2011. I can bear the increase for The Cage and the Premier Pitch @ Khalsa. However, I have to pass on the increase for the Premier Pitch @ Turf City to the players.
They say that with the new head tenant, their rental will go up 350% from March 2012. Not only have the Turf City people increased their prices but they have reduced some of the small discounts I get for bulk booking and paying in advance. Their prices to me have gone up by 20 to 28%.
With effect from 1 March 2012, I have to put up the price for games at Turf City by $2 per player. That's a 17% increase for the Saturday game and an 18% increase for the Sunday game, a lower percentage increase than Turf City's increase to me.
That will be $14 per player for the Saturday game and $13 per player for the Sunday game (with effect from March 2012).
Apart from payment by Paypal, the payment modes post on the Payment Information board provides account details for two bank accounts, one with POSB and the other with UOB, into which payment can be made by internet banking or direct deposit via ATM, cash or cheque.
Several players still tell me they prefer to pay cash. If I'm present at a game, then of course, you can pay me cash. If I'm not at a game, and payment via internet banking, ATM or cheque is not available to you, you can still deposit cash. Recently, I have been e-mailing players who owe me for previous games and say they are only able to pay cash to inform them:
If the regulars consider the current payment too much, we can consider moving the weekend game to an uncovered pitch, which will be much cheaper. Or we can stick to the small pitch at Turf City, which also works out cheaper.
Your math is wrong Look Liew. You're asking those who play weeknight games to subsidize the weekend games. Would you subsidize someone else's game?
The math for the weekend games alone is set out in the earlier post.
The weeknight games are played on uncovered pitches, which are much cheaper than the covered pitches at Turf City. Also, numbers are between 12 to 14 (8 to 10 for Kallang), not 14 to 16, for the weeknight games.
The way you work it out, those playing weeknights would pay $28 more per game so that those playing weekends can pay less, which could be below cost even!
Two regulars voted as selectors by the other players, and then selecting their respective teams, is the way forward. ....
I may also start giving a small discount to the two team selectors, perhaps $2 each. This may be reduced to $1 if the scoreline is too one-sided or other issues arise during the game for which the team selectors should be responsible.
If we don't get two selectors, either because players don't get enough votes, or players decline to be selectors, I will suggest line ups as I do now. However, the line ups may be delayed to less than 3 hours before the game.
For taking on additional responsibilities, the two team selectors will be given $2 credit each. I know it's token, but it's better than nothing.
If the scoreline is too one-sided, the credit for both selectors will be reduced by $1 as they didn't balance the teams well enough.
If other issues arise during the game resulting from a team selector failing in his other responsibilities, the credit for that selector may also be reduced by $1. If a selector feels that a player on his team repeatedly ignores his exhortations to play by the rules or in the right spirit, he can provide me with the details and I will remind the player concerned. If there was any reduction in credit for that selector in this regard, it may be reversed.
Although it is token, the $2 credit is for taking on additional responsibilities, including:
* Agreeing on balanced line ups. If there is no agreement, the credit will be $1 less. If the line ups are very unbalanced, the credit may be $1 less. * Ensuring their team plays in the right spirit and according to the rules. If serious issues arise in this respect, the credit may be $1 less.
The credit will only be given after the post-game report has been posted, at the same time as the $2 credit for the first report. If issues are raised later, any reversal may be later as well.
Since the two games on Sunday 6 May 2012, even if there are insufficient votes for team selectors (minimum of 2 players with at least 2 votes each), I have been appointing two players with votes as team captains.
The two team captains can agree on changes to the line ups, and have the other responsibilities of team selectors.
By default, the team selectors are also team captains. It is of course open for team selectors to appoint someone else on their team as team captain. Where are there insufficient votes for team selectors, but there are players with votes, 2 of them will be team captains.
The responsibilities of team selectors other than those relating to line ups are actually those of team captains:
I've been reflecting the credits for first reports and team selectors/captains in the same way as I do payments. However, I do not actually receive anything, so it's not good accounting practice. In fact, I should deal with such credits in the same way I deal with penalties, under a separate section. The "Penalties" section of the current balances spreadsheet will be re-named "Credits & Penalties". Credits will be reflected as positive numbers (black) while Penalties as negative numbers (red). From June 2012 onwards, the confirmation of credits will be on the report thread, as the credits are only given after the first report, instead of the monthly payment thread. Likewise, penalties are confirmed on the schedule thread, not the monthly payment thread.
* Internet banking transfers (POSB and UOB) * Paypal * Cash deposits (by ATMs or cash-deposit machines) * Cheque deposits
I sometimes go down to a game to collect cash, but I'll only do this if the player concerned pays a significant amount ($50 or more) to credit. I'm not going to go out of my way to go down to a game just to collect $10 from one or two players.
I'm prepared to be more relaxed with:
* Players who usually maintain credit of at least $20, but haven't gotten round to topping up. * Players who are prepared to be flexible about which games they play, and will switch games to make up numbers.
What is more annoying are players who insist on playing a particular game, take up a place in that game, sometimes at the expense of other players who have credit, don't want to maintain credit, but still take ages to make payment for games they have already played.
I am considering two options:
* Everyone maintain a minimum balance of $20. * Putting up the payment per player by $1 across the board, but giving those who prepay a $1 credit.
In the meantime, I will continue to be flexible with those who maintain credit or pay in timely manner, or are prepared to come in to a game to make up numbers for a game, but stricter with those who only want to play particular games but only make payment after several reminders, sometimes for 2 or 3 unpaid games, weeks after they played.
* if the player has credit, I will deduct payment from his credit. * if the player has no credit, I will deduct payment from the credit of the player putting the name down.
If you pay for another player, you can always collect from him at the game itself. If you are not playing, I suggest you do not put down names for others, unless you are sure payment arrangements have been made.
For guest players, unless the player has previously paid for himself, I will look to the player putting the guest's name down for him for payment, even if he indicates the guest will pay for himself.
Occasionally, where I put a player down to make up numbers for a game, and the player is not familiar with the payment methods, I will ask him to pay one of the regulars, either a player who he is familiar with, the team selector/captain for his team, or the player with the most credit balance. I will deduct the payment from the credit of the receiving player once he confirms he has received payment.
Due to Premier Pitch's new payment terms (which take effect from 1 October 2012), the Saturday and Sunday games on the covered big pitch will be a flat $14 per player. There will no longer be a $1 discount for the Sunday game.
However, as I am still aiming to have a second game on Sunday (from 8 to 9 pm, at Indian Association, 7-a-side), there are more places available on Sunday than Saturday. Also, the Saturday game fills up much faster than the Sunday game at Turf City. Therefore, I will keep the Sunday game on the covered pitch at Turf City at $1 less per player than the Saturday game on the same pitch for now.
The Indian Association pitch is cheaper than the 7-a-side pitches at Khalsa and East Coast, so it works out to $8 per player. As an extra incentive for this new game, I've been giving $1 off for the game at Indian Association, both on 23 and 30 September 2012, so that it is $7 per player. Nevertheless, we had no one down for the game on 23 September 2012, and only 1 player down for 30 September 2012. I will continue with the $1 discount until the game fills up regularly.
Actually, the Premier Pitch's new payment terms for the covered big pitch at Turf City does benefit me in a small way if I pay more games in advance, so I can actually reduce both the Saturday and Sunday games to $13 per player.
Anyway, it is more straightforward to have the same payment for both weekend games on the big covered pitch at Turf City.
I guess it doesn't make much difference if its $1 or $2.
For team selectors/captains at Kallang, I'll keep the credit at $1 each.
However, for first reports, on the odd occasion that first reports have been provided for games at Kallang, I have been giving a credit of $2, so I'll stick with that. It's still an hour game, usually high scoring, so the effort in writing a report is no different from a 7 or 8-a-side game.
As I'll deal with credits generally on this thread, I will rename it "Payments & credits".
* Everyone maintain a minimum balance of $20. * Putting up the payment per player by $1 across the board, but giving those who prepay a $1 credit.
I think both will be difficult to implement, and will be unlikely to achieve the desired objective of ensuring prompt payment.
It is annoying when players continue to put their names down for games when they haven't yet paid for previous games despite several reminders. However, they do usually pay. I do operate on trust.
More worrying are players who owe for one or more previous games, and then don't play again, and don't pay despite several reminders. It leaves me wondering if they ever will pay. From now on, any approved player who owes payment for more than a month will have their account disabled. They can still play, but they have to contact me to put their name down for a game. I won't allow other approved players to put their name down either. Players whose accounts are disabled for non-payment will have "(O)" (for owing) added before their Display Name - better than "(O$P$)" I guess.
* Those who owe for previous game, and the amount owed. * Those who are short, and the amount by which they are short. * Those who have not paid yet. * The rest have prepaid.
For those who have prepaid, I also provide details of those who will be short for their next game, plus their credit balance.
You'd think players owing for previous games or with insufficient credit would have ample time to top up or make payment before their next game, but too often that isn't the case.
From now on, when the team selector poll is put up, or sometime before the poll closes, I will indicate against the names down for each game who owe for previous games or are short, the amount they owe for previous games, plus the one they are down for.
If there is no team selector poll, I will do so 12 to 6 hours before the game.
Reminding those who owe for previous games to make payment is one of the most time consuming aspects of maintaining the GIFFA system, which really shouldn't be the case. I will need to review the rules on payment. Bottom line is that I haven't been enforcing the rules I introduced in November 2011:
* Players who owe me for more than one game can only be in reserve for any game until they make payment. * Players who owe me any amount cannot put names down for others until they make payment.
They are not easy to enforce.
For now, the amount of leeway I give to players who owe for previous games will depend how much they top up each time - those who top up $50 each time will get some leeway, those who top up $100 each time, more, those who top up $200 or more, even more. Trust works both ways.
I'll also be more flexible with players who are flexible - willing to come in for a game that is short of players, rather than sticking to the more popular games.
Payments received are also recorded on the payment information thread for the current month. The record of payment serves as the only "receipt". In order to minimise the work required, I check and update payments received not more than once a day, currently about 6 hours before that day's game (so about 3 pm for weeknight games scheduled for 9 pm and 11 am for weekend games scheduled for 5 pm).
Sometimes, payment is received after I check, so the payment is only reflected on a subsequent day.
As set out in the post above, I will from now on be providing payment information on the schedule thread between the time the team selector poll is put up and closes (that is, at least 6 hours before the game), rather than 6 hours or less before the game, so checking for payments is no longer tied to providing payment information.
The spreadsheet is also updated to reflect usage of payment or credit for games, as deductions, game by game. This is based on the players for the game, as reflected on the schedule thread.
However, the latest spreadsheet is not uploaded daily. Currently, I am only uploading the latest spreadsheet once a week, usually on Friday, but sometimes delayed until Saturday morning.
In the interim, there are further payments received, and credits, and occasionally penalties, and further usage for games. Until the latest spreadsheet is uploaded, the information can be found on the message board, as described above.