|
|
Post by Rajiv on Aug 20, 2011 12:02:28 GMT 8
Timmy has suggested line ups last two Saturdays ( 6 August 2011 and 13 August 2011), and there was some feedback on last Sunday's suggested line ups. .... I prefer comments to be provided on the schedule thread or by private message on the message board. SMS is ok, but I do try to cut down on SMSes. It is preferable if I receive the following types of comments before I put up my proposed line ups: * Suggested line ups, or partial line ups. * Colour preference. * Players you'd like to be on the same side with. * Players you don't want to be on the same side with (reasons should be provided  ) After the proposed line ups are put up, I'd be grateful if comments could be limited to the balance of the teams and sensible player swaps. Other than players you don't want to be on the same side with (which is likely to be sensitive), I don't see why the other types of comment cannot be on the schedule thread. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Aug 20, 2011 12:04:15 GMT 8
Thanks for the response Fai. As I said earlier (above), it really depends who the other 7 players are. If the other 7 players in one team would not be significantly weaker, I may be prepared to have it that way. However, I don't want to infer that just because 7 players have their names put down together, they should be in the same team. I would be grateful if the person(s) putting 7 names down make the request on the schedule thread at the time they put the names down, or at least before the line ups are put up. Other players can then also comment on the request. If a request is made, but I don't think the teams are balanced, I will consider swapping just the player making the request (and maybe one other) to see if the sides can be balanced, without splitting up all 7 players |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Aug 20, 2011 14:23:57 GMT 8
After I put up the suggested line ups: The comments of regulars who have withdrawn, or are in reserve, would be particularly useful, as they may have an idea of what would be balanced, yet not have a vested interest. |
|
|
|
Post by Fai on Aug 20, 2011 16:27:10 GMT 8
Sure. I think lets try this method and see hows the response. I will indicate whenever i would like to keep the 7 together as a team and see if there's any comments.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Aug 21, 2011 11:58:39 GMT 8
.... I've noticed an increasing tendency to overreact to being stuck with uneven numbers. I try to ensure every game has even numbers, but from time to time, we get stuck at odd numbers (not necessarily due to late withdrawals). The possible solutions: * Pick up a player at the venue itself. * Modify the rules with the team with an extra player handicapped by where they can score from (eg, from within the D). * One player switching over halfway through, with the handicap switching over too. Treat the two halves as two legs, "home" and "away". The side with the extra player is at "home". It is of course disappointing when we are stuck with uneven numbers, in the same way it is disappointing when for one reason or another, we don't get balanced teams. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Aug 24, 2011 15:50:06 GMT 8
That is because the group of 7 who want to play together are gaining no significant advantage other than the fun of being a group of friends/relatives playing on the same team. In fact, if the other team is signficantly stronger, they are willingly taking on the disadvantage of facing a stronger team. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Aug 27, 2011 17:30:44 GMT 8
.... When I put the name of a player I don't personally know for his first game, I will send him an e-mail which will include the following: This covers several recurring issues: * Line ups. .... |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 1, 2011 9:41:23 GMT 8
Two regulars selecting their teams has always been an option. It was raised regularly on the old blog, including in the following posts: * Choosing Sides (Part 2), on 12 April 2009. * Rankings & Line Ups: Some Themes, on 18 April 2009. * Challenges, on 29 April 2009. I've suggested the selection method for tonight's game at Sports Planet: Rai, Kelvin Au, as all the players are known to the two of you, can you pick your teams (Rai white, Kelvin red)? .... An easy method is for the two selectors to take turns to pick players - Selector A picks first, Selector B picks two, Selector A picks another two, and so on until Selector A is left with the last player - first suggested by Tom in October 2008. After the selection process is completed, the two selectors can agree to swap players. Once the teams are finalised, either selector can post it on schedule thread. No one else need know the order in which the players were picked. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 10, 2011 10:41:36 GMT 8
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 13, 2011 23:27:46 GMT 8
After I suggested the line ups for tonight's game at Sports Planet: I feel this looks very much like last week's, may I suggest: .... For the game at Sports Planet Thursday before last: Rai, Kelvin Au, as all the players are known to the two of you, can you pick your teams (Rai white, Kelvin red)? .... .... Guess not. .... For tomorrow's game at Khalsa: Fai and Rainer have been doing the reports for the Wednesday night games. Would they like to agree on the line ups? Only proviso is that they cannot be on the same team. They're also familiar with all the other players .... If the two of you are doing the line ups, would one of you post it on this thread at least 6 hours before the game (ie, by 3 pm tomorrow). will be offered where: * The places are filled up at least 9 to 24 hours before the game. * There are two registered players who regularly play in that game. * They are familiar with the other players. It will be offered to players who contribute significantly on the message board, including doing reports. They will be invited to post the proposed line ups at least 6 hours before the game. If they don't do so by then, I will suggest the line ups as usual. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 15, 2011 7:26:34 GMT 8
After I suggested Fai and Rainer agree on the line ups for last night's game: i have to withdraw due to some work committment. sry. Would like to suggest Fai, Vincent yzq, roy thian, Joel, ruy, zong zheng and Stanley in whites. Any objection? .... No responses, so I'll leave it as: Whites: Fai, Vincent YZQ, Roy Thian, Joel L, Ruy, Zong Zheng and Stanley C Reds: Edmund T, Johnny, Ee Hwa, Wee Teck, Lynz, Boris, Bobby Any further comments? Everyone, please bring both a white top and red top in any event. .... . .... I don't know many of the players, so I really couldn't comment on the line ups myself. .... In such circumstances, I can only leave it to the other regulars to comment. I think those who played last week and this week might agree that last week's game, where the players were mixed up, and ended in an 8-8 draw, was more fun than this week's game. Both times, Fai suggested the line ups. Last week, because there were 8 of them (Fai and contacts), they split themselves up 4 per team. .... As set out above, it really depends on who are the other 7. If there are too many one sided games, players who might make up the other 7 begin to lose interest, and sustainability of the game suffers. I believe that was what was beginning to happen with the Thursday game at Khalsa. For today, I have managed to get 14 for Khalsa without a team of 7 from David T, and even with a second game at Sports Planet, which goes to show there is a demand for places, just not to have the chase a game against an organized team of 7. For those who want to play as a team of 7, increasingly, it will have to be limited to specially arranged challenge matches. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 15, 2011 12:08:31 GMT 8
As Fai mentioned, the first half hr was fairly tight. Reds with new faces were trying to contain Whites (Fai & frens) who have been playing together for quite a number of games. Their familiarity showed in the later part of the game as they passed around very well to score their goals. .... and we needed Rainer's goalscoring instincts.. !! (Boris signed up because he saw yr name, Rainer!) .... As pointed out above, the team of 7 always have the advantages of familiarity and better organization. As also pointed out above, whether having the remaining 7 in one team is balanced depends on the personnel. .... Good workout played in the best spirit. Once a rapport builds up between regular players, do the team of 7 really need to stick together as one team? |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 16, 2011 8:25:27 GMT 8
Kelvin Au put together a team of 7 for last night's extra game at Sports Planet. To summarize the position on keeping a group of 7 together as one team in our regular games: * If I am suggesting the line ups, I am very reluctant to keep a group of 7 together as one team. I may do so only if it is reasonably clear that the other 7 are at least as strong. I may be more flexible for newer or extra games. * Where all or nearly all the players in a game are regulars, I may invite two of the more regular players (more likely two who contribute significantly on the message board), to agree on their teams. The two of them cannot be on the same team. They can agree to keep a group of 7 together. One of the two will of course be on the other team - and will have to bear the responsibility for any complaints about uneven teams .
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 18, 2011 11:32:39 GMT 8
Rajseran SMSed me to suggest 4 players per team, with the rest to be filled. I will accommodate such suggestions in my suggestion if I can adjust the remaining players so that the line ups are at least as favourable to the opposing team as I might have suggested myself. .... Of course, if I don't think I can get balanced sides by accommodating such a suggestion, I will ignore it. And other players are always free to comment on suggestions as to line ups, whether from me or any other player. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 22, 2011 22:41:34 GMT 8
We have a few pairs of brothers. And then there are of course Fai, Ruy, Stanley C and Shawn K, who are cousins. And several pairs of friends who put their names down together. Or as a group of three. Or who ask to be put on the same team. .... Last Sunday, Arijit suggested that we try Raminder and Nawal in separate teams. Maybe next time. .... I tried it once, the following week, but that was a rather makeshift game, where we had a couple of new players, and we ended up swapping Nawal back to the same team as Raminder. I'd rather the initiative to be on separate teams came from the players themselves. .... As much as I enjoy playing with my brother (because we understand each other's play well), I do not mind being in seperate teams once in a while. .... Tonight, I put the brothers Daniel T and Edmund T on separate teams, but I checked with them first. Sometimes, it takes time. .... Once a rapport builds up between regular players, do the team of 7 really need to stick together as one team? Maybe a bit more time for a group of 2 or 3 friends/relatives - because it's easier to keep them on the same team, it's also harder to 'force" them to be in separate teams. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 24, 2011 15:20:17 GMT 8
.... Two selectors picking their respective teams will be offered where: * The places are filled up at least 9 to 24 hours before the game. * There are two registered players who regularly play in that game. * They are familiar with the other players. It will be offered to players who contribute significantly on the message board, including doing reports. They will be invited to post the proposed line ups at least 6 hours before the game. If they don't do so by then, I will suggest the line ups as usual. I've invited the following players this week: * Kelvin Au and Gilbert L on Tuesday. They didn't take it up. * Fai and Wee Teck on Wednesday. They agreed on first 7 names against remaining 7 names. * A more limited invitation to Rajseran and Raminder for today's game to fill 2 places in the team with Raminder (with Rajseran in the opposing side), and agree on any further swaps. Didn't work out as there was a spate of withdrawals, including Raminder, who had to work. I'll increasingly invite two players to pick their teams. .... An easy method is for the two selectors to take turns to pick players - Selector A picks first, Selector B picks two, Selector A picks another two, and so on until Selector A is left with the last player .... Another alternative is for a reserve to suggest line ups. He won't know which side he'll end up in should he get in, so he'll have to try to be fair. I'd been thinking about it for a few weeks, but Rajseran has pre-empted me by suggesting the line ups for tomorrow's game while still in reserve. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 7, 2011 7:15:17 GMT 8
.... We tend to focus too much on line ups, and underplay ... other factors. .... .... Other factors include: * Team formation and organization. * Fitness and form of individual players. New players can be significant factor as well. Not only can a new player whose weakness is not factored into to the line ups shift the balance against his team, a new player who is very strong can shift the balance in favour of his team. The solution factored into the system is player swaps, but there is a reluctance to swap players, especially in more competitive games. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 14, 2011 13:56:04 GMT 8
.... The thing about challenge matches is our opponents are usually organized and a team that has played with each other a long time with better apprehend and grasp of the game. .... That is why, as repeated several times in this thread, I have been reluctant to have a group of friends play as one team in our regular games. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 15, 2011 18:22:48 GMT 8
.... .... To the extent I have the information, I also try to get a mix of: .... I try not to spend too much time on line ups, but I do give due consideration to the various factors, and more broadly that: * each team has a similar mix of stronger and weaker players. * each team has sufficient experience and leadership. Each game is different, and I don't expect everyone to agree on what amounts to balanced sides. I do invite comments after I suggest line ups, and I prefer comments to be posted on the schedule thread. .... .... If anyone thinks the side they are on is significantly weaker, you can let me know, and I will switch you to the other side. .... .... I don't think that's gonna solve anything. ..... .... It's not the only way to deal with perceived imbalance, but unless perception of imbalance is more widespread, I'm somewhat reluctant to make more substantial changes to the line ups. As always, the more feedback there is, the better. ... For the player concerned, at least he can't be unhappy about being on the side he perceives to be weaker, and can't complain about the line ups no matter what the result. . Other types of comments, such as one side is too physical, or too defensive, or too slow, may carry the same implication, but I might deal with them differently. More generally, I will usually only re-do the line ups if several players express concern. And I don't think anyone has ever complained after the suggested line ups have been posted that their team was too strong, at least not to me. .... My preference is for any two regulars to contact each other and take turns to pick their teams from the pool of players who have put their names down. Then either of them can post the line ups on the message board. .... .... An easy method is for the two selectors to take turns to pick players - Selector A picks first, Selector B picks two, Selector A picks another two, and so on until Selector A is left with the last player .... .... .... Two selectors picking their respective teams will be offered where: * The places are filled up at least 9 to 24 hours before the game. * There are two registered players who regularly play in that game. * They are familiar with the other players. It will be offered to players who contribute significantly on the message board, including doing reports. They will be invited to post the proposed line ups at least 6 hours before the game. If they don't do so by then, I will suggest the line ups as usual. . The Saturday game now raises the most number of comments about line ups before the game. We've come close to letting two regulars pick their teams for the Saturday game, but in recent weeks, there have been changes in personnel on the day of the game, or a couple of newer players playing. We'll get there soon. The bottom line remains: .... .... the main purpose of the message board (as was the case with the blog before), is to get enough players for each game. As we only have one hour for each game, deciding line ups before hand is primarily to save time at the pitch, so we can play one hour flat out. .... .... We tend to focus too much on line ups, and underplay ... other factors. .... .... Other factors include: * Team formation and organization. * Fitness and form of individual players. * The attitude of the players. New players can be significant factor as well. Not only can a new player whose weakness is not factored into to the line ups shift the balance against his team, a new player who is very strong can shift the balance in favour of his team. The solution factored into the system is player swaps, but there is a reluctance to swap players, especially in more competitive games. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 15, 2011 23:00:53 GMT 8
Like I said, I do spend some time giving due consideration to the line ups. The two teams are then assigned their colours - white or red for 7/8-a-side games, white or black for 5-a-side games. If a player only brings the opposing teams colour, it causes confusion. If a player brings white instead of red or black, it is usually possible to get a red or dark bib from the venue itself. However, if a player brings red or black instead of white, then unless he able to borrow a white top, it forces arbitrary changes to the line ups. In fact, each schedule thread clearly states: When I suggest the line ups, I add: If there are late withdrawals, I consider whether there should be any changes to the line ups, and notify the players affected. However, if the player only has red/black, then the change may not be possible, or I may need to consider other options. Further, if the game is very one-sided, or a player cannot continue due to injury or illness, player swaps may be necessary during the game itself. Again, if players don't have white with them, swaps may not be possible. Latecoming can also cause confusion about line ups. It happened again last Thursday. To give a simple example: * If two players with Whites are late, the rest may assume one of Reds should be with Whites, so one of Reds' players switches over. * When the two Whites players arrive, one switches over to Reds. Again, an arbitrary change. It's one thing if the players agree to a switch after some consideration. Arbitrary changes to line ups due to players bringing the wrong colour or latecoming are unacceptable because they are arbitrary. If we are going to settle for arbitrary changes to the line ups, why should I spend significant time giving consideration to line ups. We might as well settle for the original system. From a post on the old blog on 12 April 2009: It would save me a fair amount of time, but I imagine no one would be happy with the situation. If you only have one colour available, let me know, and I will factor it in when suggesting the line ups. .... It is preferable if I receive the following types of comments before I put up my proposed line ups: .... * Colour preference. .... .... This is sometimes the case for newer players, who may not have all the colours, or those who play frequently, who may not have time to wash the colour that they have used recently. You should let me know beforehand, rather than just turn up in the wrong colour. |
|
....
)
