|
|
Post by Rajiv on May 1, 2012 10:13:42 GMT 8
We've had a month now of elected team selectors for our regular games. For each game: * The players vote for two team selectors (one for each team) * The two team selectors agree on the line ups. Apart from agreeing on line ups, the team selectors have other responsibilities: The $2 credit for team selectors is token. Every player has two votes. Players should vote responsibly, knowing that they will end up in the team of one of the two elected team selectors. Team selectors should together give thought to getting balanced teams, and individually give thought to the strengths and weaknesses of the players in their team, and how best to organize their team. In turn, players should respect the team selectors, who have been elected by the players themselves. Some basic GIFFA values - choice, respect and responsibility. In the longer term, I believe our games will achieve a higher and more consistent standard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on May 17, 2012 8:04:27 GMT 8
Some observations and considerations arising from the Tuesday night game at East Coast ( not directed at anyone in particular since I in any event don't know exactly what happened): * If two players go in 100% for a 50/50 ball, they both equally bear the risk of being injured. * The more mature and intelligent players learn to exercise some discretion, and to hold off where necessary. Sometimes, it's easier to win the ball by holding off, and taking it off the full-blooded opponent who is so intent on winning the ball he hesitates after winning the ball while he figures out what to do with it after winning it. * Players who frequently catch their opponents are careless, if not reckless, and need to cut it out. The rules provide if you catch an opponent, it is a foul, even if the ball is won. *If a player continues to be careless or reckless even after repeated reminders, I need to consider whether to exclude the player (if he has not already dropped out from our games by being frequently injured). All I can hope for is that he does not put other players on the injury list before he goes. .... The functions of team selectors/captains include: If the team selector/captain feels he is not getting through to any particular player on his team, let me have details, and I will remind the player concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on May 30, 2012 22:07:04 GMT 8
We've had recent discussions on over-zealous tackling, how players perform during a game, and playing in the right spirit, for example: * Saturday, 28 April 2012, at Turf City. * Saturday, 12 May 2012, at Turf City. * Tuesday, 15 May 2012, at East Coast. * On the thread for the game on Saturday, 19 May 2012, but more about the first game on Sunday, 20 May 2012, at Turf City. * The second game on Sunday, 20 May 2012, at Turf City. On how players perform during a game, we've further had: ....: what you said works on the assumption that everyone plays to win and are willing to work together as a team to make that happen But in reality, i have played many games where some players just want to play up and do not even want to help out in defence. to them, what matters is that they enjoy themselves (often at the expense of others and the team) playing in their favourite positions rather than in the position that best suits the team's needs Much of this now falls to the team selectors/captains, as described above. More generally: .... ..., players come into our games with varying expectations. Although I repeatedly emphasise the need to play in the right spirit, what you often end up with is a blend made up of the different players - a bit of the good, the bad, and the ugly. Don't take any of it too seriously. Over time, as players get to know each other, there is some degree of convergence of expectations as players get to know each other's qualities (both footballing and character-wise) better. And there's always been a competitive edge to our games. .... There will always be a diversity of players in our games. However, as players play more regularly, there will be some convergence in expectations. Hopefully, this convergence is transmitted into the voting for team selectors/captains. Newer players do need time to adapt. However, if, over time, several pairs of team/captains for a particular game inform me that they don't want a particular player on their team, or is not suitable for that game, I will exclude the player from that game. If this is repeated across several different games, I may exclude the player altogether. Excluding a player is not about ability, but about attitude. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 17, 2012 22:59:05 GMT 8
The players voting for two team selectors, and the two team selectors agreeing on the line ups, with each responsible for one team, is intended to keep our games fair yet competitive. Unless they ask someone else on their team to be team captain, the selectors are also team captains. We've sometimes had other criteria for line ups in our regular games, for example: More recently: * Thursday, 7 June 2012, at Khalsa - Khalsa regulars (+ 1 guest) v The Rest. * Sunday, 10 June 2012, at Turf City, 2nd game - Look Liew & friends v The Rest. * Thursday, 14 June 2012, at Khalsa - David T & friends v The Rest. Xiong Wei has introduced several colleagues recently, so we've also had: * Sunday, 27 May 2012, at Turf City - Xiong Wei & colleagues + 2 others v The Rest. * Sunday, 10 June 2012, at Turf City (1st game) - Xiong Wei & colleagues + 3 others v The Rest. Three of Xiong Wei's colleagues had joined him for the first time the week before - the second game on Sunday, 20 May 2012, at Turf City. Allowing friends/contacts to play on the same team is an important way of introducing new players. Of course, it's a lot easier if it's just 2 or 3 friends. Generally, 3 or 4 friends on the same team is ok if the teams can still be balanced. With team selectors, the final decision is with them. A group of longstanding friends playing together will have the advantage of greater understanding over and above their individual abilities. Therefore, the other team should be significantly stronger individually to compensate. Further, when a group of friends put down just enough names to make up a team, there is an element of having "selected" their team. "The Rest" don't have the same advantage. To be fairer, it should be a team match, where it is open to both sides to put together their team without being limited to the pool of players who put their name down for the game. Look Liew and friends are largely older players, so I give them some leeway as age is a significant disadvantage. David T and friends playing as one team in our regular games has been a bigger issue. For last Thursday, I left it to the players on the opposing side: .... The rest are fairly strong, just that some of them have never played together before. .... Between Kelvin, Bobby and Brendan (who has been playing regularly on Thursdays at Khalsa), they might know all the players. Perhaps they can discuss it, and decide if it would be fair. Final say is Kelvin's, with 2 votes. If they decide to mix the players up, let me know, and I'll suggest line ups, with Kelvin as captain of 1 team, and Bobby of the other. .... It would have been a difficult decision for the players, but in the end, they went with David T & friends v The Rest. I have no idea how it worked out, as no one provided a post game report. .... As regulars become familiar with each other, each game develops a social dimension of its own. There is a balance between keeping a game sociable, while not allowing it to become cliquey. The latter can be a greater deterrence to new players than any rules. This applies to line ups as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 20, 2012 9:05:05 GMT 8
.... ..., we have a fairly high attrition rate. The main reason we have been able to maintain 4 to 8 games a week over the past two years is that we constantly have new players joining us. The tighter rules on putting new players down for a game is more to do with how they fit into our games, rather than to deter new players. As regulars become familiar with each other, each game develops a social dimension of its own. There is a balance between keeping a game sociable, while not allowing it to become cliquey. The latter can be a greater deterrence to new players than any rules. .... ..., if regulars for a particular game don't interact before or after a game, or on this message board, there is less incentive for players, both longstanding and newer players, to keep coming back in the long run, which can affect numbers significantly. .... .... We have a host of other values, principles and standards, as discussed on this thread and elsewhere on this board, as well as a system and rules, as further discussed on the "GIFFA system & playing rules" thread. When introducing new players, apart from considering whether they meet our minimum standards, do impress on them some of the more basic matters, such as not withdrawing late and turning up early, no sliding or reckless/dangerous play, and taking turns in goal. I give leeway to newer players, to allow them time to familiarize themselves with the values, principles, standards, rules and system. I also don't want to make it too onerous for regulars to introduce new players. There should be no deterrence to introducing new players. In fact, as stated above, a consistent flow of new players is what has kept GIFFA (and FIOFAFI before that) going. Also, our games are ultimately social, so I am not inclined to have or enforce a lot of technical rules, or severe penalties for breaches of the rules. For those who repeatedly ignore our values, principles, standards and rules, the ultimate sanction is exclusion, either from particular games or completely. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Aug 4, 2012 0:02:42 GMT 8
Even if their introducer gives us some idea of how good they are, we won't know how new players fit it until they play. Team selectors aren't bound by that, but it does make sense. It does help the new player to be on the same side as the player who introduced him, especially if he doesn't know anyone else. Sometimes, the introducer and the new player want to continue to be on the same side in the longer term. I don't see it as a problem as the sides can still be balanced by moving other players around. It may be possible with even up to 3 or 4 friends wanting to be on the same side. However, with team selectors, I leave it to the team selectors. Without team selectors, it could end up as a group of friends against the rest - most recently: * David T and friends against the rest on Thursday, 19 July 2012, at Khalsa. * Look Liew's selection against the rest on Sunday, 29 July 2012, at Turf City. .... Look Liew and friends are largely older players, so I give them some leeway as age is a significant disadvantage. David T and friends playing as one team in our regular games has been a bigger issue. .... This applies to line ups as well. I suppose we just have to take it one game at a time. With several of David T's friends playing other games as well, most recently, Saturday evening at Turf City and Wednesday night at Khalsa, perhaps the compelling need to be on the same team will diminish over time. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Mar 19, 2013 19:44:38 GMT 8
From the report thread on the game last night (Monday) at East Coast: ... no need to apologise for shouting. We like communicating on the pitch .... We are all here to have a good workout & enjoy our game. Some applause or encouragement will be much appreciated. None of us paid ... to get put down. .... .... i ddint hesitate to tell [name] he had a lousy game after the match - but i didnt tell him DURING the match in fact i told him to keep trying & told him good try even thou he kept shooting to the sides. .... I thought there was a post on this Discussion board on the difference between communication/encouragement and blame/abuse, but I couldn't find. I did find a discussion on the old blog though, dating back to 8 October 2008! At the time, I said: Later on the old blog, in a post entitled "Playing Styles And Foul Play" dated 29 January 2009, a precursor to the first set of rules posted on 24 May 2009: I think we can discern the difference between beneficial, positive or encouraging shouting and detrimental, negative or belittling shouting to team mates. When I see a wayward shot on goal, I often shout "keep it on target". After all, you have a better chance of scoring with a poorly struck shot that is on target than a well struck shot that goes well wide. Sometimes, I have even found myself telling a team mate who was space or in a good position but remained quiet to call for the ball from another team mate. On the other hand, you have some players who call for the ball no matter where they are on the pitch and expect the pass, even when they are being closed down or there is another player in a better position to receive the ball. I have seen on occasion the player who called for the ball belittling the player who chose to use the ball differently. Bottom line is that the player with the ball has to make the decision how to play the ball. Just because you call for it doesn't mean you should receive it. Basic stuff, like telling a team to move into space, keep a position or drop back, are all part of the game. Sometimes, it is more generic, like to the team as a whole to keep their shape and discipline. Players on the receiving end do have to be a bit thick skinned as well. In the end, everyone just has to remember to play in the right spirit, an issue addressed at the start of this thread on 11 January 2011 and several times since, most recently on 30 May 2012. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Apr 14, 2013 18:51:32 GMT 8
Reminders from the "Safety" thread: .... I think we all need to take a step back, and remind ourselves that our games are primarily social. From time to time, we risk catching an opponent accidentally in a tackle. If the player committing the foul says it was not intentional or accidental, we should take that at face value. However, if a player repeatedly catches opponents with bad or mistimed tackles, then the explanation wears thin. The onus is on all of us to play by the rules, and take reasonable care. If a player is repeatedly careless in his tackling, I will speak to him. On each occasion during a game, it may only be a foul, with a free kick conceded. However, if despite reminders, no effort is made to exercise greater care, the ultimate sanction is being blocked from playing. The sanction will be applied sooner for reckless or intentional fouls, especially ones which risk causing injury to an opponent. .... I don't think we need to hold back from 50/50 challenges, but it is important to make sure you win the ball, and not take out the opposing player by accident. Even if it is an accident, it will often be because the player making the challenge was careless, if not reckless. Everyone has to make greater effort to avoid being either careless or reckless, and especially avoid making reckless tackles. .... .... .... .... However with the benefit of hindsight and underpinned by the principles of social footballing, perhaps this incident is a good reminder for all GIFFA players that we should curb our positive aggression and pull our punches in situations where going for a challenge (albeit non malicious) might result in the inflicting injury to our fellow players. At the end of the day, we are social footballers and it should be top priority that we avoid inflicting any form of injury upon our fellow footballers and friends. Although i am the first to admit that in the heat of the moment, it is easier said than done. .... .... .... Maybe a timely reminder for us to be a bit more careful given the (alleged) social nature of our games. Given the friendship and camaraderie, I am fairly hopeful that all concerned will shake on it the next time on the pitch. Peace. From the report thread on the Saturday game two weeks ago: .... In conclusion, it was agreed post match that all the players should make a conscious effort to keep a cool head in the game and minimise unnecessary verbal confrontations. These conflicts can escalate into fights and excessive use of force in the game. This i believe very much goes against the spirit of fair play and goodwill that underpins the GIFFA ethos. There is a reminder with every schedule thread: I hope it doesn't take a more serious incident before the reminder sinks in, especially for the Saturday game. From the Playing Rules & Principles: .... * Ultimately, we are each responsible for our own well-being and the well-being of those we play with. Safety is a priority. Our core values are:
* Facilitating a work-life balance.
* Maintaining health and fitness even as we get older through regular and sustainable participation in activity.
* Voluntary participation with maturity and in good spirits.
* Achieving a balanced and healthy perspective on sport and competition.
* Developing friendships and finding enjoyment through participation.
Everyone who plays by the rules and core values is welcome. The converse is that anyone who does not play by the rules and core values is not welcome. Anyone repeatedly breaching the rules and principles may be blocked from playing for a period of time. .... Our games are competitive, especially the Saturday game, but it should be about getting the most out of our games, and the best out of ourselves, rather than winning or losing. Getting the best out of ourself includes taking reasonable care. Last say to Arijit: .... The Saturday game for me is one of the highlights of my weekend . Enjoy the the friendship and camaraderie with the Saturday regulars . .... Given we play for fun and to enjoy , injury is not part of the plan . Definitely need to be more cautious. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on May 2, 2013 10:02:27 GMT 8
The weekend games at The Grandstand have been the cause of some concern. Overzealous tackling, especially for the Saturday game, has been raised several times now, but I think the issues are wider than that. There's also a lot of arguing over decisions such as free kicks and penalties, again, especially for the Saturday game. When a player calls a foul, the response from the opposing player might well be that he went down too easily. And the camaderie, or if you prefer, kiss-and-make-up, of the after-game drinks on Saturday should not be an excuse for going overboard during the game. Nevertheless, the Saturday game remains very popular. I hope the excessive aggression during the game isn't a pull factor.  The rules currently provide: The rules effectively cover overzealous tackling, excessive arguing over decisions, and several, but not all forms of gamesmanship. Gamesmanship has been defined as follows: The bigger issue is enforcement. I will need to revise the rules so that they are enforceable, without the need for a referee. These issues may not be as prominent for the Sunday game, but I received the following SMS from a player who had played at Kallang and Khalsa before trying out the Sunday game at The Grandstand: A reminder: |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 3, 2013 18:28:30 GMT 8
Players coming into games with differing expectations has been discussed on various discussion threads, most recently: * On the "Skill sets & playing positions" thread, on 8 December 2012. * On the "The social aspect & fun" thread, on 30 May 2012. * Earlier on this thread, also on 30 May 2012. Much of it relates to differences in expectation between longer standing players and newer players. However, differences of expectation can arises between regulars too. The players for the game yesterday (Monday) at East Coast were largely regulars, but differences of expectation seems to have adversely affected the game. Players join our games for a variety of reasons, for example: * A good run out, for fitness or for fun. * A competitive game. * To be able to push themselves hard. * To win. We need to accept that not everyone sees the game the same way. Players are expected to play as a team and make a reasonable effort, but even then, there needs to be a lot of give and take. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jan 24, 2014 16:18:19 GMT 8
|
|
|
|
Post by Desmond on Jan 24, 2014 20:47:54 GMT 8
Speechless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Feb 7, 2014 10:47:37 GMT 8
From the report for the game last night (Thursday) at Khalsa: .... I've added the team selector poll. I've limited it to the Khalsa regulars. #11-15 would like to be in the same team. Thanks! Vote for Kelvin! Team selectors are Kelvin Au and Sean Luo. .... .... .... I stopped keeping score at 11-4 and i think the game ended 18-6. .... To say the match was imbalanced is an understatement. .... Sorry guys - I did consider proposing to swap some players, but I couldn't think of a good split (assuming the 4 or 5 of you wanted to continue playing together). I wasn't planning to play much as my knee was still not 100% - and sort of took that into consideration when we formed the teams. Anyway, apologies if it was too one sided, certainly didn't want to ruin anyone's evening... .... Yesterday's line up was totally lop sided. It was no contest at all honestly. Whites were way too strong for reds to even give a fight as a team. At some point due to the huge deficit, morale was also low from reds. ..., if you showboat, do fancy tricks and flicks ... when your team is leading by 8,9 goals, then that is very very disrespectful. You just want to humiliate your opponents further. No need to do all this especially when you know its already a big gap in the scoreline. .... I dont know who would agree and not agree with me but that is my perspective. Cheers. Yilong has played with us before, at Kallang, on 9 July 2013: .... Yilong, playing his first game, proved to be a good player, .... .... Wayne and Martin were new to us. As Sean observed: .... Playing together at their 11-a-side Saturday games, Wayne, Martin and Yilong combined well with lots of one-twos and off the ball running. .... As I've pointed out before, familiarity between players on one team can be a big factor, especially as our games usually involve a wide mix of players. .... Earlier on this thread: .... I accept that there are two major problems with a group of friends playing on the same team in a regular game: * Even if the players on the other team are stronger individually, the understanding between the group of friends can be an overriding factor. * Unlike for a team match, the other team doesn't have a choice of players (for example, to ensure all positions are covered), which risks the game being even more one-sided. .... Good understanding does not develop overnight. .... There is a difference between players who just want to play, and those who want to play as a team. ..... .... As I have previously stated: .... Trying to keep friends/relatives or players who are familiar with each other on the same team can distort the balance. Hopefully, as players get to know each other better, these factors will be less relevant. .... I hope that the more regularly players play, the less the need to stick together as a group of friends/relatives. .... Once a rapport builds up between regular players, do the team of 7 really need to stick together as one team? More feedback helps. And more recently, on the "Skill sets & playing positions" thread: .... The ability to develop understanding with different players is also a skill. The more instinctive understanding with players you play with regularly comes more easily, and is comfortable. For a group of friends who have been playing together for a long time, it can sometimes be difficult to come out of that comfort zone. Again, it is about adaptability. .... Anyway, those who play regularly learn to adapt. .... When the group of friends include good new players, it is even harder for the other team. If you are familiar with the group of friends, you can try to organize your team to counter their strengths. If you don't know their strengths and weaknesses, there is a greater chance they will tear your team apart. This was the issue previously with David T and friends. When they first started playing with us, they were much stronger, and used to win comfortably. After playing with us for a while, our overall pool of players got better, and learned to counter some of their strengths, games against David T and friends got closer. In the past, when David T and friends had 6 who wanted to play on the same team, I on occasion jokingly suggest playing 6 against 8. I once even seriously suggested that a player on waitlist come in to make 8 v 7, in order to redress the balance. However, due to withdrawals, we only had 14 in the end. For last night, we could actually have had 8 v 7, as William Y was on waitlist, but I guess no one was to know how one sided it would end up. Also, I think last night's game might not have been so bad if Reds had taken up a very defensive formation, but perhaps they didn't have the players for that. If a group of friends want to stick together no matter what and don't want to switch to make the game more even, and the game is very one sided, I suggest one of the other players from their team switch over to make 6 v 8 at least until the team with 8 take the lead. The team with 8 may feel embarrassed to play with 2 extra players, but even under 11-a-side rules, a game is only abandoned if a team is reduced to 6 players, so you could have 11 v 7. 6 v 8 is much fairer by comparison, and would only arise in our games because one group of players is not mature enough (or perhaps not familiar enough with our games) to split themselves up between the two teams. The "adults" in "Generic Indoor Football for Adults" is not meaningless.  Some of these issues are now addressed by the following: Changing line ups during a game has been dealt with for a long time under Playing Rules & Principles. Each schedule thread provides: For new players, I ask for their mobile numbers so that I can add them to the WhatsApp group chat. I then inform them that more information about our games is available under "The GIFFA System" thread. I do this to impress on everyone what our games are about. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Mar 22, 2014 19:13:48 GMT 8
I have added the following to the "Information on Player Lists" thread on the "Playing Lists Updates & Playing Records" board under this "Administration" category. Everyone in the "GIFFA Player" group can put their names down for GIFFA-defined men's games. To be added to the "GIFFA Player" group, a player needs to be registered, have his registration accepted, and fulfil the following conditions: - Be 21 years of age or above in the current year.
- Have played at least once in the current 6 month period.
- Meet our basic standard.
- Participate in accordance with GIFFA values and principles.
.... Serious breaches or disregard of the GIFFA values and principles or of the playing rules may result in the player's registration being deleted and a permanent ban on playing in our games. .... I have now added the core values to the "Overview" thread as follows: .... The core values for all projects, sport, activities, games or events are: - Maintaining health, fitness and/or interests even as we get older through sustainable participation in sports and other activity.
- Facilitating a work-life balance.
- Voluntary participation with maturity and in good spirits.
- Achieving a balanced and healthy perspective on sport and competition.
- Developing friendships and finding enjoyment through participation.
.... . It was in bold. I later made it bold and red. I yesterday revamped the Playing Rules & Principles post, including splitting it into two parts. The first part is now an overview, which included the core values. On a separate note, from the "Latecoming, late withdrawals & no shows" thread: .... ... everyone has to make a greater effort to be early, aiming to be at the venue 10 to 15 minutes before the game is scheduled to start. .... For a while, I used to stipulate the time slot as 4.45 pm to 6 pm (for weekend games) and 8.45 pm to 10 pm (for weeknight games) to try to ensure that players arrive on time, but I stopped doing so. .... With immediate effect, I will resume adding 10 minutes before the game, and adding in the schedule post: .... Players may run late due to being held up at work, a prior appointment or engagement overrunning or due to an emergency. If it appears you will be held up, and there are players on waitlist, please consider offering your place to the first player on waitlist. I will allow the player making the offer to switch to being first on waitlist, without penalty. If everyone aims to be 10 to 15 minutes early, then even if, worst comes to worst, a player ends up running 15 to 20 minutes late, he still shouldn't be more than 5 minutes late for the start of the game. .... I will give players until the end of the month to get their heads round what is required of them. I will start monitoring late withdrawals, no shows and latecoming from next month (March 2014). And from the "Filling places & choices" thread: .... By and large most players have observed the rules of the game in both form and spirit. However there have been more than the odd incident of players withdrawing late on the day of the game but keeping within the rules so as to avoid the penalties. While it can be argued that this should pose no significant issues to an occurrence of a game, in reality it can become a source of irritation to players who have signed up for the game, only for it to be cancelled on the day of the game due to late withdrawals (albeit within the permitted timeframe of 4(?) hours) and insufficient players on the waitlist to fill the void. On a few occasions there have been last minute scrambles to get players to fill in so that the game could go ahead. I think we can all accept the occasional late withdrawals by players due to health reasons, injury, work and family commitments. The key word here has to be "occasional". When it becomes a habit and repeated week after week, we then have a question on the level of commitment to play by these players. I therefore strongly feel that these players who cannot ascertain whether they would be playing due to recurring personal commitments or reasons, should put themselves on a waitlist. This is hard to enforce since the burden is on the player to exercise his discretion and consideration and unexpected events do crop up at the last minute. The mitigating factor is therefore the frequency of occurrence. In addition to the above I would like to propose that players who due to personal commitments withdraws on the day of the game for 2 consecutive weeks will only be allowed to put his name on the waitlist the following week regardless of whether he is committed to play or not. Alternatively we can impose a fine on players who withdraws on the last day consecutively for 3 weeks in a row. The period from 30 hours before the game onwards is now covered by pre-game protocols. For me, a withdrawal is ordinarily not late unless it is made 4.5 hours or less before the game. .... .... Anecdotal accounts and impressions ... are not reliable. .... For me, the more important question when a player puts his name down for three games a week over a fortnight, and then plays maybe one game in that time, is whether there is sufficient "commitment to play", or whether the player is merely reserving or "choping" a place for himself before the places fill up and until he decides whether he actually wants to play. Once the team selector/captain poll goes up, we are in game mode, and withdrawals after that can be disruptive to the poll, which is an important part of the pre-game process. As the payment information goes up at the same time as the poll, withdrawals after that does also mean extra work for me. As I accept that players may have to withdraw for a variety of reasons, I take it in my stride, within the parameters of the system we have in place. However, if a player is repeatedly withdrawing after the poll goes up, and in a month plays only once for every three or more post-poll withdrawals, then I have to ask if they are taking the commitment to play seriously enough. I suppose the only way to answer that is to keep track of post-poll withdrawals. I will start doing so from next month. .... under the "Information on Player Lists" post stickied on the "Player Lists Updates & Playing Records" board to monitor late withdrawals and no shows. I will use the same table to monitor post-poll withdrawals. . The considerations have been discussed in some detail under the "Filling places & choices" and "Latecoming, late withdrawals & no shows" threads. There are penalties for late withdrawals and no shows. However, provided the withdrawal is not late, there are currently no consequences for repeatedly withdrawing after the team selector/captain poll goes up. From the same post as above: The game last Sunday (16 March 2014) at The Grandstand was left at risk when 3 post-poll withdrawals left us with 12. We just about got back to 14, to enable to game to go on. For the game at Balestier Road this Thursday (20 March 2014), we had 7 post-poll withdrawals, which left us with 8 players. Although we gradually got back to 14 by 5.33 pm over the course of Thursday, as Zakaria said on the WhatsApp group chat, large number of post-poll withdrawals are disruptive, not just for me and the system, but for the other players as well, who suddenly find that a game that looked certain to go on is no longer a certainty. The issue for me with repeated post poll withdrawals is one of "choping" a place, without any commitment to play. A couple of post-poll withdrawals were avoided today for the game tomorrow (Sunday) at The Grandstand. Like I said, I accept that players who are committed to play may have to withdraw due to other circumstances, and as long as they let me know early enough (at least 4.5 hours before the game), we should be able to find a replacement. However, it can create difficulties when significant numbers withdraw less than 30 hours before the game. It is even more of an issue that certain players repeatedly withdraw less than 30 hours before a game, thus pushing up the number of withdrawals for certain games. Therefore, from April 2014 onwards, I will monitor the number of post-poll withdrawals over a rolling 4 weeks period. Any player who withdraws post-poll 4 times or more over that period can only go on waitlist in the following week, up to the time the poll goes up. Late withdrawals will be excluded as there are separate penalties for that. However, I will monitor late withdrawals and no shows separately over a rolling 6 month period. At the present time, this is not for the purposes of additional sanctions, but to ensure players don't form impressions of other players without knowing the facts. Currently, latecoming doesn't appear to be a significant problem, if, for no other reason, than the fact that it is seldom reported. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Mar 31, 2014 16:39:44 GMT 8
I'm not sure why the game yesterday (Sunday) at The Grandstand, went so badly. 10-0 is about as one sided a score-line as I can remember. 14-4 at Balestier Road on Wednesday, 18 April 2012, is probably the closest. I wouldn't include the 18-6 final score on Thursday, 6 February 2014, as the winning team was stacked with players from Stan and Kelvin's Saturday 11-a-side team. I suggested the line ups and appointed captains: I suggest: .... Nick with 2 votes can be captain of Team 1. With Babs withdrawing, no one else has votes, so I'll go with the regular with the most number of games in the current 6 month period. Kelvin (with 41 games), isn't that regular for Sundays, so Kien (27 games) can be captain for Team 2. Captains can agree on changes. I'll assign colours in an hour and a half. . Amongst other responses, Kien wanted to end the game 5 minutes early. Kelvin Au felt Reds stopped trying. The playing rules state we play for an hour flat out. "The game" section under "The GIFFA System thread" states that we "continue to play until at least the end of the time slot". Earlier this month, I was having a WhatsApp chat with a regular player (one not involved in the Sunday game), and I mentioned what is required is "reasonable effort". Later, I noticed that the playing rules provided that "Everyone should contribute to their best of their ability to the team they are playing for". When I re-structured the playing rules just over a week ago, I changed it to: Perhaps it was just a mismatch of expectations. Unfortunately, if players on the team that is losing badly drop their heads, it just gets worse. As I've said before, no one enjoys a one-sided game, not even those on the winning side. The players, especially the team selectors/captains, just have to bite the bullet and make the changes, while there is still time. Ending the game prematurely is not a solution, at least not for those looking to get a good work-out and some enjoyment out of our games. Nor is trying to get the players on the team that is losing badly to try harder, especially when one or more have completely lost heart. Instead, it can aggravate the situation. I don't want to spend too much time on a post-mortem. However, I am concerned about new or less regular players (of which there were a few yesterday) coming into a game like this and not seeing what our games are all about. |
|
|
|
Post by Kelvin Au on Apr 4, 2014 8:47:50 GMT 8
Rajiv, with some online marketing, I am sure we can increase numbers overall  Question is, if you'll welcome the sudden influx, or prefer to keep it word-of-mouth. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Apr 4, 2014 9:24:52 GMT 8
Kelvin, I moved your post from the "Filling places & choices" thread to this thread because it is a better place to discuss the overall considerations. The aim is to give the players a choice, so that's why the post to which you responded on the "Filling places & choices stated: .... I would rather give the Sunday evening game at The Grandstand a rest and make an effort to get the two new games going. What I plan to do is not schedule the Sunday evening at The Grandstand for the whole of April 2014, and instead schedule both the Sunday night game at Balestier Road and the Monday night game at The Grandstand. Those who want a second game at The Grandstand still have it, on Monday night, and better spaced from the other game on Saturday, so players can play both games if they want. It also means that we now have a weeknight game at The Grandstand. And we get a weekend game at a venue besides The Grandstand. While trying to fill up the Sunday evening game at The Grandstand over the past couple of years, I have become aware that there are players who would otherwise play on Sunday who find The Grandstand too far from them. It also means that the Sunday game is at a cooler time of day. The heat at 5 pm is a factor, even on the covered pitch. .... I sent out a WhatsApp broadcast this morning to try to fill both games. I explained that it was "2 new games for our existing pool of players". There are two features of our system that require the bulk of our players to be regulars:
- Team selectors/captains need to be familiar with the bulk of the players for each game.
- It takes some time for players to become familiar with the GIFFA System, the playing rules, and the GIFFA values and principles.
An influx of large numbers of new players makes both more difficult. So I'd rather keep it as largely introductions through friends.
The number of GIFFA Players has actually risen quite fast over the last few months:  On the other hand, there has been no corresponding increase in the number of games per month. The reason would appear to be far fewer players are playing 30 games or more each month. As pointed out elsewhere, the profile of our players is changing. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 21, 2014 20:18:23 GMT 8
Apart from the Wednesday night game at Khalsa which was cancelled due to 13 (!) withdrawals, and the Thursday night game at Khalsa for which there is no report yet, issues arising from every game this week, as discussed on the report threads. - From the report thread for the game on Saturday (13 September 2014) at The Grandstand:
.... .... i don't remember when we had two full teams on a saturday by 5pm sharp. ... Is that a reference to late-coming?  The Pre-game protocols section of the GIFFA system thread provides as follows: .... No matter what prior appointment or engagement you may have, you should start making your way to the venue sufficiently early, taking into account your mode of transport and travel or traffic conditions. .... .... The Saturday evening game suffers from two particular problems relating to Saturday afternoon/evening - (i) as raised often before, traffic conditions in the Bukit Timah area can be very bad; (ii) as often raised on the WhatsApp group chat, taxis can be difficult to get. The solution of course is to start making your way earlier. I can give newer players some leeway, but regulars should know better. It it comes to my attention that a particular player is frequently late, I will remind him to be early. If he persists, I may block him for a period of time, or from particular games. For now, I will include a specific reminder about the difficulties relatingto traffic conditions and taxis in the schedule post for the Saturday game. .... during the game i noticed some trash talk. also, when a player calls foul it should be accepted as a foul. think it is better to err on the cautious side in such a case. .... The Playing Rules & Principles actually provides: .... - As we play without a referee, if a player involved in a passage of play calls a foul, play it back to one of the goalkeepers until it is agreed that is is a foul. If it is disputed, the game continues from the goalkeeper who has possession of the ball. If necessary, the dispute can be resolved later on the message board. Don’t just leave the ball for the opposing side and stop playing. Sometimes, they will continue and score.
- At first instance, the matter should be left to the players involved in the passage of play. Other players not involved in the passage of play can express an opinion, but don’t press it. The final word is with the team selectors/captains. If there is no agreement, the game continues from the goalkeeper in possession of the ball.
.... .... tactics is for captains to decide. all sat players are capable of being captains and the vote should be accepted. injured players should probably add that they are injured/coming back from injury when they sign up. finally, maybe we should nt push our fellow players too hard. i m certainly guilty of the latter. though none of the reasons above would probably affect the joy of the game on its own, last saturday we had all of the above and that probably affected the fun factor. see ya all soon. The "Team selectors/captains & line ups" section of the GIFFA System thread provides as follows: The issues are addressed in detail under the Guidelines, including: .... It is useful to know the players, including their strengths, weaknesses, and idiosyncrasies, including which players combine well together, or don't play well together, or what circumstances bring out the best (or the worst) of a player. The information for new or newer players will necessarily be limited. I will provide what information I can, including links to reports on games that the player in question has previously played in, and referring the team selector to that player's introducer, or other players who have played with that player before. Players are encouraged to disclose any relevant factors about themselves, especially any factors, such as previous or recurring injuries, earlier physical exertions, or loss of fitness, which may affect their form on the day. .... .... Team selectors/captains also have the final say on how the team in organized, formation and tactics. This includes the position that each player in the team plays. .... Players are expected to be adaptable. As the games are also meant to be social, there should also be a large degree of flexibility and accommodation in how any particular player is deployed. A player's preference should be taken into consideration, but more importantly, his capabilities. .... Finally: a few things that i thought made the game maybe less enjoyable for some... .... I think the more familiar players become with the GIFFA System thread, the Playing Rules & Principles, and the Guidelines, the better. However, it does take time. - From the report thread for the game on Sunday (14 September 2014) at The Grandstand:
.... The issue is -if players can take hard challenges without swearing. From my experience in fiofafi,some can and some cant. When some cant then lots of words and swearing are exchanged. Though its just a friendly,its football. Thats fundamental. I'm not sure what that is about but what is or isn't acceptable in our games is set out under the Playing Rules & Principles thread. Comparison with other games of football is not useful. Over the past few years, I have noticed a lot of players have gotten seriously injured playing in other games, which keeps them out of action for months. The risk of injuries is to some extent inevitable in a contact sport, but my aim is to eliminate the risk of sudden impact injuries such as fractures and torn ligaments resulting from excessively physical challenges by opposing players. Wear and tear injuries and over-exertion injuries are for individual players to avoid for themselves, by moderating the frequency and intensity with which they play according to their age, physical constitution and level of fitness. - From the report thread for the game on Monday (15 September 2014) at MacPherson:
.... I would prefer to dwell on how Whites played. One word - UNBELIEVABLE@! In football, its important to score goals. Its just as important to prevent your opponent from scoring. In order to do that, we need to DEFEND! When you are 3-1 up in the game, you DEFEND!! You hold the ball and wait for a good opening to attack. Nooooooo, stubborn. Just give the ball away. Tired lah. Then stop running all over the place and DEFEND!!! Football is also a thinking game, use your brain! Please respect that there are the other 6 players in your team who are working very hard to stay in the game and you just give the ball away. .... .... .... To a certain extend, I agree with Bert and learning how to keep ball is part of the play especially if you are holding a 2-goal or more lead. It is okay to move backwards and/or across and patiently look for opening. Reds did manage a bit of that when leading 4-3 and we did get an opening just before time where glenn was set free. Secondly, when you feel the legs are not going to run, get in goal and catch a 5 minutes breather - you will come out fresher and can contribute to the team's cause better. .... The following issues are addressed on the Team organization, formation & tactics thread: All players do need to familiarize with issues that arise from time to time in our games. At first instance, it is for the selector/captain to decide how the team should be organized, and the role of each player in that formation. The captains do need to take into account individual players strengths, weaknesses and idiosyncrasies. This is set out in some detail in the Guidelines thread. During the game, it is for the selector/captain to remind players of what is required. If a selector/captain feels that a particular player made little or no effort to work with him, he can let me know, and I will remind the player concerned of what is required. If a player repeatedly ignores or makes little or no effort to do what is required of him, he may be blocked from playing for a period of time, or indefinitely, from particular games or all games, depending on how often and serious his repeated disregard of the requirements of our game is. - From the report thread for the game on Tuesday (16 September 2014) at Kallang:
.... .... As a postscript, it is somewhat odd that the team selectors get a $1 CREDIT for their (lopsided) selections. I am wondering whether Rajiv might consider tweaking the system and making it more incentive-based such that if the scoreline in a match is so skewed in favour of one team (e.g winning margin of 10 goals or more) then both team selectors (or at least, the losing team's selector) will incur a $1 deduction. A few of us also thought that this wouldn't have happened if we left team selections to Rajiv. The team selector/captain credit is a token for taking on the responsibility of agreeing on line ups and captaining the teams. I previously considered withholding it if line ups were very unbalanced, but I've decided not to, as the reasons why it doesn't work out on the day can be very varied, and doesn't detract from the fact that the selector/captain did make some effort. Instead, the consequences for one-sided scorelines is reflected in the points for the team selector/captain table. Of course, if, after the game, the team selectors are embarrassed by their selections, they can always decline the credit. I can only go by the reports to have a sense of the current form of players, so wherever possible, I leave line ups to selectors. Additionally, for this game, there were two new players, so I thought it was fair to leave it to their introducers to agree on line ups. Like I've said before, players, especially the team selectors/captains, do need to bite the bullet to make changes during the game if it is clear that the line ups aren't working out. I really don't see how even those on the winning team can enjoy a grossly one-sided game. If they do, then they clearly don't appreciate what our games are all about. Team selectors/captains do need to be familiar with the Guidelines, but it will take time. ... two factors adversely affected this: a) the misjudgment on the wide gulf in standard between the 2 new players who each played on opposing sides. There was no way the 2 team selectors could have done any better in this regard given lack of knowledge; and b) the last minute withdrawals. ..., it might be better to leave team selection to Rajiv. .... I would have been even more handicapped, as not only would I not have known the new players, there are an increasing number of players I haven't even met yet, and even the players I know, I haven't seen them play for ages, so I wouldn't know their current form. To be honest, line ups for the 5-a-side games are usually easier to do than the 7 or 8-a-sides, which is why I do them more readily. However, the system is geared towards those who play regularly having the final say on line ups, whether as team selectors or captains. It is after all, social football with a competitive edge. Experience counts for a lot in team selection, and the only way to gain the experience is to keep at it. The more important lesson really is that it is better to make the changes early on, once it becomes clear that the teams are grossly uneven, even if there is reluctance or resistance from several players, rather than to let it spoil the game, and having the feelings of dissatisfaction fester beyond the game. The final say is always with the team selectors/captains. I think the bigger issue was on Ian's team was a guest player who could hardly play. And in a 5-aside game every player is important. Under Appendix I to the GIFFA System thread: .... Although the GIFFA-defined games are social, they are also competitive. It is difficult for those who have not played much football before to join our games, unless they have a lot of other sporting experience. .... Although those who play with us regularly find they improve a lot in many if not all areas of their game, you do need to meet a basic standard to fit in in the first place. .... .... I previously considered implementing the following (from the "Individual skills, attributes & positions" thread): .... * If you put down the name of a player for a regular game who has not played with us before, you must vouch (on the message board, when putting his name down) that you have played in a game with him before, and that he meets our minimum standards. * If you cannot vouch for that, he must post a Self-Rater on the "New Player" sub-board. * If neither condition is met, he can only remain in reserve, and can only play if we have no other players available. .... In the end, it was too draconian, and difficult to enforce. I will have to consider some kind of rule though. Players do need to be familiar with the three system and rules related threads. It takes time. From the "GIFFA system & playing rules" thread: .... The following threads are now stickied on the Schedule board in the following order: Although the guidelines are on a separate thread, logically speaking, they are a subset of the GIFFA System. .... , each schedule thread made express reference to the GIFFA System and the Playing Rules & Principles. Currently, each schedule thread provides as follows: Over the years I have been doing this, most issues that could possibly arise have arisen at some time or other, and are addressed in the system/rules threads. There's no point getting worked up over issues that arise - just address them. That's the best way to deal with them. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 5, 2015 10:07:12 GMT 8
From the "Safety, health & sustainability" thread: .... ..., there have been several games recently, which have given rise to concerns about injuries and the risk of injuries: .... The issues ... have been discussed on various threads on this Announcements & Developments board, including this one, the "GIFFA System & playing rules" thread, and the GIFFA values, principles & standards" thread, and are covered to some extent or other in the Playing Rules & Principles.
The considerations that require emphasis include:
- Every player has a responsibility to take due care. While injuries, even serious ones, may arise even from innocuous tackles, the risk is greater from reckless or overly robust play. Both need to be cut out. Players prone to injury should also take greater care of themselves.
- Any tackle that goes through an opposing player, or catches or goes through an opposing player in the follow through is not allowed, and is a foul. If excessive force is used, it will be viewed far more seriously.
- No matter what the provocation or grievance, any form of retaliation will be viewed very seriously.
- Our games accommodate players of varying styles and abilities. This was addressed on the old blog as early January 2009, in a post entitled "Playing Styles And Foul Play". Some players generally tackle harder than others. Players who are overly robust should cut it out. Players who are clumsy should be more careful. However, to deliberately go in harder on certain players because you have an issue with them or don't like them is wrong. If you have an issue with another player, bring it up with the team selectors/captains, or me. To target a player to be on the receiving end of greater force than a player would usually apply is a form of intentionally robust play, and may be viewed more seriously than overly robust play arising through recklessness (for which greater care should be taken) or a personal style of play (which should be moderated).
- If a foul or bad tackle was accidental, arising from misjudging the situation or mistiming the tackle, an apology should be forthcoming. If nothing else, the apology serves to show that it was in fact an accident. An apology offered should be accepted by the player on the receiving end. If there is any issue to follow up on, do so with the selectors/captains, on the report thread, or with me.
.... ..., all our games should be played in the spirit of sportsmanship.
I will tighten up the "Safety, duty of care & disclaimer" section of the GIFFA System, and the Playing Rules & Principles, as may be necessary, to further address the above considerations.
.... There was also a complaint of racism after the game on Sunday, 13 September 2015, that a player used "white" when swearing at another player. As there was an apology on the WhatsApp group chat, which was accepted by the other player, I treated the matter as closed. In response to matters coming to a head in the game on Tuesday, 22 September 2015, I created a thread on "Sportsmanship" on the "Introductions, Requests & Chat" board. The discussion addressed how to deal with "wind up merchants", but upon further discussion, I began to doubt if the term was useful at all. The more relevant discussion is on "sportsmanship" and "gamesmanship". From the thread: .... Although it has been discussed at various times, "sportsmanship" is not mentioned in the above passages. From Wikipedia: It is easier to define an antithesis of sportsmanship, "gamesmanship": .... What is clear that all conduct that amounts to gamesmanship or that adversely affects the spirit in which our games are played is not allowed. This includes: - Damaging the mood of the game by excessive or prolonged shows of anger, aggression, petulance or pettiness.
- Repeatedly finding fault with your team mates.
- Ignoring or trying to override the team selector/captain.
- Any form of verbal abuse, whether of a team mate or opponent. Verbal abuse is not limited to use of swear words, but includes prolonged or repeated criticism or verbal attacks on any other player in a negative or derogatory manner.
- Trying, whether verbally or through conduct, to provoke an opponent into retaliation.
- Feigning being on the receiving end of a foul, or feigning an injury.
- Calling out to an opponent or the opposing team with the intention of confusing them, for example calling for a pass from an opponent so that he believes a team mate is calling for the ball, and thereby concedes possession.
- Insisting on calls during the game, such as on corners, goal kicks, kick ins, fouls and goals, going in favour of oneself or one's teams. The rules provide for how calls should be decided in the event of a dispute.
During the game, players can refer such conduct to the team selectors/captains. If appropriate, team selectors/captains should speak to the offending player. After the game, any player, including the team selector/captain, can refer such conduct to me, with sufficient detail of what transpired. On the other hand, communication during the game can include shouting. From the "Sportsmanship" thread: .... - ....;
-
- ..., shouting can actually be good for the game. I have been in games which are very flat because everyone is so quiet. A couple of strong characters can do a lot for a game. ....
- ..., express the exhortation in positive terms. For example, if a chance is missed, instead of saying "How could you miss that?" or something else negative, if a player skies a shot or puts it wide, a call of "keep your shots down" or "keep it on target" may be appropriate, because you're not going to score if the shot is not even on target, while even if it is not hit with a lot of power, there is still a chance it might go in if it is at least on target. If the mistake was a result of lack of concentration, a shout of "concentrate" would be in order. If the mistake was the result of holding on to the ball too long and being closed down by opposing players, then a suitable exhortation can be made. The right pass is far more subjective. A player who thinks he is in a good position and calls for a pass from the player in possession may not receive the pass because the player in possession may see the situation differently. There is no point having a go at the player for not making the pass that was called for. Even if the player who didn't make the pass is one who tends to hold the ball excessively and loses possession as a result, the appropriate comment is about not holding on to the ball for so long, and not about making the pass to the player who called for the pass. Some of this has been discussed under the "Individual skills, attributes & positions" thread.
.... The following passage from the "Playing Rules & Principles" will have to be clarified: .... - Sometimes, words may be said to a player falling short of the basic standard which seem harsh. However, please no swearing or show of aggression towards your team mates or opponents.
.... As reiterated recently, the "Adults" in "Generic Football For Adults" is not superfluous. Everyone is expected to participate as an adult, with maturity. I wouldn't want to place too much of a burden on the selectors/captains. And from the "Playing Rules & Principles" thread: .... Our core values are: - Maintaining health, fitness and/or interests even as we get older through sustainable participation in sports and other activity.
- Facilitating a work-life balance.
- Voluntary participation with maturity and in good spirits.
- Achieving a balanced and healthy perspective on sport and competition.
- Developing friendships and finding enjoyment through participation.
Everyone who plays by the rules and core values is welcome. The converse is that anyone who does not play by the rules and core values is not welcome. .... As I also reiterated recently, this forum, and the GIFFA System, are facilitative. I operate the forum and system to provide broad parameters, and guidelines. If players want to participate in our games, and to get the best out of our games, they have to make proper use of the forum and the system. If there is something about our games that bothers you, speak up, either to any player that is the cause, to the team selectors/captains, or to me. There are plenty of avenues to address your concerns. You don't have to bear it, or worse, walk away from our games. On the other hand, don't retaliate or react in a way that may itself amount to a breach of the Playing Rules & Principles. As I said to one of the players recently, I am not here to be a policeman. Very often, an apology from the offending player will resolve the matter. If a matter is closed on the forum, but anyone remains aggrieved, or feels that the matter is more serious and further action should be taken, you have to decide for yourself if there has been a violation of the law, or whether you have other recourse in law, and follow up as you think fit with the relevant authorities, or with other proceedings. I am not in a position to advise players on this. On the other hand, if despite several reminders, a player doesn't participate in accordance with the principles and rules, or his breach is very egregious, I will have no choice but to exclude him from further participation, whether for a period of time, or indefinitely. As I am prepared to give everyone several chances, I do not easily treat a breach as very egregious. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Feb 14, 2016 10:53:32 GMT 8
Issues arise from time to time, covering the whole gamut of topics addressed under this, the Administration & Developments board. Recently, we have had to deal with the following:
And from the "Latecoming, late withdrawals & no shows" thread: .... As an aside, I also wouldn't want to place too much of a burden on team selectors/captains. They need to be able to enjoy the game too! .... We can deal with issues with good humour. And if nothing further else, I have learnt to value punctuality and time keeping even more, something my wife used to complain about me when we first got married. For all of this to be sustainable, it has to be fun for me too. From a WhatsApp exchange with Rainer earlier this week: - After Rainer expressed the view that persistent late-coming was disrespectful of other players and unacceptable:
- After Rainer expressed shock that both captains and players did not know the rules:
- After Rainer observed that many players were unaware that the rules provide for team selectors/captains to have the final say on the application of the rules:
- After Rainer noted that captains should be more involved:
The Overriding Principles, Core Values & Game Rules have recently been revamped to make certain issues, including how rules and principles are to be applied, clearer. Certain things need to be emphasized: - Feedback on significant matters is important. It is best given on the report threads, or the Chat threads. If it's genuinely sensitive, you can message me personally, but please don't message privately me just to avoid a more public discussion of the issue. An open discussion of relevant matters is important as to how the response is shaped. That's the nature of a forum. What is more important is to express yourself with sufficient moderation and courteousness. The aim is to deal with an issue, not to cause offence to anyone.
- At first instance, team selectors/captains should try to deal with material issues that arise during a game. Petty issues shouldn't really arise at all, if the game is played in accordance with the Overriding Principles and Core Values. Team selectors/captains shouldn't be overly burdened. If the issue cannot be resolved at the game itself, it can be followed up on the forum.
If games are played in accordance with the Overriding Principles and Core Values, there shouldn't be as many issues as there have been. The Overriding Principles and Core Values now provide as follows: PLEASE READ TO THE END OF THIS THREAD. YOUR PARTICIPATION IN OUR GAMES IS PREMISED ON IT..... Our games, and the playing rules set out in the post below are geared towards (i) keeping the game flowing (ii) while reducing the risk of injury and (iii) are intended to accommodate different styles of play. These are Overriding Principles. All Game Rules should be interpreted and applied in this light. Further, our Core Values are: - Maintaining health, fitness and/or interests even as we get older through sustainable participation in sports and other activity.
- Facilitating a work-life balance.
- Voluntary participation with maturity and in good spirits.
- Achieving a balanced and healthy perspective on sport and competition.
- Enhancing appreciation and understanding of teamwork and co-operation.
- Developing friendships and finding enjoyment through participation.
All games are expected to be played, and all Game Rules interpreted and applied, in accordance with the Core Values. .... Everyone who plays by the Core Values ... is welcome. The converse is that anyone who does not play by the rules and core values is not welcome..... Players shouldn't be team selectors/captains if they don't know what is required. Apart from the Overriding Principles, Core Values and Game Rules, there are also the Guidelines On Team Selection, Organization & Game Play and the GIFFA System. A lot to read perhaps, but if a player understands the Overriding Principles and the Core Values, the rest is largely common sense! The Overriding Principles and Core Values also provides: I have added an Appendix II to the GIFFA System thread to set out the current exclusions. I added the references in the first post to the GIFFA System thread. I have also updated the "Overview" post. The section previously headed "Playing" now comprises of the following: .... GamesThe aim is to have at least one game a day, so that anyone who wants to play on any day of the year has the possibility of a game. Times and locations may vary. Other games and activities may be arranged or organized on an ad hoc basis. The system and the schedule for our regular men's games, the overriding principles, core values and rules by which our games are played, and reports for our games, are under the "GIFFA-Defined Men's Games" category. You need to read through the system and the overriding principles, core values and rules before you participate. .... TermsIn particular, the first post to the GIFFA System thread provides: ....Please also read the Overriding Principles, Core Values & Game Rules. Your participation in our games depends on it. This thread on the GIFFA System, and the Principles, Values & Rules, are in essence the terms on which you agree to participate in our games. .... .... The rest of that section is now headed "Requirements". The reference to seasons has been moved from the bottom of the "Requirements" section to the "Games" section. Continuing with Rainer v Andrew B, Rainer came in for the game at the Grandstand yesterday (Saturday) as a late replacement for Glenn. During an exchange about "wake up calls" in the WhatsApp group chat for the game today (Sunday), Rainer added as follows: The conversation then continued as follows: | Yap he has improved
But did told me - he left earlier after knowing rainer was playing
| | We had the same issues with Fergus before, always a risk of relapse, need the "doctors" on hand to do their job when that happens.
Drs Raj, Babs and Rainer
| | fergus is a goner
| | He did make an effort
That's why we need more doctors. Can't leave it all to Rainer can we.
And as the saying goes, "laughter is the best medicine"
| | True - lol ....
|
On a more serious note, players do need to be more engaged for the system to be sustainable, and for everyone to get more out of it. Dialogue, co-operation, and working with weaker or flawed players (rather than excluding them) is all part of it. From the report thread for yesterday's game: And from the schedule thread for the game today: |
|
....
Question is, if you'll welcome the sudden influx, or prefer to keep it word-of-mouth.
