|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 26, 2014 11:33:23 GMT 8
From above: From the "Safety, health & sustainability" thread: .... I've finally added the contents: .... The following was moved to the first section of the "Playing Rules & Principles" thread: .... Anyone who repeatedly breaches or disregards the rules and principles may be blocked from playing for a period of time. .... More serious cases may result in an indefinite or permanent ban. An equivalent was added to the introductory section of the GIFFA System thread when it was first divided into sections in January 2014. I have now expanded on it as follows: .... Any player who repeatedly or persistently disregards the requirements of the GIFFA System, or disregards a reasonable request made by me, may be blocked from playing, for one or more games, a period of time, or indefinitely, depending on the seriousness of the non-compliance. .... On Sunday, we had a player blocked indefinitely, for repeated no shows. On a separate note, from above: .... I used to add links from The GIFFA System and Playing Rules & Principles posts to the latest discussion on particular issues on the announcement and discussion threads. However, as the issue progresses, I don't always update the link. Further, I was not consistent in adding links. I will therefore remove all the links from those posts/threads to the announcement and discussion threads. .... Instead, at the bottom of each section/post, I will include links to the announcement and discussion threads that are relevant to that section/post. Except for external links to location maps for our venues, and an internal link to information on parking at Balestier Road on the "Pitches @ Balestier Road" thread, under the "Scheduling & numbers" section of the "GIFFA System" thread, all links on these three game-defining threads (referred to above) will be between the three threads, or to the "Overview" thread on the Administration board. .... There is also the following link under the "Filling places & withdrawals" section to a post on the "Social dimension, and fun" thread: I'll leave it for now, but come back to it later. I've just added the references to "Pre-game protocol, cancellations & weather policy" and "The game, reports, credits, round ups & team selectors table" sections of the GIFFA System thread, so the process of adding links at the bottom of each section is now complete. I have replaced "The restriction on guests may be relaxed for special reasons" under the "Filling places & withdrawals" section of the GIFFA System thread with "The restriction on guests may be relaxed in very exceptional circumstances" removing the link in the process. Another example of exceptional circumstance arose recently. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jul 3, 2014 10:19:00 GMT 8
A couple of issues raised in the report threads this week. From the report thread for the game on Monday at East Coast: ..... .... But for the record, if a player goes off field to change boots, drink water or shit at the opponents end, it is courtesy to let everyone know (especially the opposing defence) when you are active and back in the game. You can't just suddenly get on the field collect a pass and shoot. (anything in the regs for this item Jiv?) .... .... Not specifically, but should be covered more generally by the rules on playing in the right spirit and against gamesmanship. Team selectors/captains can decide. From the "Team organization and game play" section of the "Guidelines On Team Selection, Organization & Game Play" thread: .... During a game, the two team selectors/captains also have the final say on the application of the Playing Rules & Principles. Any residual dissatisfaction after the game can be discussed on the report thread for the game. .... If the team selectors/captains can't agree, it can be discussed on the report thread after the game. .... The provision under the Guidelines quoted above has also been added to the first section of the Playing Rules & Principles thread. I have added in both places that if the team selectors/captains cannot agree, the issue should be discussed on the report thread after the game, and may be followed up on the appropriate announcements and developments thread. It now reads as follows in both places: From the report thread for the Sunday evening game at The Grandstand: rajiv is it possible to agree before kick off whether we will have a 2 minute drink break after 40 minutes of the game? rule is that you can't leave the pitch so must bring your drink with you and strictly limited to 2 minutes or less (I think you would find it would be less than 2 in most cases) I think it would greatly improve the quality of the game in the last 20 I've added to the first section of the Playing Rules & Principles thread that team selectors/captains can agree to modify or adapt the rules to take into account circumstances at the game. From the "Filling places & choices" thread: .... The priority is ordinarily based on who gets their name down on the forum first. However, if I am forced to ask around to fill a place and we are down to the last few hours before the game, I think it is only fair that I have some discretion who gets the place. By this stage, I would have asked around fairly extensively, so it doesn't matter if the reply is the WhatsApp group chat, by a personal message (whether WhatsApp or SMS), a telephone call, or on the forum. Players who want to ensure priority by putting their names down on the thread would have had ample time to do so in the 5 preceding days, after the schedule thread was first put up. In fact, priorities start to change once the poll is up (a day and a half or less before the game), as those who owe for more than one previous game lose priority, and I can move GIFFA Players ahead of guests on the waitlist. I have added the following to the "Filling places and withdrawals" section of the GIFFA System thread: Priority for a game is in the order in which the names are put down on the schedule thread for that game. After the team selector/captain poll is put up for that game, priority may be modified as follows: - On the waitlist, GIFFA Players may be moved ahead of guests.
- On the waitlist, players who do not owe for previous games may be moved ahead of players who owe for previous games. This is separate from the provision under "Payment and penalties" below.
- If I am forced to ask around extensively to fill up any remaining places, priority may be in the order in which they reply to me, especially in the last few hours before the game.
From the "Team selectors/captains & line ups" thread: A lot of regulars are opting out as team selectors or even captains from the weekend games at The Grandstand. This despite my having increased the credit for team selectors for these games from $2 to $3 since March 2013. For the more popular games which fill up within a day or two, the better incentive to be team selectors might be that I reserve places for the previous week's team selectors in the following week's game. From next month onwards, I will reserve 2 places in the following week's game for 48 hours for the two team selectors (captains not included) from the previous game. The players must confirm on the schedule thread within 48 hours that they are in, either by themselves or through another GIFFA Player on their behalf. If either of them does not confirm his place within 48 hours, the place will be released to others. From next month onwards, I will reduce the team selector credit for the weekend games to $2, in line with the games at Balestier Road and East Coast. I have added the following to the "Filling places & withdrawals" section of the GIFFA System thread: .... For more popular games, two places will be reserved for the first 48 hours for the team selectors in the previous game. .... The change in the team selector credit for the weekend games at The Grandstand is now reflected in the "The game, reports, credits, round ups & team selectors table" section of the GIFFA System thread. Where an elected team selector asks another player to act as team selector for him, all or part of the credit may be given to the substitute team selector. Also, from the same post from the "Team selectors/captains & line ups" thread: I have made the change to the "Team selectors/captains & line ups" section of the GIFFA System thread. As team captains have been included, the "Weekly Round Up & Team Selectors Table" board was renamed "Weekly Round Ups, Tables & Game Records" I have brought the expressions in the "The game, reports, credits, round ups & team selectors table" section of the GIFFA System thread in line, including renaming the section "The game, reports, credits, round ups & tables". The last paragraph of the section now reads: .... There is also a weekly round up and a team selectors/captains table for included results on the Weekly Round-Up, Tables & Game Records board. The weekly round ups are posted according to 6-monthly seasons, from April to September, and October to March the following year, with one thread for each season. .... |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Apr 8, 2015 10:09:27 GMT 8
Several important changes were introduced by the start of the current quarter, so I summarised them in a new thread on the "Introductions, Requests & Chat" board, as follows, and provided the link the WhatsApp group chat for the more popular games: I may use the same thread in the same way in the future. For the games over the weekend (Saturday, 4 April 2015 and Sunday 5 April 2015), Jake was keen to introduce the back-pass rule. The rule, as described on Wikipedia, is as follows: Our rules currently provide as follows: Playing Rules: .... - The players in each team take turns in goal. .... There is no backpass rule, so the goalkeeper can pick up the ball even if the ball was passed back to him by a team mate.
.... The reason why we don't apply the back-pass rule is so that players who are nervous about playing in goal are more comfortable doing so when taking their turn. The rules also provide as follows: .... Team selectors/captains can agree to modify or adapt the rules to take into account circumstances at the game. .... , Jake volunteered to be team selector after Chen Hong declined, and agreed with the other team selector to apply the back-pass rule. From the "7 or 8-a-side for the big covered pitch at The Grandstand" thread on the "Introductions, Requests & Chat" board: I am not aware whether the back-pass rule was applied in the Sunday game. Going forward, whether to apply the back-pass rule can be decided game by game by the team selectors for each game, especially for the games at The Grandstand. If it becomes the norm, even if only at The Grandstand, I will change the rules accordingly. On the WhatsApp group chat for the Saturday game, Desmond also suggested that we do away with the scoring restriction on the team with the extra player if one team is for whatever reason a player short. He suggested that the team a player short should just bear the consequences. Our games are not like other competitive games where teams are put together independently, and then turn up to play. For our games, as players put their names down individually, selectors and the other players on the team have no choice over the pool of players. Nevertheless we have a system to try to get evenly-matched teams, and ensure the game is competitive. If team selectors decide to do away with the scoring restrictions, they can do so. However, they should be willing to switch a player over if the team with the extra player start to run away with the game. On the WhatsApp group chat for the Saturday game, Jake also queried the method of creating the system and making rules. I replied that the the system is a mix of what is necessary, what is expedient, and what people think or want. Most issues have been discussed on this board over the years. With each thread on this board running into several pages, it may not always be easy to find the most relevant discussion on an issue, but I can usually find it, and bring it to the attention of those discussing the issue again. |
|
|
|
Post by Rainer on Aug 20, 2015 11:19:28 GMT 8
From my experience the back-pass rule does not improve any aspect of the game. On top, it seems difficult to administer for multiple reasons:
- if the gc picks up a back-pass on the goal-line according to the rule an indirect free-kick is awarded to the opponent team on the goal-line. where does the 'wall' stand in that case?
- what exactly is a back-pass may often be unclear, l.e. was the pass 'deliberate' or not, did an opponent have any contact with the ball before the gc picked it up, did the captains communicate to their teammates if the back-pass rule is applied for the game ect.
additional rules are generally a hindrance to a fluid game. there is a good reason why we don't play with an offside rule either. i am against the back-pass rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Nov 17, 2015 17:39:20 GMT 8
There have been controversies in the following recent games about handball: As I stated in the report thread for the game on 3 November 2015: Calling a foul for handball is a controversial area. Even referees in the professional game have a lot of difficulty with making the right call. Some articles to read: My aim is to keep our games flowing and to avoid getting bogged down in technical rules. As deliberate handball is a controversial area, unless it is reasonably clear that there was contact between the ball and a player's hand or arm, and that the contact was deliberate on the part of the player, it is not a foul. The Playing Rules also provide: .... - 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.
.... .... Each of our games is played in a confined space, with a much higher player to playing area ratio than 11-a-side football. The risk of the ball deflecting or ricocheting off other players or other parts of the body and striking an arm or the hand is high. Unless it is reasonably clear that the hand or arm was moved towards the ball, or held in a position, to deliberately block, deflect or control the ball, it is not a foul. If there is any real doubt, we continue with a goal kick, with possession going to the team that was last in possession. More generally, to assist the selectors/captains to make a quick decision on disputed calls, please apply the following rules of thumb: - If the player on the receiving end of the tackle or challenge is physically hurt or suffers greater physical impact than is a normal incident of our games, it is presumed to be a foul, resulting in a free kick or penalty.
- In every other case, it is presumed not to be a foul, and the game should resume with a goal kick.
While the aim is to keep the game free flowing, safety is a priority. On the other hand, from the "GIFFA values, principles & standards" thread: .... 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: - ....
- Feigning being on the receiving end of a foul, or feigning an injury.
- ....
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. .... ..., 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. To "feigning an injury", I will add "feigning serious hurt". Also, from the "Sportsmanship & Gamesmanship" thread: .... Players can disagree about calls, but the use of pejorative terms like "cheat", even if purportedly in jest, is uncalled for, and unsporting. Please cut it out. Anyone who can't deal with such issues as a sensible adult should seriously consider whether our games are suitable for him. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jan 15, 2016 14:49:48 GMT 8
From the "The social dimension, and fun" thread: I have renamed the "Sportsmanship v Gamesmanship" thread on the "Introductions, Requests & Chat" board as "Attitudes". From that thread: .... The issues are clearly broader than simply "Sportsmanship v Gamesmanship". It is about the attitude players have about our games, or take during our games, and covers several aspects, including: - Gamesmanship, including winding up opponents, simulation, and feigning injury, and making unnecessary calls during a game or insisting on calls going in one's favour.
- Excessive arguing and unnecessary displays of hostility, anger, or aggression.
- Over-reacting or retaliating, whether in words or overzealous tackling.
Further, we all need to learn to balance the competitive edge to our games with the primary social dimension. .... The social dimension is primary. Competitiveness is the edge. Players who overdo the competitiveness have to consider whether they want to play with us, or find a team playing in a competitive league, or even organise their own game. Our values are clearly stated on 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. .... I will remind players of this as often as necessary. Given the primary social dimension, I am loathe to suspend or ban any player. .... Unprovoked and excessive personal abuse, violence well beyond the physical contact inherent in football, or putting other's safety at serious risk are probably the only things for which I would impose an immediate sanction. And exaggerating incidents or over-reacting to them in order to influence me will be counter-productive. And I will remember. Our players need to get on with each other for the system to work. A lot of players meet for the first time through our games, and get to know each other well. Players who don't appreciate the core values, or the system we work with, have to decide for themselves if they want to continue playing with us. .... ..... Given the primary social dimension, I would rather seek to modify unsuitable behaviour through repeated reminders, rather than adding or imposing more technical or rigid rules and sanctions. .... If repeated reminders don't have the desired effect, I am prepared to tailor specific rules and sanctions for the player in question. It is then left to the player concerned to decide for himself whether he wishes to continue to play in our games. However, if unsuitable attitudes and behaviours do not change after repeated reminders and more limited sanctions, and the player still insists on playing in our games, at some stage, the player concerned will have to be specifically excluded. In a related context, Dennis was one of the team captains for the 6-a-side game on Tuesday, 12 January 2016, on a small pitch at The Grandstand. Not for the first time, the mood of the Tuesday game deteriorated quickly over petty calls, arguments, and reactions. The core values should be borne in mind at all times during our games. Also, at stated at the outset on the "Playing Rules & Principles" thread: .... We play each game without a referee. The playing rules set out in the post below are geared towards keeping the game flowing while reducing the risk of injury and are intended to accommodate different styles of play. .... Where the two selectors/captains agree on a decision, they in effect act jointly as referee. However, no one selector or captain is a referee. More importantly, one of the primary aims is to keep the game flowing, and not to constantly stop the game over inconsequential or imagined fouls. From the "Abilities" thread on the "Introductions, Requests & Chat" board: .... In attempting to apply the rules, Dennis seems to have overlooked the following: .... If significant contact is made with an opposing player by any of the above, it is a foul (even if the ball is won), with a free kick to the opposing side if committed outside the D and a penalty if committed inside the D. Any player who repeatedly commits such fouls will be suspended. .... There is a requirement for "significant contact" before a foul is called. It has to be applied sensibly. I think there is an increasing tendency by certain players to over-react, whether it is Dennis or anyone else calling fouls over inconsequential incidents, and then blowing it up, or players reacting to Dennis, and the whole thing getting blown up even more. Over-reacting is often a form of gamesmanship, in the same way simulation or feigning injury is, and needs to be cut out - Dennis has to stop the excessive calling of fouls, and arguing about them, and those playing with him need to be thicker-skinned (as apparently Honda is  ). If players are going to overreact, I will define "significant, change "significant" to "substantial" or some other word that is clearer in meaning, or consider further changes to the rules. Football is a contact sport. Our games are for adults. In this context, at its simplest, "significant contact" means over and above that which is normally incidental to, or to be expected, in our games. .... I will review the Playing Rules & Principles over the next few months to ensure the above considerations are brought out clearly. On a separate note, from the schedule thread for last night's game: .... I'd like to raise the question of using spiked boots during Giffa games... about 6 players were using spiked boots and that led to a number of injuries on both sides. Moritz's toe was bleeding after the game as he got stamped on unintentionally and Kenny also took a nasty wack. For the whites, 1 player also got kicked in the ankle (unintentionally of course) and was nice enough to get up immediately and shake it off. If football boots are the norm of Khalsa matches, I'm definitely going to recommend everyone to wear it (along with shin guards) so that at least everyone is prepared and people don't complain about spikes at the end of the game.. aka play at your own risk. Just my thoughts. .... I messaged Imran on WhatsApp. He couldn't remember who had worn studs. If I know who they are, I can remind the players concerned of the rules on footwear. From the "Game kit & equipment" thread: .... The rules are clear: .... It is now a question of enforcement. I'm not going to suggest that selectors/captains check footwear before the game. However, if anyone notices improper or unsuitable footwear, they should bring it to the attention of the selectors/captains. At first instance, it is for the selectors/captains to decide what action should be taken. At the very least, they should remind the player concerned to exercise greater care. If the matter is more serious (either the player disregards the selectors/captains, or there is an injury, or a player has been reminded previously), the selectors/captains or the other players affected should inform me. .... .... It would be useful if team selectors/captains could take note. Perhaps team selectors/captains should carry a notebook and pen during the game. The rules on footwear were established some time ago. Players, especially new or newer ones need to be informed or reminded. Although it is on the GIFFA System thread, most players don't read. In order to inform or remind a player, I need to know who the player is. If, instead of informing me of an issue so that I can address it with the players concerned, other players, especially the longstanding ones, take the view that they will disregard the system or rules as well, that is the start of the breakdown. I am seriously considering requiring team selectors/captains to have a notebook and a pen with them.  More seriously, players, especially team selectors/captains, have to appreciate that they undermine the long term sustainability of a game if they don't provide me with relevant information. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Feb 13, 2016 10:47:43 GMT 8
Continuing from above, from the report thread for the game at The Grandstand on Sunday, 31 January 2016: .... I think I need to tidy up the Principles and Rules to give clarity, in the light of issues that have arisen over the past year. I have made the changes. The Playing Rules & Principles before the changes are as below: Playing Rules Principles _ GENERIC INDOOR ....pdf (361.5 KB) Playing Rules Principles _ GENERIC INDOOR ....pdf (361.5 KB) The Overriding Principles, Core Values & Game Rules after the changes are below. Overriding Principles Core Values Game Rul....pdf (295.66 KB) And from the "Attitudes" thread: Continuing from above, the game on Tuesday, 5 January 2016 saw Dennis in "action" once again. Before that, Dennis had not played since November 2015. From the report thread: I view these as unacceptable incidents of gamesmanship, amounting to disregard for the principles and rules we play by, and going against what our games are for. I have been through these with you several times before. It is unfortunate that I have to repeat myself. And I don't think you have suitably apologised. A qualified apology is no apology at all. A simple "sorry" is an apology. To illustrate a non-apology, saying "I'm sorry you can't take my banter" is not an apology. I might have to impose a complete silence rule on you for you to continue playing. If anyone does a zip across their mouth at you, you have to zip it. If you don't, you may have to suspended for a period of time or indefinitely!!!  Sportsmanship should not be saved for after the game, it should be exhibited throughout the game. And its not about you, or anyone else. Everyone has to get on for our games to be sustainable. Overdoing mea cuplas, even if not meant to be sarcastic or ironic, makes it about you, while references to the characters or motives of other players hints at criticism of them, and makes them the issue. You don't need to second guess other players. Just cut out all forms of gamesmanship and bad behaviour. After I posted that, Dennis had a lengthy exchange with me on WhatsApp. He also posted the following response on the report thread: Rajiv you do realise I am making this effort in the spirit of the new year and being over generous in reproaching myself in view that no one takes a stand or any stand at all for that matter. rightly or wrongly, I did my own cross examination and apologised to Perm - incase he felt it was my tackle that took him out. I did not qualify any apology - anyway as I said, I will be pretentious and friendly to kind and foul alike in future on the pitch if I choose to play so there will be consistent treatment for everyone. so if there are recriminations as a result of people bad behaving, and you know most people in the forum are nice, they dont like to report others but only choose to do so, because they are themselves being given a dose of the same on the pitch, you will know why that happened. those who chose to hide behind a veil are often the ones who are guilty of some wrong doing themselves - else why hide? when I speak up, and report - I seem to feel the full force of the "law" I ought to follow that zip rule across the board then. anyway like I said, I know what I have to do. its a new year let's not start the year on bad blood. My further response: From the schedule thread for the game last night: .... After the run ins between Dennis and Peminder in last week's game (when neither was captain), as captains, I have to remind them of the Playing Rules & Principles, in particular, the following: - Playing in the right spirit.
- Unless it is agreed or conceded that there has been a foul, there is no foul, and the game resumes or continues accordingly.
- Disagreements about particular incidents, if important enough, can be resolved after the game, or on the report thread.
As Dennis is one of the two captains, the "zip it" rule can't apply to him in this game. .... After the game, I received the following complaints from two players I had not previously received complaints from: That's brings to about a dozen the number of different players who have complained to me about Dennis since he returned to Singapore in April 2015. I have reminded Dennis many times to moderate and control his behaviour. Each time, he has argued with me, providing excuses for his behaviour. It is a waste of everyone's time. With immediate effect:
- ....
- The "zip it" rule will apply to Dennis. If any other player faces Dennis and runs an imaginary zip across his own mouth, Dennis is not to utter a word for the next 5 minutes. The player doing so should do so from a reasonable distance in order not to inflame or aggravate the situation.
.... Upon further consideration, the "zip it" rule should be of general application, not just limited to Dennis. And to make sure it is focused, effective, and used correctly, only team captains can use it, on any player playing in the game, whether the player is on their team or on the opposing team. I've added the following to the Game Rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Feb 23, 2016 15:42:29 GMT 8
Further to the post above, on the report thread for the game on Tuesday, 15 February 2016, at The Grandstand (small pitch): Dennis you clearly didnt see how my hands were placed. Even your captain agreed it was not handball. .... Yas my bro, I dont think it matters where your hands were placed? *I think you were like rubbing your nether regions or something * the point I am making is if we are going to call handballs, let's be consistent and call every ball which hits the hand a handball, else we can argue till the cows come home and still wont find any consistency. Yes the skip decided not to call it, because he saw that it was pointless which is why we din argue at that time, I am just making the point now because your team seemed to play it down conveniently .... .... Actually Dennis, it does matter where the hand is placed, more so in our games than the professional game even. This was discussed on the "GIFFA system & playing rules" thread recently, as follows: [Quotation from above post] I'll add the above "presumptions" to the Overriding Principles, Core Values & Game Rules. thanks Rajiv - the only problem is we cannot even decide where the hand is placed - that's the problem!?! that was the inference I was trying to make - for eg. handball called against Stuart for heading the ball into his own hand - its really a case of ball to hand rather - that's why its so difficult to call unless its a blatant handball which was not the case for our incidents - so I would much prefer - call it all or not at all unless its blatant and an intentional act to bring the ball or interfere with the flight of the ball. splitting hands here I think - The general rule is if you can't call it don't call it. It is also relevant is whether the player had committed an act which is in any event disallowed, such as having an arm outstretched. I'll add that to the presumptions too. Not splitting hairs Dennis, establishing principles. Maybe I should add one more presumption, when it's 50:50, the decision goes in favour of the team that is trailing by 2 goals or more. I think I'll add that as well. More importantly, if the player(s) concerned or the captains agree, is there anything more for any other player to say? I've made the changes to the Games Rules, as follows: .... - As we play without a referee, if a player involved in a passage of play calls a foul, unless the player committing the foul or his team captain concede the foul, continue the play until the ball goes out of play or is in the hands of a goalkeeper. When a foul is called, 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 the call is conceded, it resumes with the free kick or penalty as the case may be. Where there is a genuine dispute, and no agreement is reached, the following rules of thumb shall be applied to expedite matters:
- If the player on the receiving end of the tackle or challenge is physically hurt or suffers greater physical impact than is a normal incident of our games, it is presumed to be a foul, resulting in a free kick or penalty. It should not lightly be alleged that a player is feigning physical hurt. However, a player's past conduct is a relevant consideration. Therefore, my advice to all players is do not develop a reputation for simulation or feigning physical hurt. It will be held against you.
- If the player has committed an act that is in any event disallowed, as set out above, this will weigh against him.
- All genuinely 50:50 calls should be decided in favour of the team trailing by 2 goals or more.
- In every other case, it is presumed not to be a foul, and the game continues from where play stopped.
- If necessary, the dispute can be resolved later, in the post-game discussions, or on the report thread for the game.
.... In making the changes, I also noted that following the recent additions, the reference to "gamesmanship" appeared in to separate passages. I have now combined them into one, as follows: - Players are expected to play in the right spirit. During a game, captains may agree that a disruptive player should leave the game for 5 to 10 minutes to cool down, compose himself or reflect on his conduct. Repeated or serious instances of not playing in the right spirit may result in sanctions. The following are examples of not playing in the right spirit:
- Committing a deliberate foul, or calling out to a team mate to commit a deliberate foul.
- All forms of gamesmanship, including but not limited to winding up opponents (over and above mere banter), simulation and feigning injury, repeatedly making unnecessary calls during a game or stubbornly insisting on calls going in one's favour, or calling out to an opponent to pass the ball to you in order to confuse the opponent.
- Excessive arguing and unnecessary displays of hostility, anger, or aggression towards other players, whether on your own team on the opposing team.
- Over-reacting or retaliating, whether in words or by overzealous tackling, or blowing up incidents to try to influence decisions.
On a separate note, from the "GIFFA values, principles & standards" thread: And from the "Scoring from anywhere" thread: I suggest you set up a poll on possible scoring scenarios 1) Direct goal fm a kick in 2) Direct goal fm a Goalie's throw 3) Direct goal fm a corner these remain unclear to me and its better to have it decided by voting once and for all. For a goal scored off the roof net, i think its been generally accepted that its a no -goal unless it touches someone along the way. Perhaps we can have more of a discussion on this thread to flush out what the issues are in respect of each, before I put myself to the trouble of adding 3 polls. .... The rationale is discussed further above. The rules currently provide for the following: - We continue to play off the overhead netting. However, if a ball goes in directly off the overhead netting, it is not a goal.
- We can score from anywhere on the pitch. A team can score direct from a free kick, goal kick or kick in. There are no indirect free kicks in our game. A goalkeeper who catches the ball in play can throw it directly into the opposing goal. Of course, the goalkeeper cannot handle the ball outside the "D".
- If a goal is scored or disallowed, we usually re-start with a goal kick, although those playing in the game may agree to start from the centre spot after a goal is scored.
Anyway, any GIFFA Player can put up a poll: .... Previously the principles and rules included provision for team selectors/captains to modify the rules for a particular game. I took that out earlier this month, but I shouldn't have, so I've put it back in. The passage now reads as follows: .... The Game Rules are set out below. The two team selectors/captains for any game can, between themselves, agree to modify the Game Rules for that particular game, as they think necessary or desirable. During a game, the two team selectors/captains also have the final say on the application of the Overriding Principles, Core Values & Game Rules. If the team selectors/captains cannot agree, the issue should be discussed on the report thread after the game, and may be followed up on the appropriate announcements and developments thread. Any residual dissatisfaction after the game can also be discussed on the report thread for the game. .... Much the system, and the rules, have been in place for some time now. It has reached the stage where I am reluctant to make changes, unless there is a clear reason for doing so, or there has been sufficient discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on May 27, 2016 8:41:46 GMT 8
Continuing from the post above, Appendix II to the GIFFA System thread read as follows: Kong Fei's exclusion from the team selector/captain polls ended on 3 May 2016. Chen Hong's exclusion is lifted with immediate effect. As for Dennis, from the "Attitudes" thread: .... Going forward, I'll let Dennis play in any game he wants to. However, he remains on probation, so I won't allow him to put his name down himself, at least until the end of June 2016. He has to do so through me. He is also excluded from team selector/captain polls until the end of the year. .... Appendix II will be amended accordingly. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jul 28, 2016 9:03:19 GMT 8
The "Pre-game protocol, cancellations & weather policy" section of the "GIFFA System" thread currently provides: .... For games on uncovered pitches, if there is heavy rain and/or lightning in the hour before the game is due to start, the game will be cancelled, unless it appears that the rain/lightning is easing up, and that the game can go ahead despite the wet conditions. .... The Khalsa game on Thursday, 21 July 2016, was cancelled at 9.05 pm due to heavy rain. It eased up by about 9.20 pm, but the pitch would in any event have been too waterlogged to play on. From the schedule thread: .... It only started to rain at about 8.40 pm, with several players already there or on their way, and only became heavy about 8.50 pm. As players were already there before the game was cancelled, I will include it as a game played for purposes of the number of games played per month and by each player. I believe that has only happened once before, on 30 September 2012. We had two games on that night, both of which were cancelled. Currently, 3 of our 6 games are on uncovered pitches, Monday night at Macpherson, and Wednesday and Thursday nights at Khalsa. Before 2011, most of our games were played on covered pitches. To the best of my recollection, I doubt that more than 10 games have been cancelled due to rain since then. However, even if heavy rain stops by 8 pm, there is a risk that the game may be cancelled due to the pitch being waterlogged. This appears to be a greater risk at Macpherson, where I understand the water is very slow to drain away. The game on at Macpherson on Monday, 16 May 2016 was cancelled for this reason, even though it had stopped raining by 7.30 pm, as those who play regularly there felt the pitch would still be waterlogged at 9 pm. Several games have been cancelled over the years due to the haze. From the "Filling places & choices thread: .... .... Going forward I propose the following: - Anyone who doesn't want to play even if the 3-hour PSI is below 150 one hour before the game should withdraw 5 hours before the game, so that I have enough time to find a replacement. This includes players who don't want to wait until one hour before the game, and want to make other plans instead.
- If the 3-hour PSI is between 150 and 175 one hour before the game, I will leave it to the individual players whether they wish to go on. If enough players want to go on, the game can go on. Those who don't can drop out.
- If the 3-hour PSI is between 175 and 200 1 hour before the game, I will suggest to the players that the game be cancelled. If enough players want to go on, I will not cancel the game, subject to the caveat that the players who want to go on should consider the conditions at the venue at before the game starts, and make a final decision then whether to go on. If they decide at that time to cancel, please let me know,so that I can cancel the booking too.
- If the 3-hour PSI is above 200, I will make the decision to cancel.
And from the "Safety, health & sustainability" thread: .... Some views that the thresholds are too low: .... I will continue to use the 3-hour PSI from the NEA website. However, in deciding whether to go on at PSI levels above 150, players may wish to consider additional factors: I will fine-tune the haze policy and add it to the GIFFA System thread in due course. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Dec 15, 2016 20:52:22 GMT 8
From the "Price of popular games" thread on the Stand-Alone Polls board: .... The number of withdrawals in the 30 hours before the Wednesday game remains a huge problem. I will certainly implement in the new year one of the options being voted on above. Only 2 votes so far: It doesn't end there though. If the game is cancelled, there is a risk of having to pay for the cancellation. From the "Filling places & choices" thread: .... ..., the management at HYFA @ Macpherson, and the new management at The Grandstand, repeatedly warn me that I will still have to pay for the pitch if the game is cancelled less than 48 hours before the game. So far, I have had to argue/plead with them to waive payment for the games that have been cancelled. Going forward, for games on those pitches, if we do not reach the minimum number at least 48 hours before the game, it will be cancelled. For all games, if we have enough 24 hours before the game, I will create the WhatsApp group chat as usual. However, if there are withdrawals after the group chat is created, which cause the game being cancelled: - Any payment for the unused pitch will have to be shared equally between those who withdrew after the group chat was created. I will first try to have the payment waived or reduced.
- If no payment is required for the unused pitch, those who withdrew after the group chat was created must still pay a $1 admin fee.
The above will take effect from the game scheduled tomorrow (2 November 2016, for Monday, 7 November 2016).
This now extends to Khalsa. The new manager at The Grandstand was previously overall in charge of both the Premier Pitch @ Grandstand and the Premier Pitch @ Khalsa. When he became more hands on at The Grandstand, he started enforcing the cancellation policy. Looks like he is now doing the same at Khalsa. So with immediate effect, the system set out above for cancellations will apply to all venues. I have modified the "Pre-game protocol, cancellations & weather policy" section of the GIFFA System thread to provide as follows: .... If 48 hours before a scheduled game, we are short of the minimum number, I will cancel the pitch booking. However, if numbers improve after that, I may re-make the booking for the pitch. About 48 hours before the game, I create a WhatsApp group chat with all the players who have a confirmed place for the game. Any player who has to withdraw should notify the group chat. If there are players on waitlist, they will be added to the group chat in place of the player who withdraws. If we are short of players, it is the responsibility of everyone, including myself, to try to find players to make up the numbers. If we have less than the minimum number required for the game, the pitch booking will be cancelled. If between about half and the minimum number of places are filled, I will ask those who put their name down to see whether we can get at least the minimum number, or whether they are interested in switching to a smaller pitch (subject to availability). If we have at least the minimum number when the group chat is created, but as a result of withdrawals, the game is cancelled, those who withdraw less than 42 hours before the game will have to share any cancellation fee payable for the venue, unless they find their own replacement. If there is no cancellation fee payable, they will still have to pay a $1 admin fee. Withdrawals include anyone stating a condition for playing which was not stated before the group chat was created, for example, they only want to play with the maximum number. Further, those who remain unconditionally available until the game is cancelled will have places reserved for them for the following week's game. .... Under the "Filling places & withdrawals" section, I have added the following: The above changes take effect with the next game to be scheduled. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Mar 27, 2017 18:52:20 GMT 8
From the report thread for the game last Saturday (18 Mar 2017): Balanced teams with Whites winning 3 to 2 via a hotly disputed penalty. CredIt to Gerald for owning up to fouling Cedric but they were too many people arguing if it was an valid penalty. Jiv, if I am not wrong, the victim of any foul should be the only one whose can call it. My view is that we should apply this so everyone including team captains should stay out of the discussion. Also noticed that sat games tend to be heated. ..., I think we should all be reminded that we are doing this for fun .... .... Christian raised the same matter in the group chat before the game yesterday (Sunday). Jon also referred to the issue of handball, which has been discussed earlier on this thread. I referred the group chat to the following passages from the rules: ....
- Other than that the goalkeeper within the "D", players are not allowed to deliberately handle the ball or deliberately use their arm to change the direction of the ball. As each of our games is played in a confined space, with a much higher player to playing area ratio than 11-a-side football, the risk of the ball deflecting or ricocheting off other players or other parts of the body and striking an arm or the hand is high. Unless it is reasonably clear that the hand or arm was moved towards the ball, or held in a position, to deliberately block, deflect or control the ball, it is not a foul.
....
- Subject to the considerations and qualifications below, the following are also not allowed during a game:
Considerations/qualifications: If significant contact is made with an opposing player by any of the above, it is a foul (even if the ball is won), with a free kick to the opposing side if committed outside the D and a penalty if committed inside the D. The converse is that if there is no significant contact, there is no foul and the game continues. In this context, at its simplest, "significant contact" means contact materially over and above that which is normally incidental to, or to be expected, in our games. Football is a contact sport. Our games are for adults.
.... - As we play without a referee, if a player involved in a passage of play calls a foul, unless the player committing the foul or his team captain concede the foul, continue the play until the ball goes out of play or is in the hands of a goalkeeper. When a foul is called, 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 the call is conceded, it resumes with the free kick or penalty as the case may be. Where there is a genuine dispute, and no agreement is reached, the following rules of thumb shall be applied to expedite matters:
- If the player on the receiving end of the tackle or challenge is physically hurt or suffers greater physical impact than is a normal incident of our games, it is presumed to be a foul, resulting in a free kick or penalty. It should not lightly be alleged that a player is feigning physical hurt. However, a player's past conduct is a relevant consideration. Therefore, my advice to all players is do not develop a reputation for simulation or feigning physical hurt. It will be held against you.
- If the player has committed an act that is in any event disallowed as set out above, this will weigh against him.
- All genuinely 50:50 calls should be decided in favour of the team trailing by 2 goals or more.
- In every other case, it is presumed not to be a foul, and the game continues from where play stopped.
- If necessary, the dispute can be resolved later, in the post-game discussions, or on the report thread for the game.
....
I also made the following observations: - If particular incidents are discussed in sufficient detail on the group chat or the report thread, we might achieve greater consistency.
- Excessive argument during the game about particular incidents should be discussed on the report thread. Those who are being ridiculous will sooner or later get shown up or embarrassed, and learn the appropriate way to address such incidents. If they don't, I will have a word with them.
- This forum is an appropriate platform for discussion, it is after all a forum.
- Ultimately, it's about playing as adults, and not being childish or immature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 2, 2017 9:04:01 GMT 8
From the report thread for the game on Monday (29 May 2017) at Macpherson: Maybe we should also say that one goal has been refused because a defensor was drinking water at the same time... so girly this rule Yap, not very sure where the line is drawn. Maybe Rajiv to clarify if it is no stopping regardless of situation. Cause I already saw hamadi running towards the keeper thinking he is swapping keeper and thus called "wait" very loud even before the game was restarted. But we saw then that he was not swapping keeper but went out for a drink which no one understood why he did that. The rules provide that players are to take turns in goal. It is up to selectors/captains to co-ordinate the swapping of keepers. As a matter of common sense, it is best to do so when the ball is out of play, or when the ball is with the keeper to be switched. However, I'm not going to make rules for that. Some things have to be left to common sense, otherwise, we'll end up with such a plethora of detailed rules that the system becomes unworkable and the games unplayable. There are some salient rules though, and analogies to be drawn from other rules. The rules provide the following: - "When a foul is called, don’t just leave the ball for the opposing side and stop playing. Sometimes, they will continue and score." This is just common sense, and applies to any situation where there is a unanticipated halt in play, or change in team organisation.
- "All genuinely 50:50 calls should be decided in favour of the team trailing by 2 goals or more." As far as I am concerned, this is an extension of the principles of sportsmanship.
- "Everyone should make a reasonable effort and contribute to the best of their ability to the team they are playing for." Players should not just switch off during a game. It is advisable to leave the pitch if you have to do something else, like drink water, or make a phone call. If a player has to leave the pitch for an extended period, inform your captain/selector.
Bottom line is that everyone should play in the right spirit. The principles and values provide the over-arching principle that "During a game, the two team selectors/captains also have the final say on the application of the Overriding Principles, Core Values & Game Rules."
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Nov 1, 2017 7:14:02 GMT 8
The GIFFA System currently provides as follows (under the "Filling places & withdrawals" section): The above was introduced in December 2016. The reason for the above, as set out on "The price of fast-filling game" thread on the "Stand-Alone Polls board, was that fast filling games often suffer from a lot of withdrawals in the last 24 hours. Players "choping" places had been an issue for some time before that. However, until recently, "choping" places has not been an issue this year, and the rule has so for not been applied. Until September 2017, we have not had so many players on waitlist for the more popular games, and the less popular games have been filling up better on the forum itself. However, in October 2017, the problem arose again for the Monday night game at Macpherson, as follows: - For the game on 9 October 2017, we got to 8 on waitlist. With 5 withdrawals (3 after the WhatsApp group chat was created), we were left with 3 on waitlist.
- For the game on 16 October 2017, we got to 7 on waitlist. With 5 withdrawals (4 after the team selector poll was created), we were left with 2 on waitlist.
- For the game on 23 October 2017, we got to 10 on waitlist. With 3 withdrawals after the WhatsApp group chat was created, we were left with 7 on waitlist.
- For the game on 30 October 2017, we got to 8 on waitlist, but with 10(!!!) withdrawals (8 on the day of the game itself, including 5 from the waitlist), we were left with only 12.
The game on 30 October 2017 was compounded by rain after 8 pm. 2 players did not want to go ahead in wet conditions. If we had had the full complement of 14 players, we could have still gone ahead 6-a-side, as the rest of the players were keen or willing. In September 2017 (and on several occasions before that), we had 4 players on waitlist for the Monday game on a few occasions, but with withdrawals, we were rarely left with more than a couple of players on waitlist. The situation in October 2017, as described above, was significantly worse. Therefore, from this month onwards, I will implement the rule strictly (especially since I am also creating additional games to accommodate more players). I will modify it slightly, as follows, to give players a bit of leeway: I have modified the section on the GIFFA System thread accordingly. On a separate note, Raj's exclusion from the team selector poll ended on 26 June 2017. There is currently no one under any exclusion. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Dec 18, 2018 13:55:03 GMT 8
From the "GIFFA values, principles & standards" thread: .... I am informed that Anthony has been late more than once since then. I have no choice but to act. The following sanctions take immediate effect:
- Anthony will be excluded from team selector/captain polls until further notice. I do not see how he can be selector/captain if he has great difficulty abiding by any of the GIFFA values, principles and standards, in this case, punctuality.
- He will not be given the first report credit unless he states the time he arrives in the report. If he is more than 5 minutes late, he will not be given the first report credit. Anthony often does the first report credit for the games he plays in. While I appreciate his effort in this respect, being prompt should apply first to being on time for games, before being first to post a report. Again, this will apply until further notice.
The situation will remain under review.
The sanctions were due to frequent or regular late-coming from the time he first started playing in Q4 2015. This was reflected under Appendix II of the GIFFA System thread ("Current exclusions/sanctions") as follows: To give him credit, even after the above sanctions were put in place, Anthony continued to post first reports for the games he played in. For the first few, he reported himself as having arrived at 9 pm. However, after about a month, he was regularly reporting himself as being 5 minutes late. Although he was earning the first report credit, he was also confirming his persistent late-coming. He hasn't done a report since 11 October 2018. There have been no complaints about his late-coming since the above sanctions were introduced. I will remove the sanctions. However, if there are further complaints, they may be re-introduced. On a separate note, from the the report thread for the game on 4 October 2018: The incident early in the game involved Josiah and Seth. I have boiled down the versions to two at the ends of the spectrum: - The first version: As Seth received a pass, Josiah ran into him from behind, knocking him over.
- The second version: As Seth tried to run past Josiah with the ball, Josiah impeded him.
The differences are significant in two respects:
- Whether Seth could have anticipated Josiah's challenge (and thus his fall).
- Whether the force of the collision was entirely that of Josiah's or arose from the momentum of both players.
Anand informed me yesterday that when Seth fell, he broke his arm in three places. I am very sorry to hear that. I hope he recovers quickly. This was Josiah's first game with us. He has messaged me to express his regret for the injury to Seth, and has voluntarily agreed not to play in the Thursday game for 3 months. Since yesterday, Anand has also been pressing me to take action against Josiah, and even after I said I would look into the matter, he continued to press me. When I said I need to gather the facts first, he insisted that it was a sliding tackle with studs showing, and tried to get his colleagues (5 of 6 his team mates) to back his account. Two of them gave me their accounts, but they were more in line with the first version above, not the version Anand pressed on me. The one player I would have liked to hear from, but have not, is Seth himself, perhaps because of his injury. However, Anand was insistent that it was not necessary for me to hear from him. Anand was the team selector for his team, and has been team selector on several previous occasions. I expect certain standards from team selectors, and I feel that Anand has fallen short in pressing unsupported claims on me, and insisting on a quick decision and severe sanctions even before the facts had been gathered and reviewed properly. In the circumstances, Anand will be excluded from team selector polls for a period of 3 months until he becomes more familiar with the system. More information about the system in the following threads: The following has transpired since the above post: - Anand messaged me on 8 October 2018 to say he would not be playing anymore. He has not played since.
- I had a discussion with Seth on WhatsApp on 30 October 2018 and 3 November 2018. I learnt how serious his injury was, and how badly affected he was by it, and conveyed both my regrets, and Josiah's regrets, to him. I also conveyed Seth's sentiments to Josiah on 30 October 2018, and asked him to consider how he can make amends.
- When we have been short of players for the Thursday game in recent weeks, Jeremiah has asked if his brother can play. I have asked those playing (which included colleagues of Anand and Seth from Disney) if they had any views. There were no objections. However, Josiah did not play.
The whole incident was very unfortunate. Some time has passed, and I think it is best to lift all sanctions. It would be good if Josiah could find some way to make amends to Seth, whether now, or in the near future.
As such, there are currently no sanctions in place against anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jul 23, 2019 19:47:26 GMT 8
Places for each game are based on a priority system. Although ordinarily, priority is based on the order in which names are placed on the schedule thread, there are the following exceptions: - Selectors/captains from the previous week's game have first priority in the first 24 hours.
- PRG players who commit to less popular games have priority in the first 24 hours for all games scheduled on the day of that game and the next 6 days. Currently, the less popular games are Sunday night at Khalsa and Tuesday night at Macpherson, but this may change from time to time.
- PRG players are allowed to put one name other than their own in the first 24 hours, and and additional name in the next 24 hours. Any names exceeding these limits lose priority within those periods.
- Players who have not played with us before or are not registered as GIFFA players (that is, guests) have no priority in the first 48 hours.
- If, within 24 hours of the schedule thread going up, a game fills up and has players on waitlist, and continues to have players on waitlist until the selector poll goes up (not more than 24 hours before the game), but withdrawals after the selector poll going up resulting in the game being cancelled or postponed, those who had a confirmed place when the WhatsApp group chat was created, but withdrew after the selector poll went up, will lose priority in the first 24 hours after the schedule thread for the following week's game goes up.
- Anyone who owes for more than one previous game when the WhatsApp group chat is created will lose priority and be moved to the bottom of the list.
Additionally, players who owe more than $50 (including the game they wish to put their name down for) are not allowed to put their names down for any game.
Our primary routine games are about giving more players the opportunity to play across a broader range of games, rather than fewer players rushing to grab or hog limited placed in a few games. It's not about getting your name in within the first couple of hours, but about making the commitment within the first 24 hours to play. Within that first 24 hours, players who are supportive of the system benefit in return.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 5, 2019 22:24:04 GMT 8
Continuing from the post above, there are further changes to the priority system, as updated on the "GIFFA values, principles and standards" and the "Social dimension, and fun" threads. In particular, selectors/captains and PRG players who do the first reports for the previous week's game have first priority in the first 24 hours. PRG players who put their names down for slow-filling games (games that do not fill up within 72 hours of the schedule thread for that game being put up) also have priority in the first 24 hours for all games for which the schedule thread goes up in the 7 days after that slow-filling game. There have also been changes to the credits for games, including the following: - The $2 credit for selectors is split into $1 credit for being selector and $1 credit for being captain. Each selector can appoint any other player in his team (other than anyone who has specifically opted out as captain) as captain.
Since the start of this month, there are 6 fixed games and 3 rolling games for the routine weekly schedule. A PRG player who regularly plays in a fixed game can ask for that game to be converted to a challenge match. The request should be made at least 6 days before the date of the game. The terms will be refined over time.
As most of our regular venues now require 48 hours' prior notice of cancellation, I will create the WhatsApp group chat between 60 and 48 hours before the game. Currently, I am creating the WhatsApp group chat 30 to 24 hours before the game. I will add the selector/captain poll 36 to 24 hours before the game. Currently, I am doing so 24 to 12 hours before. The poll will close 6 hours before the game. Currently, it closes 5 hours before.
The timing for the admin fee for withdrawing later from a fast-filling game (one that fills up within 24 hours of the schedule thread for that game being put up) and for the late withdrawal penalty, will be adjusted accordingly. I will also apply the admin fee more generally. The changes are as follows:
- For a fast filling game, having 3 or more players on waitlist at the time the WhatsApp group chat is created, anyone who had a confirmed place when the WhatsApp group chat is created, but withdraws after the selector/captain poll is put up, will have to pay a $1 admin fee.
- The late withdrawal penalty will run from the time the poll closes (that is, 6 hours before the game starts, instead of 5).
I will be revising the following to reflect the changes:
The above pages as at 1 July 2019 will be archived.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Nov 3, 2019 11:42:48 GMT 8
As I have said many times, from the outset, our games are to give those keen to play regularly an opportunity to play. From early on, the aim has been to have a game a day, so that whichever day a player wants to play, there is a game available. All our games have a reasonable balance between being competitive and being social, albeit some games are more more competitive while others are more social. The more popular games are those which are made up largely or entirely of regular players, giving rise to a greater consistency in standards, and higher commonality of expectations, inevitably leading to a greater competitive edge. For some time now, the most competitive game has been the Saturday game at Grandstand, played 8-a-side on a 7-a-side pitch. The greater competitiveness, together the higher player/area ratio, gives rise to greater physicality and aggression. Fortunately, since the Saturday game also has a higher proportion of older players, the greater aggression is manifested through the mouth, and not the fist! However, it also means that the Saturday regulars are less forgiving of the weaknesses of non-Saturday regulars, which makes it harder for them to break into the game. Also, when the Saturday game has been short of players for one reason or another, it has been hard to get players from the other games to come in, as the Saturday game has a reputation for being overly competitive. The challenge match has been a expedient solution. The Saturday evening challenge match organised first by Aschkan and now by Raj Singh has become a regular feature. It gives the regulars a greater say on how the game is organised, including who gets to play in that game. It also allows me to focus on the newer Saturday evening game at Khalsa, to allow those who can't get a place in the Grandstand game, or don't want the hyper-competitiveness of the Grandstand game, to get a game. The non-competitive, social, "all-comers" game is unfortunately still some way away. I will try to get one going by the end of the year. The aim is to be as inclusive as possible. The name of this forum is "Generic Indoor Football For Adults", to cover as many types of "indoor" football as possible. 5 or 7-a-side football (including futsal) started off being played indoor, but all our pitches are now outdoor (even though the ones we use at the Premier Pitch @ Grandstand are covered). To reflect a primary value, I will change "Indoor" to "Inclusive". The priority system is aimed to encourage players to play in the less popular games, instead of rushing for the more popular games, giving rise to long waitlists, and then having several players withdrawing after the WhatsApp group chat is created two days before the game. Sometimes, we get to 10 for a less popular game on a 7-a-side pitch, but because some of those 10 do not want to play 5-a-side, we end up cancelling the game rather than going ahead 5-a-side. This is unfortunate, since the aim is to give players an opportunity to play, and cancelling the game rather than going ahead 5-a-side undermines this primary purpose. Accordingly, going forward, players who do not remain available for a 5-a-side in the event we do not get enough players to remain on the 7-a-side pitch will lose any priority they would have gotten from putting their name down for the game. In fact, this should apply to any qualification that players have to playing, such as only wanting to play with the maximum number (for example, 7-a-side on a 7-a-side pitch), and not the minimum number (for example, 6-a-side on a 7-a-side pitch). The use of the priority system has only had a limited effect on reducing hogging or "choping" of places. To this end, the late-stage withdrawal admin fee (covering a longer period than the late withdrawal penalty) serves to supplement the priority system. If a PRG player's name is put down in the first 24 hours after the schedule thread goes up, the player has a confirmed place at the time the WhatsApp group chat is created with no less than 3 players on waitlist at that time, and all the places remain filled at the time the selector poll is added, the player will have to pay a $1 admin fee if he withdraws less than 12 hours before the game, in addition to any late withdrawal penalty for withdrawing less than 6 hours before the game. Also, I am currently reducing the price the player by $1 in the event it does not fill up within 48 hours after the schedule thread goes up, but declaring it is a slow-filling game (that is, it has not reached the minimum number) only 2 days before the game (more than 72 hours after the schedule thread goes up). Going forward, I will do both at the same time, 72 to 84 hours after the schedule thread goes up. |
|
....
).
