|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 1, 2012 10:24:15 GMT 8
Line ups agreed between Dan and Babs: Whites: Dan B (ts), David N, Jeff Lim, Imran, Clarence, Stephen 5, Mohammed Reds: Babs (ts), Lynz, Stan d Man, Lester, Azfar, John J, Brendan Everyone, please bring both a white top and a red top in any event. .... I understand Whites won comfortably. Add any comments about the game below. |
|
|
|
Post by Babs on Jun 1, 2012 10:32:43 GMT 8
A tough game for Reds who aside from a 5-10 min spell int he second half never really got going. A poor disjointed performance was summed up by our own players tackling each other in midfield leading to a goal for the opposition, shots from the half way deflecting and going in, belting own goal shots from the Reds, and some great Whites play led by Dan who at times was unplayable.
I have to take a large share of blame as I suggested the sides & Dan was happy to go along with them, but on paper I felt they were both quite evenly matched. Certainly it didn't look like a 15-6/16-6 game. Imran suggested a few times to mix up the teams but there was no point at that stage & reds still wanted to battle on.
Quite rare for a Wednesday game to be that one sided these days but it just didn't click & Whites were in the mood.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 1, 2012 10:45:10 GMT 8
Thanks Babs. I think there is a learning curve for team selectors as well. There's never any harm in changing the line ups halfway through if the game is too one sided. I think we need to go back to the purpose of our games. For those looking for regular, good, competitive games, which are enjoyable, and conveniently available, we have our regular games for adult males who meet the minimum standard. .... Our games are not for any other purpose. The "warm and fuzzy feeling" of a good, competitive, enjoyable game is within that purpose. .... .... Changing line ups when the score line is too one sided is not about easing off on the losing side. It is about acknowledging, as adults, that the line ups for that game are not working out, ending that game, and starting a new game with new line ups. The two games can be treated as two legs, with the aggregate score determining the overall winner. It keeps the game competitive, from beginning to end. I would limit it to the following situation though: * At least half the game has been played. * The scoreline is very one-sided. * The losing team has run out of ideas. In the circumstances, it would be very rare. .... Sometimes, even the winning side might appreciate a revamp halfway through. $2 credited to Babs for a first report. $2 credited to each of Babs and Dan B as team selectors/captains. |
|
PRG Player
|
Post by Lynz on Jun 1, 2012 11:37:56 GMT 8
Have to say that this would probably be the worse game i have played in since joining GIFFA. From the start, some of the Reds players decided to play their own game instead of the original shape suggested by the ts which led to easy pickings for Whites. Difficult to comment since people come and play for different reasons; some to score, to have a run around etc. Only plus point was that no one got overly upset and yelled/scolded. Even Stan was subdued ..haha ....maybe he really is now Stan da woMan.....  In this case, i didn't think it would have made much difference in swopping as the same would have occurred for the other team. It is not so much about the scoreline but how the game is played. We have seen scorelines that seems one-sided but the games were fairly competitive. And it is after all a team game where hopefully everyone contributes to their best abilities. Damn, Babs... I was hoping for the $2 credit as consolation for the first report.... |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 1, 2012 13:02:36 GMT 8
Thanks Lynz. I believe Clarence made the same point about teamwork last week, and added to it under the "Team, organization, formation & tactics" thread. My response to Clarence was: Good point Clarence. I guess initially, it's just an "idiosyncrasy" that the team selectors have to bear in mind when agreeing on line ups. However, the team selector/captain has the final say. In the longer term, players have to adapt or they will end up being excluded from games. Both last week and this, I have no idea which players are being referred to, so I'm not directing my responses at anyone in particular. More generally: .... 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. .... .... 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. .... Apart from standards, voting is also about getting to know the other players and keeping our games fun. There is a game element in players voting for team selectors, and team selectors dividing the players up into two teams. .... There is a large element of players getting to know each other better. Even after all this time, there are players who are fairly regular who have never or hardly ever played together before. ... I was hoping for the $2 credit as consolation for the first report.... If you want to get in sooner, don't wait for me to start the report thread, any approved player can start the report thread anytime after the game. |
|
|
|
Post by Babs on Jun 1, 2012 18:47:54 GMT 8
Sorry Lynzy, I needed the 2 bucks myself as I felt so bad about the match!!
Formations only work if everybody is disciplined in their positions & do what is required in the role. In this case the formation I went for was 1-2-3-1, where the 2 wide midfielders would be fitter guys able to support the lone striker and drop back when not in possession, basically work the lines! We had central defenders going up attacking, midfielders attacking and not coming back, it was a bloody shambles! These things happen from time to time, but holding your role and being disciplined in your movement is not rocket science, me included at times! When 1 or 2 lose shape then the rest tend to be dragged out of positions also trying to fill gaps that they didn't create in the first place, in the end they look like the players at fault!
Agree with Lynz, one of my more frustrating games for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clarence Lee on Jun 1, 2012 20:52:02 GMT 8
Even though I was on the team that won, I did not enjoy myself as much as I would have if the game was more competitive.
To be dramatic, nobody won and football lost on the night
Agree with Babs totally. Formations are only as good as players who want to play to them.
Hope that this game was an exception and looking forward to a more competitive game next wednesday!
|
|
