|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 22, 2011 9:00:08 GMT 8
For the two games at Sports Planet, I considered increasing the price differential between the more popular Tuesday game and the less popular Thursday game. .... When I put up the thread for next Tuesday's game, I'm minded to make it $11 per player. If the game fills up within two days, it will remain at $11, and the Thursday game will be put up as $8. If it does not fill up within two days, it will be reduced back to $10, and the Thursday game will be put up ast $9. .... However, after numbers evened out between the two games: .... ... for now I'll stick with the usual pricing - $10 for the Tuesday game and $9 for the Thursday game. I hope that more than a price differential, players are intelligent enough to see that by rushing for a more popular game and ignoring a less popular one, they risk undermining both the more popular game (they themselves or other regulars can't get a place, and perhaps lose interest in it) and the less popular game (not enough players, and if the game gets cancelled, less choice for everyone). |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Dec 19, 2012 14:14:51 GMT 8
The schedule thread for the Saturday game at Turf City filled up very quickly in successive weeks in November 2012: * Game on 3 November 2012, within a day of the schedule thread being put up, with 3 reserves 24 hours of the schedule thread being put up. * Game on 10 November 2012 - within 12 hours of the usual time of putting up the thread (about 8 am). * Game on 17 November 2012 - within 12 hours of the thread being put up. * Game on 24 November 2012 - in just over 2 hours of the thread being put up. * Game on 1 December 2012 - within an hour and a half of the thread being put up. A Tuesday night game at East Coast had previously also filled up in just over hour and a half of the thread being put up - the game on 18 September 2012. The Tuesday night game at East Coast had also filled up fast in the weeks before: * For the game on 4 September 2012 - within 7 hours. * For the game on 11 September 2012 - filled within 8 hours. In fact, the Tuesday night game at East Coast had been filling up fast from late July/early August 2012. However: .... .... ..., with withdrawals on Monday and Tuesday, reserves usually get to play, up to the sixth reserve two weeks ago. .... Finally, the solution was to move the East Coast game from Tuesday night to Monday night. The rationale: .... Currently, the Tuesday night game fills up on the day it is put up, that is, Thursday, or by the following day, and there are several reserves. On the other hand, the Monday night game at Kallang struggles to fill up. It is frustrating that the Tuesday night game, with 14 places available, fills up, and has several reserves, much earlier than the Monday night game, with only 10 places to fill. The system works better if the earlier game fills up first. It appears to be the venue that is more popular than the day of the week, so it would make sense to move the East Coast game to Monday night. Also, by having a longer gap between the first East Coast game, and the second one on Thursday, more players are likely to play twice a week, which would give the Thursday night game at East Coast greater consistency. .... The game at Kallang was correspondingly switched from Monday night to Tuesday night. Since the switch was made, both the Monday and Thursday night games at East Coast, as well as the Tuesday night game at Kallang, have been more sustainable. Like the East Coast game when it was on Tuesday, with withdrawals in the day or two before the game, most of the reserves for the Saturday game at Turf City have gotten to play. When a game develops a reputation for being very popular, players try to get their name down quickly, and then withdraw later if they find they can't make it. So you end up with games filling up within 2 hours. The longer term effect is that other players stop even looking to put their name down, which in turn limits the pool of players for that game. With the normal attrition of players being injured, away or losing interest, this artificial limiting of the pool of players for a game is counter-productive in the longer term. With several players away, it took a fair bit of SMSing on the Friday to fill the game at Turf City on Saturday 8 December 2012, the week after the game that had filled up in an hour an a half. Several players who don't usually get to play on a Saturday got to play. With several players being away of having other social commitments at this time of the year, the Saturday Turf City games last week and this week have filled up well, again, with several players who don't usually play on Saturdays or who are new. It is good that the pool of players is broadened, but when everyone is back and raring to go in the new year, the Saturday Turf City game may well fill up faster than ever. For me, a game filling up by the second day after the schedule thread is put up is too fast. You get players rushing to put their names down, and then withdrawals as you get closer to the game, which makes for much volatility and uncertainty, and can be a barrier to playing for less regular players. The aim is to have several players down by the end of the second day, and full or almost full by the third day, 2 days before the game itself. It's a sign of a good spread of games and players - sufficient players and sufficient games - which makes the system sustainable. However, unlike the Tuesday East Coast game, I can't move the Saturday Turf City game. My preference would be to start a Saturday morning game at Turf City to take some of the pressure off the Saturday evening game, but unfortunately, a covered pitch at Turf City is not available on Saturday mornings as it is block booked by a soccer school. Also, it is never easy to start a new game, as it does not have a "track record". However, if in the new year, the Saturday Turf City game regularly fills up within an hour or two, I will need to find a solution. It might well be a Friday night game at The Rainforest Arena at Turf City, a bit further up from the Premier Pitch. Another option is to not allow guests in the first 48 hours after the schedule thread is put up. Players who want to get in quickly for Saturday would need to be approved players. New players need to get at least one game in before their registration is approved. If they can't get a game in on Saturday, there are lots of other games to get in for. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Mar 18, 2013 8:16:03 GMT 8
For the Saturday just gone: .... I messaged about 130 players, but no takers for the 6 to 7 pm slot. Of the few who replied, most are injured or away. With school holidays in Singapore, and then Easter holidays in international schools, I don't expect the 6 to 7 pm slot to take off until sometime in April, but I'll try every week until May. .... I'll put the price per player back to $13. I expect that's how it will be over the next few weeks. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jul 11, 2013 22:03:50 GMT 8
With the June school holidays in Singapore over, I assumed more parents would be back at work, and numbers would pick up. It did for Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday last week (1 to 3 July 2013), but it was struggle to fill the game on Thursday at Khalsa, the usually popular game on Saturday at The Grandstand barely filled up, and we were left 1 short for Sunday game, also at The Grandstand. From the report thread for the Sunday game: .... The games early in the week filled up fast. The games from Thursday onwards were slow to fill up. Even the Saturday game was slower than usual, and had places left on Friday morning. .... The Monday game this week was cancelled and we were also one short for the Tuesday game at Kallang. In fact, I made an extra effort to make sure that the Tuesday game (with only 8 to 10 players required) went on, as I didn't want two games in a row to be cancelled. As for the Monday game: 4 of the 9 don't want to switch to a small pitch, so best to cancel. . With numbers for last Sunday's game stuck on 12, there was some discussion on the WhatsApp group chat about complacency. If we don't have at least 14 by Saturday, I actually message about 100 players on Friday or Saturday. If we are still short on Sunday, I message again, largely the same 100 players but some other more remote possibilities. I wouldn't call that complacent. The problem is several players wait until Sunday before deciding to play, or can only be sure of their availability on Sunday itself. Often, the players who have come in on the Sunday afternoon had been messaged twice, once on Friday or Saturday, and again on Sunday. Bearing that in mind, I sometimes wonder whether it is worth my while messaging before Saturday evening. Nevertheless, apart from the Monday game being cancelled, both the Sunday and Tuesday games started with a player short (although in both cases, we did manage to pick up a player from the venue itself,, notably, a female player for the Sunday game). .... From the replies I get (and only about 1 in 10 reply), several players are away. Could it be they are away in July to avoid the June holidays and get cheaper flights? I suppose it is a factor, especially for Singaporeans without children in school, who can avoid the mad rush during the June school holidays. A lot of expats are also away, mainly because the holidays in their home countries run from July to September. On top of that, we are in Ramadan, so our few Muslim players may be unavailable, especially for night games. Whatever the reason, there was quite a dip in numbers between last Thursday and this Tuesday. It seems to have stabilised for the games from yesterday (Wednesday) onwards, but volatility can return at any time. Longer term, if a game is not three-quarters full 48 hours before the game, or doesn't even have the minimum number in the 24 hours before the game (2 less than the maximum number), then those who are keen for the game to go on should make more of an effort to ask around or even introduce new players. If it comes down to me having to message players twice, or even thrice, we're getting desperate. Also, I'm not sure WhatsApp messages always get through, or whether everyone who is on WhatsApp checks it regularly, but if a player shows up on WhatsApp, I use WhatsApp unless it is clear he hasn't checked WhatsApp for several days or more. When I'm messaging up to 100 players each time, I avoid SMSing. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on May 17, 2014 16:23:51 GMT 8
From above: .... ..., even the weekend games at The Grandstand have not been filling up, and we've gone ahead 7-a-side (instead of the usual 8-a-side) several times since the start of February 2014: .... A sharp contrast to the situation in the first half of 2013, when the Saturday game often filled up within a day or two of being put up on the schedule board, and as fast as within half an hour! .... ..., the games at Balestier Road have been filling up much better. .... Although the Saturday evening game at The Grandstand still fills up quickly, usually within a day or two of the schedule thread being put up on Monday morning, the days of it regularly filling up within 2 or 3 hours (between November 2012 and May 2013, and within half an hour for the game on 30 March 2013!) are long gone (although you never know when they might come back). At that time, I considered (in March 2013) back to back slots from 5 to 6 and 6 to 7 pm, and (in April or May 2013) trying three teams over two hours, to accommodate greater numbers. In the end, the only changes that were introduced were: The game that has been filling up very fast of late is the Wednesday night game at Balestier Road. Over the past 2 months, the following Wednesday games have filled within half a day: - The game on 12 March 2014, within 8 hours. 2 out of 3 left on waitlist.
- The game on 19 March 2014, in half a day. 2 out of 5 left on waitlist.
- The game on 2 April 2014, within 4 hours. After having 3 on waitlist, we had one place available on the day of the game.
- 9 April 2014, in about 3 hours. After having 5 on waitlist, and 2 more coming in later on, only 1 didn't get to play.
- 16 April 2014, in about half an hour. 2 out of 6 were left on the waitlist.
- 23 April 2014, in just over an hour. 4 out of 7 left on waitlist.
- 30 April 2014, within 4 hours. Despite a further 5 names, with withdrawals, a further 4 places became available after the team selector poll was put up, including one after line ups went up.
- 7 May 2014, within 3.5 hours. 1 out of 7"]=http://giffas.proboards.com/post/39736/thread]7 left on waitlist.
- 14 May 2014, in just over 7 hours. None of the 4 on waitlist were left.
The coming Wednesday, 21 May 2014, within 3.5 hours. A day later (4 days before the game), there are already 6 on waitlist.
There are two issues with games filling up so fast. Firstly, there is a mad rush to put names down for the game. Sometimes, the rush is to "chope" a place, and not necessarily a commitment to play. Secondly, there is the risk of a lot more withdrawals, as players who have merely choped a place decide on their availability closer to the game. As I've said before: .... For me, a game filling up by the second day after the schedule thread is put up is too fast. You get players rushing to put their names down, and then withdrawals as you get closer to the game, which makes for much volatility and uncertainty, and can be a barrier to playing for less regular players. .... From the schedule thread for the game on 7 May 2014: .... .... What happens when we have 21 signups ?  Withdrawals will bring it back closer to 14.  Said partly in jest, but accurate.  Previously (in November 2010), when there was a mad rush for the Sunday evening game at The Grandstand, I introduced restrictions on putting names down for others for the first time. When there was a mad rush for the Tuesday night game at East Coast, with a correspondingly high degree of volatility due to withdrawals, in September/October 2012, I switched the Tuesday night game at East Coast with the Monday night at Kallang (which was frequently cancelled due to insufficient players), and both games benefitted. Restrictions on putting names down for others are still in place, and switching the Balestier Road game on Wednesday night with a night game at another venue (Monday night at East Coast or Tuesday night at Kallang) isn't an option. Apart from being disruptive to another regular game, there is no availability of a pitch at Khalsa on Monday or Tuesday night. Most of the options considered for the Saturday evening game at The Grandstand as described above don't apply or are difficult to apply to the Wednesday night game at Balestier Road. Playing with three teams over 2 hours from 9 to 11 pm, or having back to back games from 9 to 10 pm and 10 to 11 pm will be more difficult on a weeknight, with players coming from work, and having to work the following day. Also, my view remains that playing three teams over 2 hours is the exception for GIFFA. Putting the schedule thread up one day earlier (Thursday instead of Wednesday) won't make any difference. I haven't ruled out restricting the number of names in the first 48 hours to 2, but not just now. One remaining option is adjusting the payment per player. When there were two night games at East Coast on Tuesday and Thursday each week, and the Tuesday game was filling up very fast, while the Thursday game was a struggle to fill up, I considered (in September 2011) putting up the payment per player for the Tuesday game by $1 per player, and using it to subsidise the Thursday game by $1 per player. As I've stated before: ... I have two tools for dealing with excessively popular games - price, and opening up a new slot. .... . Also, when I first discussed prepayment: .... In time, changes in price may be used to move demand from more popular games to less popular games. .... From June 2014 onwards, if a game fills up too fast, the payment per player will be increased by $1 in a subsequent week, and the less/least popular game at the same venue will be reduced by $1 the week after, as follows: - If a game fills up within 6 hours of the schedule thread being put up, the payment per player will be increased by $1 the subsequent week. The week after that, the payment per player for the less/least popular game at the same venue will be reduced by $1.
- If a game fills up within 12 hours of the schedule thread being put up two weeks in a row, the payment per player will be increased by $1 the subsequent week. The week after that, the payment per player for the less/least popular game at the same venue will be reduced by $1.
However, if the game for which the payment has been increased by $1 is slow to fill up, after 48 hours, I will reduce the payment to the usual amount. There will also be no reduction the following week for the less/least popular game at the same venue.
Also, as stated above, I will also be monitoring players who take a place within 48 hours, but withdraw after the team selector/captain poll goes up. If a player does so too often, he may be blocked from putting his name down in the first 48 hours for a period of time. And from the schedule thread for the game on 23 April 2014: Can someone give up his spot to me? I will be travelling on Friday for 3 weeks and no football for 3 weeks is too much to bear... .... Rajiv, you want me to test the market rate for your Wednesday night games?  You'd have to pay not only the player who gives up his place, but those ahead of you on the waitlist. Could be expensive. If the player wanting the place is the first on waitlist, then the player giving up his place can just swap with him, and take his place on the waitlist. However, as stated above, if the player is not first on waitlist, each of the players ahead of him on the waitlist must agree to swap as well. And if the the "deals" are made after the team selector/captain poll goes up, it's additional work for me, so the player offering to pay will have to pay to me 10% of the total he is paying to the other players ; subject to a minimum of $2. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jan 29, 2015 14:42:17 GMT 8
Other than the 5-a-side game on Tuesday at The Cage and the 7-a-side game on Thursday at Khalsa, since the start of the year, our other games (which are all 7 or 8-a-side on bigger pitch) having been filling up within a day or two of the schedule thread going up (5 days before the game). However, with withdrawals, there are often places available the day before or on the day of the game, especially for the Wednesday game at Khalsa and Saturday game at The Grandstand, which have taken turns to be the most popular game for some time now. Currently, the Monday game at Macpherson and the Sunday game at The Grandstand are filling up as fast. Although the Thursday game is slower to fill up, it doesn't suffer as much from withdrawals, so we are often left with players on waitlist for that game. Only the Tuesday game at The Cage remains a struggle to fill up. Unfortunately, the Wednesday game this week was cancelled after being reduced to 10 players following 7 withdrawals. The 14 places had initially filled up within 24 hours. As discussed on this thread in February 2014, a game being cancelled as a result of a large number of withdrawals in the 24 hours before the game, despite having filled up fast and having had several players on waitlist, has affected the more popular games before. The popular Wednesday game was previously affected as recently as in September 2014. At that time, I tightened the rules on group withdrawals, and started monitoring post-poll withdrawals. Monitoring added to the work I have to do, so I didn't continue with that. However, the issues remain the same, as described earlier in this thread: .... There are two issues with games filling up so fast. Firstly, there is a mad rush to put names down for the game. Sometimes, the rush is to "chope" a place, and not necessarily a commitment to play. Secondly, there is the risk of a lot more withdrawals, as players who have merely choped a place decide on their availability closer to the game. .... .... A reminder that in putting your name down for a game, there is a degree of commitment to play in that game. Sometimes, the mind is keen, but the body isn't ready (due to uncertainty whether the player will have recovered sufficiently from illness or injury). Sometimes, the body is ready, but the circumstances are not yet in place (due to uncertainty over which game to play in, or personal schedules). If the uncertainty is significant, then the player isn't really in a position to make a commitment, and should hold back on taking up a place. There are always other games in our schedule. However, many players tend to stick with the games they are familiar with. If the player nevertheless wishes to indicate his interest in a particular game, but isn't yet in a position to give sufficient commitment, then he can put himself down on waitlist. Although it doesn't guarantee him a place, if there are still places available the day before the game, I will ask that player first. ..... Also, from earlier in this thread: .... 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 am considering changing the penalties for withdrawals and no shows from the start of the next quarter (that is, from 1 April 2015) as follows: - $1 admin fee for withdrawals (a) less than 24 hours before the game or (b) after the team selector/captain poll goes up (whichever is later for that particular game). However, for each season (April to September, or October to March the following year), $1 will be waived from the first 6 times admin fees are imposed on a particular player. Therefore, only players who repeatedly withdraw less than 24 hours before the game will be affected.
- For late withdrawals (5 hours or less before the game), additionally:
- $1 penalty for withdrawals after the team selector/captain poll closed (usually 5 hours before the game).
- $2 penalty for withdrawals less than 3 hours before the game.
- $3 penalty for withdrawals less than 2 hours before the game.
- $4 penalty for withdrawals less than 1 hour before the game.
- Half the price per person for withdrawals less than half an hour before the game.
- For no shows:
- The price per person less $3 for a no show with good reason given.
- The price per person less $2 for a no show with some reason given.
- The price per person less $1 for a no show with no reason given.
As group withdrawals haven't been an issue, I will do away with different penalties for group withdrawals. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 20, 2015 19:18:55 GMT 8
Since the start of August 2015, the games on Monday @ Macpherson and Wednesday @ Khalsa fill up fast, with several players on waitlist within the first 48 hours after the schedule thread goes. However, a steady trickle of withdrawals on the day of the game, sometimes starting the evening before, means we usually only have just enough. The Tuesday night game on a small pitch at The Grandstand resumed on 18 August 2015 and has been filling up well since then. On the other hand, we haven't had a Thursday night game at Khalsa since 18 August 2015. For 10 September 2015, the game was switched to the Friday afternoon at The Grandstand due to the public holiday for the general elections on 11 September 2015. The Friday game was cancelled in the end. The next public holiday is Hari Raya Haji this coming Thursday (24 September 2015). From the "Public holidays & seasonal factors" thread: Within 32 hours, there were 8 players on waitlist for the game on on Wednesday (23 September 2015) at Khalsa. From the schedule thread: .... There's no slot available before (8 to 9 pm) or after (9 to 10 pm), so playing with 3 teams over 2 hours is not an option. The coming Wednesday is the eve of a public holiday (Hari Raya Haji). Wilson asked if it is possible to get a 2 hour slot elsewhere. I doubt 2 hours on a big pitch is available anywhere between 7 and 11 pm, and anyway, I'm reluctant to re-locate a game as some players may not want to move the game. I can consider an hour elsewhere for a second game, but even a one hour slot at Sports Planet @ East Coast is not available before 11 pm. 2 hours on a small pitch may be available, but I doubt many would want to switch to a small pitch. Anyway, I've schedule a game at the Grandstand for Thursday evening. There are also 6 players on waitlist for the game tomorrow (Monday) at Macpherson, and 3 players on waitlist for the game on Tuesday (22 September 2015) at the Grandstand. The best I can do is schedule an extra game, either on Tuesday on a small pitch at East Coast, or on Thursday, on a big pitch either at Khalsa or East Coast. As many of those who play on Monday and Wednesday do not like playing on a small pitch, I will schedule the extra game on Thursday. As the Khalsa game as been struggling for a while, and we haven't had a game at East Coast for a long time ( since August 2014), I will schedule the extra game at East Coast. The question of playing with 3 teams over 2 hours had come up previously for the game on Wednesday, 2 September 2015, at Khalsa, when we got to 9 on waitlist within 36 hours. What was more disturbing on that occasion was that the Thursday night game at Khalsa was cancelled with only 5 names. Apart from these extreme examples, there is a general trend of players rushing for the more popular Wednesday game, while the Thursday game is a struggle to fill. If enough players kept an open mind, we'd find that both games were similar. However, I've given up trying to ask players to switch from oversubscribed games to games that are slow to fill up, as the responses are very poor. When prepayment was first introduced in November 2010, I considered using price to influence numbers between more popular games and less popular games. This was last discussed on the "Payments, credits, penalties & usage" thread on 18 May 2014 (see more generally here giffas.proboards.com/thread/1429/payments-credits-penalties-usage?q=demand). For next quarter, I am considering the following: - If within 48 hours of the schedule thread being put up, there are more than 4 players on waitlist, the price per player will be $1 more. If, however, by the time the payment information is put up, there are no players on waitlist, the price per player will return to the original.
- For each game that is charged $1 extra per player, a game that is struggling to fill up will be reduced by $1. If there is no game struggling to fill up not already subsidised, I will create an extra slot, with the price per player reduced by $1 for that game.
However, if the game at East Coast on 24 September 2015 fills up, I will consider keeping the Thursday game at East Coast for October 2015, instead of implementing the above. The following ( under the "Payments & penalties" section of the GIFFA System thread) was introduced with effect from 1 April 2015. For withdrawals 5 hours or more before a game: So far, only Calvin has used up all 6 waivers, and the $1 admin fee has not been imposed yet. Further, I have only been recording such withdrawals if they occur on the day of the game itself. It is, nevertheless, additional work for me. The bigger problem is that allowing a player to put up to 3 other GIFFA Players down in the first 48 hours means that certain players have standing arrangements between themselves where one of them automatically put names down for 3 others to "chope" places for more popular games, and then leave it to those other players to withdraw if they subsequently find they can't make it. This has been discussed earlier on this thread. It is ok if these players are sufficiently committed to play, and withdraw early enough if they can't make it, but it is a headache for me if they think to withdraw only on the day of the game, because sometimes, even if there were players on waitlist or available, these other players may no longer be available by that time. Withdrawing less than 5 hours before a game carries a penalty. However, instead of monitoring withdrawals on the day of the game over each 6 month period, it may be simpler to require those who do so, and wish to play in the same game over the next two weeks, to put their own name down if they wish to have their name added within the first 48 hours of the schedule thread going up. Therefore, no one else can put their name down for them in the first 48 hours, and they have to do so themselves. If they want to keep the privilege of having another player put their name down for them during that time, they have to pay a $1 admin fee, and have sufficient credit to cover the admin fee.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 2, 2015 15:50:49 GMT 8
Continuing from the post above, the rush for certain games, with players on waitlist within 24 hours of the schedule thread being put up, has continued. For some time now, and despite the haze getting worse last month, these are the games that fill up fastest: - The Monday night games at Macpherson.
- The Wednesday night games at Khalsa.
- The Sunday evening game at The Grandstand.
However, with a lot of withdrawals in the 24 hours before the game, most of the players on waitlist for the Monday and Wednesday games do get in.
The following games are just about filling up, although the Saturday game tends to be badly affected by long weekends:
- Saturday evening game at The Grandstand.
- Tuesday night on a small pitch at The Grandstand.
Further to the post above, we haven't had a Thursday night game since 18 August 2015. The extra game on Hari Raya Haji (24 September 2015) was also cancelled. I switched the Thursday night games on 24 September 2015 and 1 October 2015 to East Coast. From the schedule thread for the game on 1 October 2015:
4 names only, 3-hour PSI at 181. Best to cancel. I'll try again at East Coast next Thursday.
To accommodate more players, I am prepared to make more of an effort to get the Thursday night going again, either at Khalsa or East Coast, and try again to get either or both of a Sunday night game at Khalsa, and a Friday night game at The Cage, going. However, to provide incentives to players to consider less popular games:
- For schedule threads put up tomorrow onwards, the price per player for up to the three most popular games will be increased by $1. If however, when the team selector poll closes, there are no players who put their names down in the first 72 hours left on waitlist, the $1 increase will reversed.
- For every game for which $1 extra is charged per player, a less popular game, or new game, will be reduced by $1.
- If a player who puts his name down for a game within 48 hours of the schedule thread going up (including having another player put his name down for him), and has a confirmed place the day before the game, withdraws on the day of the game, for the following week's game, no one else can put his name down in the first 48 hours after the schedule thread goes up, and he has to put his own name down for himself if he wishes to have his name put down within the first 48 hours. If this doesn't improve the situation, from November 2015 onwards, this may be extended to the following two weeks. I will also consider reducing the number of names each player can put down in the first 48 hours from 4 to 2 for the more popular games.
To kick this off, I'll reduce the price per player for the game on Thursday, 8 October 2015, at East Coast, by $1, even though I haven't charged $1 extra for any game yet.
The haze has been a big factor over the past month. From the "Safety, health & sustainability" thread:
.... HYFA @ Macpherson informed me that they use 150 as the threshold, so I will stick with that. I will also stick with the 3 hour PSI. To summarise, I'll cancel the game if the 3-hour PSI climbs above 150 in the hour before the game. If any player does not want to play if the PSI is between 100 and 150, please withdraw at least 5 hours before the game, otherwise, the usual penalties for late withdrawal will apply. .... Three night games have been cancelled so far due to the haze:
- The game on Monday, 14 September 2015, at Macpherson, with the 3-hour PSI at 167 at 7 pm, and 223 at 8 pm.
- The game on Monday, 28 September 2015, at Macpherson, with the 3-hour PSI reaching 261 at 6 pm, and most players deciding to cancel.
- The game on Tuesday, 29 September 2015, on a small pitch at The Grandstand, with the 3-hour PSI at 8 pm was 167. Although it had fallen from 230 at 5 pm, those living in the vicinity of the Grandstand said it was still pretty bad in that area.
On the other hand, 2 other games went ahead with the PSI climbing above 150:
For the game on 28 September 2015, after it had been cancelled by the players at 6 pm, the following from the schedule thread:
With some rain at 6 pm, 3-hour PSI fell to 168 by 8 pm, 176 by 9 pm, and 171 at 10 pm. We could have have gone on if the players had wanted to. I'm always prepared to wait until 8 pm to make the final call. As I have pointed out before, this forum is facilitative. Ultimate decisions are made by those playing. 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 at 8 pm, 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 at 8 pm, 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.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 8, 2017 18:47:53 GMT 8
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 15, 2019 12:05:23 GMT 8
On 20 Jul 2019, I re-set the criteria for inclusion in the selector/captain poll. The reason I have a minimum threshold (based on number of games played) is to limit the position of selector/captain to PRG players who have sufficient experience of our games, and have been playing regularly enough to be sufficiently familiar with the current players. As each PRG player has two votes (for two selectors/captains) The threshold for the selector poll in particular has from early on been set somewhat higher than it needs to be in order to try to prevent "tactical" voting, basically where a player votes for one player whose team he wants to be on, and another who is vastly less experienced, and/or is likely to agree to significantly less than optimal line ups merely out of lack of experience, indifference or deference to the other selector. This was a greater risk when I went with the vote even where there were less than the minimum required. However, I also changed this on 20 Jul 2019. From the schedule thread for the game on Monday, 2 Sep 2019: @rajiv - can you give the rational of not letting those without the minimum required votes be the selector but those with the most games instead ? From the schedule thread for the game on Saturday (31 August 2019): Cedric asked why Raj with 2 votes is not the other selector, as he would be familiar with those playing. The rules were changed in July 2019 as follows (on the "Team selectors/captains & line ups" thread): .... Although there is a minimum requirement for each selector to have at least 3 votes, even if one or both of the two players with the most number of votes have less than 3 votes (1 or 2 votes), I allow them to be selectors if they are experienced and are sufficiently familiar with those playing in that game. Going forward, I am going to apply the minimum 3 vote requirement strictly. If either or both players have less than 3 votes, either the player(s) with the most number of games in the current 6 month period or over the past 3 years, or a selector/captain from a previous game, will be appointed instead. .... The previous work around diminished the rule requiring a minimum 3 votes each, and left it to me to make an assessment of whether a player with less than the minimum number of votes is sufficiently experienced and familiar with those playing, which I am no longer willing to do. Further, the votes of just 2 players should not be deciding who the selector is. I would rather fall back on more objective criteria, such as number of games played, or a player having been a selector in a previous week. The bottom line is more players should vote. Additionally, being selector/captain carries certain responsibilities (taking charge of the game, implementing the rules, making changes to the line ups during the game if necessary, and reporting serious breaches of the rules or other material developments), and benefits (priority for the following week's game, and credits) which would be better placed in players who are clearly experienced (previous selectors or most number of games). Again, the bottom line is more players should vote. And if a player voting feels strongly enough about who is selector/captain, get others to vote. Further, tactical voting can backfire, as a player may end up on the other selector's team, or teams risk being significantly unbalanced. From the "Team selectors/captains & line ups" thread: As I update the number of games played in the current 6 month period some time during the month, dropping the numbers from the game 7 months ago, the figure can change significantly. As Ben hadn't played any games between May and July 2019 due to a hamstring injury, when I dropped his games for February 2019 towards the end of August 2019, his number of games fell below the threshold. Nothing to do with his performance as selector.  I was thinking that I actually don't need such a high threshold. I will lower it going forward. For 7 or 8-a-side games, any of the following will suffice: - 18 games in the current 6 month period and 40 games over the past 3 years.
- 15 games in the current 6 month period and 45 games over the past 3 years.
- 12 games in the current 6 month period and 50 games over the past 3 years.
- 10 games in the current 6 month period and 55 games over the past 3 years.
- 8 games in the current 6 month period and 60 games over the past 3 years.
For 5 or 6-a-side games: - 15 games in the current 6 month period and 35 games over the past 3 years.
- 12 games in the current 6 month period and 40 games over the past 3 years.
- 10 games in the current 6 month period and 45 games over the past 3 years.
- 8 games in the current 6 month period and 50 games over the past 3 years.
If more players vote in the poll, I can reduce the threshold even further, giving the players more choice.
Since the start of the month, I have allowed any regular to convert any slot, even one for a fast-filling game, into a challenge match. The request needs to be made at least 6 days before the slot (because otherwise, I will schedule the usual game 5 days before the slot), and the thread for the challenge match has to be put up on the "Challenge Matches" board in the OPSAGE category at least 5 days before the game. Two Saturday slots have been converted to challenge matches at the request of Aschkan, that is: Going forward, it suffices if the request for the following week be made in the report for the previous game.
- Selectors can be appointed or elected first, and then they put together their own teams from a wider range of players (including guests). Players can even be given incentives to play for a particular team, such as waiving of payment (full or partial).
- A high quality team can be put together to play against an existing team from elsewhere.
For challenge matches, my role can be limited to holding the regular booking (on the venue's terms) or can extend to collecting payment from players. The organiser can decide on a higher payment per player to allow for incentives to be given to certain key players. If payment is on my standard terms, I waive the organiser's payment, for taking on the responsibility of organising.
Even if players organise everything for themselves, including bookings and payments, they can still post the game on the challenge matches board, as a way of keeping a record of their games, or even as a way of picking up players when they are short. However, for such games, if captains are named in the report, and the organiser requests that the result be included in the selector/captain table, I will charge $10 per game, as there is prize money at the end of each season, with two seasons in a year. If there is sufficient interest in bringing outside games under challenge matches, I can increase the prize money. Again, it is about having greater choices.
And from the schedule thread for the game tomorrow (Monday): Wilson first to post but 9th in the packing order. Lol! From the "GIFFA values, principles & standards" thread: ... Ultimately, first come first in is a rule of convenience, nothing more. My purpose is to accommodate as many players as possible, which is a value central to the whole system. I do not need a mad rush for popular games in the hours, minutes or even seconds after I put up the thread for the game. Every PRG player who commits to playing within the first 24 hours should get a place. Unfortunately, if the number of PRG players committing to play within the first 24 hours exceeds the number of places, I have to decide how priority between them is to be determined. .... All other things being equal, those who contribute more to the system should benefit more. For example, from the "Keeping score & the competitive edge" thread: .... .... I would rather the rush be to provide reports for games (which benefits everyone, and the system) rather than to be the first to put one's name down for the following week's game (which only benefits the player concerned, at the expense of the system). .... .... And from the "Individual skills, attributes & positions" thread: .... Players coming into our games should also make sufficient effort to fit into the game, including trying to appreciate the dynamics of the more popular games which have developed over time, in particular, the level of competitiveness, and the social interaction. If a player does not have the technical skills or the fitness to fit into a particular game, then he should look to develop those elsewhere, for example, at an adult soccer school, through a fitness regime, or playing more often in less competitive games. With 9 routine games (6 fixed and 3 rolling), and an all-comers' game, I hope in time to be able to provide ample opportunities to play. If the issue is one of attitude, then a change of mindset may be required. However, none of this can be properly addressed unless we speak up about specific players. If a player has serious shortcomings, the captains do have a responsibility to tell him. It shouldn't be rude, insulting or abusive, these are just matters of fact, which can be looked at and discussed objectively. Constructive feedback is also needed for the player to improve. We all have to be more thick-skinned about such issues. If the captains feel the player hasn't listened or won't listen, or that they don't want to have to speak to the player concerned directly, then let me know. However, I am not likely to act on such feedback unless I hear from more than one captain, perhaps several. There is no point other players complaining directly to me about particular players (other than perhaps their own team's captain), because increasingly, I will refer them to their captain for that game. .... Again, players have a choice about how involved they want to be in the entire system, be is as selectors/captains, providing reports or comments, or just contributing to the discussions on the forum. Players who contribute more will benefit more, whether directly or indirectly. To give players more choice on which games to play, the weekly schedule now comprises of 6 fixed and 3 rolling games. A rolling game can be moved to later in the week (if there are insufficient names put down for the game) or to the following week (or if they are no names put down). However, to reduce the work I need to do, I will only schedule the rolling game, or roll over to a later day in the week, for days on which the fixed game fills up within 48 hours or is converted to a challenge match, and doesn't already have a fixed game with places left 2 days before the game, or another rolling game, scheduled for that day. Fixed games that fill up within 24 hours are fast-filled games. Fixed games that do not fill up after 72 hours are slow-filling games. Players who commit to playing in a slow-filling game will have priority for all games scheduled in the 7 days from the date of the slow-filling game. To try to fill up slow filling games, I am also posting slow filling games on the FIFFA & GIFFA Facebook page. Going forward, instead of creating new posts each week for slow-filling games, I will roll over the thread from a previous week. I will delete all other posts. That means a maximum of 6 posts (one for each fixed game in a week). However, so far there are only posts for Sunday evening at Grandstand, Tuesday night at Grandstand and Thursday night at Macpherson. The other three fixed games in a week have either been converted to challenge matches (Saturday evening at Grandstand) or been filling up fast (Monday night at Macpherson and Wednesday night at Khalsa). I will only post slow-filling games which have less than the minimum number 72 hours after the schedule thread is put up. |
|
....
