The team selectors went with taking turns to select, 1-2-2-2-2-2-1, before making a further swap, which ended up with Paul and Jon on opposite sides. Paul requested that they be on the same side, so the swap was reversed. Augustine requested red. Tim posted the line ups on the WhatsApp group chat at 7.05 pm, as follows:
The last minute horse-trading didn't "help" either team with the final score of 13-1 and all the goals coming from the Whites. It could have been more if Whites were more clinical and ruthless or if Augustine(I think) had not performed brilliantly between the sticks. Pretty much a walk over for a one-sided affair.
Whites made use of the flanks well with Andy and Soon Leong working down the channels. Alex moving up and down and didn't look like he lost any speed or stamina even after eating 10 chicken wings before the game. Reds tried to threaten the White's goal a couple of times but none resulted in clear cut chances.
Seriously if the swap was done, it will have been a more balanced affair as Jeff will have marshalled the defence well cutting out the balls and passes around the Reds penalty box. Thus the Reds will not have so much chances.
I feel that players who have played often thus eligible for being voted as captain will have a good understanding of what they want or feel is balanced.
I feel that all players should take their votes seriously and vote for captain properly. If they do not take it seriously, please accept the captains choices as the captains also want a fair interesting game. That was the reason why we went pick for pick and even did proposed a swap.
As mentioned that we try to let friends play together but sometimes it is just not possible unless you do not mind 13-1. I am sure Alex did not mind. ?
I don't think one swap would have made much difference. I think the 1-2-2-2-2-2-1 system only works if the selectors choose players based solely on the abilities, and not other factors, such as keeping certain players together, or avoiding certain players on their team. If other considerations are going to come into it, it's better that one selector suggests line ups, and the other then suggests changes. The selector who has more of such other factors should also be more forthcoming in making the first suggestion, because neither the other selector, or I, are mind readers.
Also, once it becomes clear the line ups are not working out, selectors should not be reluctant to make changes during the game. Posts for reading:
Completly agree with Rajiv and the first line up wasn't more balanced. Next time we change team on the field if we see again a so big difference between the two teams. Not so fun to play this kind of game...(and i would have the same thought if i was on the winning team)
Rajiv, i think that is what I and Tim have in mind. We both picked according to what we felt works in our respective team. That was also why you saw in the chat I agree to swap Jeff for Paul. But Paul wanted to play with John. I hope you can understand we were not adamant on not changing. just that we did not expect such results.
Paul, hindsight is always 20/20. I do not think Tim have picked expecting this results. In fact when we tried suggesting lineups with keeping friends together, we had problem trying to keep it balanced thus went with 1-2-2-2-2-2-2-1.
Not every huge scorelines is due to lopsided game but sometimes a team is on fire and the other team was not used to the team strategy.
Chill guys... line ups were imbalanced, but still want to point out and give credit to Alex and Jeff who partnered in defence, providing a pretty much impregnable wall, allowing the rest of the team to attack freely... till next week!