League Discussion Thread!
Viewing forum thread.
Back to Funkypool Clan League Management.
Back to Forum List.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
06:48 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
I will put my 10 bob's worth in regarding the 4 :
1. Yep Agree
2. Get Rid
3. 20 points
4. Transfers as per Captains permission.
1. Yep Agree
2. Get Rid
3. 20 points
4. Transfers as per Captains permission.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
11:42 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
1) yes, though some guidelines/checklist for default panel to use, so defaults are judged correctly
2) the completion bonus was there to help reduce defaults, rather than scrap it completely why not : give each player 2 pts at the start of a fixture. if they complete their game within the first week they keep the 2 pt bonus, if they complete in the 2nd week they get a one point bonus. If they leave a game for whatever reason, and the game does not get completed they lose their bonus, but their opponent keeps their own bonus, and not penalised due to an opponent leaving. If a game does not get played, then both players lose their bonus.
This would hopefully help keep defaults down to a minimum, and encourage capts to make subs/ swaps to get games played.
3) I dont see a prob with the match win staying as it is
4) Players should only be allowed 1 transfer per season, this would prevent a) arguments about poaching b) players clan hopping
bluenose1872 said:
Topics Being Discussed:
1. Default panel - Increasing the panel to one player from each clan. Division one players would decide defaults on division two fixtures and vice versa.
2. Completion bonus - To scrap it or not.
3. Match win bonus - Scrap the match win bonus, increase it back to 20 instead of 10.
4. Allowing players to transfer to another clan during a season with the captains permission (Like it used to be)
.
1. Default panel - Increasing the panel to one player from each clan. Division one players would decide defaults on division two fixtures and vice versa.
2. Completion bonus - To scrap it or not.
3. Match win bonus - Scrap the match win bonus, increase it back to 20 instead of 10.
4. Allowing players to transfer to another clan during a season with the captains permission (Like it used to be)
.
1) yes, though some guidelines/checklist for default panel to use, so defaults are judged correctly
2) the completion bonus was there to help reduce defaults, rather than scrap it completely why not : give each player 2 pts at the start of a fixture. if they complete their game within the first week they keep the 2 pt bonus, if they complete in the 2nd week they get a one point bonus. If they leave a game for whatever reason, and the game does not get completed they lose their bonus, but their opponent keeps their own bonus, and not penalised due to an opponent leaving. If a game does not get played, then both players lose their bonus.
This would hopefully help keep defaults down to a minimum, and encourage capts to make subs/ swaps to get games played.
3) I dont see a prob with the match win staying as it is
4) Players should only be allowed 1 transfer per season, this would prevent a) arguments about poaching b) players clan hopping
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
12:25 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
bonus points only cause arguments with other clan teams and other players like it as again this season
just go back to the old way if you win your fixture you get the bonus points this way it helps the league runners
and it simple for everyone to understand
just go back to the old way if you win your fixture you get the bonus points this way it helps the league runners
and it simple for everyone to understand
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
13:00 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
It hasn't been explained what happens with subs. In the first week if a sub is made and the game played do you still get the 2 points? You are also penalising players who have arranged matches to be played in the second week because they cannot arrange anything for the first week. No point having two weeks to play games if everyone is just going to rush to get all games played in the first week to try and secure an additional 16 points.
I just think with any completion bonuses it becomes more a case of chasing those points which takes something away from the overall integrity of the match score.
I would rather see the League take action against teams/individuals causing defaults and doing it robustly.
I just think with any completion bonuses it becomes more a case of chasing those points which takes something away from the overall integrity of the match score.
I would rather see the League take action against teams/individuals causing defaults and doing it robustly.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
13:08 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
My judgements on em all:
1. Yes this is for the best
2. Get Rid/Get some strict rules in place.
3. 20 points
4. Transfer with captains permission, however get some rules in place to prevent bullying for captains to release a player
Also, can you put james's individual thing in there or has it already been decided on?
1. Yes this is for the best
2. Get Rid/Get some strict rules in place.
3. 20 points
4. Transfer with captains permission, however get some rules in place to prevent bullying for captains to release a player
Also, can you put james's individual thing in there or has it already been decided on?
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
13:26 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
in the case of a sub being used, the points would transfer over to the sub, from the player that has been subbed out.Most teams/players try to get their games played in the first week, i am aware that not everyone is able to do this, but some kind of bonus for players completing games quickly should be in place to prevent what happens atm with some teams leaving the majority of their games until the deadline weekend,when their opponents have had their players online, and willing to play for the 2 wks, then games either going to default, or the team that has tried to get the game played, having to sub in players just to get the game played, when the original player has waited the 2wks for the game.
chris said:
It hasn't been explained what happens with subs. In the first week if a sub is made and the game played do you still get the 2 points? You are also penalising players who have arranged matches to be played in the second week because they cannot arrange anything for the first week. No point having two weeks to play games if everyone is just going to rush to get all games played in the first week to try and secure an additional 16 points.
I just think with any completion bonuses it becomes more a case of chasing those points which takes something away from the overall integrity of the match score.
I would rather see the League take action against teams/individuals causing defaults and doing it robustly.
I just think with any completion bonuses it becomes more a case of chasing those points which takes something away from the overall integrity of the match score.
I would rather see the League take action against teams/individuals causing defaults and doing it robustly.
in the case of a sub being used, the points would transfer over to the sub, from the player that has been subbed out.Most teams/players try to get their games played in the first week, i am aware that not everyone is able to do this, but some kind of bonus for players completing games quickly should be in place to prevent what happens atm with some teams leaving the majority of their games until the deadline weekend,when their opponents have had their players online, and willing to play for the 2 wks, then games either going to default, or the team that has tried to get the game played, having to sub in players just to get the game played, when the original player has waited the 2wks for the game.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
13:46 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
As before I think trying to compress games into the first week just to maximise your bonus points takes something away from the integrity of the league and how it should be contested. But that is just my view.
I am not sure what the figures are for defaults this season but I would imagine they still are not huge (although I agree none is better than some!).
I would also think the default figure are roughly not too dissimilar now to what they have been every season, including before any Completion bonuses.
As a start, how about an immediate suspension from the following fixture set for any player judged to have been at fault for causing an unplayed/unfinished game? All judgements on that made by the default panel/league runners are binding and not up for discussion/appeal. Then follow that through with the existing rules on removing players from the league with multiple default offences as required.
I am not sure what the figures are for defaults this season but I would imagine they still are not huge (although I agree none is better than some!).
I would also think the default figure are roughly not too dissimilar now to what they have been every season, including before any Completion bonuses.
As a start, how about an immediate suspension from the following fixture set for any player judged to have been at fault for causing an unplayed/unfinished game? All judgements on that made by the default panel/league runners are binding and not up for discussion/appeal. Then follow that through with the existing rules on removing players from the league with multiple default offences as required.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
14:04 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
bluenose1872 said:
Topics Being Discussed:
1. Default panel - Increasing the panel to one player from each clan. Division one players would decide defaults on division two fixtures and vice versa.
Like the idea, to stop defaults taking to long to come in though would suggest the league runners taking the first 3 votes in from the players from a different league.
2 & 3 Bonuses
We need the match completion bonus and the win bonus needs to be 10 pts in my opinion, there are loads of scenarios we're inviting by not having these set right.
The defaults were coming down all the time, we had a really good season last time round so why this is getting overhauled is beyond me. Was a sensible tweak giving people the bonus points when games were started and 1 player deacts...just causing arguments though so back to the way it was if anything
4. Allowing players to transfer to another clan during a season with the captains permission (Like it used to be)
No, I was undecided what was better before this season but I like players not getting poached during a season and not having the arguments from that. Would add that after a player has played a match for a team then they can't play for anyone else (reliability friendlies included) to the rule.
.
1. Default panel - Increasing the panel to one player from each clan. Division one players would decide defaults on division two fixtures and vice versa.
Like the idea, to stop defaults taking to long to come in though would suggest the league runners taking the first 3 votes in from the players from a different league.
2 & 3 Bonuses
We need the match completion bonus and the win bonus needs to be 10 pts in my opinion, there are loads of scenarios we're inviting by not having these set right.
The defaults were coming down all the time, we had a really good season last time round so why this is getting overhauled is beyond me. Was a sensible tweak giving people the bonus points when games were started and 1 player deacts...just causing arguments though so back to the way it was if anything
4. Allowing players to transfer to another clan during a season with the captains permission (Like it used to be)
No, I was undecided what was better before this season but I like players not getting poached during a season and not having the arguments from that. Would add that after a player has played a match for a team then they can't play for anyone else (reliability friendlies included) to the rule.
.
14:39 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
I am not sure what the figures are for defaults this season but I would imagine they still are not huge (although I agree none is better than some!).
16 in total throughout both divisions.
chris said:
I am not sure what the figures are for defaults this season but I would imagine they still are not huge (although I agree none is better than some!).
16 in total throughout both divisions.
15:16 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
As a start, how about an immediate suspension from the following fixture set for any player judged to have been at fault for causing an unplayed/unfinished game? All judgements on that made by the default panel/league runners are binding and not up for discussion/appeal. Then follow that through with the existing rules on removing players from the league with multiple default offences as required.
at the moment we have
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
chris said:
As a start, how about an immediate suspension from the following fixture set for any player judged to have been at fault for causing an unplayed/unfinished game? All judgements on that made by the default panel/league runners are binding and not up for discussion/appeal. Then follow that through with the existing rules on removing players from the league with multiple default offences as required.
at the moment we have
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
15:25 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
So it could be changed to one lost default (ie judged guilty of causing match to be unplayed) means unavailable for immediately following fixture set. And that counts even if they were already announced in the fixtures - they would be removed. If they had managed to play their next game already before the default decision on the previous fixture then league runners decide whether to apply suspension to the next fixture set or remove the suspension.
Could apply to both players obviously as well if both were at fault in not getting a game played.
dgeneratio said:
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
So it could be changed to one lost default (ie judged guilty of causing match to be unplayed) means unavailable for immediately following fixture set. And that counts even if they were already announced in the fixtures - they would be removed. If they had managed to play their next game already before the default decision on the previous fixture then league runners decide whether to apply suspension to the next fixture set or remove the suspension.
Could apply to both players obviously as well if both were at fault in not getting a game played.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
15:26 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
Not keen on the idea of rewarding 2 points in the first week and 1 in the second for completed games. There is a 2 week period to get them played therefore you should be allowed to use the 2 weeks without losing out on points.
This could also cause problems if a player has a valid reason for not being on the first week, why should they lose out?
This could also cause problems if a player has a valid reason for not being on the first week, why should they lose out?
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
15:26 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
Agreed
diamond_jem said:
Not keen on the idea of rewarding 2 points in the first week and 1 in the second for completed games. There is a 2 week period to get them played therefore you should be allowed to use the 2 weeks without losing out on points.
This could also cause problems if a player has a valid reason for not being on the first week, why should they lose out?
This could also cause problems if a player has a valid reason for not being on the first week, why should they lose out?
Agreed
15:32 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
So it could be changed to one lost default (ie judged guilty of causing match to be unplayed) means unavailable for immediately following fixture set. And that counts even if they were already announced in the fixtures - they would be removed. If they had managed to play their next game already before the default decision on the previous fixture then league runners decide whether to apply suspension to the next fixture set or remove the suspension.
Could apply to both players obviously as well if both were at fault in not getting a game played.
Agree with this suspension, players who have huge defaults against would deserve to miss a fixture.
chris said:
dgeneratio said:
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
So it could be changed to one lost default (ie judged guilty of causing match to be unplayed) means unavailable for immediately following fixture set. And that counts even if they were already announced in the fixtures - they would be removed. If they had managed to play their next game already before the default decision on the previous fixture then league runners decide whether to apply suspension to the next fixture set or remove the suspension.
Could apply to both players obviously as well if both were at fault in not getting a game played.
Agree with this suspension, players who have huge defaults against would deserve to miss a fixture.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
15:38 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
So it could be changed to one lost default (ie judged guilty of causing match to be unplayed) means unavailable for immediately following fixture set. And that counts even if they were already announced in the fixtures - they would be removed. If they had managed to play their next game already before the default decision on the previous fixture then league runners decide whether to apply suspension to the next fixture set or remove the suspension.
Could apply to both players obviously as well if both were at fault in not getting a game played.
Agree with this suspension, players who have huge defaults against would deserve to miss a fixture.
Agreed
horse10000 said:
chris said:
dgeneratio said:
2 Lost Defaults = 1 fixture suspension
So it could be changed to one lost default (ie judged guilty of causing match to be unplayed) means unavailable for immediately following fixture set. And that counts even if they were already announced in the fixtures - they would be removed. If they had managed to play their next game already before the default decision on the previous fixture then league runners decide whether to apply suspension to the next fixture set or remove the suspension.
Could apply to both players obviously as well if both were at fault in not getting a game played.
Agree with this suspension, players who have huge defaults against would deserve to miss a fixture.
Agreed
15:39 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
only problem is you would need to look at the person at fault.
e.g. sean_paul plays whocares8x8, seb sends lots of messages but lyle doesn't reply that much then lyles captain decides to sub within the final 2 days, say beenjammin.
wouldn't be right for been to be fixture banned, it would have to be lyle as hes the one at fault.
also would need a guideline on a score where you would be fixture banned, e.g. 11-4 or above
i do like the idea in principle though
e.g. sean_paul plays whocares8x8, seb sends lots of messages but lyle doesn't reply that much then lyles captain decides to sub within the final 2 days, say beenjammin.
wouldn't be right for been to be fixture banned, it would have to be lyle as hes the one at fault.
also would need a guideline on a score where you would be fixture banned, e.g. 11-4 or above
i do like the idea in principle though
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
15:45 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
I see your point James, it would have to be implemented so that it was fair. The above scenario does suggest it would be unfair for beenjammin to get a fixture ban only having 2 days to play a match.
Although thinking about it, I cannot think of a logical/fair way to punish defaults when people get subbed in, having a shorter time period than the normal fixture deadline gives us a major hurdle to deal with.
Although thinking about it, I cannot think of a logical/fair way to punish defaults when people get subbed in, having a shorter time period than the normal fixture deadline gives us a major hurdle to deal with.
15:49 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
Would only apply to players who had made no effort to play fixture and had a large default against.
16:15 Sat 31 Dec 11 (GMT)
[Link]
maybe this then.
1 lost default = Warning
2 lost defaults = 1 fix suspension
if a player has made no or little effort to play then 2 lost defaults apply.
1 lost default = Warning
2 lost defaults = 1 fix suspension
if a player has made no or little effort to play then 2 lost defaults apply.
Unable to post | |
---|---|
Reason: | You must log in before you can post |
League Discussion Thread!
Back to Top of this Page
Back to Funkypool Clan League Management.
Back to Forum List.