|
its so wrong
|
| the-shark |
Posted on 02-09-2008 20:34
|
Home From Home
Posts: 432
Joined: 14.10.07
|
i do think the unpredictables deserve a little bit of credit for being where they are as opposed to people saying there only top because they have a small squad! man for man of course the prop are the better team but you cant really say the supposed squad players they have weakened the team considerably enough to have stopped them from doing better this season. with the excepion of last week where the pawleyne dropped shaggy and porter for the 2nd session even tho they was better than the players who came in ! virtually every team has put in there top 2-3 players again even if they lost there 1st game because they want to win! simple as that.
we may need a bigger boat..! |
| |
|
|
| andye |
Posted on 02-09-2008 20:54
|
Home From Home
Posts: 394
Joined: 02.10.07
|
it's whatever floats your boat really...
most teams will play all their attendies but that will probably change in the cup, crunch time at the end of the season and also when playing the top teams. |
| |
|
|
| RasFas |
Posted on 02-09-2008 21:20
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 166
Joined: 05.10.07
|
andye wrote:
most teams do give most of their players a game. the rack pack do, as do the prop. the unpreds don't and are top of the league by some distance.
it seems a bit unsportsmanly especially in the summer league but it depends i suppose what teams priorities are.
Taken from divisional singles...
Rileys Unpredictables BISHOP.Graf 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 - - - - - - = 10
Rileys Unpredictables KNOCK.Chris 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 - - - - - = 10
Rileys Unpredictables BROWN.Daniel 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - = 9
Rileys Unpredictables O'DONNELL.Mick 1 0 - 1 1 - 0 - - 1 1 1 1 - - - - - = 7
Rileys Unpredictables POYNTER.Terry 1 0 - 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 - - - - - - = 7
Rileys Unpredictables TERTULLIEN.Francois 0 - 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 - - - - - = 7
Rileys Unpredictables TURNBULL.Luke 1 1 1 1 1 - 0 0 0 0 - - 1 - - - - - = 6
Well thats scotched that theory! Wanna try another one?
While we're at it lets check how many of the 9 Props who turned up to play us in week 8 actually played.
The Propeller HARTLEY-MILLER.Mark 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 01 0 1 0 1 - - - - - = 8
The Propeller MILLS.Cliff 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 1 0 - - - - - - - = 8
The Propeller CHARLWOOD.James 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 10 0 1 0 0 - - - - - = 7
The Propeller SWETTENHAM.Gary 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 10 - 1 0 1 - - - - - = 7
The Propeller HEWSON.Adam 1 - 0 0 - 0 1 - 1 - 1 1 1 - - - - - = 6
The Propeller ALTES.Rod 1 - - - - 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 - - - - - = 5
The Propeller ADAMS.Paul 1 0 1 0 1 - - - - 0 - - - - - - - - = 3
The Propeller JACKMAN.Tom 1 0 - 0 1 1 0 - - 0 - - - - - - - - = 3
The Propeller POOL.Nick 0 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 1 - - - - - - = 1
The Propeller MACQUIRE.Paul - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = 0
Yup, 5!
5 twice and 4 on the bench.
If you want to write bollocks about us, write it where I can't see it... |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 02-09-2008 21:28
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
For further information please www.fragile-egos.com 
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 02-09-2008 21:33
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I wouldn't mind but it's only the Summer League anyway so it's not like it really matters anyway?
If it were the Winter League I'd understand . .
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Shaggy |
Posted on 02-09-2008 21:44
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 888
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Francois in rubbish at binary shocker.
House!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| |
|
|
| JugglingSpence |
Posted on 02-09-2008 21:46
|
Home From Home
Posts: 271
Joined: 05.10.07
|
RasFas wrote:
If you want to write bollocks about us, write it where I can't see it...
Surely that has to be added to the random quotes box!  |
| |
|
|
| andye |
Posted on 02-09-2008 21:55
|
Home From Home
Posts: 394
Joined: 02.10.07
|
ok i appologise....
i'm really sorry...
i take it all back...
the unpredictables do play weak players;
Rileys Unpredictables TERTULLIEN.Francois 0 - 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 - - - - - = 7 |
| |
|
|
| Foxy |
Posted on 03-09-2008 19:26
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 186
Joined: 04.11.07
|
I know that I managed to upset a few of our players earlier in the season by not giving them a frame every week. But after a few good results at the start of the season we took a team vote on whether we play every one every week and just have fun, or play a strong team and become contenders for winning division. The result was to try to win!
Therefore I do put out a strong team, but also try to ensure that all members do get a frame every other week. |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 03-09-2008 21:02
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
We?re a bit different in our approach I think. I?m looking for my players to improve and gain in confidence so that we can move through the divisions as a team. To do these things they need match experience and for me as a captain to have some confidence in them. In my team every player who turns up will get a frame each week because every one of them is capable of winning.
I look to recognise and reward good play with a second frame. Even if it means I don?t end up playing what I consider to be my strongest players twice.
We have improved massively as a team over the last few months and individually everyone has learned from eachother and taken their own game forward.
|
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 03-09-2008 21:30
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
Surely these are all arguments for the 10 game format? It suits teams that are short of players and for teams with big squads everyone can get a game. As has already been said, if teams chose to play their best 5 twice every week they will soon run out of reserves. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 03-09-2008 21:48
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Not only that but everyone is posting on the basis of a format that hasn't been passed at the AGM yet . . There is a chance that it could revert to the old 7 frame format and then team captains really will have some decisions to make!
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| ThePower |
Posted on 03-09-2008 22:24
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 970
Joined: 05.10.07
|
If it remains as a 7 frame format then its a step backwards. Momentum will be with 10 frame format. It has to happen. |
| |
|
|
| the-shark |
Posted on 04-09-2008 17:27
|
Home From Home
Posts: 432
Joined: 14.10.07
|
i think it will be a close vote as there seems to be very mixed feelings towards the 10 frame format. on the plus side is obviously it helps teams with smaller squads but the minus is the later finishing times especially when you have to travel away. i am all for the 2 x 5 but only if a time limit is involved. fed up with these late nights.
we may need a bigger boat..! |
| |
|
|
| Fat-Dart |
Posted on 04-09-2008 18:28
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1308
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Shaggy wrote:
Francois in rubbish at binary shocker.
There are 10 types of people in this world:
Those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
| |
|
|
| JugglingSpence |
Posted on 04-09-2008 18:37
|
Home From Home
Posts: 271
Joined: 05.10.07
|
the-shark wrote:
i am all for the 2 x 5 but only if a time limit is involved. fed up with these late nights.
I don't think a time rule is needed. Teams just need to start on time and try and skip the 15- 30 minute break between sets while they decide who plays in the 2nd.
If a game starts at 8:15 and the captains decide who they will play in the 2nd set during the 5th frame then games should finish on time. If there is a delay in selecting the team then just get the 1st frame of the second set going and THEN sort the problem.
At the moment most teams are probably losing nearly 45 mins to an hour each match on messing around which is why they finish later. |
| |
|
|
| Fat-Dart |
Posted on 04-09-2008 18:50
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1308
Joined: 05.10.07
|
That's true.
Rob 'The Cat' Cogar is notoriously our slowest player and, out of interest, we've been keeping an eye on his occasional marathon matches to see if a stopwatch would make any difference.
The answer is very little, if any. He generally plays each shot within a minute, albeit somtimes not by much, but it's often the tactical element that drags frames out, meaning it's the number of shots in a match rather than just the time taken to play each one.
As for the start time, I don't think I've seen a match start at 8.15 so far. Teams may arrive by 8.15, but by the time all the faffing about and card-filling has been done, it's well past 8.30 before break-off. |
| |
|
|
| Sniper |
Posted on 04-09-2008 18:56
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 52
Joined: 22.04.08
|
Fat-Dart wrote:
That's true.
Rob 'The Cat' Cogar is notoriously our slowest player and, out of interest, we've been keeping an eye on his occasional marathon matches to see if a stopwatch would make any difference.
The answer is very little, if any. He generally plays each shot within a minute, albeit somtimes not by much, but it's often the tactical element that drags frames out, meaning it's the number of shots in a match rather than just the time taken to play each one.
As for the start time, I don't think I've seen a match start at 8.15 so far. Teams may arrive by 8.15, but by the time all the faffing about and card-filling has been done, it's well past 8.30 before break-off.
Erm ok - you ref his matches from now on and see if you dont fall asleep in the process.
I now have a natural ability to fall asleep standing up!!!
 :
Edited by Sniper on 04-09-2008 18:57 |
| |
|
|
| Fat-Dart |
Posted on 04-09-2008 19:27
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1308
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Sniper wrote:
Erm ok - you ref his matches from now on and see if you dont fall asleep in the process.
I now have a natural ability to fall asleep standing up!!!
:
Nah, you're ok, it's punishment enough watching... Mind you, as you say, it was amusing seeing you nodding off leaning against that post.
 |
| |
|
|
| the-shark |
Posted on 04-09-2008 19:43
|
Home From Home
Posts: 432
Joined: 14.10.07
|
mmmm fair comments about matches not starting at 8.15. tactics are for players who cant pot.
we may need a bigger boat..! |
| |
|
