|
Rankings, Div Singles & Secs
|
| Golden |
Posted on 12-05-2008 22:22
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
If it is a tie I'd better keep it as Rod'll only lose it again  *
* joke |
| |
|
|
| Viper |
Posted on 12-05-2008 22:37
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 578
Joined: 06.10.07
|
ThePower wrote:
Deutch wrote:
ThePower wrote:
I'll bring a bin to Presentation Night. We'll put the trophy in it and who ever decides they want to take it out can be forever known as 'The Garbage Picker'...... Bottom line is is that I have to be seen as being fair ..... a precedent was set a few seasons ago when 2 joint winners approached the League re joint winners trophies which as you well know is now the norm. At the time that I submitted and stated that the three winners from Div.1 and Div.4 would be awarded joint winners trophies I honestly thought that the previous three way play-off was for a runner-up spot but after coming across the Play-Off sheet in one of my files yesyerday, how can I be seen to treat this seasons 3 winners any different from last season. Im going to go through the motions of submitting the Play-Off details for Tuesday 27th May.
Fair enough Mark, rules are rules etc but two players do not wish to participate in the play off. I doubt Rod will want to be seen as claiming it on that basis. So, when I go through the motions of circulating the Play-Offs ... arranging a ref etc etc etc and lets say that Rod does turn up ... my only option there then will be to award it to him ....... have you another option you may wish to be considered that would be acceptable to all three competitors & the League, because if you have and I deem it to be reasonable then another precedent would be made. |
| |
|
|
| ThePower |
Posted on 12-05-2008 22:55
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 970
Joined: 05.10.07
|
I understand Mark where you are coming from.
Scott and Danny are happy to share it, thats two from three and I doubt Rod after all this publicity would want to win it by default. On the basis two from three feel a carve up is the gentlemanly thing to do, it seems sensible for them to share it.
|
| |
|
|
| Viper |
Posted on 13-05-2008 00:24
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 578
Joined: 06.10.07
|
ThePower wrote:
I understand Mark where you are coming from.
Scott and Danny are happy to share it, thats two from three and I doubt Rod after all this publicity would want to win it by default. On the basis two from three feel a carve up is the gentlemanly thing to do, it seems sensible for them to share it.
On that basis, & subject to Rod's approval I would be prepared to award three trophies (which would be smaller) by using the same oncost of 2 awards for 3. You and Danny would need to seek Rod's approval and if this is so then I would offer the same courtesy to the Division 4 contenders. If you could let me know before this coming Saturday then I won't need to send out any Play-Off sheets. |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 14-05-2008 07:47
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
ThePower wrote:
I understand Mark where you are coming from.
Scott and Danny are happy to share it, thats two from three and I doubt Rod after all this publicity would want to win it by default. On the basis two from three feel a carve up is the gentlemanly thing to do, it seems sensible for them to share it.
Excuse my ignorance but I thought this was a competition? Why is carving up gentlemanly thing to do? |
| |
|
|
| BigJake |
Posted on 14-05-2008 15:55
|
Home From Home
Posts: 227
Joined: 06.03.08
|
Sass wrote:
Excuse my ignorance but I thought this was a competition? Why is carving up gentlemanly thing to do?
 |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 14-05-2008 16:49
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Sass wrote:
Excuse my ignorance but I thought this was a competition? Why is carving up gentlemanly thing to do?
That question pretty much answers itself doesn't it?
From what I understand Rod agreed to split the Individuals last night . . |
| |
|
|
| ThePower |
Posted on 14-05-2008 16:50
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 970
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Sass wrote:
Excuse my ignorance but I thought this was a competition? Why is carving up gentlemanly thing to do?
I think the fact that now all 3 players have agreed to share the honours, we'll put this matter to bed now. 
Its a matter of choice, but I think scrapping the Play-Off's is the way forward. You play 22 matches, work hard each week to win and then have a 1 frame shoot out. Its a waste of everyone's time including the league's. So at a time like this when 3 players clearly respect one anothers achievements this season it is a fitting end to play the 'gentleman' card. It just goes to show you that winning a 'competition' is not everything. Even in Division 1.
Edited by ThePower on 14-05-2008 16:57 |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 14-05-2008 16:58
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Fair enough if he's happy to share but the tone of your posts made Rod look like the bad guy if he didn't agree to share the trophy and I think it's wrong to do that.
I'm pretty sure it's the rankings that interests him most in any case. Surely that won't be shared? |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:06
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Golden wrote:
That question pretty much answers itself doesn't it?
Do you always answer a question with another question?
I don't see your point here.
Edited by Sass on 14-05-2008 17:07 |
| |
|
|
| Shaggy |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:10
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 888
Joined: 02.10.07
|
For what its worth my opinion is that it should be shared... At the end of the day if after 4 1/2 miles of the Grand National, if its a dead heat, its a dead heat.... They dont do an extra 100m sprint the next day to decide it.
House!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| |
|
|
| Dogger |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:11
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 805
Joined: 02.10.07
|
I think Deutch said on the previous page that the rankings will be shared, it's never been a tie before, and each player will get their own trophy. |
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:24
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
I think Shaggy's right but last year in Div 2 we didn't get a choice about sharing it, we were told it was a three man play-off. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:26
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Sass wrote:
Do you always answer a question with another question?
|
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:32
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Sass wrote:
Fair enough if he's happy to share but the tone of your posts made Rod look like the bad guy if he didn't agree to share the trophy and I think it's wrong to do that.
I'm pretty sure it's the rankings that interests him most in any case. Surely that won't be shared?
It will be . . It was mentioned earlier in this thread I think . . |
| |
|
|
| ThePower |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:37
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 970
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Sass wrote:
Fair enough if he's happy to share but the tone of your posts made Rod look like the bad guy if he didn't agree to share the trophy and I think it's wrong to do that.
I'm pretty sure it's the rankings that interests him most in any case. Surely that won't be shared?
Are you Rod's number one fan or something??!! 
I think I said Rod would not want to win it by 'default'. At no time has Rod stated, as far as I am aware, that he wanted a play-off?
Two players were able to come on here to voice their approval to share the title before speaking to Rod which maybe was regrettable because it would put Rod in a no win position. As Mark Halsey said, if Rod wanted to turn up then it was his to win. Fairplay to Rod for agreeing that was of no interest to him and for the sake of the competition was not the best thing to do.
Edited by ThePower on 14-05-2008 17:43 |
| |
|
|
| ThePower |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:40
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 970
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Shaggy wrote:
For what its worth my opinion is that it should be shared... At the end of the day if after 4 1/2 miles of the Grand National, if its a dead heat, its a dead heat.... They dont do an extra 100m sprint the next day to decide it.
You have to stick that one in the Random Quotes Box! |
| |
|
|
| BigJake |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:52
|
Home From Home
Posts: 227
Joined: 06.03.08
|
I think this should be awarded to the best player, not best players. There should only be one best player! And what ever means are needed to get there then that's what should happen.
Although when all three players decide they don't want to play anymore, I can see that my little philosophy falters. 
Although haveing thought about it a bit more I guess you could argue that the league has technically finished, so they are all the best players in the league...
I can see both sides of the argument having valid points
Edited by BigJake on 14-05-2008 17:55
|
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 14-05-2008 17:58
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
You're arguing with yourself Jake.
|
| |
|
|
| BigJake |
Posted on 14-05-2008 18:04
|
Home From Home
Posts: 227
Joined: 06.03.08
|
longshanks wrote:
You're arguing with yourself Jake.
No I'm presenting a balanced argument, there is an almost polar difference.
Funny thing longshanks. I was out yesterday and a friend remarked that every time I post you seem to post immediatly after, as if you're waiting on my every word. I hadn't noticed it at the time. But now with this latest post I couldn't help but laugh to myself as his point in hand seems to have been proved.
Thanks for the obvious interest in me darling 
But you really should be saving your energies for our match...
Edited by BigJake on 14-05-2008 18:07
|
| |
|
