Week 29 KCs and MotM Feb 27th, 28th, Mar 3rd and 4th
- murf
- FISO Viscount
- Posts: 109449
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:28
- Location: here
- FS Record: Once led TFF. Very briefly.
- FPL:
- Contact:
- aldo1
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 2354
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:26
- Contact:
-
- FISOhead
- Posts: 677
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:27
- Location: ipswich
As I have said many times before imo this particular scoring mode is totally unnecessary and quite often a complete nonsense.
The telegraph for many years refrained from this type of points scoring and I don't think they have enhanced the competition in any way by now including it.
You only have to read reports to know that reporters often can't have seen the games themselves but have most likely relied on a third parties contribution as their description of certain situations differs so much from what you yourself actually saw ( just recently a totally different Ipswich player was attributed with shooting against the bar with the opposite foot to that actually used and often we are told a player scored with his head when we saw quite clearly for ourselves it was with his foot !!!). I'm sure that in many cases these MOM assessors can't even be bothered to give a great deal of thought to their selection and quite often just give it to the person who performed a couple of deeds that stick in the mind but did very little else in the game.
I personally would like this scoring mode eliminated from the game in future and though there are no doubt some FF players who are happy with it I would be surprised if the majority did not share my view ( in which case the more comments made about it to TFF then the more likely they might be persuaded to dispense with it next season).
The telegraph for many years refrained from this type of points scoring and I don't think they have enhanced the competition in any way by now including it.
You only have to read reports to know that reporters often can't have seen the games themselves but have most likely relied on a third parties contribution as their description of certain situations differs so much from what you yourself actually saw ( just recently a totally different Ipswich player was attributed with shooting against the bar with the opposite foot to that actually used and often we are told a player scored with his head when we saw quite clearly for ourselves it was with his foot !!!). I'm sure that in many cases these MOM assessors can't even be bothered to give a great deal of thought to their selection and quite often just give it to the person who performed a couple of deeds that stick in the mind but did very little else in the game.
I personally would like this scoring mode eliminated from the game in future and though there are no doubt some FF players who are happy with it I would be surprised if the majority did not share my view ( in which case the more comments made about it to TFF then the more likely they might be persuaded to dispense with it next season).
-
- Kevin and Perry
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:26
Just cos you havent got VDS I for one think VDS pulled off err 1 great save and had to put up with the disgrace that was the Man U defence for 45 mins. Mis kicking, giving the ball away and generally looking like a school team.
Granted it should have gone to a Reading player, but to those of us that have VDS in goal..i think it was the correct MOTM
Granted it should have gone to a Reading player, but to those of us that have VDS in goal..i think it was the correct MOTM
-
- Sir KnowsFitbaAlot
- Posts: 17514
- Joined: 23 Oct 2006, 13:00
- Location: Just sitting here, knowing fitba (Ray-Bans).
- FS Record: The superstar of FISO
- Contact:
- dachshund
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1712
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:35
- Location: Over the line!!!
- Contact:
-
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 9367
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:45
- Location: Being PM'd
- FS Record: Better than most.
- Contact:
I think your spot on here.dachshund wrote:I would have given it to VDS myself, honestly, and I don't have him in TFF. Did everything right, could not get near the two goals through no fault of his own. Though Oster and Gunnarsson were good too.
Oster had alot of the ball and looked a threat.
Thought Saha cause alot of problems for the Reading back line, however at times he was wasteful and control let him down a bit.
- Burcop
- Treebeard
- Posts: 137
- Joined: 04 Jan 2006, 09:54
didnt think any united player deserved motm
after they went 3-0 up they then eased off and reading came
back into it. yes vds did make a good save and looked solid
when coming for most crosses, but surely that is not enough for motm.
Reading put on a better show from then onwards and there was good play from ostler, little, de la cruz and even bikey.
after they went 3-0 up they then eased off and reading came
back into it. yes vds did make a good save and looked solid
when coming for most crosses, but surely that is not enough for motm.
Reading put on a better show from then onwards and there was good play from ostler, little, de la cruz and even bikey.
- Burcop
- Treebeard
- Posts: 137
- Joined: 04 Jan 2006, 09:54
although "the current bun" gave him as their motm !!Crompton wrote:I think your spot on here.dachshund wrote:I would have given it to VDS myself, honestly, and I don't have him in TFF. Did everything right, could not get near the two goals through no fault of his own. Though Oster and Gunnarsson were good too.
Oster had alot of the ball and looked a threat.
Thought Saha cause alot of problems for the Reading back line, however at times he was wasteful and control let him down a bit.
- Jameselaprendi
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 2099
- Joined: 19 Jul 2006, 23:13
- Location: Morons, your bus is leaving!
- FPL:
Just as I thought.Bramernic wrote:All KCs as predicted last night. Definitely no to O'Shea.
Cant believe VDS got motm by the way, ridiculous decision. Henry Winter probably didnt know any of the Reading player's names and/or couldnt tell one from another. Or maybe he was just looking at the match from a Man United point of view. VDS definately flapped at a few crosses/shots. I admit he made one tremendous save.
I say all this despite his motm meaning my best team is now odds on to break 1300 tonight
- Fabien
- FISOhead
- Posts: 923
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:27
- FS Record: TFF: 23rd (single entrant)
People I know that were at the Utd game at the weekend thought VDS was the best player on the pitch. Perhaps he got this one as a sort of cumulative effect. I know it shouldn't work like that, but in some respects it is fairer that a player that is consistently good, without ever standing head and shoulders above the pack, gets one occassionally.
-
- FISO Knight
- Posts: 11136
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:32
Its nonsense when people post along the lines - "it was a disgrace giving MotM to X" etc etc
In the case of VdS, he had a very good game except for one David James type horror in the second half. Personally I wouldn't have given him MotM but to argue that it was a nonsense decision is an even greater nonsense.
Its clear that many casual TFF managers like looking for the MotM awards on a Monday morning. Even some who were strongly agin their introduction are learning to live with them and even starting to embrace them, especially since the marks were downgraded from 5 to 3 which may, or may not, have stemmed from suggestions to TFF/GFM last season.
Long ago many of us argued strongly to TFF that introducing MotM was a silly decision, but its a bit late now to moan on these boards. Choose your timing appropriately. In late May when GFM/TFF are planning next years game find out who is in charge of it, and enter into a sensible discussion with them, asking for evidence of popularity etc. However I think that you are in a minority now. I'd have thought that there was more scope for improving the game by arguing for a reduction of penalty shoot out points in the same way that MotM points were reduced. That would be popular with multi entrants and other "professional" FF managers and since such a suggestion would not be for a total elimination, it could well be acceptable to those in charge of the game who want to keep a certain random element that appeals to some lucksters.
In the case of VdS, he had a very good game except for one David James type horror in the second half. Personally I wouldn't have given him MotM but to argue that it was a nonsense decision is an even greater nonsense.
Its clear that many casual TFF managers like looking for the MotM awards on a Monday morning. Even some who were strongly agin their introduction are learning to live with them and even starting to embrace them, especially since the marks were downgraded from 5 to 3 which may, or may not, have stemmed from suggestions to TFF/GFM last season.
Long ago many of us argued strongly to TFF that introducing MotM was a silly decision, but its a bit late now to moan on these boards. Choose your timing appropriately. In late May when GFM/TFF are planning next years game find out who is in charge of it, and enter into a sensible discussion with them, asking for evidence of popularity etc. However I think that you are in a minority now. I'd have thought that there was more scope for improving the game by arguing for a reduction of penalty shoot out points in the same way that MotM points were reduced. That would be popular with multi entrants and other "professional" FF managers and since such a suggestion would not be for a total elimination, it could well be acceptable to those in charge of the game who want to keep a certain random element that appeals to some lucksters.
- Chief Wiggsy
- Grumpy Holman Snr
- Posts: 2758
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:26
- Location: Tinkerland
- FS Record: FISO TFF League winner 2005/06 and FISO TFFE League winner 2009 (which got me £100 off NSCTV).
- Contact:
Don't agree meself. Think it was an unnecessary addition to a game which showed which managers were able to get points from players worthy of choice when creating points on the pitch by a quite well structured points system and not when a reporter deemed worthy.
The balance of three points decided between two or three players that played better than others that day, but resonably equal to each other, is then quite possibly different choice due to reporter picked for game.
Too random. Still don't seem right to me.
The balance of three points decided between two or three players that played better than others that day, but resonably equal to each other, is then quite possibly different choice due to reporter picked for game.
Too random. Still don't seem right to me.
- Bramernic
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 9204
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:26
- Location: Dartford, Kent
- FS Record: Plenty of super league prizes, nothing from the organisers.
- Contact:
- Bramernic
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 9204
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:26
- Location: Dartford, Kent
- FS Record: Plenty of super league prizes, nothing from the organisers.
- Contact:
View Latest: 1 Day View Your posts