Last Man Standing 17/18 III - Week 8

[JonnyRed(WCFC)]

if we'd have implemented the 2 picks for this round then pretty sure we'd have had a winner or whittled it down to 2 any rate, but it was a first time occurrence and we learn from it for future LMS's, all part of the fun and anxiety lol

 

[wizadry]

i agree with spongebobblade on this occasion!

Spoilsports!

 

[Pinchy]

Fair point but them's the rules, have been since Brownie's 1st comp. We can maybe change the rule for the next one if everyone agrees.

Quite right. You don’t change the laws of the game during a match.

I would change it as Boo suggests, but for the future. It should require a 75% majority though, being a fundamental change.

 

[boo radley]

If only we had V A R in place.
Does it say anything in the rules about this situation?

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

Have we had this situation in the other comps then?

Yes, once on my watch I think.

I can see your point but on the other hand we have picked 7 consecutive winners compared to your 1. That wouldn’t be fair to start on an even keel again would it? Yes of course it’s easy for me to say but the rules must have been thought out beforehand and I’d be in agreement even if I was in your position. It’s unfair on Jim too when he’s only following what’s been set before him

There's 2 sides to the argument, obviously in the middle of a comp, those knocked out will want it 're-setting' those still in will want another crack. I also tend to agree with spongey, those further into the comp arguably deserve more of a chance, it's just the same as cup competition where the semis are played over 2 legs. Clubs could complain that maybe results would have been different if earlier rounds had been 2 legs but that's the advantage of getting further into the competition.

I think it's fair as it is, it only really comes into play when we get to the business end of the comp and as above, arguably those getting that far deserve more leeway. There's other options such as increasing the number of picks (as we do anyway) having tie breaks to settle it where there's no winner, open to suggestions as ever.

 

[wizadry]

Yes, once on my watch I think.



There's 2 sides to the argument, obviously in the middle of a comp, those knocked out will want it 're-setting' those still in will want another crack. I also tend to agree with spongey, those further into the comp arguably deserve more of a chance, it's just the same as cup competition where the semis are played over 2 legs. Clubs could complain that maybe results would have been different if earlier rounds had been 2 legs but that's the advantage of getting further into the competition.

I think it's fair as it is, it only really comes into play when we get to the business end of the comp and as above, arguably those getting that far deserve more leeway. There's other options such as increasing the number of picks (as we do anyway) having tie breaks to settle it where there's no winner, open to suggestions as ever.

No suggestions mate, just tell the fuckers to hurry up.

 

[Jesus_was_a_Blade]

Alternative idea, give me the money and then....ermmm..... I forget the rest.....

 

[JonnyRed(WCFC)]

A tie break isnt a bad idea but what the hell could it be?...it cant be one like they do on radio show quizzes like talksport do because everyone could just cheat the answer then...


maybe predict the total number of goals across all 4 divisions/Cup (if its on) for the weekend and the closest one to the pin wins?!

 

[metty]

How about having a roll over but with the last men standing having a free entry.

 

[wizadry]

How about having a roll over but with the last men standing having a free entry.

Great idea!

Starting after this tournament, obviously.

 

[JonnyRed(WCFC)]

I like that idea as well... but...

If it rolls over twice say, then you will probably get people jumping on the bandwagon paying a tenner for a go at it when the regular players will have stumped up 30 quid in total from the initial one so from that perspective its a little bit unfair

 

[spongebobblade]

I like that idea as well... but...

If it rolls over twice say, then you will probably get people jumping on the bandwagon paying a tenner for a go at it when the regular players will have stumped up 30 quid in total from the initial one so from that perspective its a little bit unfair

Then they would have to pay £20 to be in it? The same as everyone else has paid bar those who have had free entry second time around?

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

Or maybe rollover for previous entrants (for that particular comp) only.

 

[JonnyRed(WCFC)]

Then they would have to pay £20 to be in it? The same as everyone else has paid bar those who have had free entry second time around?

£10 or £20 depending when they join in