Page 97 of 220 FirstFirst ... 47879596979899107147197 ... LastLast
Results 1,441 to 1,455 of 3288

Thread: CW Draft League

  1. #1441
    Hall of Fame Member Cevno's Avatar
    Simon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    15,713
    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    Perhaps we should make it essential to have them in the XI, otherwise I'd hazard a guess they would be relegated to 12th man
    Yeah, that'd work much better or else everybody will use that clause to fill their 12th player position.

  2. #1442
    Eds
    Eds is offline
    International Debutant Eds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,112
    Forcing people to use a certain clause in their XI is a bit... :/

    If you picked a clause where 0 good players can be picked then it's your fault if everyone uses it to pick their 12th man, quite frankly.
    "If that Swann lad is the future of spin bowling in this country, then we're ****ed." - Nasser Hussain, 1997.

  3. #1443
    Hall of Fame Member Cevno's Avatar
    Simon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    15,713
    Quote Originally Posted by Eds View Post
    Forcing people to use a certain clause in their XI is a bit... :/

    If you picked a clause where 0 good players can be picked then it's your fault if everyone uses it to pick their 12th man, quite frankly.
    But if everybody has to use that clause in their 11 it will even out, as it'd be the same for everyone. Would also add a different dimension to this draft compared to all previous ones on CW and make people use their other 11 clauses wisely to get 10 starting players.

    Right now everybody can just leave that clause till the last and then pick 11 out of 11 in the other ones.

    Either we should make it compulsory to include in 11 or Jager can change that clause. I prefer the former personally, but either would be better.
    Last edited by Cevno; 16-09-2012 at 04:29 AM.

  4. #1444
    Eds
    Eds is offline
    International Debutant Eds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    But if everybody has to use that clause in their 11 it will even out, as it'd be the same for everyone. Would also add a different dimension to this draft compared to all previous ones on CW and make people use their other 11 clauses wisely to get 10 starting players.

    Right now everybody can just leave that clause till the last and then pick 11 out 11 in the other ones.
    And that's Jager's fault for picking a clause which doesn't let you have any good players.

    If you have to include someone from Jager's clause in the XI, then everyone will use Blakus' clause for their 12th men. And so on and so forth. Where's the line?


  5. #1445
    International Vice-Captain watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,595
    I just assumed that everyone would make the women cricketer their 12th 'man'. Didn't think for a second that it would be compulsory to have a women in the actual XI. Sounds too much like 'Affirmative Action' ideology from the Clinton administration for mine. And I'm a political conservative.

    Nothing against Jager BTW.
    Last edited by watson; 16-09-2012 at 04:35 AM.

  6. #1446
    Hall of Fame Member Cevno's Avatar
    Simon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    15,713
    Quote Originally Posted by Eds View Post
    And that's Jager's fault for picking a clause which doesn't let you have any good players.

    If you have to include someone from Jager's clause in the XI, then everyone will use Blakus' clause for their 12th men. And so on and so forth. Where's the line?
    Blakus' clause still at least has some room for picking up decent players towards the end of this, who may make some teams when other clauses are exhausted.

    But for Jager's clause, everybody will automatically use it for their reserve to be on the safe side as their is no concrete way of comparing.

  7. #1447
    International Captain Agent TBY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    North Point
    Posts
    6,613
    This is quite a pointless debate because it really doesn't matter whether you have the female in the first XI or not. Whoever you pick with that clause isn't going to affect your votes or how good your team is perceived to be - nobody knows has a clue about any of them.

    No offence, but I think it's a terrible idea for a clause.
    orz

  8. #1448
    Dan
    Dan is offline
    Global Moderator / Cricket Web Staff Member Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse
    Posts
    6,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent TBY View Post
    This is quite a pointless debate because it really doesn't matter whether you have the female in the first XI or not. Whoever you pick with that clause isn't going to affect your votes or how good your team is perceived to be - nobody knows has a clue about any of them.

    No offence, but I think it's a terrible idea for a clause.
    I can think of a number of good women's cricketers off the top of my head. It's a great way to get people out researching and learning more about cricket. Isn't that what this forum's for?
    My sworn enemy:
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
    I hate s smith.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
    I give out points for style of which Steve(n) Smith has none.

  9. #1449
    International Debutant Jager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The land of Siddle
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent TBY View Post
    This is quite a pointless debate because it really doesn't matter whether you have the female in the first XI or not. Whoever you pick with that clause isn't going to affect your votes or how good your team is perceived to be - nobody knows has a clue about any of them.

    No offence, but I think it's a terrible idea for a clause.
    point taken that no-one has any idea. I'm going to say no to making it compulsory, it's not fair otherwise
    Oh for a strong arm and a walking stick

  10. #1450
    Eds
    Eds is offline
    International Debutant Eds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    But for Jager's clause, everybody will automatically use it for their reserve to be on the safe side as their is no concrete way of comparing.
    Precisely why it's not a good clause in a Draft 'League'.

    EDIT: It's fine as a 12th man type thing though.

  11. #1451
    International Debutant Jager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The land of Siddle
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Eds View Post
    Precisely why it's not a good clause in a Draft 'League'.

    EDIT: It's fine as a 12th man type thing though.
    In some regards it limits the flexibility of teams, making the other 11 selections slightly more important

  12. #1452
    Hall of Fame Member Cevno's Avatar
    Simon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    15,713
    Quote Originally Posted by Eds View Post

    EDIT: It's fine as a 12th man type thing though.
    12th man isn't taken into account while rating teams though, so it might turn into a beauty contest.

  13. #1453
    International Vice-Captain watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,595
    A good compromise would be that the 12th women IS rated. She has too appear on the Voting thread.

    Incidently, don't you love sports/forums dominated by blokes as it's like a time warp to the 1950s. I'm about to pass out laughing here
    Last edited by watson; 16-09-2012 at 04:57 AM.

  14. #1454
    Dan
    Dan is offline
    Global Moderator / Cricket Web Staff Member Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse
    Posts
    6,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    12th man isn't taken into account while rating teams though, so it might turn into a beauty contest.

    +

    =
    Draft win?

  15. #1455
    International Captain Agent TBY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    North Point
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by rvd619323 View Post
    I can think of a number of good women's cricketers off the top of my head. It's a great way to get people out researching and learning more about cricket. Isn't that what this forum's for?
    Okay, but how much research can you do anyway? Women's internationals have existed since 1934 (I just looked it up, you learn something new every day!), but how much footage or literature do you think exists? Is there enough to let you differentiate between Heyhoe-Flint, Bakewell and Denise 'Ms. Don Bradman' Annetts?

    I don't think there is. Most people will have to rely on stats alone, and we all know that's an absolute crapshoot.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Draft threads
    By Richard in forum Site Discussion
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 27-05-2014, 05:26 PM
  2. Biggest plodders in international cricket history.
    By Camel56 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 175
    Last Post: 26-07-2010, 02:34 PM
  3. Surrey 2002: A Cricket Captain Diary
    By SIX AND OUT in forum General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17-02-2005, 08:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •