Reserves Draft QF2 | BBRBB v Aldo Staine

[EdWeatherall]

Hi all

I will vote for whoever answers this question best?

Give yourself 3 pts for every player you have seen play live in the flesh
Give yourself 1 pt for every player you have seen play live on the TV
Give yourself -62pts for each player you have only seen via youtube
And give yourself -3 pts for each player you haven't ever seen play

Thanks

 

[Muffled funk]

I voted for BBRBB cause I thought the underdogs would be more up for the win on the day.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Whether you like it or not of course it's about me, and @The Stain 's last post expressed out loud the clear lack of respect towards me that transpires through this thread.

If there are some things you don't want to say publicly then please PM.

Mate,as Aldo said, it's just a concern that so many posters who've never participated or even voted in drafts before bandwagon on you. Usually we do anticipate and account for scan voting, but this clearly is out of the norm. I think you do not see it because you are new to mains drafts, but to those who've been playing longer, this just feels not normal. Personally I feel that most who voted are just using your team to take the piss out of draft games as whole and not really voting for the team they like.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Is there a problem because I'm leading? I don't understand really.

It has nothing to do with you, or your team, mate - and it isn't insane in any way that you're ahead in the match.

The match was started, a couple of opening posts were made - and then all of a sudden it was 8-1. Could be entirely coincidental that this happens in a match where an unusually high number of posters who normally don't vote in these things make an appearance (maybe they've all become interested recently). Could be entirely coincidental that people appear in the threads to - clearly - take the piss as well.

Who can tell on the aul Internet?

For me, I reckon it's time for a break.

 

[Gio]

It's always a risk in any open vote. For as long as that is the way matches are decided, the potential for piss-taking votes is always going to be there. I'm not sure if a break in itself would necessarily change that dynamic. Again we could look at doing the voting element in a different way to find something less prone to piss-takes/agendas/scan votes etc.

 

[rimaldo]

justice for rinus!!!!!!!

 

[Physiocrat]

@BBRBB

I'm with EAP. I quite like your side, the oddity is the speed of voting and who is doing it. In all the previous drafts we've done it has never happened this way.

 

[Enigma_87]

I like @BBRBB 's side as well. Love a diamond too. By no means is inferior.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Again we could look at doing the voting element in a different way to find something less prone to piss-takes/agendas/scan votes etc.

Yeah, could do that.

We've talked about it before, but it hasn't been properly looked at beyond giving managers a double vote.

 

[Rado_N]

I thought it was about time I checked some of these things out and his team looked better, what's the big deal?

 

[harms]

I thought it was about time I checked some of these things out and his team looked better, what's the big deal?

There is always a possibility of false accusations here, but the whole thing smells fishy (not only in this game, but in a few last ones too)

 

[Chesterlestreet]

It's not a big deal, as such, since the actual "who wins" part is always the least interesting one - but piss taking and whatnot ruins the flow of the matches, and thus the flow of potential discussions (the latter being the interesting part).

And it's hard to envisage a match format that doesn't involve voting - the thing has to have some kind of direction, and some kind of determining principle.

 

[Earthquake]

I thought it was about time I checked some of these things out and his team looked better, what's the big deal?

Ridiculous that you have to justify yourself posting in a damn thread on the caf.

 

[Rado_N]

Ridiculous that you have to justify yourself posting in a damn thread on the caf.

Think I'll go back to ignoring them, this all seems a bit much.

 

[Earthquake]

Think I'll go back to ignoring them, this all seems a bit much.

Don't blame ya, disappointing tbh.

 

[Gio]

Yeah, could do that.

We've talked about it before, but it hasn't been properly looked at beyond giving managers a double vote.

I'm not sure there's an easy way round it. We could restrict it to managers and ex-managers only, but it's snobby and exclusive. The open-ended inclusive principle is a good one to uphold in the interests of a broad church and embracing different views.

The whole voting thing is a strange beast anyway. Here obviously there is a couple of dodgy votes, but I don't think 15-9 is a far-fetched scoreline by any manner of means. It's not a hammering and my own take was that it could have gone either way. And there's an ebb and flow to it - for example in each round of the 40s draft I was getting pumped before hauling it back in the second half. Folks' rationales for voting will vary wildly - tactics, personality, favourite players, disliked players, quality of arguments, cnut-factor of the managers, aesthetics of the teamsheet. It's difficult to justify a hardline position on any of that.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

There is always a possibility of false accusations here, but the whole thing smells fishy (not only in this game, but in a few last ones too)

We could all be paranoid, I suppose.

Anyway, this is ridiculous. Nobody can deny this match has been ruined, whether from paranoia or other factors. If people want to discuss what Gio touched on above, I'm all for that. But this draft is over for me.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

We could restrict it to managers and ex-managers only, but it's snobby and exclusive.

Absolutely - I've never liked the idea of turning people away for whatever reason.

Can't have that - and, yes, the price to pay is the possibility of anything from sheer scan voting to sheer piss taking.

However, we can't have matches like this one - that's pointless. There's a fair amount of comments in this thread which are obvious piss takes - a trend which began in one of the first round matches (the one with what we assumed was a technical problem of some kind). Add that to the unusual voting pattern, and it becomes hard to just carry on, ignoring the anomalies (so to speak).

 

[VivaJanuzaj]

Wow I can't believe the scoreline! I mean I know Godin and T.Silva get a lot of credit but they have a big big missions today especially with Maicon there whose not the best defender against Kempes.. but wow...

 

[Šjor Bepo]

the scoreline as such isnt the measure of how close the game is, you can lose 5:0 and the match as such could be a close one as every vote was decided by some little thing.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Ridiculous that you have to justify yourself posting in a damn thread on the caf.

Well the whole game is based on opinions and justifications. So if you are really interested we'd appreciate a word or two on why you think a team is better of which player you think will make the difference. That's how we learn about players, styles etc.

Think I'll go back to ignoring them, this all seems a bit much.

We need you!

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

And if there's no piss taking, then so be it. BBRBB goes through.

 

[VivaJanuzaj]

Just saw the whole shenanigan calls, a lot of of @BBRBB voter's seem legit so I don't know whats the issue here and I don't see a reason to suspect the ones I don't know.. what happened in the other match threads?

Moreover, I find it hard to believe that a gang of redcafe's evil minds will go on threads and try to destroy it by voting for the worst team, because I don't think they give a feck enough to read and actually decide which is the worst team. So it's probably not malicious.

As for the match, I think @Aldo & @The Stain have the better team but it's not like it's completely one sided. I'm surprised BBRBB is winning but I'm not shocked because his build is interesting, although I don't think his defenders can cope in this match and Kempes vs Maicon is a huge mismatch here.

 

[Enigma_87]

I don't see an issue with having a neutral to vote or scan vote really. He still spent time to go through the teams and make a decision. We've seen scorelines going from 9-2 to level in couple of hours. The current score is like 5 points difference, it's not like it's a whitewash.

I don't think my or another manager's vote should hold more weight as in the end in equally matched sides is just an opinion.

I doubt @Rado_N is taking the piss on this one either given that he has been nothing short of helpful in every draft so far.

Anyhow too bad it turned to this at the end especially since it's @BBRBB 's first game which is really disappointing.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

I doubt @Rado_N is taking the piss on this one either given that he has been nothing short of helpful in every draft so far.

It's pretty easy to see which posts in this thread are piss takes, surely.

And, no - it obviously isn't Rado's, he's been around these things for ages now and has been nothing but helpful.

 

[Enigma_87]

It's pretty easy to see which posts in this thread are piss takes, surely.

And, no - it obviously isn't Rado's, he's been around these things for ages now and has been nothing but helpful.

To be fair I'm not sure who it is as I see posters that have voted for both managers who didn't vote in previous games(or drafts). But again it's probably due to me being around in the last (I think 4) drafts and I haven't taken part in the 20 or 30 before so it's harder to differentiate. But yeah I can obviously see the point and found the scoreline surprising as well.

 

[Earthquake]

Well the whole game is based on opinions and justifications. So if you are really interested we'd appreciate a word or two on why you think a team is better of which player you think will make the difference. That's how we learn about players, styles etc.

Did I not do that already?

 

[Eboue]

I voted for BBRBB because I think that in football more than any other sport, a team takes the personality of its manager. BBRB has shown a steadfast determination and singlemindedness that reminds me of the great 05 Chelsea or 56 Steaua Bucharest in their will to win. He's not getting sidetracked by drama and hurt feelings like Aldo/Stain are. Aldo/Staine are making the same mistakes as 09 Arsenal or 97 MLS All Stars West. I think Diego Simeone would agree that talented high maintenance sides may look better on paper but as we all know, Redcafe Reserves Drafts aren't played in paper they are played on the pitch. And on the pitch, I'll take BBRBB because of their mental strength and also because less of their players are in wheelchairs.

 

[Moby]

I voted for BBRBB because I think that in football more than any other sport, a team takes the personality of its manager. BBRB has shown a steadfast determination and singlemindedness that reminds me of the great 05 Chelsea or 56 Steaua Bucharest in their will to win. He's not getting sidetracked by drama and hurt feelings like Aldo/Stain are. Aldo/Staine are making the same mistakes as 09 Arsenal or 97 MLS All Stars West. I think Diego Simeone would agree that talented high maintenance sides may look better on paper but as we all know, Redcafe Reserves Drafts aren't played in paper they are played on the pitch. And on the pitch, I'll take BBRBB because of their mental strength and also because less of their players are in wheelchairs.

feck off.

 

[Balu]

It's always a risk in any open vote. For as long as that is the way matches are decided, the potential for piss-taking votes is always going to be there. I'm not sure if a break in itself would necessarily change that dynamic. Again we could look at doing the voting element in a different way to find something less prone to piss-takes/agendas/scan votes etc.

Yeah, could do that.

We've talked about it before, but it hasn't been properly looked at beyond giving managers a double vote.

The voting system isn't the problem here. If it's a personal agenda against Aldo, then everyone just looks like an idiot for all I care. If it's some weird way trying to tell us that they believe these drafts are stupid, then everyone still looks like an idiot in my opinion. If the drafts annoy people, just the tell the regular draft junkies here and either ban drafts in general, limit the number of drafts played in a year or give us a subforum and let us play there. All options are fine as long as they're openly said. The latter would mean many neutrals wouldn't see the threads and we'd lose voters, which is a shame, but if that's how it's supposed to be, fair enough.

I get that these drafts are a bit silly, but overall they're still excellent football discussion and a fun way for people to learn about the history of the game if they're interested in it. If there's a group on the Caf including some mods who think it's stupid and that it hinders the doom and gloom, calling everything shit and talking only in hyperbole football discussion we have in almost all threads nowadays they sure as hell chose a way that perfectly fits in with that to let us know.

 

[Moby]

All options are fine as long as they're openly said.

That's never gonna happen. What happened here is what was always going to happen.

 

[Cina]

Disappointed to see it end like this after the work put in by you both. FWIW I thought it was really close but BB just shaded it, though I know more of his players so maybe that's why I picked him.

 

[rimaldo]

i've voted in a first few cricket drafts and the odd football one too. i always found the cricket drafts easier to visualise as although it is a team game, it is full of 1v1 matches and it's easier to imagine if bat or ball would be on top. team dynamics and tactics are far less important.

with the football ones, i look at 1v1's too as i have no fecking idea how an italian i've never heard of from the 1950's will play in a free role behind an equally anonymous brazilian striker from the 20's, who i'm reliably informed drifts out wide to the left and cuts in to shoot. i of course only know about because a passage has been copied and pasted from a wiki page.

i was going to vote for bb in this one, largely because i'd actually heard of some of his players and i'd choose more of his players in a 1v1 matchup. it's coming across a little cliquey and hipster. seems you can only vote if you're planning to vote for the right person and new participants aren't welcome, especially if you only have questionable knowledge of football played 120 years ago.

 

[harms]

seems you can only vote if you're planning to vote for the right person and new participants aren't welcome, especially if you only have questionable knowledge of football played 120 years ago.

No, as long as it's not a pisstake, you're welcome. We are just alarmed by some posts in the earlier threads, like

i've calculated the age differences and the biggest issue that both teams have is that depending on what year the game was played in, half of the players would either be pensioners, embryos, toddlers or glints in eyes.

i've not seen much of rinus israel play but i'm fairly sure he'd stop an embryotic crespo running past him, even at the ripe ol' age of 42, if the game was played in the 80's. for that reason mazhar probably can't win. but this is football and the underdog might win so i'll have to vote for mazhar, it's the only way football can be the real winner.

and a huge amount of the voters that were around cafe forever and never took interest in the draft, before now. Maybe we're overly paranoid, but it really seems like this whole thing is a joke for someone, while we contribute a lot of our time to this.

p.s. it's pretty funny btw, your post that I quoted

 

[Physiocrat]

the scoreline as such isnt the measure of how close the game is, you can lose 5:0 and the match as such could be a close one as every vote was decided by some little thing.

Bring back score lines. X wins by 1, 2 or 3 goals.

 

[Big-Red]

After reading up on some of these players I'm actually leaning towards Aldo now.

 

[Moby]

Maybe we're overly paranoid

Nope. Some of you just aren't as aware on how this bunch 'operates'.

 

[Adzzz]

Not sure why mods have been called into this or questioned, if there was a problem with draft threads they would have been stopped yonks ago surely?

Some posters may genuinely not know enough to make an in-depth observation to the thread, tactically speaking and on the caf you'll always get a few comments that aren't in the 'spirit' of the thread but are in the spirit of the cafe, so relax.

I voted for you Aldo, the game looks like it should be tight and you picked one of the worlds great freekick takers, basically taking out BBRBB's strong def.

 

[Snowjoe]

I was hoping to hear more from the managers about their teams and their strengths but instead it's been more like listening to Benitez and his fachts rant.

 

[Rado_N]

Not sure why mods have been called into this or questioned, if there was a problem with draft threads they would have been stopped yonks ago surely?

Some posters may genuinely not know enough to make an in-depth observation to the thread, tactically speaking and on the caf you'll always get a few comments that aren't in the 'spirit' of the thread but are in the spirit of the cafe, so relax.

I voted for you Aldo, the game looks like it should be tight and you picked one of the worlds great freekick takers, basically taking out BBRBB's strong def.

But Buffon...