Home > About FIFFA, Participation > Choosing Sides (Part 2)

Choosing Sides (Part 2)

[continuing from here]

Between 18 and 26 August 2008, Tom started collating stats on each participant’s win-loss ratio, briefly following up on his suggestion on 5 August 2008.   I started keeping participation records (attendance and results) for each session from 1 September 2008 onwards.

On 6 August 2008, Bret had suggested that stats could be used to determine line ups.

In a post on 10 October 2008, I said that I had “included the difference between each participant’s win-ratio against loss-ratio, which works out to figure between 1.00 and -1.00.”

Once the participants for each session is confirmed, I will list the participants in order of that figure, and divide them into teams as follows:

• Team A – 1st, 4th, 5th, 8th, ….
• Team B- 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 7th, ….

I’ll start for next week’s sessions, and we’ll see how that works out.

In response, Tom suggested using captains to select sides.  We tried that for a while, but it was left to me to decide who should be the captains or selectors.   When I went with the two highest ranked players, they often didn’t have the time or the inclination to choose their sides, so it fell back on me to determine the sides based on rankings.

Rankings are still being used to determine line ups, although the methodology has been revised several times since then. Several changes have been made for the start of the current quarter.

The evenness of sides has continued to be an issue, most recently on 19 March 2009, and on 9 April 2009.

Two captains taking turns to choose their sides is fine with me.  However, on top of everything else I am doing, I cannot co-ordinate the arrangements between the two captains.  I suggest the following procedure:

  • After all the players for that night’s session are confirmed, any of the players can identify the two highest ranked players by downloading the Excel document which contains the latest rankings.   It can be any two regulars even.
  • If either of them puts the line ups on the blog on behalf of both of them, I will take that as the line ups.   If there are any late withdrawals, I will help to find a replacement, but I won’t re-jig the sides.  The replacement can take the place of the late withdrawal, or the two captains can re-jig their sides before the session starts.  Each player having both colours with them would be useful for this purpose as well.
  • If no line ups are put up before then, I will put up the line ups based on the rankings anytime between 4 and 5 pm.
  • Even if the line ups on the blog are based on the rankings, the players are at liberty to swap teams either before or during the session.  They can even re-do the line ups if they like.

Remember, the colours for each day are pre-assigned:

  • Monday:  Black, Red.
  • Tuesday:  Red, White.
  • Wednesday:  White, Black.
  • Thursday:  Black, Red.

If you don’t have sufficient jerseys or T-shirts in the requisite colours, you can always put in your order for a FIOFAFI jersey or T-shirt in the second batch. 🙂

As I’ve said before, I have no intention to dictate how the sessions should be played, and the blog is meant to be facilitative.  My involvement, as much as anyone else’s, is to the extent I am able and willing to be involved.

In the end, it’s all for fun.

Advertisements
Categories: About FIFFA, Participation
  1. Yas
    Mon 13 April 2009 at 2:49 am

    firstly Jiv, to link me to not liking losing is an understatement. I do not know why ou t of so many participants it has to be me. Giving an honest and frank opinion is my nature and it is not ‘linked’ to not liking losing. Rajseran also do express his honest opinions on games but that does not equates to not liking losing. So i found the ‘dont like’ losing linkage absurb. Secondly, not trying to be cocky or humble but for a 24 year old guy to be placed in the rannkings together with ‘veterans’ is unfair and doesnt generate any ‘kicks’ from it. Tom also mentioned to me that for a young guy to feel good and berate about doing shit in front of older guys is rather unsportsmanship like and i have to agree.. So i will come, play my game and be a flamboyant guy on the blog. Other then that, its fair im out of the rankings for sportsmanship factor and also to prevent contoversies in an event if my team loses.. Thanks dear Rajiv 🙂

    • rajiv
      Mon 13 April 2009 at 8:03 am

      Yaseen, not liking to lose or wanting to win is not a bad thing. I could have linked it to several recent or earlier posts, by either you, Rajseran, or anyone else, but I could only link to one.

      You’ve called for an alternative, for example, on 19 March 2009, so I thought of you. 🙂

      The simple alternative now is for any two regulars to choose their sides and post it on the blog once the players for the session is confirmed.

      I’ll keep the rankings going. It’s just a convenient way for me to determine the line ups if it hasn’t been put up by any two regulars. In order for me to do that, everyone who has played has to be in the rankings.

      The simple way to be “out of the rankings” is to ignore it. 🙂

      Anyway, I’ve taken out the sentence “Is it any coincidence that the issue is raised most often by some of the participants who are high in the rankings, and don’t like to lose? :)” and the links in it, as it isn’t necessary to the above post.

  2. Tue 14 April 2009 at 5:01 pm

    Here’s a suggestion, and only a suggestion; the objective is to create balanced teams.

    (1) Classify each player into (A), (B), (C) and (D) “pools”. Initial classification to be done by three or 4 of regular / senior FIOFAFI players (eg Jiv, Gilbert, Murray, Andy M)

    (2) Then, fill teams with A / B / C / D class players equally.

    This suggestion is based on a player’s skill level as opposed to his form.

    As always, the usual qualifications apply: no system is perfect etc.

    • rajiv
      Tue 14 April 2009 at 10:21 pm

      (eg Jiv, Gilbert, Murray, Andy M)

      What about you Tom? 🙂

      Several issues:

      • Classifying players requires making subjective assessments of all players across the board. The rankings are based on actual results, far less subjective.

      • There is still the issue of which players go into which teams for each session. Two regulars choosing their teams is voluntary, made for a particular session, and the two making the choice win or lose based on their selections.

      • As we have new players coming in all the time, the classifications will have to be kept up to date, and it is likely that no one but their introducers or those playing in the sessions they play may have any idea which class they should be.

      • Those confirming for any one session are unlikely to fall evenly within the four classes in any event.

      It just seems like much more work and controversy than either the ranking method (subject to player swaps) or two captains choosing, without any greater benefit.

  3. Wed 15 April 2009 at 3:49 pm

    In reply:
    “Classifying players requires making subjective assessments of all players across the board.” Correct, they are subjective assessments insofar as they are made by humans.

    “The rankings are based on actual results, far less subjective”. As stated elsewhere, once rankings are no longer “raw” but contain weightings and other inputs, they are as subjective as any method. And as stated in my initial reply, this rankings system prioritises skill over class.

    “There is still the issue of which players go into which teams for each session”.
    Of course. This proposal only eases the allocation of players into teams.

    “Two regulars choosing their teams is voluntary, made for a particular session,”
    Sometimes, players would rather not volunteer.

    “As we have new players coming in all the time, the classifications will have to be kept up to date, and it is likely that no one but their introducers or those playing in the sessions they play may have any idea which class they should be.”
    Simple solution: Newbies start at D and is open to “promotion”.

    “Those confirming for any one session are unlikely to fall evenly within the four classes in any event.”
    Absolutely. Judgement calls: eg 1A = 2Bs or whatever.

    “It just seems like much more work and controversy than either the ranking method (subject to player swaps) or two captains choosing, without any greater benefit.”

    More work / controversy than that fabulous formula on here, and without greater benefit? Well, if you say so.

    • rajiv
      Wed 15 April 2009 at 4:18 pm

      Tom, awarding points for wins, draws and losses or games played, and their averages, is no more subjective than your ordinary league table. Were you very affected when they switched from 2 points for a win to 3 points for a win? Or from goal average to goal difference?

      And far less subjective and controversial than most ranking systems, such as ELO ratings, UEFA coefficients and FIFA rankings.

      Dividing participants into classes is entirely subjective and about certain participants assessing or making “judgment” about other participants. Any “volunteers”?

      Far simpler to deal with it session by session. Regulars might start volunteering to pick their teams when they become more familiar with the other players who often play in the same session, and when the issue of how we pick sides is no longer a matter of great controversy.

      • Wed 15 April 2009 at 5:59 pm

        Jiv,
        As stated elsewhere and before, once rankings have weights attached … etc etc etc. Last time I checked, this was Fiofafi not UEFA (thanks for the links, very useful) so the comparison is meant to do what exactly?

        “is entirely subjective”: well, no, it is not. Footballing criteria – ability to pass, etc – can be discussed and evaluated.

        Anyway, here goes one 1 final attempt after which you can have the last word. Here are two sentences, after which there is a question.

        (1) Volunteers voluntarily choosing teams have to have some idea of the quality of the players.

        (2) The A / B / C / D classification aids the volunteer system.

        (Q) Agree / disagree?

        • rajiv
          Wed 15 April 2009 at 6:01 pm

          Your normal league table with 2 or 3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw and no points for a loss is “weighted” in more or less the same sense that the rankings are “weighted”, as is the choice between goal difference and goal average for deciding which of two or more clubs with equal points should be placed higher.

          Go ahead and classify Tom, and we’ll see if anyone choosing teams rely on the classification. I take it you’ve volunteered to do the classification? 🙂

          The complete list of participants is here.

          Follow the links to see why the comparison with UEFA coefficients and FIFA rankings arose.

  4. rajiv
    Thu 7 May 2009 at 9:28 am

    To accommodate a schedule spread over 6 days a week, I’ve re-looked the colours for each day. I’ve also taken into account that some of the Bukit Timah regulars are opposed to playing in white, so the Black/Red combination is reserved for them. The things I have to bear in mind. 🙂

    The colours for each day will now be:

    • Mondays: Red, White.
    • Tuesdays: White, Black.
    • Wednesdays: Black, Red.
    • Thursdays: Red, White.
    • Saturdays: White, Black.
    • Sundays: Black, Red.

  1. Sat 18 April 2009 at 8:45 am
  2. Sat 18 April 2009 at 12:06 pm
  3. Sat 18 April 2009 at 12:44 pm
  4. Thu 7 May 2009 at 9:55 am
  5. Sat 23 May 2009 at 10:10 pm
  6. Sun 19 July 2009 at 9:43 pm
  7. Wed 26 August 2009 at 8:58 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: