Round 3 (2009) TITANS v RABBITOHS

[Tittoolate]

Hiya blokes.

Have to say this was an entertaining round, both sides 'played hard, done good' per Jack Gibson. Thanks Bunnies. Good luck but not TOO MUCH!

Thanks Ref for putting in a big one. Wouldn't be a game without you.

Mrs Tittoolate is a bunny supporter so have had an extra share of good cheer this arvo going over the superb lodgement and giving her grief. Simple joys!

Also, it is friday night here in sunny Mumbai. All praise to the great lord of beer/vodka/wine/deep sleep.....

oooroo
M

PS
Do I get the cliche prize?
T

 

[Misanthrope]

First off, I had two articles that incurred penalties regarding length. Franko's article was too short by F7s regulations, and unless I miss a rule about quotations being excluded from the word count, TITs Anonymous' was far too long. If there is a rule I missed, can someone let me know? I looked everywhere and didn't see anything about it.

Without further ado!

South Sydney


Colors are All Around Us – Franko
This started strongly and seemed to be going somewhere positive, and then it just kind of... ended. A disappointment after a promising beginning.
SCORE: 77 (-5 points for length) = 72


Thoughts from Game Day – DaveQ
An interesting article on the different ways in which we can view a game. I've certainly indulged in it from time to time.
SCORE: 83




Protection for the Kickers – byrnerovellifan
Definitely an issue that has long been a talking point within the game. I felt this lost a bit of momentum as a result of over-long sentences and the occasional misused word.
SCORE: 79


An Ode to Benny's Return (part 2) – miccle
A well written, poetic piece about Bennett's return to Brisbane and its effect. A thoroughly enjoyable piece.
SCORE: 85


Direction of the Game from a Past Great – Marshall_magic
An amusing read with some very valid points that I myself often ponder. I'm not sure Raudonikis would ever have said it quite so eloquently, and there were some tense changes mid-sentence that confused – but it was still an entertaining read.
SCORE: 84


TOTAL: 403



Gold Coast Titans


Willy's Stinky Situation – Titanic
An... odd article. It took me a moment to grasp that this was entirely tongue in cheek. I blame the Irish car bombs. A well written piece about the dramas surrounding our game and how, in most cases, they're blown grossly out of proportion.
SCORE: 86


Bert's Balls – tits&tans
Wow. Physics and how they relate to the forward pass. I loved it. A little wordy for a layman at times, but it never strayed too far and became inaccessible. A really good read.
SCORE: 88


NRPL – Amadean
Classic. Any article that mocks sports I hate, mentions enemas, and references curling is a winner in my book.
SCORE: 90


Shakespeare in League – TITs Anonymous
As a theatre major and an unabashed Shakespeare nut, it was good to see the man getting some play on a rugby league forum. Some amusing parallels drawn here.
SCORE: 85 (-30 points for length) = 55
NOTE: I could find no rule that says quotations weren't counted, only that the references posted after he fact were not.


Choices – Titan Uranus
I don't know what the put in the water in Shanghai (although I suspect it isn't safe to drink), but the Titans have such a wealth of talented writers. An enjoyable piece. But 'ew' to there being an Aussie Rules team in China.
SCORE: 87

TOTAL: 406

FINAL SCORE: Gold Coast Titans 406 def. South Sydney Rabbitohs 403

MOTM: Amadean (Titans)

 

[Amadean]

Thanks for the reffing Misanthrope, with a couple of rule calls it can't have been easy. From the players point of view, my F5 key may never recover.

Great work by the Titans to get our first win, lots of team-work yet to do though.

Side point: enemas need to feature more frequently in F7s matches.

 

[Franko]

Gee and i thought it only got going when South's become involved. That's when my pulse rate gained momentum. Not to worry though it was a last minute rush.

 

[byrne_rovelli_fan82]

Whoa that was a lot closer then I thought!!

Well done Titans.

And a very impressive effort all around Rabbits didn't miss out by much!!

 

[miccle]

Well done to all players for some outstanding reads and a damn good contest.

Bunnies, just missed out but never fear - the bonus point for all five in is a big positive and we'll be ready and raring to go for next round.

Big thanks yet again to Misanthrope - a very fair and efficient job as the man in the middle. Said it before and I'll say it again, it'd be a bloody hard job to do!

 

[Titanic]

Good win team, great stuff Souths and thanks Ref and I point out that I think this quote from the F7's Rules is open to another interpretation:

[SIZE=+1]Marking procedures[/SIZE]
Guidelines
-From 2005, referees will mark each article out of 100 (previously it was out of 10).
-articles score more points if they are rugby league related. articles which have little or no reference to rugby league will score low.
-articles which show some effort will be marked favourably.
-The more original the article, the higher the score.
-Players who borrow from other sources would be advised to list those sources (these sources will not be included in the word count).
-A well researched article may also score well.
-Any entry which is considered plagiarism will be disqualified. This is at the discretion of the referee.

 

[Misanthrope]

-Players who borrow from other sources would be advised to list those sources (these sources will not be included in the word count).

I interpreted that as not including the sources, which I didn't include. The quotes, however, were included in my word count. I've always included them and had them included in the past.

 

[Dave Q]

Cheers Mis, thanks for your efforts.

The cheque is in the mail.

 

[Titanic]

Yes Misa we realise your intepretation and are happy to accept your decision.

However, a quote is also the source and not original work either, so we put forward the opinion that writers shouldn't be given recognition (by way of the word count) for work that is not their own. Referencing, in our way of thinking, is another point where the writer "owns up" to using someone else's work (as it should be).

Therefore, by way of explanation to the TA's foreword, we advised TA to go back and pad-out his article so that he wouldn't get penailsed for using so many quotes and not make the word count as required, rather than the reverse... we live and learn.

 

[Misanthrope]

Well, unless I get a note from the top stating otherwise, I'm inclined to continue to include quotes which enhance an article (as they well should) within the word count. I know quotes I've used in the past have been included.

 

[LeagueNut]

Backpacker Points

3 points - Amadean (Titans)
2 points - tits&tans (Titans) :thumn
1 point - Titan Uranus (Titans) :mrgreen:

 

[Titanic]

Misa', as I've stated earlier here and now in the Management thread this is not about your Reffing, or about changing TA score, it's about the rule itself.

Had TA used his initial article (without editing) then it would have included 227 words of quotations and that in our interpretation of the rule would have constituted "plagiarism".

We are not arguing for anything here except trying to prevent anything similar in future.

 

[Misanthrope]

Ah, no worries, chief. For what it's worth - even with 227 words that were clearly quotes from the bard, I wouldn't have cited him for plagiarism. I'm not a robot, I can tell when it is fitting :lol: