Welcome to the Firkin L awards 2002

[Willow]

Welcome to the Firkin L Awards. You'll see it has its own section in the side bar.

Last year, the idea was put forward by fellow forummer, Bomber that we hold a LWOS best player award for the 2002 NRL season.

The idea being that we the supporters decide who is the best player of 2002 with our own 3-2-1 rating systems of every game, every weekend.

It seemed to everyone at the time that awards should have two main principals:
1.) Keep it simple and,
2.) Make it enjoyable.

The object of this post is to nut out thefiner points and rules of the 2002 Firkin L Awards as decided by discussion.

Basically, anyone can vote and any game can receive a number of judges. Work it out from there....

Keep in mind that we're never going to come up with a perfect system but I'm sure whatever we come with, its sure to better than the current Dally M situation which is decided by journalists.

Once thats done, a LWOS moderator will be appointed to manage the awards.

All weekly round ups and discussions will be conducted in this 'Firkin L' section so as to make it easy for members to locate the progress votes every week.

It should be great fun and who knows...we might even be able to get the overall winner accept the award at our very own end-of-year galah event!

 

[ozbash]

well, i volounteer to be said moderator.
by the powers vested in myself, i declare s,jones to be the 2002 LWOS supreme player and the nz warriors are the ultimate team.
thank you for participating.

 

[Willow]

Ok let me make an ammendment to the rulez...lol
Ozbash will not be the appointed controller of the Firkin Ls...

...
...I wont be either...

 

[legend]

I predict the Firkins will soon overtake the outdated dally m's and at least we will get an accurate picture of who is the best and they don't have to be a media darling like the dally m's are.Suspensions don't count for anything in this voting system so every player will be in it right up until the semis, even those mugs from St George.

 

[imported_feral dragon]

Will points be allocated on a 3 2 1 basis or will all players be rated from 1-10?
Should referees be included in the ratings?

 

[Willow]

3-2-1 for the players.

These are the basic rules as I understand it...keep in mind that we can change this following a dicussion.

1.) Forummers can vote on any game and can vote on more than one game. A forummer is any member, manager or assistant manager.
2.) Forummers can only submit one series of votes per game.
3.) The voting will be as follows: 3 points for best player, 2 points for second best and 1 point for third.
4.) Should a game have more than one series of votes (which is likely), then an 'average' score has to be worked out so the top three players gain the appropiate points. Only three players can receive points per game.
5.) All games must be have points designated. In the eventof no pointsbeing put forward for a game then one of the managers or assistant managers will act as a proxy voter using whatever means he/she can.
6.) The forummer must have seen the game in question, be it at the ground or on TV.
7.) Votes are closed at a certain time...lets say Tuesday midnight and the votes and running score are posted on Wednesdays.

I expect there will other things to add here in the near future.

This system is by no means without flaws...imo, its impossible to have a perfect system. However, the Firkin Ls are designed so that the supporters vote and in that, any supporter can enter whenever they please....it sure beats the hell out the Dally Ms way of doing things.

As for referees, there were no plans to have them rated as well but if the general opinion is that we do have such a thing, then I cant see why not.

 

[ozbash]

""The object of this post is to nut out thefiner points and rules of the 2002 Firkin L Awards as decided by discussion.""

finer points...........lol..... rules........

i reckon the top poster on LWOS and FRONT ROW should be acknowleged and presented with a cyber-cup for the week.

 

[Broncos-fan-baller]

Great idea! But one small hiccup I picked gents.


If anyone and everyone can vote for their favourite player of the round, regardless of whether they were at the game or viewed it on the box,then wouldn't the team with the most number of fans here in this communityvote for their own player, thereby making it a little unfair for teams that don't have a huge following on these boards?


In other words, lets take (the mighty) Broncos and (shamefull) Manlyas an example. Because their are far more Bronco supporters here then Manly fans, if the two teams were to play, then wouldn't the Bronco fans pick one of their players (naturally)as the most outstanding of the round even though a Manly player may have been the better player (asif)in the eyes of a neutral fan? Isn't that a little unfair?

I think a better way would be to limit the number of members that can pick the player of the round per game. Say possibly the first five or so posters who forward their selection?

Just an idea guys. I'm not being a smart arse

'fan-baller )

 

[Willow]

BFB:
I think thats an excellent point.
Not that I think anyone will lose any sleep over Manly getting kicked in the guts every week but it does represent a flaw in the system.
We'llthrow that into the think tank.

 

[legend]

Not to sound like i'm plugging the front row again but you can set up a poll on whatever topic you like and as you have to be a registered member to vote there could be no chance of rigging the voting and you would always get accurate results. Just a thought.

 

[Johnsy]

If we work out the average points for each team it will be even across the board, so long as each game receives a few votes, eg
St George v BrisVegas
10 people vote and Locky receives 8 points but was voted for 4 times, therefore he receives a total of 2 points for that week. Of course only the three highest players will receive votes, we need to have a minimum of say 3-5 nominations for that game for a player to qualify for any points in the corresponding game.
Johnsy
Johnsy

 

This message has been deleted by the manager or assistant manager.

 

[Willow]

Firstly, we've since worked out that the voting poll at Front Row only allows a maximum of 10 entries so it wouldn't be practical to work the Firkin Ls over there.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Johnsy, thats about the gist of it.
Basically, we're after the top three players of the game and it doesnt really matter how we get to that point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have been thinking about the point raised by BFB, ie that players from 'hated' teams will never getmany votes because of the lack of representation in the forum...eg Manly.

The way I see it, we can solve this by one of three ways:
1.) Do nothing. We dont give a shit, after all its supposed to be simple.
2.) Have a manager act as 'devil's advocate' and make sure that he /she puts in an impartial vote when required.
3.) Amend the ground rules so we have to vote for three players FROM EACH TEAM.

Any thoughts?

 

[Willow]

Actually Johnsy, I was thinking of something far more simpler.
Everyone just rates the players 3-2-1...this is a system everyone is familar with.

Whoever accumulates the most ratings points, receives 3 game points for that round. Whoever receives the second most rating points get 2 points and the least rating points receives one point. There will always be a minimum of 3 players because everyone has to rate three players.

What do we do in the event of a tie? (I hear you ask).
OK, if two players get the most points, then they get 2.5 points each for the game. This being half of the sum of5 points that were on offer for the first and second.
If three players get the same amount of points then they get 2 points each for the6 points that were on offer.
Alternatively, if there is a tie for second place then the 3 points on offerare split at 1.5 each.
I think thats the fairest way of dealing with dead heats.

I assume that everyone is going to watch the Charity Shield this weekend. Might be an idea to give Firkin Ls a test drive....

 

[Johnsy]

Willow sounds good, unfortunately I will be taping the shield game and wont get to see it untill early morn. The trial sounds like a good idea, to give the Firkins a test that is.
Johnsy

 

[Willow]

np Johnsy. I'll start up another thread specifically for the Shield. That'll explain the ground rules we've nutted out here.

 

[CanadianSteve]

Post #2 in this thread - classic example of Ozbash humour.

 

[imported_Everlovin_Antichrist]

You'll probably have to point out the humour in that post for anyone with a brain Steve.

 

[CanadianSteve]

Well, it struck me as funny anyway.

3 posts, EA, good to see you back here. BTW, you are now eligible for some of the forum awards for 2005.

 

[Willow]

In retrospect, it sounds bloody complicated.

The forerunner to the LU awards.

Mind you, I do like the concept of having fans voting for it.