KOTW vs Cowboys

[perverse]

3. Mullen - im starting to get excited again with this bloke. he ended last season very well and has exploded to begin this one. isn't coming up against much competition, but isn't even giving them a sniff, either.
2. Houston - love your work, champion.
1. Henry -

lots of guys unlucky to miss out on points.

 

[Matt23]

3 - Mullen
2 - Houston
1 - Henry

 

[Perth Knights]

3 - Mullen
2 - Houston
1 - Henry

As above. Great game from all three, but with honourable mention to Tui and Hilder.

 

[Serc]

Ok so everyone has given Mullen the most points, so he will get dozens and dozens of (thoroughly deserved) points again this week! Also lots of points for Houston as well so I shall share them around a bit with a few others who made great contributions

2 - Tolar
2 - McManus
1 - Henry
1 - Pato

 

[Johns Magic]

Dan Lolar...

 

[Serc]

I don't get it, now doesn't seem the right time to make fun of him?

 

[Johns Magic]

No, last night when he let in a pathetic soft try to keep them in the game was probably the right time to make fun of him.

I don't hate the guy, but giving him points for last night...

 

[Serc]

It pissed me off big time when he and Ciraldo (who was equally to blame) let that try in also.

But to be fair, it was the only tackle that Tolar missed all night.

Everyone on this forum has been screaming out for a prop to make lots of carries and good metres for all of last season. Finally we see one of them (who we would all agree was the most unlikely of the lot) produce exactly what we are looking for, 2 weeks in a row, and you have so much pride that you couldn't possibly swallow it for a moment and not have a dig at him for just one week, after producing what all our other props cannot. Not to mention this guy is knocked from pillar to post by the entire forum, and if you didn't know any better you'd think he was the second coming of Greg Smith, even though overall he isn't that far behind the rest of our props.

I don't know about you, but I support anyone that wears our jersey as much as I can, which means giving any of them credit where credit was due.

(In the context of how I was giving out my points) I would've actually given given him 3 but for that try on halftime.

 

[Rolla]

Ok so everyone has given Mullen the most points, so he will get dozens and dozens of (thoroughly deserved) points again this week! Also lots of points for Houston as well so I shall share them around a bit with a few others who made great contributions

2 - Tolar
2 - McManus
1 - Henry
1 - Pato

Not trying to tell you (or anyone) how to allocate your points, of course there are no 'right/wrong' answers here. But is charity against the idea of this thread?

 

[Rolla]

2. Mullen
2. House
1. Henry
1. Pato

 

[Serc]

Its not charity, as charity would be giving Ciraldo points for making 1 run for 11 metres. Its helping make the distribution of points a little bit better across the board. One of the major flaws we have in our system (and i'm not that fussed about it - but its a flaw nonetheless) is that people who made major contributions (in the top 4, 5, 6, 7 players in the team), or played well by their standards struggle to get any points at all.

In a team sport like this, now that a certain A. Johns isn't playing for us, its not exactly a fair representation of who did what to have the top 3-4 players in each game claiming 95% of the points, with someone who made almost as good a contribution getting next to nothing. This affects the overall tally where say someone like Hilder is often there or there abouts in our top 4/5/6 players every week, but someone looking at the tally in the years to come would have no idea how valuable he actually is to the team.

 

[Rolla]

Fair enough explanation. By charity i wasn't having a dig at the guys that you picked, they played ok i guess. I just mean that leaving out the best players because they were a lot better (hence the large allocation of points their way) and giving them to players who were ok seems charitable to me.

IMO (and it is very much only my oppinion) the KOTW is designed to reward our standout players, not our consistantly/sometimes slightly above average players. if a player is consistantly between our 4th and 7th best as you say, they will certainly pick up points without charity votes.

I guess what im saying is, your explanation made sense, i suppose just disagree with your logic. Unless i am misunderstanding the KOTW system (keeping in mind it is knight of the week, not knight of the year)

 

[Jobdog]

2 - Mullen
1 - Henry
1 - Paterson
1 - Hilder
1 - Uate

 

[Serc]

All 4 of them were good to great! Not just 'ok' surely!

Tolar (already explained)
McManus (just like the McManus of old)
Henry (2nd good game in a row in his 2nd game ever)
Pato (getting close to his early 2010 form)

KOTW is indeed designed to show up the standout players, and it will never show up perfectly our consistently average/above average players. However someone between our 4th to 7th will struggle to get any points in most situations.

The tally for yesterday will probably look something like:

Mullen 60
Houston 35
Paterson 12
Henry 10
Uate 5
Fa'aoso 3
McManus 3
Sau 2
Hilder 1

Which is not a very good reflection of how much people were worth to the team last night...what I try to do each week is to at least get a point or two registered for those who made contributions that certainly weren't 3, 4 or 5 times less valuable than others.

Oh and in case this thought has entered anyones mind...just because Coasttroll has got Tolar in his agenda, doesn't make you as much of a moron/troll as he is by giving him a mention! Now now don't be scared!

 

[Johns Magic]

IMO (and it is very much only my oppinion) the KOTW is designed to reward our standout players, not our consistantly/sometimes slightly above average players. if a player is consistantly between our 4th and 7th best as you say, they will certainly pick up points without charity votes.

This is spot on. Points should be given to those that deserve them, not those that you feel sorry for. But that's not my gripe.

Serc, you'll notice I haven't bashed Tolar about his performances at all so far this season. He has been much improved this year with the ball in hand and it has been encouraging.

But he put in a terrible attempt at a tackle at a crucial moment of the game that kept the opposition in it. He also dropped a simple ball cold when we were on the attack, for the second week in a row. It's things like that that tarnish his game, and giving him two points as if he was the best player on the field is a bit much.

A better opposition could have launched a comeback based entirely on that try Tolar let in, and that was bush league standard.

Sometimes the stat sheet doesn't reflect the crucial moments of the game.

 

[sneaky_is_here]

2- Mullen
2- House
2- Henry

 

[Serc]

Serc, you'll notice I haven't bashed Tolar about his performances at all so far this season. He has been much improved this year with the ball in hand and it has been encouraging.

Yes I've noticed that

But he put in a terrible attempt at a tackle at a crucial moment of the game that kept the opposition in it. He also dropped a simple ball cold when we were on the attack, for the second week in a row. It's things like that that tarnish his game, and giving him two points as if he was the best player on the field is a bit much.

Sometimes the stat sheet doesn't reflect the crucial moments of the game.

I think we all agree that the poor attempt on the line, and the dropped balls are frustrating and devalues his input into the team. However, if Ben Cross had those very same stats, and dropped one or two (or three - as he usually did) cold...you and the entire forum would be all over him like a fat kid at a buffet. There'd be minimum 1 points from just about everyone, with some 2's thrown in as well.

Don't forget he got 2 points in the context of the way I was giving out points as well - in my mind he was around our 5th best player on the field last night.

 

[Johns Magic]

I think we all agree that the poor attempt on the line, and the dropped balls are frustrating and devalues his input into the team. However, if Ben Cross had those very same stats, and dropped one or two (or three - as he usually did) cold...you and the entire forum would be all over him like a fat kid at a buffet. There'd be minimum 1 points from just about everyone, with some 2's thrown in as well.

I don't think the dropped ball was that big a deal in all honesty. It was the missed tackle, and I doubt if Cross had missed the same tackle you'd have people waxing lyrical about him in here.

Don't forget he got 2 points in the context of the way I was giving out points as well - in my mind he was around our 5th best player on the field last night.

Fair enough if you're voting on that basis, but I don't think that's the point of this thread. Not a big deal though.

 

[Big Tim]

It pissed me off big time when he and Ciraldo (who was equally to blame) let that try in also.

But to be fair, it was the only tackle that Tolar missed all night.

Everyone on this forum has been screaming out for a prop to make lots of carries and good metres for all of last season. Finally we see one of them (who we would all agree was the most unlikely of the lot) produce exactly what we are looking for, 2 weeks in a row, and you have so much pride that you couldn't possibly swallow it for a moment and not have a dig at him for just one week, after producing what all our other props cannot. Not to mention this guy is knocked from pillar to post by the entire forum, and if you didn't know any better you'd think he was the second coming of Greg Smith, even though overall he isn't that far behind the rest of our props.

I don't know about you, but I support anyone that wears our jersey as much as I can, which means giving any of them credit where credit was due.

(In the context of how I was giving out my points) I would've actually given given him 3 but for that try on halftime.

 

[Rolla]

The reason i don't think Tolar or Jimmy were good-great because three of the cowboys four tries came from defencive mistakes from these to men. And neither did a whole lot more than is expected, some good work rate from both is about all. This is probably an argument for the other thread though.

In regards to the KOTW i think the order of the players you listed in the count is pretty much spot on to how the boys played (without trying to balance the points, just naturally how it falls). The lower guys dont deserve more, they weren't in our best few against cowboys (which is the whole point of the system as far as i can see... it is implied in the title), but they do get a mention. Just like you don't get 'Man of the Match' unles you were man of the match. Guys like Mullen deserve all the top KOTW points, because he was Knight of the Week, simple.