Interesting read folks.... a few comments if I may.
I can see where Crusher is coming from... perhaps something akin to the tropfest where you would have that particular word or phrase of the game that writers in any way could include in their article. I think that keeps the element of fun plus allow a degree of equity in the scoring if for example some bonus points was given to the best use of the 'word' or 'phrase'.
I know I get stuck for ideas, I'm not a tachnical expert on footy so I sometimes think I push the line on how mauch rugby league content I have in my articles...something I think some refs don;t seem to notice... for example a recent article which was a great english essay on the history of Feminism with perhaps the last paragraph tying it in to relate it to RL. Which is fine but how do you then compare and mark accordingly when compared to a full on league content article?
Like Mortica, over the last couple of seasons I have become a little more used to understand what particular refs like and what they tend to look out for. I write accordingly. The audience...or should I say Audient then becomes the referee rather than the readers out there. Though, with a lack of any real statistics I can;t back it up.... BUT! just judging by the number of hits a thread gets and knowing that probably 5 out 60 hits are mine doesn;t really say much about the readership...BUT! again... I write cause it's fun and this comp allows that room for fun (having said that I rarely read other peoples articles, reserving that to players of the round)... of course if that was REALLY the case I wouldn;t be keeping to much notice of the Backpacker PotY scores.
For me though I would like more feedback from either the refs when the scores are posted...especially in their comments. With so many close games I would like to be at least a little more satisfied that my article was understood. Structured articles are happening more frequently lately and ref are picking up on this and I want to be sure that either the premise or structure of my articles are understood.... more comments from the refs would be awesome. Contructive critisism I would appreciate too.
One of things that annoys me is that it clearly states that in the opening post that only game posts are allowed but I'm finding it annoying that some players are posting comments before the refs have posted the score... I know this is just me but I would like to see this area cleaned up more.... Commenst after the ref has posted is fine...and perhaps only captains before the scores.
Ta
