20-01-2013, 11:26 PM
amuir Wrote:If one team recruits players with similar grades eg Muir=Redpath=Coffey which gives more flexibility than another then they should be praised.
For Dragons: Burnett = Bathie = Cocuzzo. If Bathie and Cocuzzo don't play then it is Dragons fault.
I want to encourage as many strong players as possible and don't want the 3rd best player to always get weak games and put him off.
Why not prepare for Muir/Redpath/Coffey now, then when play Hamilton you have all the answers at your fingertips. I prepared for Burnett/Bathie/Cocuzzo and was happy to play all 3 or even Tate/Orr.
Variety is spice of life, keeps me young etc.
Those are my arguments for a 50/80 point rule
The problem here Andy is that it smacks of self-interest. You may have a point, but it shouldn't over-ride the simple fact that a rule should be fair to everyone involved - your team, ours and everyone elses. That's what the majority of rules do, and your version doesn't.
What is your objection to having the team lists exchanged in advance? (This seems to be a popular idea)