Like I said the team has to be functional, you have for example punished (bit harsh a statement) doc for putting Henry on the left of an attacking 3,for me he made his name there with Arsenal but more to the point a front 3 of Aguero, tevez and Henry's positions on a 2 dimensional pitch is irrelevant, it hardly means that's where they would have to play. Far too much credence is put on it, the quality of the players are what counts and as long as all the bases are covered and the team is fairly balanced then formation shouldn't really be punished.
Not punished. But, its those small details which TBH is the difference IMO in a draft like this where almost all have got great teams.
If you have 2/3 similar teams then fair enough but we have strayed from the original issue, people putting good teams in a ridiculous position.
I for one consider things like how well the formation would work and whether the players are in their best positions to be very important, regardless of what type of draft. Everyone is drafting top quality players so these kinds of details make the difference to me.
In retrospect I should maybe have picked Vieri over Toni but I thought Toni had more accomplishments during the evaluation period. I just didn't think my attack would be rated that highly, plus I wasn't sure how people viewed Carrick.
I agree with Viper, ANYONE can draft a team full of quality 10s & 9's, there's always a shit tonne of them. To draft a team that would work together & would win games is where the skill comes in. It's not right is it, alot of teams were close but not so close to justify a team being voted 1st & last. . It's been similar for the last 3 or 4 drafts, maybe longer, definitely reached a new level of ridiculous there though.
Imagine.. If you will. A draft with dedicated judges who aren't competing and therefore voting without having anything to gain or lose. Imagine.. If you will. A draft done right.
But people who are interested in the draft will want to participate. And people who aren't participating are unlikely to be bothered to spend enough time ranking to give results that are any better.
Is it that people are voting good teams low to try and win? Is it that people look at the username rather than the team? Is it that people are using different criteria to judge? Or is it just that different people look for different things - in which case fair enough and it should even itself out and we don't need to change it.
End of the day if you are doing either of those 1st three you need get out more it's a game it's supposed to be (and is) fun.
It is the same after each draft results everyone is always unhappy with the results. We just need to deal with it.
It's only really been a problem in the last 5/6 drafts. There were a couple of iffy votes here and there but now it's happening on a ridiculous level. Clear great teams being voted in last is no accident.
Best Team 1-Guyett 2-mrwatfordfc 3-The Red Viper 4-Borobob 5-Prolifik 6-Blasian Baggie 7-Joga Bonito 8-Ollie 9-WAFC Dan 10-Andy-Gers 11-The Doc 12-Kaboose 13-AJ 14-NCFC Din 15-Shance 16-Navyred 17-Tony Adams Best Defence (including GK, CB, FB & WB) 1st - Guyett 2nd -mrwatfordfc 3rd - WAFC Dan Best Midfield (including WB, DM, CM & AM) 1st - Kaboose 2nd - Guyett 3rd - Andy-Gers Best Attack (including ST, FW & W) 1st - The Red Viper 2nd - Borobob 3rd - The Doc Best Balance 1st - Borobob 2nd - Blasian Baggie 3rd - mrwatfordfc My votes. No shame.
