Page 1 of 1

Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 8:54 am
by smeghead
Dally M Points

Raiders v Tigers – Judge: Andrew Johns

3 R Farah (WTI)

2 D Shillington (CAN)

1 B Ryan (WTI)

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 9:18 am
by tiger05
Fair call.

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 10:46 am
by stryker
Not saying that these players didnt play well but for mine

Josh Duggan should have scored = He had spiders all over him all day long ran the ball back hard and made some crucial tackles at the back.
Robbie Farah should have scored = His work around the ruck area and his defense were the best I've seen from him in ages.
Benji Marshall should have scored = Had a quiet game by his standards only, what he did do was of high quality scored a try with great backing up, set a few up with very selective passing and defended well - I'm sure I saw him make 4 tackles in a row there at one stage.

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 2:03 pm
by innsaneink
stryker wrote:Not saying that these players didnt play well but for mine

Josh Duggan should have scored = He had spiders all over him all day long ran the ball back hard and made some crucial tackles at the back.
Robbie Farah should have scored = His work around the ruck area and his defense were the best I've seen from him in ages.
Benji Marshall should have scored = Had a quiet game by his standards only, what he did do was of high quality scored a try with great backing up, set a few up with very selective passing and defended well - I'm sure I saw him make 4 tackles in a row there at one stage.
Farah got 3 pts

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 3:24 pm
by ron burgandy
well i wonder what more marshall had to do to poll atleast 1 point

2 try assists
3 line break assists
1 try
1 line break

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 3:27 pm
by hybrid_tiger
Marshall was quiet for 60 minutes, so those stats are scary.

Honestly, one game we are going to fire and play well in attack and defence for the whole 80 minutes and we will put 70 points on some poor team.

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 6:02 pm
by Marshall_magic
Dugan was easily the best player on the field, JoEy has been up to his old tricks again.

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Mon 05 Apr, 2010 10:38 pm
by stryker
Marshall_magic wrote:Dugan was easily the best player on the field, JoEy has been up to his old tricks again.
Agreed I think it should have been 3 - Dugan, 2 - Farah, 1 - Marshall

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Tue 06 Apr, 2010 1:05 pm
by Juro
Dally M points are so seriously flawed! I've said it before and I'll probably keep on saying it - The whole points system is backwards!!

You give 3 players points (3, 2, 1) regardless of how they played and the rest of the 31 players get nothing. You could have a game where everyone plays perfect, but over 90% of the players get nothing. Or you could have the most ordinary game ever played, and one guy walks away with 3 points because he sucked the least.

What happens if you are in a side with 3 superstars? You will struggle to get a point, no matter how you play. If you are the only decent player in a team, you'll pick up 3 points every time your team wins.

Please, give every player a score (out of 5, 10, 100, whatever) and add that up at the end of the year. That way players are judged on their own performance, not the performance relative to everyone else.

Who invented this mess???

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Tue 06 Apr, 2010 2:25 pm
by tiger sean
Juro wrote:Dally M points are so seriously flawed! I've said it before and I'll probably keep on saying it - The whole points system is backwards!!

You give 3 players points (3, 2, 1) regardless of how they played and the rest of the 31 players get nothing. You could have a game where everyone plays perfect, but over 90% of the players get nothing. Or you could have the most ordinary game ever played, and one guy walks away with 3 points because he sucked the least.

What happens if you are in a side with 3 superstars? You will struggle to get a point, no matter how you play. If you are the only decent player in a team, you'll pick up 3 points every time your team wins.

Please, give every player a score (out of 5, 10, 100, whatever) and add that up at the end of the year. That way players are judged on their own performance, not the performance relative to everyone else.

Who invented this mess???
That sounds like a much better system to me.

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Wed 07 Apr, 2010 5:46 pm
by Marshall_magic
Juro wrote:Dally M points are so seriously flawed! I've said it before and I'll probably keep on saying it - The whole points system is backwards!!

You give 3 players points (3, 2, 1) regardless of how they played and the rest of the 31 players get nothing. You could have a game where everyone plays perfect, but over 90% of the players get nothing. Or you could have the most ordinary game ever played, and one guy walks away with 3 points because he sucked the least.

What happens if you are in a side with 3 superstars? You will struggle to get a point, no matter how you play. If you are the only decent player in a team, you'll pick up 3 points every time your team wins.

Please, give every player a score (out of 5, 10, 100, whatever) and add that up at the end of the year. That way players are judged on their own performance, not the performance relative to everyone else.

Who invented this mess???
Problem with that is it will favour guys who play all 24 games, over guys who play say 20. If you play 24 games and score 7/10 you score 168 points, if someone misses 5 games, they'd need to average close to 9/10 to beat them. If they did that, and added up the best 15 games of the player (I think that's a fair representation of their season), it would provide a more balanced result, based on performances, not how many games you play.

Re: Dally M Points

Posted: Wed 07 Apr, 2010 10:35 pm
by MacDougall
I say just say minimum 15 games, then highest average score per game. Though your idea is alright as well.

Say for instance Brett Kimmorley has a grand total of 181 points and plays 22 games this season, he gets an average score of 8.23, then Johnathan Thurston gets a score of 154 and plays 17 games he gets a score of 9.06, even though he has a lower aggregate, he played less games so he has a higher average score.