S4 WCOAP World Amateur Team Championship 2010

[Shogun112]

IMO APAT didn"t "succumb to pressure", to change the rules.

They made what they thought was a sensible decision, people presented their evidence to suggest that it wasn"t as good as it seems (primarily because of the different circumstances in the timing of this year"s team championship compared to the previous season when this rule would have had much more validity) - and as a result of which APAT made an evidence based decision to change it.

You are kiddin me right?

If APAT steadfastly refused to consider any feedback into how it could improve the way in which any of the individual events (or the season"s as a whole) were run then it would stagnate and become more and more disconnected and irrelevant to it"s membership. It"s an extremely promising sign that if a decision is made that evidence suggests is "wrong", APAT will fix the mistake rather than ignore it.

how about look at it this way...

If the Premier Football League were asked for opinions into the qualification into Europe next season, and at the start of the season they say, first 4 will qualify to be in the Champions League...  And then.. Some time 5 weeks before the end of the season, they change the rules and say, we have listened to "opinion" and we are changing it to only the top 2 teams, therefore, unlucky teams in 3rd and 4th place...

Do you think that is acceptable to just change the rules of qualification mid season?

Or...  Do you think it would be prudent to wait until the season has finished and apply the new rules to next season?  

[SirPercival]

IMO APAT didn"t "succumb to pressure", to change the rules.

They made what they thought was a sensible decision, people presented their evidence to suggest that it wasn"t as good as it seems (primarily because of the different circumstances in the timing of this year"s team championship compared to the previous season when this rule would have had much more validity) - and as a result of which APAT made an evidence based decision to change it.

You are kiddin me right?

The rules at the start of the season did not include an automatic qualification for the team event. This is one of the reasons I argued to remove the criteria that was later introduced.

Do you honestly think it is fair that I would have to pick a player because they had gotten say 7th place in one event? (note: I haven"t yet checked the rankings, this is just to demonstrate my point).
If APAT steadfastly refused to consider any feedback into how it could improve the way in which any of the individual events (or the season"s as a whole) were run then it would stagnate and become more and more disconnected and irrelevant to it"s membership. It"s an extremely promising sign that if a decision is made that evidence suggests is "wrong", APAT will fix the mistake rather than ignore it.

how about look at it this way...

If the Premier Football League were asked for opinions into the qualification into Europe next season, and at the start of the season they say, first 4 will qualify to be in the Champions League...  And then.. Some time 5 weeks before the end of the season, they change the rules and say, we have listened to "opinion" and we are changing it to only the top 2 teams, therefore, unlucky teams in 3rd and 4th place...

Do you think that is acceptable to just change the rules of qualification mid season?

Or...  Do you think it would be prudent to wait until the season has finished and apply the new rules to next season?  

[Jon MW]

...

how about look at it this way...

If the Premier Football League were asked for opinions into the qualification into Europe next season, and at the start of the season they say, first 4 will qualify to be in the Champions League...  And then.. Some time 5 weeks before the end of the season, they change the rules and say, we have listened to "opinion" and we are changing it to only the top 2 teams, therefore, unlucky teams in 3rd and 4th place...

Do you think that is acceptable to just change the rules of qualification mid season?

Or...  Do you think it would be prudent to wait until the season has finished and apply the new rules to next season?  

It isn"t a comparable situation though.

Champions League qualification brings with it significant financial gain.
Teams can build into their budget the potential gain of qualification and plan accordingly.
If the number of teams who qualified were changed this would affect that strategic and tactical planning - i.e. those teams who were in the mix to "just" qualify would no longer have a chance of qualifying and money they might have spent on trying to get into the qualifying spot would now no longer be rewarded by the extra funds that would arise from qualification.

With APAT, the only way it would make a strategic difference would be if someone won or finished highly in one or more of the early championships purely because it would mean they would be an automatic pick for the Team Championships.

I strongly suspect that this isn"t the case. I really don"t think anybody played any differently in the previous championships because this rule was in place.

The effect having this rule, or not having this rule, would be when the teams are picked.

If it was changed after the teams were picked then someone automatically picked could make arrangements - then get dropped, which would clearly be wrong.

Changing the rule before the teams are picked means that nothing in this season has been affected, and hence there is no reason not to change it for this season rather than wait.

[Jon MW]

Try and fix your quoting skills SirPerceval  

[Shogun112]

The rules at the start of the season did not include an automatic qualification for the team event. This is one of the reasons I argued to remove the criteria that was later introduced.

I saw the rules for myself..!!  They were there..!!  Why else would we be arguing the point..!!  Why else would APAT have to state that they changed it..!!

Do you honestly think it is fair that I would have to pick a player because they had gotten say 7th place in one event? (note: I haven"t yet checked the rankings, this is just to demonstrate my point).

It is irrelevant whether it is fair or not.  If the rules say it is done this way, then changing the rules mid season is more unfair than the rule itself.

[SirPercival]

The auto selection was introduced on May 17, 2010, 01:46:18 pm. I do not believe this was the start of the season.

[Jon MW]

...
It is irrelevant whether it is fair or not.  If the rules say it is done this way, then changing the rules mid season is more unfair than the rule itself.

As I"ve suggested,imo , nothing has been organised before this rule was decided, nobody has spent any money or played any differently - this rule has no practical effect up to the point that teams were decided - so how is it unfair to change it?

[Shogun112]

It isn"t a comparable situation though.

You are kiddin right..!!  I am making a point about qualifying and the rules being changed mid season, and it IS comparable..!!

Champions League qualification brings with it significant financial gain.
Teams can build into their budget the potential gain of qualification and plan accordingly.
If the number of teams who qualified were changed this would affect that strategic and tactical planning - i.e. those teams who were in the mix to "just" qualify would no longer have a chance of qualifying and money they might have spent on trying to get into the qualifying spot would now no longer be rewarded by the extra funds that would arise from qualification.

I am reading this thinking, what are you on about..!!

With APAT, the only way it would make a strategic difference would be if someone won or finished highly in one or more of the early championships purely because it would mean they would be an automatic pick for the Team Championships.

I strongly suspect that this isn"t the case. I really don"t think anybody played any differently in the previous championships because this rule was in place.

The effect having this rule, or not having this rule, would be when the teams are picked.

If it was changed after the teams were picked then someone automatically picked could make arrangements - then get dropped, which would clearly be wrong.

Changing the rule before the teams are picked means that nothing in this season has been affected, and hence there is no reason not to change it for this season rather than wait.

Are you drunk?  You clearly do not understand the point I am making..!!

[Shogun112]

...
It is irrelevant whether it is fair or not.  If the rules say it is done this way, then changing the rules mid season is more unfair than the rule itself.

As I"ve suggested,imo , nothing has been organised before this rule was decided, nobody has spent any money or played any differently - this rule has no practical effect up to the point that teams were decided - so how is it unfair to change it?

What has money spent got anything to do with my point?  please take time and re-read my point..!!

[Jon MW]

It isn"t a comparable situation though.

You are kiddin right..!!  I am making a point about qualifying and the rules being changed mid season, and it IS comparable..!!

Champions League qualification brings with it significant financial gain.
Teams can build into their budget the potential gain of qualification and plan accordingly.
If the number of teams who qualified were changed this would affect that strategic and tactical planning - i.e. those teams who were in the mix to "just" qualify would no longer have a chance of qualifying and money they might have spent on trying to get into the qualifying spot would now no longer be rewarded by the extra funds that would arise from qualification.

I am reading this thinking, what are you on about..!!

With APAT, the only way it would make a strategic difference would be if someone won or finished highly in one or more of the early championships purely because it would mean they would be an automatic pick for the Team Championships.

I strongly suspect that this isn"t the case. I really don"t think anybody played any differently in the previous championships because this rule was in place.

The effect having this rule, or not having this rule, would be when the teams are picked.

If it was changed after the teams were picked then someone automatically picked could make arrangements - then get dropped, which would clearly be wrong.

Changing the rule before the teams are picked means that nothing in this season has been affected, and hence there is no reason not to change it for this season rather than wait.

Are you drunk?  You clearly do not understand the point I am making..!!

I really didn"t think it was that complicated.

Football: if a club spends £5,000,000 with the aim of qualifying for a tournament which will increase their revenue by £20,000,000 then changing the qualifying rules has a direct influence on what they would have done if the rules hadn"t been changed mid season (figures made up, cba to look up the real figures)

APAT: if this rule had never been suggested, none of the results of existing tournaments and nobody"s individual plans or expenses would have been any different to what they are now - therefore there is no difference between changing the rule now and never having the rule in the first place.


EDIT: it"s not specifically the money - it"s the fact that there is absolutely no effect whatsoever, on anything that has already taken place

[Shogun112]

I have said enough on this matter now..!!

I mave made my point, I have expressed how I feel.  There really isn"t any point me arguing with anyone about this. 

Nobody is gonna make me feel any differently about rule changing mid season in any form of sport or activity.  ITS  JUST NOT DONE..!!!

Formula 1 did it just last week, changed a rule about a Safety Car.  So wrong.  They should wait until season close.

Best wishes for the eventual team.

Carl.

[SirPercival]

The auto selection was introduced on May 17, 2010, 01:46:18 pm. I do not believe this was the start of the season.

bump

message may have gotten lost due to my lack of ability to use the quote function correctly.

[Jon MW]

Summary

In terms of the matter of principle, this:

The auto selection was introduced on May 17, 2010, 01:46:18 pm. I do not believe this was the start of the season.

bump

message may have gotten lost due to my lack of ability to use the quote function correctly.

In terms of the matter of practicality, this:

... there is no difference between changing the rule now and never having the rule in the first place.
...

[MintTrav]

APAT announced the "top two" rule on 17 May, immediately received a lot of objections as people felt it would be top two from a very limited number of games and then said the same day that members" views would be taken into account. On 19 May they said that the rule was under review. Your claims about the rules being changed part-way through the season are misrepresenting the position and are unwarranted.

Carl, you have been banging on for ages about how you should be entitled to a place on the basis of a single (very good) result. I"m probably not the only who is tired of reading your posts on this, even before today. Just leave it up to the Captain.

[MintTrav]

Congrats Brian, Colin, Stuart, Paul & Jean Michel


but most of all super-Captain Brendan  XXX