suggestion

[andyc]

i dont know if this has been tossed up before, but i reckon itd be a good idea to earn points for players earning man of the match or man of the series awards. what do you think?

 

[marc71178]

That certainly is an interesting suggestion, and not one we've thought of in the past I believe!

 

[andyc]

That certainly is an interesting suggestion, and not one we've thought of in the past I believe!

wow thought it would have been. ive had a few players get MOTM and MOTS before, and ive always wished i couldve earned points for it.

 

[James]

I actually thought of this a few months ago and talked to Rich Twyman about it. We came to the decision that the MOTM earns the most points overall anyway so why even more?

 

[andyc]

^fair enough. thanks

 

[Rich2001]

I actually thought of this a few months ago and talked to Rich Twyman about it. We came to the decision that the MOTM earns the most points overall anyway so why even more?

I recall talking about it but will take James word thats what we said as I can't actually remember

One other small issue that I can think of is MotM is quite a personal view espically in tight situations and this in turn can see different media naming different players as the MotM for a game so could be a problem unless you said only MotM from (insert site/person/media here) would count.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I recall talking about it but will take James word thats what we said as I can't actually remember

One other small issue that I can think of is MotM is quite a personal view espically in tight situations and this in turn can see different media naming different players as the MotM for a game so could be a problem unless you said only MotM from (insert site/person/media here) would count.

From CricketWeb, duh

 

[James]

^fair enough. thanks

We could be tempted to change our mind if you come up with some good resasons

 

[andyc]

We could be tempted to change our mind if you come up with some good resasons

cause i want more points ?

haha okay, well for one, the best player of the match may not always be the highest run scorer or wicket taker, meaning he might not earn the most points out of the match, while he may have performed the best. for example, Player A hits 120 off 200 balls, and then Player B comes in and hits 50 off 25 or 30 balls, and takes a wicket or two and is rightly awarded the MOTM. Player B will probably end up with less points than Player A, despite a better performance by Player B. this means that fantasy cricket members who picked the better player (Player B) do worse than those who picked a worse player (Player A). by provding a reward of possibly 5 points for a MOTM award, and maybe 10 for MOTS, members get appropriate rewards for picking the better player.

EDIT: An example of the above scenario is today's Australia vs. New Zealand game. Gilchrist, the man of the match, hit 54 of 37 and took two catches, giving him, I'm pretty sure, 23 points. Damien Martyn hit 65 off 78 not out and took one catch, giving him (I think) 27 points. Gilchrist played better, as he had more influence on the game, and therefore was a deserved MOTM recipient. He earned, however, less points than Martyn, which is slightly unfair to those players who picked Glichrist but not Martyn. So by awarding points for MOTM, this type of thing is countered.

 

[brad cooper]

I agree. In my opinion, many of the A class players are players you have the ability to "change the game" (eg Ponting, Gilchrist, Tendulkar etc) whereas B & C class players tend to play at a steady rate, that does not "change the game" (eg Martyn). The effect players have on the game is only really represented in bonus for a high strike rate ( which is not that large a bonus). Were points awarded to the man of the match, i think 10 points would be sufficient as any more would influence the competition too much.