Talk Fantasy Football

I think it would be good if Beppe (assuming he chairs) tries to summarise in writing what is going to be discussed / what suggestions have been brought to the table / what options people might have. He's the only objective party here so is really the only person who can do this. Something made available to all before hand as suggested.

It would obviously be helpful if someone objective could write up what was agreed and discussed.

To Loki - I think it should be that wider search for ideas, rather than just discussing whether Joe's proposal is to be accepted or not.

An interesting suggestion (full marks for putting it out there and getting the ball rolling), but it is just one person's idea.

I think that it would be good to summarize what will be said during the captain meeting and then reported on TFF. It hasn’t necessarily to be a minute, but a simple thread on €B forum section will be enough to remember the decision that will be taken next Friday. It’s better that an English speaking person would do this and Sann will be welcome to help. I’m fine about chairing the meeting, but what I ask is that every team captain should hear the voice of his own community and report it next Friday. I’m aware not every team captain read this forum, so I ask Dries (or other Belgian organizer) to write a mail to all captains and inform them about the meeting and the need to talk to their own communities about this issue.

Can I suggest that, although I understand this will be adding to the room, that at least 2 members of each team are represented instead of just the captain. This is an important decision and it is likely that there will be some captains attending who may not be involved in the future, when this decision comes into effect.

2 people of the same team might lead to a group too large to have a discussion.
Any player whishing to have his/her say can talk to the captain of your country as it's imortant that they represent the whole country and not just their own opinion.

As I will also be attending the meeting, I'll be gathering the posts from this topics and bring them to attention.

I'm of the belief that minuting this meeting is a good thing,

My reasoning are as follows.

This conversation was had in part in Copenhagen, then again in Austria.

Captains change the same same discussion goes on. Now that's not to say it won't be resolved, but it does ensure that the communities know what their dedicated spokes person does voice their concerns and views, not just the views of what they feel is best.

After all I have no idea the Dapiranha will voice what the welsh populs wish over his own personal views. (Example only)

Also future captains and meetings have something to work from in future meetings.

By minuting the meeting it makes the meeting accountable

How about something like this:

Nations that have hosted before:
(years since a nation last hosted) + (number of individual wins [to avoid complications in case scoring system changes])

Nations that have not hosted before:
10 + (Years since 2003 [first €B]) + (number of individual wins [to avoid complications in case scoring system changes])"

The team with the highest number hosts if they are willing and able.

This could be combined with a requirement of some sort of plan etc.

This suggestion implies some sort of reset of the current system which could be done at different times. My suggestion would be after the world cup 2015. So all nations would be eligible to host in 2017, but some would have significant handicaps. Adding negative modifiers for hosting multiple times could be considered, but should properly only apply to hosting after the reset is done since penalizing Italy for hosting multiple times would seem unfair. This could be done with say -10 for every hosting after the resetting.

This is not fully thought through and I am pretty sure there might be room for improvements, but firstly I would like to hear your thought on the scheme.

Not that I'm a player or captain of Eurobowl, but I do like things to be "fair".

Some of the countries have not hosted Eurobowl yet. Is it fair to derive them of it now that they are finally getting close to hosting it?

Discussion is now on if they would be able to host a tournament that size. I would ask them first if they would be able to do so instead of making new arrangements. With the system Darkson mentioned, you would have a winner of EB who has not hosted yet, two years in advance. This team would have 2 years to organize EB. If this team does not see it possible to host the next NB they would forward it to a reserve host. That could then be the actual winner of EB or the next team on the list that never hosted EB. I think that in 3 - 6 months time a nation should be able to see if they can get:

- A place to play
- A place for players to stay
- Volounteers
- Catering
- Software (but that would be available after next EB anyway so should not be a problem if the rules remain the same)
- etc

If they can't get this done, there is still enough time for another country to step in.

So, instead of making new rules allready, why don't you ask all the remaining countries who have not yet hosted EB, if they think they would be up to the task. And if they would not be able, what help the community could provide. Maybe some people are even willing to go over to a country and give them a helping hand.

Just my two cents.

Draco wrote:So, instead of making new rules allready, why don't you ask all the remaining countries who have not yet hosted EB, if they think they would be up to the task. And if they would not be able, what help the community could provide. Maybe some people are even willing to go over to a country and give them a helping hand.

I think this question is very reasonable. But I think there is a case to be made about a need for some kind of change in the near future:

Competing over hosting right have been a big part of the Eurobowl for quite a few years now. That part will more or less disappear in the near future if the system is kept as it is. The aim of my suggestion is to address this matter while still more or less guaranteeing nations who have not hosted before the chance to do so within a foreseeable future.

At some point, some nations must go back in the pot. I think the elegant solution is to do it gradually by penalizing nations that have recently hosted compared to other nations and giving bonuses to nations that have newer hosted.

Tripleskull wrote:Competing over hosting right have been a big part of the Eurobowl for quite a few years now. That part will more or less disappear in the near future if the system is kept as it is.

There will always be teams competing for the right to hold the next EB, only they will become less every time and of course when only one nation is left..... What you could do to keep it interesting is to indeed give teams points to build up on their position for the next sequence of EB's who get's to host first. That way you'll still have the battle you're looking for, just maybe a little less exiting just now. Then again trying to win EB should be the main goal right?

Tripleskull wrote:At some point, some nations must go back in the pot. I think the elegant solution is to do it gradually by penalizing nations that have recently hosted compared to other nations and giving bonuses to nations that have newer hosted.

Personally, I think the only elegant way is if all nations get a shot a hosting first who have not hosted yet. After that you can add all teams back into the pot and let the winners go first again or use the system you came up with. As long as the system doesn't penalize the teams who have not hosted yet and will most likely never be able to host because they would not be able to get enough points from winning games.

Don't forget that the most experienced teams will always benefit from any system that includes winning games. So England, France, Germany and Spain (ok Belgium too ) will be the most likely candidates to host in the near future again. Holland, always playing with peanutbutter teams anyway because they like it that way, would not get to host EB ever again if they would end up last every EB. And what I read in previous posts, that was the place that actually could host a very good EB.

So again, give all nations who did not host yet a chance first, before intruducing new systems that could eliminate them form hosting at all. Only from fair equal experience, you can deduct if nations are capable of hosting or not.

My thoughts in sum as a regular EB punter (going over old ground here to some extent, sorry!)...

We need some way of formally supporting host nations as we go forward. Driesfield's document is a great idea. A specific Eurobowl / Europen focus would be helpful. Basic EB/EO standards and requirements could be agreed and documented. Potential host nations should be able to make assurances they can meet those requirements.

Then we need to decide how we determine the host nation going forward. Personally I think bidding and quota scores are unnecessarily complicated. The precise specifications are also hard to agree on.

I see it as a choice between two simple options.

1. We allow all participating nations to have the opportunity to host. So the current system runs unchanged until there are no more willing/able hosts left. Then we restart the original process (interrupted when Italy kindly waived their hosting rights back in 2009) of 'winner hosts'.

2. We continue with the current system, but set a date when we reset to 'winner hosts'. This date might be a long time in advance. Everyone would know what they were working towards.

Choice #1 will eventually lead to a tournament where only one nation can 'win' the hosting right. So really not a competition at all. It may also lead to new and inexperienced nations getting the right to host. They may need more support than the more active communities. It does ensure that every nation who wants to host will get the opportunity.

Choice #2 may mean that someone who wanted to host is denied the right. However it may be much more likely to retain the aspect of competition and the sense of winning the right to host.

So perhaps the EB captains can decide which path to take when they meet on Friday?

Just some thoughts to take or leave

Draco wrote: So again, give all nations who did not host yet a chance first, before intruducing new systems that could eliminate them form hosting at all. Only from fair equal experience, you can deduct if nations are capable of hosting or not.

I am all for giving all nations an opportunity to host. That’s the purpose of the "+10" modifier. It would be very hard for say England to beat say Sweden with the required 12 wins or say France to beat Scotland by 17 point. In addition, for every year of not hosting the nations would be more likely to host the year after.

This way we can have both competition and give all nations a chance in fair time.

If I must choose between keeping the system and a strait forward reset. I would surely prefer keeping the system as it is. However, I am convinced there are several better solutions than the two extremes.

I am not worried about nations being capable or not. I think any community that are willing are probably also capable and there good suggestion out there about helping inexperienced nations out.

So frogboy what do you know anyway ? Well.....

Draco wrote:Don't forget that the most experienced teams will always benefit from any system that includes winning games. So England, France, Germany and Spain (ok Belgium too ) will be the most likely candidates to host in the near future again. Holland, always playing with peanutbutter teams anyway because they like it that way, would not get to host EB ever again if they would end up last every EB. And what I read in previous posts, that was the place that actually could host a very good EB.

I agree, having a competition that requires winning in order to gain hosting rights seems daft (it may have worked for some of you up to know). I mean surely it weakens the competition, some teams may not feel the drive to play with the hardest teams some country's who want to host may not bother sending a team and then the top best country's battle it out every year believing there the best because they've beaten the "best" teams. Well lucky for you I haven't played in any tournaments yet or you'd all be playing in Wales every year
Jokes aside I would like to see a fair system in place which would allow smaller country's to host, like people have said change seems to be coming but at least have the common decency to ask the small nations if they want a chance to host before documenting and red taping them out of the equation.

Dose that qualify as a rant ? I think it might.... ??

Well don't let this discussion take the shine off next weekends events, my advise would be sit down and discuss it, take notes/minutes but give a bit of time for everyone to come away and discuss then vote on something. But then again what do I know ?

Good luck at the Euros everybody

Native English speaking dudes.

Can you please give the English as a Second Language guys a chance.

Spell stuff correctly.

Whereas we can understand the mistakes it makes it vastly difficult for others.

Tripleskull wrote:I am not worried about nations being capable or not. I think any community that are willing are probably also capable and there good suggestion out there about helping inexperienced nations out.

This comment is the best I have read in this entire thread, sums up my feelings perfectly.