I have got the approval of Maddude for a new initiative that will improve the league for next season. Here it goes...

The Feed Me Haxball League would like to recognise the players that during a match contribute a lot to their teams play whatever the result!

GSB awards are given by the opposition to the 3 players that they feel have contributed the most to the game for your team. This works great if used appropriately and the opposition properly consider who they feel deserve the awards through their play and not just isolated incidents. It is recommended that at the end of each game, a captain consults with his players about the 3 best performing opposition players during the game. Even if there are substitutes, they will still only be awarded the the three best performing players each game. Of course, this goes in the order of the best performing player with the gold award, followed of course by silver and bronze.

They will be put into the statistics and each player will have the records of the amount of Gold, Silver and Bronze awards they have racked up.

It is important that everyone understands that the awards must be taken seriously and not given to 3 numbers picked off a team sheet. Remember these awards will be posted on the website and recognise a players overall contribution to a team. I would like to stress that this is not intended to be seen as a guide to a team’s best player and I would encourage players not to play for an award; rather they should play for the good of their team with excellence and development in mind.

3 players? That's almost the whole squad. Isn't it just easier to have a man of the match?

But there's also the fact that it's Gold, Silver and Bronze, so at the end of the season you'll be able to view the performance level you played at over the course of the season

jonnyynnoj wrote:3 players? That's almost the whole squad. Isn't it just easier to have a man of the match?

Indeed.

Well, the captain should decide the opponents single best player on the pitch, this way you still get 2 MOTM's per game, but having 3 per team seems a bit overkill to me.


I don't care though, really. Whatever gets done we'll just have to make do with it.

Remember Ghost though that it's a thing of Gold Silver and Bronze, so you'll see how players have performed and at what level, rather than just a MOTM thing

But it's not really what level the person played at if you're giving them out to almost the full squad. Just my 2 pennies worth.

I suppose so although that is probably still something to do with the value of the ratings Gold Silver and Bronze

3 awards per game is definitely too much, only 4 people can play on each team per match so all you are essentially doing is ranking players in order of how good they were, so not only are you highlighting whoever played best but also who was worst (or 'least good') and I can imagine people getting upset and thinking they are not good enough if they keep getting a bronze or no award every game.

Instead of doing that you could ask each player from the opposition team after the game to nominate 1 player as motm, after they all do that then you would count the # of votes for each player and give an award based on how many people nominated them like:

4 ‐ Gold
2/3 ‐ Silver
1 ‐ Bronze

or different amounts, but I feel like that is a better system?

Why not just 3 players both teams included? Derp

i think this is a great idea in theory, but i doubt it'll work too well practically. i imagine the discussions might take a while each game and sometimes it'll be difficult to be unanimous. i have to say MoM is more fitting for so small teams, either by votes or picked by host/referee.

Vargo wrote:i think this is a great idea in theory, but i doubt it'll work too well practically. i imagine the discussions might take a while each game and sometimes it'll be difficult to be unanimous. i have to say MoM is more fitting for so small teams, either by votes or picked by host/referee.

Pretty much this

I think it should be the 3 best players from the whole match with Gold/Silver/Bronze with Gold 5 points/Silver 3 points/Bronze 1 point.
It's a better idea than MoTM I feel as two/three players who played really well can both benefit rather than only one player benefiting.

To answer Vargo's statement, we seem to have a lot of time on our hands in the evening's after the games, (I know I do, might possibly change) But I could help decide, by watching through the replay's etc..

Well if we're gonna pick 3 players each game, I'd rather do it right after the game instead of waiting until all the games are over. I'm 1 hour ahead of you guys and I get up at 5.30 am to get ready for work so I'd rather not take too long. Whoever has the replays of the match would probably be best fit to vote, I know I probably wouldn't pick a fair order in a league game where I'm focusing on my job rather than ranking players. I think that either way, someone else should vote, instead of the players themselves.

This will just lead to more arriba bias.