Media Is It Enough Yet? Nepotism and EVEN MORE Corruption

[Agent93]

Any thoughts on the latest development, btw?

I'm not keen on being edited.

 

[Noobz0r]

I'm not keen on being edited.

You know what I meant.

 

[Agent93]

You know what I meant.

I actually don't.

 

[Noobz0r]

I actually don't.

As one of the captains who generally agrees with me on this, I was hoping for outrage about my latest post than the semantics of the thread title.

 

[Agent93]

As one of the captains who generally agrees with me on this, I was hoping for outrage about my latest post than the semantics of the thread title.

I'm tired of this shit man. Tired, tired, tired.

And I see Ant Bear lookin' at me! "Man, why you gotta say that? It ain't me, it's the media. The media has distorted my image to make ,e look bad! Why must you come down on us like that, brother? It ain't me, it's the media." Please cut the ****in' shit, okay?! Okay?! Okay?! When I go to the money machine tonight, alright, I ain't lookin' over my back for the media! I'm lookin' for Ant Bear!

 

[pantskyle]

So, I didn't get into the Sweet FA cause I didn't more in threads like this.

Fine, let's get this started then.

What?

 

[manangatang]

What?

Rattled

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

Today marked the release of the All-SFA side for Season 28. I wish to congratulate all members of the side for their inclusion, and thank them for their very valuable contributions to the league this season. There is, however, one poster who shouldn't be there, despite the amount of hours they put into running the league this season.

I wish to start this post with a quote:

"the Committee recognised the effort in different area and the commitment to the league, for my 8th guernsey."

To you, the average SFA pundit, this seems like this was a vocal majority of captains that wished for Ant Bear to be included in the side. However, I can exclusively confirm that AB was named in the sides of five committee members. He was recognised by only 40% of the committee. This doesn't really add up to "committee recognition" does it?

The following players had votes from the majority of the committee:

U2tigers
Mooch
Tarkyn_24

U2tigers missed out on a guernsey due to being the 3rd ruckman, and the side only required 2. I somewhat agree with this one, however his posting quality and stats gathering is very hard to ignore. And he was in 8 club selections, 25% more than AB.

That said, Mooch was the winner of the Fred Medal. Mooch was in 8 club selections, 25% more than AB. Mooch posted every week. I think he probably deserved a spot in the All-SFA forward line ahead of AB. Tarks was high in the Fred tally considering he was in a pocket all season, contributed every week, was in the majority of club selections, and was actually a forward. I think he probably deserved a spot in the All-SFA forward line ahead of AB.

AB's justification for naming midfielders in forward line slots (ahead of the Fred Medallist!?) was that "It all came down to quotas - there were 10 or 11 defenders nominated, a similar amount of forwards but 29 midfielders, and it didn't seem right to reserve 30% of the positions for 15% of the players nominated." This is fine, it is his prerogative as administrator to make this call.

The following players had better stats and comparable (if not better) match thread and general posting throughout the season, all of them are midfield / wings and therefore also count within this quota:

Hate
spookism
GreyCrow
CakeEater
BEEG

And if I was going to pick a hybrid player whose midfield stats were skewed due to being played in different positions through-out the season, it would be JoshWoodenSpoon. Who played in the backline and midfield. And had far superior posting in both match threads and media than AB. And was given as many votes as AB.

So, we have 9 posters who it could be argued were better suited to being named All-SFA ahead of AB (whether this be due to being in a majority of captains votes, or superior midfield statistics, or better posting).

So what is AB's possible reasoning for his inclusion? His effort in different areas and commitment to the league. Which brings me to my third direct quote:

"The selections were based on a 50% playing/50% posting assessment. "

This has always been the accepted rule of All-SFA, that it is decided upon a combination of qooty stats, and posting around the league. Nowhere here does AB mention that selections could also be based on undefined effort and committment. Administrative work should not factor into All-SFA voting. It excludes all bar one of SFA participants from being measured by the metric, and is therefore an unfair advantage when being considered. It is a position that you willingly applied, and campaigned for. It is not playing, nor is it posting.

In no measurable metric outside of vague, never-before-seen selection criteria that directly contradicts official criteria does AB make the All-SFA side.

He gave himself an out through naming por_please_ya (who was given 1 vote by captains, by the way), and creating an emergency list for those he ignored for his own, selfish purpose.

- Changes to the majority required for a vote of no confidence / removal of administrator made without committee consultation.
- Deliberately ignoring technically allowed majority views to incur penalties that the administrator wishes.
- Naming himself in All-SFA despite a clear contradiction and ignoring of selection criteria.

For shame. We need to do something, Land of Sweet.

Ooooooohhhh. Sorry mate, working today.

Very good.