The Americas Draft

I'll check back after the CL.

Keeping things on schedule as much as possible has to be a priority - so I'll start the match if I get the stuff by midnight. If not, we'll have to reschedule.
 
It's 2am where he lives (Indonesia, I think). Not expecting him for a few hours at least.
 
Right - I'm off to do some work, and then off to bed, have an early start tomorrow.

Feel free to ask any neutral to start the match (getting late for the usual suspects too, though) - if not we'll just reschedule.

Two matches tomorrow and on Friday - so it looks like Saturday will be the first opening (which is fine by me - if we're done with R1 before Monday, we'll call that reasonable progress).

@MounchesterUtd @Mciahel Goodman
 
Adolfo Pedernera

Alfredo Di Stéfano's legacy was secured in Spain thanks to his spell running the most successful single team the European Cup/Champions League has ever seen back at the very dawn of its history. What's less well-known is that he had found his way to Spain via Colombia (in an era when the Colombian league operated outside FIFA's rules and was able to attract some of the finest players of the era from all over the world) after only breaking into the team at River Plate at the age of 21.

That's not an old age by any means, but it's not especially young either. Maradona had been playing first team football for six years by the time he turned 21, and most of the greats were already fixtures in their teams by that age. So why did arguably the most complete player in the history of football not break into the first team sooner?

Adolfo Pedernera is the answer. Or rather, the team Pedernera featured in. River Plate won the Argentine championship in 1941, '42 and '45 (there was only one championship per year back then, unlike today), and did so with a side regarded, to this day, as arguably the greatest club team the country has ever seen. Dubbed La Máquina ('The Machine') by a journalist in 1942, the most famous incarnation of the five-man starting lineup actually only played together eighteen times in four years, and never against bitter rivals Boca Juniors, but the names Ángel Labruna, Félix Loustau, José Manuel Moreno, Juan Carlos Muñoz and Pedernera are etched indelibly into the memories of fans – and not only fans of River. Labruna won nine league titles in all with River and is the Argentine Primera División's second highest scorer of all time (two goals behind Arsenio Erico, who misses out being included in this article because he's Paraguayan), but Pedernera, though he didn't score as many, orchestrated the play.

And it was the play that was the thing for La Máquina. Because although the goals flowed freely, it was the style that was most important, arguably even more so than winning (three titles in six years from 1941-'46 is hardly domination of Madrid-in-the-early-European-Cup proportions). Pedernera shaped that style, and that's why he's the player who gets picked out from a five-man frontline who could have made up this entire list on their own. When he left River in 1947 to move to Atlanta, Di Stéfano was brought back from loan at Huracán and finally given a place in the team. That's how good Pedernera was; when the time came to replace him, only the best would do.

Alfredo Di Stefano said:
The best player I ever saw in my life, was Adolfo Pedernera. Undoubtedly, Maradona was exceptional, fantastic. The best in years. One can not ignore even Pele. But for heaven’s sake, though it is difficult to draw comparisons, Pedernera was a very complete player who could play anywhere on the pitch.
 
I've sent mine to Chester. Can start by 15:00 BST?

I sent mine earlier on today , start whenever tomorrow, I've got a massive Skype call tomorrow about potentially doing a TED talks so I'm likely gonna be unable to comment for a bit
 
Give me a few minutes @P-Nut0712 , this week has been an absolute clusterfeck for me. Started a new job and am technically homeless.

Yeah no worries mate I've ended up busy all week aswell. Hope the homeless part sorts itself out mate.
 
Just made a thread that you guys should enjoy as it's a question born out of these drafts really.
 
NOTICE

I will allow unpicked players in the reinforcement pool unless a majority of the playing managers are against this.

The way I see it we should give as many players as possible the chance to feature here - that's one reason. It's also possible that some managers will find an unpicked player more useful - in terms of tactical variation - than the alternatives in the regular pool. So, that's another reason.

Protest if you like - I will take that into account. But unless a majority actually voice their protest (and do so before the reinforcement round opens tomorrow), unpicked players will be allowed.

Same rules of eligibility, of course - and we go with the amendment posted earlier: If a player doesn't have senior matches in the region, he will be rejected regardless.
 
Of course, unpicked players are always the welcome in a draft.

I would be surprised to see new players though!
 
Last edited:
Last match of the round is now up.

Reinforcement round starts tomorrow at 1500 BST (UTC+1).

Reinforcement format is snake (reversed draft order). Two players to draft.
 
Moving it here.

@Aldo I'm more than open to trying out something for the quarters: Non-visible votes, abandoning penalties - anything, really.

As long as the majority is on board, we can basically try out any brand of madness.
Well it has already been suggested couple of time to vote without seeing the actual result. I think this is the best way to escape a voting for a draw situation.
If that is possible and if the concerned parties are all on board then it would be worth a try, I guess. Non-visible votes, that is. Although from what I understand once you vote, you can see the score and then you can change your vote to engineer a draw like now. We have these three options at the moment:

Options:
  • Allow voters to change their votes
  • Display votes publicly
  • Allow the results to be viewed without voting

I would say the first and third need to be disabled to achieve this. Not all owing to change votes is tricky but the main reason it was introduced was to allow people to 'correct mistake votes' as sometimes they voted accidentally and wanted to change it. However that is a pretty rare occasion and if someone genuinely fecks up he can post in the thread and we can take that into account at the end. Should not be a problem 99.99% of the time though. Perhaps just make a comment on being careful before pressing the button and doing it only once you are sure of it - so no more 'I'll vote now and keep it subject to change based on discussions.' If you want to see the discussions keep your vote on hold. Can see a few pros of not allowing vote changes in my opinion. A lot of monkey business has gone down thanks to that.

The third one of course goes without saying. That in combination with not allowing changes could go a long way in removing this bug.
 
So, the proposition is:

- Voters are not allowed to change their vote
- Voters are not allowed to view results without voting

Seems perfectly reasonable to me - as something to try out, that is. We've talked about it plenty - just never actually tried it. So, why not? We have to try it at some point in order to assess it properly.
 
So, the proposition is:

- Voters are not allowed to change their vote
- Voters are not allowed to view results without voting

Seems perfectly reasonable to me - as something to try out, that is. We've talked about it plenty - just never actually tried it. So, why not? We have to try it at some point in order to assess it properly.
As far as I can remember that was the default and the only available system when the caf was using vBulletin. Xenforo came and all these new options with it. You couldn't change votes earlier, that much I am absolutely certain of.
 
So, the proposition is:

- Voters are not allowed to change their vote
- Voters are not allowed to view results without voting

Seems perfectly reasonable to me - as something to try out, that is. We've talked about it plenty - just never actually tried it. So, why not? We have to try it at some point in order to assess it properly.
Agreed.

There's another option to have a third option in the poll - Draw, I know it was tested before but not sure how it ended and if there is a point to it at all.