The First Redcafe Sheep Draft

Balu said:
I've now doublechecked my pick twice, because Aldo made me nervous :lol:
Click to expand...

You got my man you $#%&/# you!

I forgot to ask because it didn't matter for my pick, but do 2nd yellow sending offs also count? Or only straight red cards? Maybe that's the problem with one of the picks? Other than that, it's a pretty easy criteria, really.
Click to expand...

Eh? I assumed it required a number other than zero in the red card column. When people get a second yellow the ref shows a red so obviously it should feature. Or not?

Yeah, that WOULD be a big deal, if someone with no reds somehow shows up as having "received two yellows". It would mean the site proposed for reference is complete shite. Doubt it.
 
I just picked one of my favorite players of all time in round 2. If any of you cnuts have blocked him, there will be blood. I don't think he is good enough to be blocked tbh. He is a safe pick.
 
antohan said:
But statistically that surely shows up on the red column. Right?
Click to expand...

Aye, it does. There's no difference in terms of the stats we're talking about here. Player X has 6 reds in his career. Whether two of these are direct and the remainder yellow x 2 isn't specified.

Besides the criterion is in practice that the player must have been sent off at least once during his club career - not that must have received a direct red card. Aldo has confirmed this, right?

The only possible controversy I can think of is a case of conflicting sources: Source A says the player has one red, sources B and C say he has zero. And it's not immediately obvious which source is right.
 
pick sent

btw, can people stop telling everyone who they are picking? I don't know why everyone feels the need to drop hints all the time, Anto is the worst culprit and it is beginning to ruin the game. Someone said they are picking "a top top player, but Fergie may only say he's a top player" or something like that. It's so blatantly obvious who that is, and since he didn't get blocked I know now not to pick him for attempts 2/3, when I probably would've have considered him otherwise.

Basically, I don't give a shit who you are planning to pick. We all find out at the end of the round anyway, so keep it to yourselves until then.
 
Last edited:
Balu said:
:lol: You're starting to play mindgames with yourself.
Click to expand...

No, I'm just worried. Maybe you didn't, but I had him down as a possible Pol/Cutch pick if they didn't go for the biggest names, which they haven't. And they weren't around earlier today when I banged on about his stats so... :nervous:
 
Jayvin said:
pick sent

btw, can people stop telling everyone who they are picking? I don't know why everyone feels the need to drop hints all the time, Anto is the worst culprit and it is beginning to ruin the game. Someone said they are picking "a top top player, but Fergie may only say he's a top player" or something like that. It's so blatantly obvious who that is, and since he didn't get blocked I know now not to pick him for attempts 2/3, when I probably would've have considered him otherwise.

Basically, I don't give a shit who you are planning to pick. We all find out at the end of the round anyway, so keep it to yourselves until then.
Click to expand...

Er...I think you're at least half a country mile off with that. Firstly, I said that the player was a top, top player - but that others may not agree. Which means I wasn't referring to the player you're talking about. With respect, I would never have dropped a hint as blatant as that.

The dropping of blatant hints falls into the mind game category for me - and I'm fine with that. Each to his own, I guess. At any rate, you have yourself to blame if you actually based your picking on what I said about "top, top". Wait until you see who I actually picked is all I can say.
 
Jayvin said:
pick sent

btw, can people stop telling everyone who they are picking? I don't know why everyone feels the need to drop hints all the time, Anto is the worst culprit and it is beginning to ruin the game. Someone said they are picking "a top top player, but Fergie may only say he's a top player" or something like that. It's so blatantly obvious who that is, and since he didn't get blocked I know now not to pick him for attempts 2/3, when I probably would've have considered him otherwise.

Basically, I don't give a shit who you are planning to pick. We all find out at the end of the round anyway, so keep it to yourselves until then.
Click to expand...

I was doing it in previous rounds with Romario, Davids and Rijkaard, but not here. All I've done is provide stats, stats which aren't searchable unless you have the same player yourself.
 
Yeah, I guess it's not a big deal (certainly not 'ruining the game', anyway). I think I'm just cracking under the pressure of a possible 2nd sheep in 3 picks... :nervous:
 
antohan said:
All that matters is whether we are talking about your man, isn't it? Simple wiki checks to clear a couple of rival bids.
Click to expand...

Surely that defeats the draft purpose! Where the fun if rival bids are eliminated?

I don't mind obscure references or in consideration posts, but anything that is a declaration of choice and easy to trace should not be allowed.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
The only possible controversy I can think of is a case of conflicting sources: Source A says the player has one red, sources B and C say he has zero. And it's not immediately obvious which source is right.
Click to expand...

Databases are tools to make our life easier. If they conflict then ultimately what matters is whether there was a sending off or not. Drill down, find the game, sorted. Lucky fecker is all I can say.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Surely that defeats the draft purpose! Where the fun if rival bids are eliminated?

I don't mind obscure references or in consideration posts, but anything that is a declaration of choice and easy to trace should not be allowed.
Click to expand...

Of course it should be allowed as, ultimately, you choose to go with it or not.

Let's use the exact same example: I provided that info yet went with Henry (has he ever played in the DFB-Pokal? Nope). The entire point of the exercise was getting reactions, sussing where others seemed to be heading and, if it were the case, making someone think twice about targetting the one who was my second attempt choice. Funny thing is, I think someone else got him anyway. Sticking with him though.
 
antohan said:
I would delete that Pippa. Leave it for after the round. I sent a link to Aldo confirming that as well, you lucky feck. :annoyed:
Click to expand...
Yeah, I did. AldoPaine told me about it in a conversation and what I just posted was basically a copy-paste of what I sent him. But still. :drool:
 
antohan said:
Delete that too :lol: Basically, no one is supposed to know who you picked!!!!!
Click to expand...
Wait, what? Aldo is the only person (apart from @Hernandez - BFA [who isn't playing]) who know for certain who I've picked. I'm sure more than one manager already knows my pick, but you would be crazy to go for a risky pick like him in the third round, I'd say.
 
So Hernandez is an assistant of sorts?

It's pretty obvious now, which means you couldn't have gone for others, which means there's a bigger chance of X, Y or Z being available. It just isn't right, we should be kept guessing!
 
antohan said:
So Hernandez is an assistant of sorts?

It's pretty obvious now, which means you couldn't have gone for others, which means there's a bigger chance of X, Y or Z being available.
Click to expand...
I don't think he is, just someone really interested with the draft. :lol: I can't lie, I would be very interested in this draft as well if I wasn't involved in some way. The long waits are tedious but it's gathering time when it's time for results.
 
Anyhow, since you are not deleting I may as well make it clear to everyone to avoid it being a bigger issue with people wondering what it is that I know and they don't (even when I worked it out all by myself, which I'm surely entitled to):
  • Pippa picked someone that the database we were using says didn't get sent off
  • Another database says he did
  • I tracked down the game and he did indeed get sent off
  • Pippa was publishing newspaper cutouts which also confirm it
  • The deciding/qualifying factor should indeed be what happened, not what a crap database says
  • Don't think there is any need to say much more (obvious as the player in question is)
 
I just linked a game that shows my player playing for his club and getting a rather unjust red card.
 
crappycraperson said:
If other managers on here know who pippa picked due to a post of his then @AldoPaine18 has to reveal it to all.
Click to expand...

I had worked it out already and PMd Aldo with details way before the entire incident. Up to him though.

I'm not fussed as it is WAAAAY too obvious. Simple: only someone with no red cards could have been eligible due to a statistical error. How many of them did you come across? From my targets I came across four of those. Checked them in a different site and worked out where the problem was, i.e. automatically identified the player.

A post of mine further up indicated to Pippa I was onto the entire issue and he posted proof of the sending off (which I had already found and PMd to Aldo to help clear things up).

Fact is, if you don't know who I'm talking about, he is clearly not in your radar, so why make a big deal of it?
 
:lol: German Shepard. I keep that name for my team :lol:. But guys, that means, if I get a sheep, I need a German one or at least a Bundesliga one.
 
sheep.jpg
 
Why the feck did you delete the picture and then post it again after my comment :lol:. It looks like I'm a psychic or something like that now, ffs.
 
I'm obviously not very good at that psychic stuff, or else Antohan wouldn't have outplayed me in the first round :lol:, clearly a fraud.
 
Just wondering - are the sheeps going to be brutal footballers or are we going to stray away from the worst players available?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.