Which team is of least value to CricSim?

Discussion in 'Bannerman Shield' started by Farny, Jun 14, 2009.

?

Which team is of least value to CricSim?

  1. Crusaders

    7 vote(s)
    8.8%

  2. Cyclones

    2 vote(s)
    2.5%

  3. Lions

    7 vote(s)
    8.8%

  4. Pumas

    3 vote(s)
    3.8%

  5. Ravens

    3 vote(s)
    3.8%

  6. Stickies

    3 vote(s)
    3.8%

  7. Stingrays

    18 vote(s)
    22.5%

  8. Vipers

    13 vote(s)
    16.3%

  9. (Gamblers)

    24 vote(s)
    30.0%
Page 15 of 20

  1. Ged GEC King

    You ****s chuck it down our throat that you've recruited 22 of the best blokes you could find. You've even said it. You've gone through what the seconds side will be and it is full, or pretty close to from memory. You even stated earlier that you couldn't guarentee a new bloke seconds action but you'd still sign them.
    You don't add anything historical at this very moment. How can you even argue that?
     
    Ged, Jun 14, 2009
    #281

  2. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    0 people have signed. But yeah more than 11 have shown interest, doesn't mean I'll put a batsman at number 11, though.
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #282

  3. Ged GEC King

    Thanks Sherlock.
     
    Ged, Jun 14, 2009
    #283

  4. CCG C Golding

    Looks like more Stingrays hate again :p
     
    CCG, Jun 14, 2009
    #284

  5. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    We have got about 20 people at the moment, after Eggman went back on his word. I said I WOULDN'T guarantee someone a spot in seconds to get them to join.

    I'm not trying to argue it, but you can't use not winning a premiership against a side that hasn't even played a game.
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #285

  6. Flack SA Flack

    I don't understand how he Rays and Vipers have so many votes, tbh.
     
    Flack, Jun 14, 2009
    #286

  7. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    How can you compare those things against a side that hasn't played a game?
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #287

  8. Andato BJT Manera

    In a way the Ravens are very similar to the Allstars, being an elitest group so I can not really agree with that reasoning. The Ravens obviously offer a lot to CricSim as the Allstars no longer exist and they are even more elitest then what the Stars were. The fact that Rob runned the team built a positive image around the club which has continued to earn respect from most teams. But essentially, like the Allstars most players stay fairly loyal with the club and you end up with a really solid squad which performs well each season.

    The Gamblers are obviously built around a similar image of the Ravens in that they are an elitest club which signed on a personality basis without regards to whether they suit the "Raven" code. I would say the Gamblers will be more like the Allstars but time will tell if they can stay competitive and maintain the players necessary to carry on the image. The Gamblers will not get the same respect as the Allstars as the Stars built their reputation over a number of seasons and most the players in the original line up were well respected members of Sidhe at the time. The fact that the team is so strong within the first season makes it an easy target for others to attack.

    It offers something different as it is a team where the "Old Boys" come together to have a bit of fun. It may not be for the best of CricSim but it certainly offers something a little different. In a few seasons time I think the Gamblers will be given a lot more respect as they take on a similar image as the Allstars.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2009
    Andato, Jun 14, 2009
    #288

  9. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    Because they offer nothing. Nobody will ever think "Geez I wish I could play for the Rays/Vipers" Because all you have to do is send a PM, and bam, contract.
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #289

  10. morgieb MC Burridge

    Actually agree with you Manero. They (Allstars, Ravens & Gamblers) seem to be elitist, although the players Gemmell signs are different to what Crabb signs.
     
    morgieb, Jun 14, 2009
    #290

  11. Flash JP Thornton

    Gamblers shouldn't be added. It will never be a cricsim team.
     
    Flash, Jun 14, 2009
    #291

  12. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    I agree, kinda.

    I want the Gamblers to be known as just that, the Gamblers. Not a new version of the Allstars.
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #292

  13. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    The Gamblers are a boys club, that's it. That's all we want to be.
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #293

  14. Flack SA Flack

    I don't think that about any team... I don't think many people think that about many teams either.

    Pumas reject players, and don't re-sign some, but I don't think I'd use that a pro to keeping us and not the Rays/Vipers.
     
    Flack, Jun 14, 2009
    #294

  15. Flash JP Thornton

    Gayest post of the year.
     
    Flash, Jun 14, 2009
    #295

  16. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    Why did you ask to join then?
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #296

  17. BoyBlunder BOY Blunder

    I wouldn't say that. We were contacted by players who we've said we don't need and we're only targeting a few members.

    Our current squad is built on a loyal player base, hence us keeping our entire starting 11 plus alot of our ALC players.
     
    BoyBlunder, Jun 14, 2009
    #297

  18. Flash JP Thornton

    ROFL

    Do you know how I know you're gay?
     
    Flash, Jun 14, 2009
    #298

  19. Ged GEC King

    It's easier to get rid of a team that has no history. Atm, you do not. Neither do the Rays yet Rob mentioned them earlier under this argument.
     
    Ged, Jun 14, 2009
    #299

  20. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    No teams are going to be kicked out though. I think the same 8 teams will be here until about season 10. Then a team/s will be added.
     
    Boobidy, Jun 14, 2009
    #300
Page 15 of 20

Share This Page