Talk:Players - Revision history

Graaf at 13:39, 9 December 2007

2007-12-09T13:39:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:39, 9 December 2007
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Somebody put in a section for Norwegian links....took it out.		Somebody put in a section for Norwegian links....took it out.

			----

			The retirement of players and how it works is not addressed here?[[User:Graaf\|Graaf]] 13:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

2006-09-02T15:55:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:55, 2 September 2006
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Somebody put in a section for Norwegian links....took it out.		Somebody put in a section for Norwegian links....took it out.
	~~[[Media:Example.ogg]]<math>Insert formula here</math>~~
	~~----~~
	~~[[Link title]][[Link title]][[Link title]]~~

2006-09-02T13:51:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:51, 2 September 2006
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Somebody put in a section for Norwegian links....took it out.		Somebody put in a section for Norwegian links....took it out.
			[[Media:Example.ogg]]<math>Insert formula here</math>
			----
			[[Link title]][[Link title]][[Link title]]

2005-12-05T19:23:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 5 December 2005
Line 27:		Line 27:

	Injury and Suspension isn't really correct here. Don't know where it should go [[User:Dancing rob\|Dancing rob]] 21:43, 28 November 2005 (UTC)		Injury and Suspension isn't really correct here. Don't know where it should go [[User:Dancing rob\|Dancing rob]] 21:43, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
			----

			Somebody put in a section for Norwegian links....took it out.

2005-11-28T21:43:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:43, 28 November 2005
Line 23:		Line 23:

	There should be a link to the [[wages]] page here but I can't see where it fits... [[User:Dancing rob\|Dancing rob]] 15:06, 28 November 2005 (UTC)		There should be a link to the [[wages]] page here but I can't see where it fits... [[User:Dancing rob\|Dancing rob]] 15:06, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

			----

			Injury and Suspension isn't really correct here. Don't know where it should go [[User:Dancing rob\|Dancing rob]] 21:43, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

2005-11-28T15:06:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:06, 28 November 2005
Line 18:		Line 18:

	The line about 'There is some debate about the contribution of passing on a winger towards middle.' could easily be removed. There is no doubt from the rules that a wingers passing contributes to wing attacks, even when played tm, and there is no doubt (from HT-statements on the boards) that a wtm's passing adds to central attack. That people debate a thing doesnt mean that both sides are partially right. One side might be completely wrong. ;-)		The line about 'There is some debate about the contribution of passing on a winger towards middle.' could easily be removed. There is no doubt from the rules that a wingers passing contributes to wing attacks, even when played tm, and there is no doubt (from HT-statements on the boards) that a wtm's passing adds to central attack. That people debate a thing doesnt mean that both sides are partially right. One side might be completely wrong. ;-)


			----

			There should be a link to the [[wages]] page here but I can't see where it fits... [[User:Dancing rob\|Dancing rob]] 15:06, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

2005-11-28T13:16:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:16, 28 November 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Hm?		Hm?
			----
			Added by tcelind:

			I see someone has added lines in addition to what is in the rules, at least at

			'''Attack Centre'''

			...Scoring forwards

			...Passing forwards

			...Passing inner midfielders

			...'''Passing wingers towards middle'''

			Personally I have no objections to this, as it is obviously correct, but if one adds lines one should also include 'Passing from central defenders played offensive' to Central attack and to wing attack on its side, and one should add 'Defending from forwards played defensively' to defenseratings. You shouldnt do just the one.

			The line about 'There is some debate about the contribution of passing on a winger towards middle.' could easily be removed. There is no doubt from the rules that a wingers passing contributes to wing attacks, even when played tm, and there is no doubt (from HT-statements on the boards) that a wtm's passing adds to central attack. That people debate a thing doesnt mean that both sides are partially right. One side might be completely wrong. ;-)

2005-11-25T10:15:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:15, 25 November 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Minor adjustments to the Passing section.~~		Hm?

2005-11-25T04:25:37Z

New page

Minor adjustments to the Passing section.