This topic is always something that springs to mind, either when a substitution has been made or wildcard played (and in the comments section of Scott's post, about captaining a player). This happened to me last gameweek (Gameweek 35). I substituted DirkKuyt for Clint Dempsy and captained him; for me this was a tactical substitution, made to help me conquer the 13 point deficit between Mass Confusion and Marrocca Villa. And in my eyes it turned out to be exactly that (some would say pure genius), with Dempsy not playing and Kuyt gathering 13 points.
Why would I not captain Dirk Kuyt with a history that looks like this?
However, when sitting back and bathing in the realisation that Marrocca Villa had taken a 4 point deficit for nothing to happen, I quickly thought that I had been on the receiving end of 'a move of pure genius' before. There is one major difference though... I didn't think of that move as pure genius, but a mere spot of luck.
This has sprung to mind before when others have made captain choices. Most notably when 'The Science Masters' had J.S Park as their captain getting an astonishing 30 points (if I remember correctly). Now to me that is pure luck, but to Scott it may be a move of pure genius.
When do you consider it a tactical change or a lucky change? If I've made the change, it's always tactical but if I see somebody else making the change, it's definitely luck!
Or do you make your own luck in this game?
JC
Oh you definitely make your own luck. But you can obviously play for it. An in-form striker ought to rape a weak defence. But I thought that when captaining Defoe a few weeks ago and got nothing for it. But football is fundamentally quite an unpredictable game.
ReplyDeleteI loved making Park captain. I thought united would do well, and their midfield was looking shabby. Park seemed the best candidate. So i transferred him in, and made him El Capitan, and reaped the rewards.
Interestingly, only two of my players from that week are still in my team... I need to do fewer transfers.