Hey guys,
Thought I'd start a thread to discuss rule changes or just general improvements people would like to see in the competition. Could kick it off with this rule that some seem to have want but it would be great if we could get some clearer opinions. :)
Sub Rule:
It seems like it won't be happening in the AFL next season so does everyone want to just not have it or bring it in anyway?
The sub rule was possibly going to work like this:
You have your four emergencies named. (One per position or just any 4 was undecided.) Then of your four, you designate a sub. Your lowest scoring player then comes off for your sub and that is really it.
Thoughts? Feel free to suggest any other rules or improvements you feel will help the competition. Holz will ultimately make the call but he'll need your opinion on things.
I don't think we need one per position.
Just three emgs from any line, one as sub.
Fair enough, which would mean say someone is out, changes occur in this order.
1) Utility covers out player and first emergency goes to utility.
2) If Option 1 is N/A, Emergency of that position covers.
3) If neither Option 1 or 2 are possible, first emergency comes on as OOP.
If your designated substitute has to come on acting as an emergency, you do not get a sub.
Correct?
This is just if we have sub rule, if enough want it.
Yep.
Don't think we should have the sub rule now if AFL is scrapping it.
Don't think sub rule is needed as luv said.
On what you said about lowest scoring on-field player being subbed off for an emergency, takes a bit of strategy out of it. If they just have a horrible game, let the team cop it for naming them, rather than getting an emergency who scored more. If it was just for injuries then maybe, but don't think sub rule needed anymore.
IMO teams that have gone through a rebuild in the 2015 pre-season automatically get 200 bonus points per game for being daring.
So really the sub rule means you name a 16 man team and only your best 15 will count (unless you are unlucky enough that your sub gets your lowest score). It would make sense to make your best player your sub, which probably goes against what the rule is intended for.
Not to mention if the AFL scraps the rule it isn't really anything relevant. It's a no from me at this stage.
Quote from: Scrads on August 24, 2014, 08:31:49 PM
So really the sub rule means you name a 16 man team and only your best 15 will count (unless you are unlucky enough that your sub gets your lowest score). It would make sense to make your best player your sub, which probably goes against what the rule is intended for.
Not to mention if the AFL scraps the rule it isn't really anything relevant. It's a no from me at this stage.
Your third/fourth best - can't captain a sub I don't think.
Quote from: Nails on August 24, 2014, 11:40:38 PM
Quote from: Scrads on August 24, 2014, 08:31:49 PM
So really the sub rule means you name a 16 man team and only your best 15 will count (unless you are unlucky enough that your sub gets your lowest score). It would make sense to make your best player your sub, which probably goes against what the rule is intended for.
Not to mention if the AFL scraps the rule it isn't really anything relevant. It's a no from me at this stage.
Your third/fourth best - can't captain a sub I don't think.
Point taken but the theory of my point still stands.
If afl stays with the green best will definitely be doing the sub.
Not really a big fan of changing rules. I think just better activity from me and a few more interesting side things.
Are we having a sub rule now that it is staying
Quote from: LF on January 31, 2015, 11:18:29 AM
Are we having a sub rule now that it is staying
Yes, I'll read the ideas people suggested when I'm back and if anyone else has ideas happy for them to list them now.
My idea for the sub rule:
- You name one sub (can be any position).
- If one of your players is vested (green or red), your sub replaces their score.
- If two or more players are vested, your sub replaces the lowest scoring vestee.
- If your sub is vested themselves, they only replace your on-field vestee if they scored higher.
Pros:
- Stops unlikely injuries or odd vestings costing you games.
- Can't easily be manipulated like some other sub rules suggested.
Cons:
- Can be manipulated with Friday night games (e.g. I have a rookie forward named as green vest on Friday night so I quickly field him and make my sub the higher scoring midfielder I couldn't fit in that week).
- We'd need to find a solution to what happens if you have a vested player but they still scored more highly than your sub (who wasn't vested). It'd either be that you cop the lower score or that subs only come into play if they score higher. Both valid but would need to be decided in advance.
Thoughts?
Maybe go check out BXV rules as sub rule was used last season and worked well.
I actually like it that way it's simple.
I honestly like the way WXVs uses the sub rule.
Quote from: Nige on February 01, 2015, 03:52:00 PM
I honestly like the way WXVs uses the sub rule.
That's what I was leaning too , if they play half a game your emergency comes on. Should go with 4 emergencies so you can have a ruck.
I reckon BXV is the best one, just my opinion.
WXVs doesn't make it mandatory though whereas BXVs does. Although this year it has been changed to opt out, the way in which it works is slightly better imo.
when does the rookie draft start??
Quote from: nostradamus on February 02, 2015, 07:52:56 PM
when does the rookie draft start??
this Friday at 11:59pm AEST.
just getting the rookie availability sorted, and checking the team lists.
Quote from: Holz on February 04, 2015, 05:24:18 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on February 02, 2015, 07:52:56 PM
when does the rookie draft start??
this Friday at 11:59pm AEST.
just getting the rookie availability sorted, and checking the team lists.
Does this mean we have until tomorrow to finish delistings?
I believe I have a squad of 39 right now (any way to confirm other than me just being pretty sure I haven't stuffed up my list?) so I want to delist at least one more player to get a second rookie pick. I was hoping to discuss with my assistants but neither has replied for a week or two so I'll have to make an assessment. Let me know when the deadline is and I'll see if I can get a response before I just assess without counsel.
Quote from: LaHug on February 04, 2015, 06:23:50 PM
Quote from: Holz on February 04, 2015, 05:24:18 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on February 02, 2015, 07:52:56 PM
when does the rookie draft start??
this Friday at 11:59pm AEST.
just getting the rookie availability sorted, and checking the team lists.
Does this mean we have until tomorrow to finish delistings?
I believe I have a squad of 39 right now (any way to confirm other than me just being pretty sure I haven't stuffed up my list?) so I want to delist at least one more player to get a second rookie pick. I was hoping to discuss with my assistants but neither has replied for a week or two so I'll have to make an assessment. Let me know when the deadline is and I'll see if I can get a response before I just assess without counsel.
will have it right before the draft. So have till Friday 8pm AEST time
Once the Rookie thread is unlocked Holz, do you have any objections if we take Pick 1 str8 away?
Yeah, I don't get why we can't start now.
Because Holz hasn't checked the team lists,draft order etc
And some teams are still carrying delisted players and there were a couple that had over 40 players
Quote from: LF on February 06, 2015, 08:54:43 PM
Because Holz hasn't checked the team lists,draft order etc
And some teams are still carrying delisted players and there were a couple that had over 40 players
Oh okay. :)
By the way, was just looking through the rookie draft pool, you've got Patrick Wearden in there, he was delisted by Brisbane.
Quote from: Nige on February 06, 2015, 08:59:33 PM
Quote from: LF on February 06, 2015, 08:54:43 PM
Because Holz hasn't checked the team lists,draft order etc
And some teams are still carrying delisted players and there were a couple that had over 40 players
Oh okay. :)
By the way, was just looking through the rookie draft pool, you've got Patrick Wearden in there, he was delisted by Brisbane.
See this is why it needs to be checked haha
I'll fix it now :)
Quote from: LF on February 06, 2015, 09:01:05 PM
Quote from: Nige on February 06, 2015, 08:59:33 PM
Quote from: LF on February 06, 2015, 08:54:43 PM
Because Holz hasn't checked the team lists,draft order etc
And some teams are still carrying delisted players and there were a couple that had over 40 players
Oh okay. :)
By the way, was just looking through the rookie draft pool, you've got Patrick Wearden in there, he was delisted by Brisbane.
See this is why it needs to be checked haha
I'll fix it now :)
Found some more (I'm checking through the full list myself) - A.Spina, M.Warnock, N.Salter, T.Walsh.
Also, you've got J.Kelly listed under the Hawks still even though he went to the Dogs (you've got him there). :)
Thanks nige, also going through it now. So will be ready to go for opening tonight.
Quote from: Nige on February 06, 2015, 09:10:20 PM
Quote from: LF on February 06, 2015, 09:01:05 PM
Quote from: Nige on February 06, 2015, 08:59:33 PM
Quote from: LF on February 06, 2015, 08:54:43 PM
Because Holz hasn't checked the team lists,draft order etc
And some teams are still carrying delisted players and there were a couple that had over 40 players
Oh okay. :)
By the way, was just looking through the rookie draft pool, you've got Patrick Wearden in there, he was delisted by Brisbane.
See this is why it needs to be checked haha
I'll fix it now :)
Found some more (I'm checking through the full list myself) - A.Spina, M.Warnock, N.Salter, T.Walsh.
Also, you've got J.Kelly listed under the Hawks still even though he went to the Dogs (you've got him there). :)
Fixed now
Could have sworn I took Walsh of the list tho haha
Pretty sure we have two picks (Bison) after delisting Sylvia, going from 39 to 38 players.
Quote from: LaHug on February 06, 2015, 11:41:20 PM
Pretty sure we have two picks (Bison) after delisting Sylvia, going from 39 to 38 players.
Was missed only because you edited the post :)
I will fix the team list up now
Quote from: LF on February 06, 2015, 11:43:42 PM
Quote from: LaHug on February 06, 2015, 11:41:20 PM
Pretty sure we have two picks (Bison) after delisting Sylvia, going from 39 to 38 players.
Was missed only because you edited the post :)
I will fix the team list up now
All good. I'll probably waste that pick like I did this one. Never drink and pick, they say. Well whatever whatever I do what I want.