With the season now entering the final stages thought I would start a thread where we can openly discuss the British competition in General not individual teams or coaches but the competition.
Discuss things like what went wrong, what was good and how we can improve things.
All feel free to contribute and then we can make any changes by agreement of all prior to next years competition. Do not be afraid to even offer criticism of Administrator as well as my aim is to improve the competition after taking over when interest was being lost.
I will start the ball rolling with these suggested improvements and all open for comment.
We name 4 emergencies each week and with one being designated as a sub. If the sub scores higher than the lowest player on the field subs score will count instead. This will help with injuries occurring early as well.
When teams are not named rule is that weeks team is used - At the moment no penalty is involved and we had the case this year where a team was not named and using the previous weeks team won the match, Proposal is to invoke a 5% penalty for teams not being named and use last weeks team. Penalty in most cases should be between 60 - 80 points.
Is the rule for emergency replacements the right rule:
Say a defender is a late out Current rule is:
If you have a defender as utility then the utilty becomes the defender and then your first named emergency becomes utility. If there is no utility as a defender then the defender named as emergency takes the place.
If the proposal to name 3 emergencies and sub as above is approved maybe we change the rule the emergency from the corresponding position comes in. Would not effect sub as player to be replaced will score 0.
Just something to stimulate the British going forward,
Quote from: Ringo on August 06, 2013, 04:05:10 PM
We name 4 emergencies each week and with one being designated as a sub. If the sub scores higher than the lowest player on the field subs score will count instead. This will help with injuries occurring early as well.
When teams are not named rule is that weeks team is used - At the moment no penalty is involved and we had the case this year where a team was not named and using the previous weeks team won the match, Proposal is to invoke a 5% penalty for teams not being named and use last weeks team. Penalty in most cases should be between 60 - 80 points.
Just something to stimulate the British going forward,
i really like these 2 but i think we should just name 4 emergencies one for each position if one player gets injured in the 1st quater or 3rd and subbed off due to injury we can choose if we take the emergencies player score or the injured players score really unfair when a player gets injured in first 5 minutes and subbed off ::)
regarding utilities well they are utilities so if they are a late out how about we just get the highest scoring emergency players score? keep it simple
*post so I don't forget to post later*
One rule i would make is that each team has an assistant so there is less likely going to be teams that dont submit teams each week.
Quote from: Ringo on August 06, 2013, 04:05:10 PM
We name 4 emergencies each week and with one being designated as a sub. If the sub scores higher than the lowest player on the field subs score will count instead. This will help with injuries occurring early as well.
The only issue i see with this is that the second best player in the team will be named as the sub every week and will replaced the lowest scoring player
Quote from: Ringo on August 06, 2013, 04:05:10 PM
When teams are not named rule is that weeks team is used - At the moment no penalty is involved and we had the case this year where a team was not named and using the previous weeks team won the match, Proposal is to invoke a 5% penalty for teams not being named and use last weeks team. Penalty in most cases should be between 60 - 80 points.
Agree, most teams have assistants so it should be fine for all to names teams each week
Quote from: Ringo on August 06, 2013, 04:05:10 PM
Is the rule for emergency replacements the right rule:
Say a defender is a late out Current rule is:
If you have a defender as utility then the utilty becomes the defender and then your first named emergency becomes utility. If there is no utility as a defender then the defender named as emergency takes the place.
If the proposal to name 3 emergencies and sub as above is approved maybe we change the rule the emergency from the corresponding position comes in. Would not effect sub as player to be replaced will score 0.
I dont properly understand this one.
If you dont have a defender in your utilities or emergencies does the highest scoring emergency still come in and you get half? IF you have a defender that is a defender in utilities and not on the bench, does your utilities player move to the backs and who comes in to you utilities??
i will try and think of some others
Quick comment - 1 major success was Ringo's leadership. Took over during a period of instability, did a lot of hard yakka and made the BXV a great comp. thanks mate!
Hats off to Ringo --> I've found this competition very even (a close battle for minor premiership, close battle for finals, close battle for spoon). Well done :)
I say get rid of the DVC thing for next year, I don't think it's necessary.
Sub rule is interesting! Thinking of something similar in Worlds, but haven't nutted it out yet. Maybe you can only activate the sub if either the sub or the player he is replacing hasn't played? Adds that element of chance, otherwise basically a guarantee increse in score.
Not sure I understand the emergency rule proposed...
I'm happy enough with the team from last week carrying over.
Oz
Best part of each week was reading the match reviews that Ringo made up, they are so so good!!
Quote from: Spinking on August 07, 2013, 03:26:49 AM
Quick comment - 1 major success was Ringo's leadership. Took over during a period of instability, did a lot of hard yakka and made the BXV a great comp. thanks mate!
Quote from: Spite on August 12, 2013, 10:31:21 PM
Best part of each week was reading the match reviews that Ringo made up, they are so so good!!
Cant agree more with both of these guys. Awesome job Ringo, this comp looked like it might struggle at one stage but definitely didnt thanks to your awesome work. Thanks for the great year Ringo :)
Thank You guys for your support - Appreciate it just wanted to give the comp some momentum after the early struggles.
Probably did not explain the emergency properly - So will try and simplify as my intention was to always simplify it by discarding the utility component.
We name 4 emergencies - with one being the sub.
If a player is a late out and if an emergency including the sub is named in that position they automatically replace that person. If 2 emergency players can fill the required position the first named emergency will take the place. If no emergency can fill the same position then the first named available emergency shall be used with half points applying. Hope that explains a little better.
Keep the discussion coming especially if you have ideas to improve the comp it is your competition as well. There maybe things I may not have thought of.
Don't think HGA should be included in Finals
Another suggestion :P
Feel free to debate this suggestion by KB. In AFL Home ground advantage applies til GF so should we follow suit or just abandon HGA for finals series. My view is if we are making it Fantasy relevant to reflect AFL then teams finishing higher up the ladder should enjoy HGA similar to AFL.
Happy to change if majority agree though as I said it is everyones competition not Ringos.
But having our HGA can affect the outcome much more then in the AFL
Maybe have it in the 1st week of finals or something
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on August 19, 2013, 10:23:26 AM
Don't think HGA should be included in Finals
Another suggestion :P
Really disagree sorry kb! Without HGA being included, there is no difference between finishing 1st and 4th, 2nd or 3rd, 5th or 8th, 6th or 7th.
For finals I think it is a welcome reward for those that did well during the season
(But yes, no HGA for Grand Final)
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on August 19, 2013, 11:08:22 AM
But having our HGA can affect the outcome much more then in the AFL
Maybe have it in the 1st week of finals or something
Disagree with that also --> Fremantle playing Sydney in Freo, or Sydney playing Fremantle in Sydney could have a massive impact. Just hard to measure.
Quote from: ossie85 on August 19, 2013, 11:11:45 AM
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on August 19, 2013, 10:23:26 AM
Don't think HGA should be included in Finals
Another suggestion :P
Really disagree sorry kb! Without HGA being included, there is no difference between finishing 1st and 4th, 2nd or 3rd, 5th or 8th, 6th or 7th.
For finals I think it is a welcome reward for those that did well during the season
(But yes, no HGA for Grand Final)
there is still a difference if you finish in the top 4 you get a second chance if you lose the first finals game
good enough reward IMO
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on August 19, 2013, 11:18:56 AM
Quote from: ossie85 on August 19, 2013, 11:11:45 AM
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on August 19, 2013, 10:23:26 AM
Don't think HGA should be included in Finals
Another suggestion :P
Really disagree sorry kb! Without HGA being included, there is no difference between finishing 1st and 4th, 2nd or 3rd, 5th or 8th, 6th or 7th.
For finals I think it is a welcome reward for those that did well during the season
(But yes, no HGA for Grand Final)
there is still a difference if you finish in the top 4 you get a second chance if you lose the first finals game
good enough reward IMO
Cant use that as an example as Sydney dont play wekll at ANZ
Quote from: tabs on August 19, 2013, 12:19:39 PM
Cant use that as an example as Sydney dont play wekll at ANZ
[/quote]
lol - they won a Prelim last year didn't they? (I was there and booed out the ground lol).
Quote from: ossie85 on August 19, 2013, 01:16:06 PM
Quote from: tabs on August 19, 2013, 12:19:39 PMCant use that as an example as Sydney dont play wekll at ANZ
lol - they won a Prelim last year didn't they? (I was there and booed out the ground lol).
You are a collingwood supporter. You get Booed out of every ground
great comp, great result so far, clearly the best team minor premiers and a shake at the flag also :)
On emergencies - definatley no "use the highest scoring emergency", loophole like and open for exploitation", had it in AXVS this season and are changing it to first named no highest scoring (of position).
Like the sub rule. ONLY ONE player named sub and only he can replace the lowest scoring player on field - REGARDLESS OF IF INJURED OR NOT. so effectively the sub covers spuds too not just injured players.... otherwise a nightmare for Ringo to check every game.
Utility rule i dont mind either way, like the utility rule and then the emergency rule, again didnt have the utility covering the other lines rule in AXVS but may change to it this season depending on votes.
penalty for not naming a team = NONE - no point to a penalty skews the results to have a team punished that way, the rule should be based around being fired for not naming a team too often and should not involve points loss for mine. If someone is away or has a crisis they should not lose a game because of it - using last weeks team is a safegaurd and only abuse of not naming a team should result in admin ruled sacking.
MUST HAVE A HGA IN FINALS (except GF) - we didnt in AXVS and it was a BIG mistake, had people saying correctly - oh well it makes no difference where i finish in the top 4 or top 8 as in 1st and 4th no benefit to either team. Must be a HGA to reward ladder positions and reflect the actual AFL.
I wanted a "resting bonus points" in the AXVS finals but it seemed unpopular - as in teams winning the 2 finals first adn getting the week off get a bonus in the next final on top of HGA to reflect they are rested and like in the real AFL almost always win.
VERY HARD TO WIN A FLAG FROM OUTSIDE THE TOP 4...... so hard it doesn't often happen..
- on all things not mentioned here. well done Ringo, great season, can't really see anything that warrants changing.
it's BS wehen people say theres no advantage of making the top 4 with HGA you get a double chance imo that's better then HGA
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on August 26, 2013, 03:56:04 PM
it's BS wehen people say theres no advantage of making the top 4 with HGA you get a double chance imo that's better then HGA
yes there is advantage in making the top 4 with double chance.
but without HGA in finals there is no advantage coming 1st over coming 4th
or 5th over 8th
Ok I agree with that but it wasnt how you put it originally
I just think any team should be able to win it in the top 8 people can say no point making the bottom 8 of the finals to hard to beat a team with HGA
The team that finished 8th is playing the GF this year, HGA in finals should stay as it is, if you're good enough to take the GF from 8th (as ele is) then kudos.
Quote from: PowerBug on August 26, 2013, 08:14:53 PM
The team that finished 8th is playing the GF this year, HGA in finals should stay as it is, if you're good enough to take the GF from 8th (as ele is) then kudos.
That rarely happens though
Happened 100% of the time in British XV's history. ;) Can only go off that. Usually if you finish 8th, you aren't strong enough to win against 5th, and then 4th, and then 2nd all away. Ele just got really lucky that his players all are performing at the right time of the season, which is part of the game i guess. :P
Quote from: Colliwobblers on August 26, 2013, 03:48:12 PM
VERY HARD TO WIN A FLAG FROM OUTSIDE THE TOP 4...... so hard it doesn't often happen..
Maybe this weekend will change your mind on that champ ;)
Amazing, amazing work Ringo. Looking back you really did save this comp from extinction! Imo this comp has a great feel to it, just so well run and organised! Lovely work!
Pretty much agree with everything that has been said.
- No penalty for not naming a side, copping last weeks side is often punishment enough.
- Absolutely need HGA in finals (but not the GF).
- I reckon that if a defender is out, a defender emg (provided one is named) should cover regardless of whether it is emg 1, 2 or 3. If no defender is named then the first named emergency should be halved. Think we already have that but yeah, I like it haha.
- Love the write-ups each week mate, amazing!
- Have we ever floated the idea of rolling lockout in XV comps?
- Don't mind the sub rule covering your lowest scoring player + injuries. I am sure it could be exploited but I haven't really thought too much about it yet.
- The DVC thing came in handy once or twice but I don't think it is crucial to the comp. Teams can name them if they want but I went a lot of the season not naming one really! Would be happy for it to stay or go though :)
Incredible effort by yourself though Ringo, hats off to you 8)
Quote from: PowerBug on August 26, 2013, 08:28:05 PM
Happened 100% of the time in British XV's history. ;) Can only go off that. Usually if you finish 8th, you aren't strong enough to win against 5th, and then 4th, and then 2nd all away. Ele just got really lucky that his players all are performing at the right time of the season, which is part of the game i guess. :P
Luck had nothing to do with it ;) Been chatting to my mate Stevo Dank though about some of his 'natural remedies?' I just signed some papers and went with it. He seemed like a nice guy with great past experience! Whatever we are jacking our team up on seems to be working!
Regarding HGA - It is used in the AFL unless contractual arrangements with the MCG need a game to be played at the MCG and quite often this is t the expense of an interstate team.
HGA had no effect in any of the Premiership final matches although it did enable the Werewolves to get a comfortable win as scores were only separated by 1.5 goals prior to HGA. One game in the Plate was changed as a result of HGA.
What do we think of HGA being removed for Preliminary final as well as Grand Final.
Thanks also for the encouragement guys Have enjoyed it and really want to make the rules a concensus of all coaches.
Quote from: Ringo on August 27, 2013, 09:09:30 AM
What do we think of HGA being removed for Preliminary final as well as Grand Final.
No HGA for GF
HGA for PF
Yeah agree with Os ;)
Quote from: ossie85 on August 27, 2013, 09:21:50 AM
Quote from: Ringo on August 27, 2013, 09:09:30 AM
What do we think of HGA being removed for Preliminary final as well as Grand Final.
No HGA for GF
HGA for PF
Yup.
As can be seen from the year we have a couple of strong teams and some weaker teams, do we need to do something to try and even the teams up.
Do we need to implement a cap similar to Worlds or implement Priority Picks for teams winning 4 or less games with penalties for tanking.
have no real opinion on this so just putting it out there for comment.
I'm not just saying this because my team finished last but I really like the idea of priority picks like in Worlds.
Having better Draft picks will even things up enough but a points cap would be handy dont need priority picks.
Look at Liverpool, they finished last but also destroyed my top 4 aspirations.
How does the points thing work?
Basically what the points will be all players averages for this year are added up to reach a total for each team. If a player has not played then score is 0. Then a Total average points is worked out that is not to be exceeded. If you have exceeded it then you have to delist or trade.
Not sure how will work in British and still only looking at it.
BXV is crazily even but over time through trading it will start to unbalance.
I like priority picks and don't mind minimum points caps. Not sold on max caps though! :-\
Quote from: Ringo on September 09, 2013, 01:12:06 PM
As can be seen from the year we have a couple of strong teams and some weaker teams, do we need to do something to try and even the teams up.
Do we need to implement a cap similar to Worlds or implement Priority Picks for teams winning 4 or less games with penalties for tanking.
have no real opinion on this so just putting it out there for comment.
i prefer priority picks to a points cap, but maybe bring a points cap in if you are going to over a 4 season period so as not to punish the bottom teams that drafted youth just as they get to their premiership window...
Just some further discussion on trading rules coaches.
At the moment our rule is trades must be a one for one basis. Whilst this is understandable it also makes ruling on trades very hard to ensure fairness.
I would like to see the rules amended to just trades in total must be fair ie if you want to trade player x plus pick for player y then that would be legitimate. If there is sufficient interest will put to vote to apply for next years trade period. Will only apply to trade period 1 as trade period 2 will always be like for like.
Am really struggling with the trade listed Wells for Pick 13 - Firmly believe Wells is worth a top 7 pick but trade being offered is their first round pick so will probably end up approving because of the like for like rules.
Part of the review
Yes I wanted this so bad, I think it makes trades alot easier especially when involving draft picks. Im absolutely for this change. :)
I believe it was pick 13, but yeah I see your point and would that change would be good I reckon. It cuts out the trading of the spuds, who end up being delisted anyway. :P
I put Wells up for sale best offers I got was pick 13 or 14 isn't he worth what people are willing to pay?
I think 13 is worth more then May to was a bit surprised that passed
That is my point KB when looking at what I consider to see what the player is worth then looking at what trade is offered it is reasonable. Sorry to pick on yours but it was the one I have been mulling over and i did consider the Day one for a long time before approving as well and coincidentally this is now the pick being offered for Wells.
Just trying to point how difficult it is to rule on trades that are one for one.
yeah it's ok mate don't think i'm having a go at you or anything because i'm not as you prob know i just like discussions/debates
my view was i traded Cox for pick 18 could have maybe got a better one but i was happy with a 1st rounder i'd consider Wells to be worth similar to Cox considering age etc so not much difference between pick 13 and 18
And Wells only averages 111 as a mid which is pretty average in Sportal they are not hard to find plus will be 29 next year
Also when you look at my midfield i don't really need him Murphy, Lewis, Ziebell, Vince, Zaharakis, Crouch, Caddy, Tyson, M Jones, Miles, Sutcliffe, O' Rourke
Throwing another one out for discussion
We can not do anything this year as trading and draft rules are set.
With the confusion with rookie draft picks and delisting players including rookies am thinking something along these lines.
At the end of each season coaches will de-list a minimum of 7 players from their lists through retirements and delisting. De-listed players may be re drafted in either draft,
This will ensure a minimum of 4 picks in the national Draft and 3 Picks in the Rookie/Pre-Season Draft.
If more than 7 players are de-listed then these picks will be taken after the 4th Round of the National Draft based on positions on table at conclusion of season.
Picks in either draft may be traded in Trade period one and can also be on-traded.
At the conclusion of both the National Draft and Rookie/Pre-Season Draft Team Lists are to comprise 45 players.
At the conclusion of the 2nd trade period each year Coaches will lodge their final list nominating 41 Senior Players and 4 Rookies.
Know this is for the end of next year but if do not put down may forget.
Shouldn't have to delist 7 players thats way too much!
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on October 03, 2013, 12:09:05 PM
Shouldn't have to delist 7 players thats way too much!
4 or 5 is probably more reasonable.
Yeah I got players who may come good like Curren
Yeah minimum if 4 sounds good.
Need to agree on number of players to delist as this will dictate how many rounds in each draft we will have, Have picked 7 basically for 4 rounds in National Draft and 3 in Rookie Draft.
Could change to 5 with a 3 and 2 picks in each trade.
You don't have to delist any do you ? Just means you can't draft anyone until you do
That can be done KB but from an Administrative point of view need to work out how many official draft rounds are required so coaches know which picks they can trade. No use trading pick 73 say if only 4 rounds are listed for National Draft.
It is interesting at the moment though 4 of the clubs through retirements and delistings have de-listed 7 players or more.
Ringo, just to clarify if a team holds onto delisted players in the hope they will be picked up by other clubs (AFL) in the AFL Preseason draft, and they are not picked up and are therefore on a BXVS list but not on an AFL list will that team be given a pick at the end of the BXVS rookie/preseson draft to replace him?
Also do I get a compensation pick for premiership fatigue? :o
Quote from: Colliwobblers on October 05, 2013, 05:52:10 PM
Ringo, just to clarify if a team holds onto delisted players in the hope they will be picked up by other clubs (AFL) in the AFL Preseason draft, and they are not picked up and are therefore on a BXVS list but not on an AFL list will that team be given a pick at the end of the BXVS rookie/preseson draft to replace him?
Also do I get a compensation pick for premiership fatigue? :o
Not covered in the rules Colli, but I will rule that compensation picks will be available after the Rookie Draft is complete if a team has players still not on an AFL list.
Quote from: Ringo on October 16, 2013, 08:56:04 AM
As the rules stand at the moment If you want to use 2 picks in the rookie draft you will either have to delist another rookie or promote one to your Senior list using a National draft pick.
This is one rule that I am looking at for next year but at the moment do not know how to improve it. Please feel free to offer suggestions on this in the 2013 Review thread,
cool mate assumed as much
well what i was think is lets say you have 4 guys on your rookie list but want to keep them but not promote onto senior list but still want to use your rookie draft 1st rounder you could have the option on passing on your last required pick in the NAT Draft so would be going into the rookie draft with 40 senior players and 4 rookies and then you can use your first rookie pick to make your senior list have 41 players
makes sense?
should be able to put PSD pick players on your senior list OR rookie list, and rookie draft players can ONLY go on your rookie list and ND players can ONLY go on your senior list,
How are we going to pick PSD players if our list must be full after the NAT draft?
Quote from: vinny on October 16, 2013, 05:41:59 PM
How are we going to pick PSD players if our list must be full after the NAT draft?
thats what i am saying :)
they will have to go on your rookie list the way the rules are now.
Oh haha, my bad. I think it would be better if instead of saying "Your senior list must be full after the NAT draft." It should be full after all the drafts have been completed. Plus how are we even meant to get PSD picks? :P
Keep the ideas coming guys as this is the purpose of this thread to discuss and refine rules for the betterment of the comp.
Even if you have opposing views please feel free to post so I get a consensus of what is wanted before putting out to vote.
Yeah, I do agree that PSD players should be able to be put on either list.
Quote from: NigeyS on October 16, 2013, 06:44:25 PM
Yeah, I do agree that PSD players should be able to be put on either list.
BXVS PSD players being all players available in the BXVS rookie/ps draft EXCEPT AFL Rookie draft picked players... who must go on our rookie list.
and AFL ND players being the only players in the BXVS national draft pool and all having to go on our senior lists.
think that is the way to go but happy as Ringo says to get other ideas, and if any make sense may even make BXVS draft better or more interesting but the above by default i think makes the most sense....
Between Retirements and Delistings im going to lose 10 players :o .. hoping J-Pod will get picked up tho
It doesn't matter, the Badgers have the premiership sewn up
Quote from: whatlez on October 16, 2013, 07:17:28 PM
It doesn't matter, the Badgers have the premiership sewn up
(http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.5057191991706297&w=179&h=155&c=7&rs=1&pid=1.7)
Quote from: whatlez on October 16, 2013, 07:17:28 PM
It doesn't matter, the Badgers have the premiership sewn up
You were saying that 12 months ago to
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on October 16, 2013, 07:29:05 PM
Quote from: whatlez on October 16, 2013, 07:17:28 PM
It doesn't matter, the Badgers have the premiership sewn up
You were saying that 12 months ago to
Not as confident. I was scared of the Bombers 12 months ago.
Well we should make the 8 for at least the next 5 years now
All it's going to take for us to be immediately dangerous is if one or two of the many forwards we are going to draft have decent first years rest of our lines are very good
Where can you guys see Owls finishing?
We have picks #7 & #9 remember.
Quote from: vinny on October 16, 2013, 07:49:54 PM
Where can you guys see Owls finishing?
We have picks #7 & #9 remember.
Because two first year players are really gonna help your ladder position. ::)
keep the banter to the discussion thread please and leave this thread to discuss ways to improve our comp and discuss ideas.
Quote from: NigeyS on October 16, 2013, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: vinny on October 16, 2013, 07:49:54 PM
Where can you guys see Owls finishing?
We have picks #7 & #9 remember.
Because two first year players are really gonna help your ladder position. ::)
:(
At #7 & #9 this year in the actual draft were Vlastuin and Wines.
In BXV draft: Grundy and Stringer.
They would help any teams ladder position.
(Okay sorry, no more Ringo.)
do people think we actually need 45 players on our lists?
just bringing this up as there might not be many players drafted in the AFL This year so i think shortening BXV lists requirements could prevent any hassles now and in future
what i think is maybe have a list size suggestion like lists have to have between 37-45 players you don't have to have players on your rookie list they can go onto your senior list but if 41 players are on your senior list then they must go on rookie list
or just scrap the rookie list i don't like it
rook list is great, makes it AFL like.
as for reducing list size i dont think that solves the problem at all, we have 40 in AXVS and are in exact same position.
the only thing that fixes this problem is reducing the rounds in the BXVS national draft to 4 maybe 5. probably 4.
now we have done all the pick trading this is all but impossible to do.
so Ringo needs to come up with a solution, but if the list was less the only difference would be clubs might not need to or want to take as many nat draft picks each season.
but that will also happen naturally, as clubs refine their lists and cut the dead wood, each season should see late nat picks less and less likely to be used.
as for this season, it is a quandary, but Ringo will sort it.
I reckon 42 is a good number.
Technically we should have enough players to go round as all AFL Clubs have more than 45 players which is the number we have.
Where we have an issue is if we have a lot of delistings from one or 2 clubs which we do this year then the drafts will be compromised. Not sure how to work it out but will think of something and announce after we know how many players have been drafted in the National Draft. National Draft will not start until we have agreement on process and that could be by vote.
Would love to get a full AFL Club listing of players to check against our lists as I suspect we are missing a few that are not on any lists.
Yeah like some international rookie listed players maybe missing
The season will be remembered for one thing and one thing only, The Oxford Owls winning the robin hood tournament after half of my starting 15 suffered season ending injuries.
Quote from: Noz on November 12, 2013, 09:17:28 PM
The season will be remembered for one thing and one thing only, The Oxford Owls winning the robin hood tournament after half of my starting 15 suffered season ending injuries.
Yeah!
Whatever that tournament is, we got this! :P
Quote from: vinny on November 12, 2013, 09:19:26 PM
Quote from: Noz on November 12, 2013, 09:17:28 PM
The season will be remembered for one thing and one thing only, The Oxford Owls winning the robin hood tournament after half of my starting 15 suffered season ending injuries.
Yeah!
Whatever that tournament is, we got this! :P
i think Lez hacked Vinnys account :P
Hahaha what makes you say that mate?
I actually don't know what the tournament is :P
Knockout Cup. Oxford won it this season. :)
Edit: It's probably more of a last man standing comp than knockout, as only one team (the lowest scoring) gets eliminated each week.
Ohhh, thanks mate. :)
I thought that was called the Shield or something? Lez said we lost that to them, haha. :o
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on November 12, 2013, 09:33:55 PM
Quote from: vinny on November 12, 2013, 09:19:26 PM
Quote from: Noz on November 12, 2013, 09:17:28 PM
The season will be remembered for one thing and one thing only, The Oxford Owls winning the robin hood tournament after half of my starting 15 suffered season ending injuries.
Yeah!
Whatever that tournament is, we got this! :P
i think Lez hacked Vinnys account :P
Why would Lez want the Owls to win again?
it's something Lez would say about the Badgers winning whatever come on guys get with the program ::)
I think you should have went with a ;D or a ;) instead of a :P
Hahaha.
Quote from: Ringo on July 29, 2013, 09:03:12 AM
The Badgers 1475 defeats the Owls 1367 in the final.
Congratulations to the Badger Inaugral winner of the Rob Roy Shield.
Here is the Shield for your Trophy Cabinet
(http://imageshack.us/a/img594/5237/170pxmacgregorofmacgreg.png)
No one recognises that I won the award, not the Noz??
Prasing himself and saying the season will remembered for them winning the shield, that the Owls didn't even win haha
#Badgers
Noone cares about you that's why. We are all proud of the Owls!
any objections to starting the draft Thursday night? after the AFL Draft
maybe teams can just pick if they want but rules don't start until 8pm Friday
thoughts everyone?
What are the draft picking rules? 24hours?
Quote from: SydneyRox on November 18, 2013, 04:03:44 PM
What are the draft picking rules? 24hours?
yeah 2 hours if online
Well my profile always says it's online cause my phone is on FF but otherwise I'm never on. Don't use FF on anything worse really so I don't know how that rule will work for me. But I think I should be on during draft time.
Just some clarifications that are in place at the moment
Thursday 21st November
At conclusion of of AFL National Draft we will commence our draft as per final draft order posted.
So basically we can start draft at conclussionof National Draft. Will need to make some announcement concerning draft selections though to fill lists.
Regarding time current rule is
3.5 Coaches have 24 hours offline, or 2 hours online in which to make their selections, after the previous selection is made. This will be enforced by the league administrator and discretion can be used where appropriate.
I am pumped!
Quote from: vinny on November 18, 2013, 04:38:28 PM
Well my profile always says it's online cause my phone is on FF but otherwise I'm never on. Don't use FF on anything worse really so I don't know how that rule will work for me. But I think I should be on during draft time.
It will only say online if a page has been loaded in the last 15 minutes
I'll be in Lorne on Thursday night and will be out having dinner as the 21st is my Gran's birthday.
We (Lobsters) have pick 1 so...
I honestly think it's better to start it midday (EST) on the Friday, gives teams a little time to plan (as where players land could influence picks and I think it's fair for teams to discuss a little should a coach have assistants).
:)
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 06:12:46 PM
I'll be in Lorne on Thursday night and will be out having dinner as the 21st is my Gran's birthday.
We (Lobsters) have pick 1 so...
I honestly think it's better to start it midday (EST) on the Friday, gives teams a little time to plan (as where players land could influence picks and I think it's fair for teams to discuss a little should a coach have assistants).
:)
As you have first Pick start of draft will be in your hands but must be before 8;00pm on Friday.
Quote from: Ringo on November 18, 2013, 06:20:43 PM
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 06:12:46 PM
I'll be in Lorne on Thursday night and will be out having dinner as the 21st is my Gran's birthday.
We (Lobsters) have pick 1 so...
I honestly think it's better to start it midday (EST) on the Friday, gives teams a little time to plan (as where players land could influence picks and I think it's fair for teams to discuss a little should a coach have assistants).
:)
As you have first Pick start of draft will be in your hands but must be before 8;00pm on Friday.
I can guarantee that it will be done by then. Coming back from Lorne on the morning of the 22nd so will pick then. :)
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 06:32:55 PM
Quote from: Ringo on November 18, 2013, 06:20:43 PM
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 06:12:46 PM
I'll be in Lorne on Thursday night and will be out having dinner as the 21st is my Gran's birthday.
We (Lobsters) have pick 1 so...
I honestly think it's better to start it midday (EST) on the Friday, gives teams a little time to plan (as where players land could influence picks and I think it's fair for teams to discuss a little should a coach have assistants).
:)
As you have first Pick start of draft will be in your hands but must be before 8;00pm on Friday.
I can guarantee that it will be done by then. Coming back from Lorne on the morning of the 22nd so will pick then. :)
Do you not know who you are taking yet???
Quote from: SydneyRox on November 18, 2013, 06:55:20 PM
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 06:32:55 PM
Quote from: Ringo on November 18, 2013, 06:20:43 PM
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 06:12:46 PM
I'll be in Lorne on Thursday night and will be out having dinner as the 21st is my Gran's birthday.
We (Lobsters) have pick 1 so...
I honestly think it's better to start it midday (EST) on the Friday, gives teams a little time to plan (as where players land could influence picks and I think it's fair for teams to discuss a little should a coach have assistants).
:)
As you have first Pick start of draft will be in your hands but must be before 8;00pm on Friday.
I can guarantee that it will be done by then. Coming back from Lorne on the morning of the 22nd so will pick then. :)
Do you not know who you are taking yet???
Nope.
Slack Nigel
Quote from: SydneyRox on November 18, 2013, 07:28:59 PM
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 07:26:29 PM
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on November 18, 2013, 07:22:54 PM
Slack Nigel
Just gotta wait for the AFL Draft. ;)
#justgoboyd :o
But I don't want a forward that won't score decently for 3 years and will have to compete with a fellow No.1 draft pick and a guy that just finished runner-up in the 2013 Coleman Medal. :P
So not Boyd? :o
Key fwds don't get rewarded in this, I wouldn't be taking Boyd with 1.
Boyd is a sneaky to slide out of The top 5
I wouldn't take him with pick 1 either
Quote from: elephants on November 18, 2013, 07:37:55 PM
Key fwds don't get rewarded in this, I wouldn't be taking Boyd with 1.
I tend to agree. Unlike the SportsBet comp where I'll probably snap him up with Pick 1.
At least half the players available in the top 20 are much better scorers.
If I need a forward, I'll take one with 44.
I know who I would take with 1 but there is someone I really really hope slips to me :P
Haha neither would I but I thought you were taking Boyd cause that was what we thought when I was at the Lobsters. :P
Quote from: vinny on November 18, 2013, 07:42:18 PM
Haha neither would I but I thought you were taking Boyd cause that was what we thought when I was at the Lobsters. :P
Um... I don't know what you're on about. I never planned to take Boyd... ever. ???
Quote from: NigeyS on August 24, 2013, 04:35:17 PM
Well, I figured that, but you gotta risk it to get the biscuit as they say. :P
Don't forget, we're gonna get big Tommy Boyd ;D
Oh and I was telling vinny before that I was talking to Torp about possibly landing Budweiser. :o
There you are mate :)
Guessing you just want to see who goes to which club before your final decision I prob would to
Quote from: elephants on November 18, 2013, 07:41:08 PM
I know who I would take with 1 but there is someone I really really hope slips to me :P
No eagle bias? :P
Quote from: vinny on November 18, 2013, 07:47:05 PM
Quote from: NigeyS on August 24, 2013, 04:35:17 PM
Well, I figured that, but you gotta risk it to get the biscuit as they say. :P
Don't forget, we're gonna get big Tommy Boyd ;D
Oh and I was telling vinny before that I was talking to Torp about possibly landing Budweiser. :o
There you are mate :)
I legit don't remember this.
It must have been before we didn't have a semi-decent forward line. :P
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on November 18, 2013, 08:45:16 PM
Quote from: elephants on November 18, 2013, 07:41:08 PM
I know who I would take with 1 but there is someone I really really hope slips to me :P
No eagle bias? :P
If the future Eagle slips to 17 I will probably pass out :P
No chance
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on November 18, 2013, 08:49:22 PM
No chance
Never know my man! And besides, I have a few blokes I'd be happy to snap up with 17. A few speculatives and a few guys that will be there for sure.
Quote from: NigeyS on November 18, 2013, 08:46:50 PM
Quote from: vinny on November 18, 2013, 07:47:05 PM
Quote from: NigeyS on August 24, 2013, 04:35:17 PM
Well, I figured that, but you gotta risk it to get the biscuit as they say. :P
Don't forget, we're gonna get big Tommy Boyd ;D
Oh and I was telling vinny before that I was talking to Torp about possibly landing Budweiser. :o
There you are mate :)
I legit don't remember this.
It must have been before we didn't have a semi-decent forward line. :P
Haha true
how do people feel about having the drafts after New Years next year? then we'll know all the players positions and those on our list so we can draft accordingly
Would cut down the second trade period if draft was not completed promptly though. Would probably meaning combining all drafts as well national, Preseason and Rookie. Worth considering and will follow comments with interest, Could work if we set up a live draft but maybe difficult.
Quote from: Ringo on December 06, 2013, 03:51:37 PM
Would cut down the second trade period if draft was not completed promptly though. Would probably meaning combining all drafts as well national, Preseason and Rookie. Worth considering and will follow comments with interest, Could work if we set up a live draft but maybe difficult.
we could not close trading during the drafts only close trading for picks during the drafts
would mean more work for you though but i could help out with the draft thread
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on December 06, 2013, 03:35:45 PM
how do people feel about having the drafts after New Years next year? then we'll know all the players positions and those on our list so we can draft accordingly
I prefer it as is to be honest.
Doesn't the second trade period come after the dpp changes?
You can trade players to cover any dpp losses. Anyone who have more dpp losses than trades left clearly hasn't planned their team well.
Quote from: Memphistopheles on December 06, 2013, 04:59:13 PM
Quote from: kilbluff1985 on December 06, 2013, 03:35:45 PM
how do people feel about having the drafts after New Years next year? then we'll know all the players positions and those on our list so we can draft accordingly
I prefer it as is to be honest.
Doesn't the second trade period come after the dpp changes?
You can trade players to cover any dpp losses. Anyone who have more dpp losses than trades left clearly hasn't planned their team well.
my suggestion isn't really to do with trading though it's still better to know your players positions before drafting then after so you know your team needs and when you draft a player you know there position
also most of us have teams in other leagues so instead of being bored in January when all the other drafts are done we would be doing BXV Drafts
Nek Minnut, all DPP has been leaked
Coaches now that holiday period is coming to an end a couple of further matters for discussion and review.
All these are my views only and open to full discussion:
How do we feel about modifying the VC score by a factor of .5 eg if your VC scores 100 then it becomes 150. Means retaining the deputy VC though should your VC be called to be Captain or VC a late out. Just a thought.
Are you happy with current HGA advantage where lowest scoring player of Home team is doubled for HGA. Are there other options?
I am keen to maintain the 20 Bonus points for updating by 9:00am the day after final match, Do I need to extend this deadline to say midday to allow for those coaches that work at night? Reason for keeping this is it currently provides me with a double check of scores.
There are 3 rounds over 2 weeks this year which currently have a rolling lock out. With the change to emergency and sub rule is it appropriate to continue rolling lock out for these rounds?
We had a number of awards for the year as per this thread:
http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,74754.0.html
Are there any that should be deleted or any that should be added?
Feel free to add comments
i feel the vice captain thing only strengthens the stronger teams i don't really like it
Vice captain 1.5x is good
Not too fussed either way tbh.
Got my options. 8)
Yeah I don't even care haha, lets do it if people wanna!
Quote from: vinny on January 04, 2014, 11:04:33 AM
Yeah I don't even care haha, lets do it if people wanna!
Your team's so shower it won't matter. ;)
#ThanksForTCloke
I am sorry what was that wood spooner? ;)
Cloke is flowering tool, I don't even care!
Quote from: vinny on January 04, 2014, 11:15:48 AM
I am sorry what was that wood spooner? ;)
Cloke is flowering tool, I don't even care!
'wood spooner'... 'is flowering tool'...
Do you even English? :P
I inherited the team champ, it was too late to get it off the bottom.
Won half our games after I took over. ;)
I like the idea of vc x1.5.
i guess i'm not against VC 1.5 just only really helps the strong teams
Quote from: NigeyS on January 04, 2014, 11:24:46 AM
Quote from: vinny on January 04, 2014, 11:15:48 AM
I am sorry what was that wood spooner? ;)
Cloke is flowering tool, I don't even care!
'wood spooner'... 'flowering tool'...
Do you even English? :P
I inherited the team champ, it was too late to get it off the bottom.
Won half our games after I took over. ;)
Shut up Grammar Nazi ;)
Haha you just had to name a team!
Quote from: vinny on January 04, 2014, 11:45:27 AM
Quote from: NigeyS on January 04, 2014, 11:24:46 AM
Quote from: vinny on January 04, 2014, 11:15:48 AM
I am sorry what was that wood spooner? ;)
Cloke is flowering tool, I don't even care!
'wood spooner'... 'flowering tool'...
Do you even English? :P
I inherited the team champ, it was too late to get it off the bottom.
Won half our games after I took over. ;)
Shut up Grammar Nazi ;)
Haha you just had to name a team!
So did the former coach, and you, and the next guy. :P
Actually the previous coach traded, you joined half way so you had no effect and just had to name the team! :P
Quote from: vinny on January 04, 2014, 12:02:58 PM
Actually the previous coach traded, you joined half way so you had no effect and just had to name the team! :P
Not like I could do anything else with like four rounds to go. :P
Quote from: NigeyS on January 04, 2014, 12:17:29 PM
Quote from: vinny on January 04, 2014, 12:02:58 PM
Actually the previous coach traded, you joined half way so you had no effect and just had to name the team! :P
Not like I could do anything else with like four rounds to go. :P
Haha right so it was only four rounds.
Sorry, against the 1.5 Vc rule.
Happy with Hga lowest scoring player twice
Happy with 20 bonus points
Rolling lock out sounds fine for those long rounds
Great stuff ringo
Quote from: Ringo on January 04, 2014, 10:37:46 AM
Coaches now that holiday period is coming to an end a couple of further matters for discussion and review.
All these are my views only and open to full discussion:
How do we feel about modifying the VC score by a factor of .5 eg if your VC scores 100 then it becomes 150. Means retaining the deputy VC though should your VC be called to be Captain or VC a late out. Just a thought.
We do this in AXVS and it is popular however i am neither for or against making the change in British.
Are you happy with current HGA advantage where lowest scoring player of Home team is doubled for HGA. Are there other options?
I think the HGA bonus should be more consistent, your lowest scoring player could score anything from 1 to 70 which makes the HGA vary wildly, this is not realistic, a HGA should be the same week in week out or close enough, so I favour a % of the total score. In saying that having double lowest players score does add another degree of interest to the comp by making you actually care about what your lowest scoring player is likely to score and setting your team with this in mind...
I am keen to maintain the 20 Bonus points for updating by 9:00am the day after final match, Do I need to extend this deadline to say midday to allow for those coaches that work at night? Reason for keeping this is it currently provides me with a double check of scores.
Happy with the 20 point bonus, though I have never missed out on it I would not like to lose a game because of it, i think the time you allow for score updates is more than fair.
There are 3 rounds over 2 weeks this year which currently have a rolling lock out. With the change to emergency and sub rule is it appropriate to continue rolling lock out for these rounds?
Unsure on this one, need it explained to me better :)
We had a number of awards for the year as per this thread:
http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,74754.0.html
Are there any that should be deleted or any that should be added?
Will look into this and give feedback, love what you have done so far tho.
Feel free to add comments
The HGA is good how it is ... 4 clubs share the MCG ..4 clubs share Etihad
Sometimes you get a crap score for your HGA which is realistic imo.
example: Collingwood play Hawthorn at the MCG .. HGA ? not really
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 04, 2014, 06:55:29 PM
The HGA is good how it is ... 4 clubs share the MCG ..4 clubs share Etihad
Sometimes you get a crap score for your HGA which is realistic imo.
example: Collingwood play Hawthorn at the MCG .. HGA ? not really
Good point FF.
With the mini contoversy the sub rule has caused thoughts on no Partial rolling lock outs at all.
What this means is all teams are locked at the first bounce of the round and for those few rounds that are over 2 weeks including byes no adjustment allowed in second week. We have no rule set regarding Partial lock outs so seriously considering this rule as a disincentive to those thinking of rorting the sub rule. With 4 emergencies one for each line should be no reason to have the partial lock outs.
Sounds good to me
Yeah doesn't worry me!
I dont think anyone should have players starting for them that are in sub contention in the AFL :P
No partial imo, once its in, it in. People have things to do on weekends... Like SC haha.