Hi all,
A place for everbody to post any changes they would like to see happen, any concerns, or anything at all.
Your idea maybe put up for a vote!
Topics include:
- Substitute rules
- Home Ground advantage
- Membership points
Anything at all...
So...
go...
Home Ground Advantage idea still good to go? The one where it is multiplied by so much?
I am still a fan of that, substitute rule would be cool. Maybe only half of the substitutes score should count, as it should be primarily used in case there are early injuries or incredibly poor performances?
Still not a fan of the membership points.
Yeah, I know it was said that the influence is going to be minimal, but there are/were teams that care about it a lot more than others.
Not fussed about the rest. :P
What's the idea for the HGA?
As for substitute I don't mind the idea for a rule to be put into place. Would the substitute be the guy we name on our second IC spot, or just a 16th player that only counts a % of his score if one of our XV is subbed off?
Not a fan of the Membership points either. Interested to see this substitute rule though
Yeah I've always thought membership points were unnecessary.
Not a fan of the membership points either. Some coaches have a lot of time to put into it where some others due to Personal commitments do not.
HGA still favour doubling the lowest score for the Home team. Either way think there were very few results that swung on HGA over the year,
Substitute rule - This is the option that I would prefer nominate one of the emergencies as a sub and if any of your players are either subbed off or the initial sub and your nominated sub scores more than the player subbed then your nominated sub player score is taken. Needles to say will only apply if the nominated sub not required as an emergency replacement for late outs.
Well, isn't the excuse of "some coaches can't put time into their teams" their fault because they have more than one team? Obviously their are some real-life stuff that interferes, but is updating your team every day that hard? You rack up the points hence advantage very easily.
I bet myself, CF and other sole coaches without other teams are on the top of the tally.
I don't mind updating teams and that kind of thing but I find the membership poll very hard to do much with tbh
The membership poll is only a miniscule way on how you can earn membership points though
Quote from: Purple 77 on December 16, 2013, 04:57:51 PM
Well, isn't the excuse of "some coaches can't put time into their teams" their fault because they have more than one team? Obviously their are some real-life stuff that interferes, but is updating your team every day that hard? You rack up the points hence advantage very easily.
I bet myself, CF and other sole coaches without other teams are on the top of the tally.
Yeah I guess that's true mate. But Ringo's case is different. He runs an entire other comp by himself, that takes plenty.
Quote from: Purple 77 on December 16, 2013, 04:57:51 PM
Well, isn't the excuse of "some coaches can't put time into their teams" their fault because they have more than one team? Obviously their are some real-life stuff that interferes, but is updating your team every day that hard? You rack up the points hence advantage very easily.
I bet myself, CF and other sole coaches without other teams are on the top of the tally.
Yea but some of us cant do graphics which get you big points.
Not a fan of membership points at all.
Quote from: vinny on December 16, 2013, 05:09:37 PM
Quote from: Purple 77 on December 16, 2013, 04:57:51 PM
Well, isn't the excuse of "some coaches can't put time into their teams" their fault because they have more than one team? Obviously their are some real-life stuff that interferes, but is updating your team every day that hard? You rack up the points hence advantage very easily.
I bet myself, CF and other sole coaches without other teams are on the top of the tally.
Yeah I guess that's true mate. But Ringo's case is different. He runs an entire other comp by himself, that takes plenty.
This is true, and occurred to me when I posted that. Would be hard undoubtedly, but there are ways to at least keep up, like posting your team before Friday, updating team scores once each day on Friday-Sunday, and, if there is time, having a game review once in a while. If anyone did this, they would keep up and even overtake other clubs.
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on December 16, 2013, 05:11:59 PM
Yea but some of us cant do graphics which get you big points.
Not a fan of membership points at all.
There are plentiful other ways to get points, and a certain type of Graphics, like for a team squad, only gets you 5 points extra once, not every week.
Just saying there are heaps of ways to get them.
Don't like membership points either.
Quote from: Purple 77 on December 16, 2013, 05:13:37 PM
Quote from: vinny on December 16, 2013, 05:09:37 PM
Quote from: Purple 77 on December 16, 2013, 04:57:51 PM
Well, isn't the excuse of "some coaches can't put time into their teams" their fault because they have more than one team? Obviously their are some real-life stuff that interferes, but is updating your team every day that hard? You rack up the points hence advantage very easily.
I bet myself, CF and other sole coaches without other teams are on the top of the tally.
Yeah I guess that's true mate. But Ringo's case is different. He runs an entire other comp by himself, that takes plenty.
This is true, and occurred to me when I posted that. Would be hard undoubtedly, but there are ways to at least keep up, like posting your team before Friday, updating team scores once each day on Friday-Sunday, and, if there is time, having a game review once in a while. If anyone did this, they would keep up and even overtake other clubs.
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on December 16, 2013, 05:11:59 PM
Yea but some of us cant do graphics which get you big points.
Not a fan of membership points at all.
There are plentiful other ways to get points, and a certain type of Graphics, like for a team squad, only gets you 5 points extra once, not every week.
Just saying there are heaps of ways to get them.
Know that Purps and I always manage to update thread (most weeks) and lodge teams but do not have the time for Graphics etc that others do. That is the point I am making as to why I am not 100% in favour. Do not mind bonuses being given for points but just think it needs to be level for all. A few things for these points are a little uneven imo. eg Points for the first to lodge each week some are working when it opens and do not have the chance to take advantage. Just one I am quoting.
Maybe needs a revamp slightly to ensure fairness to all.
Can always get an assistant to do some of the things like graphics or match reviews if you don't have time.
Quote from: CrowsFan on December 16, 2013, 05:38:28 PM
Can always get an assistant to do some of the things like graphics or match reviews if you don't have time.
pity there is no banter points or I would be up there. I do alot of trade reports and stuff like that. not really liking the member points but its out there so its kind of unfair to remove it.
Rightio...
Not much activity in this thread..
Unfortunately it looks like the membership points idea isn't going to fly. I'd much rather have the support of the league than force something on people (particularly as it required a bit of extra work also).
Cheers for the contributions everyone!
Not much love on a substitute rule either, so maybe next year (I'm not a huge fan of that one either).
i did all that work for nothing? :(
Regarding the sub rule and maybe not the right name but how about we change our emergencies to 4 with one to cover each line. Not sure whether all in favour of this so will put it out there as well.
Pros: An emergency for each line to cover late outs.
Cons: Removes the right of coaches to name more than one emergency form say mids. DPP players may assist though.
^ not a huge fan of that one sorry Ringo.
The 'interchange' basically acts as a 4th and 5th emergency as it is. Plus it probably benefits the team with more midfielders.
Was just a thought though to save OOP but happy with what ever is decided,
So... nobody panic... I'm just mentioning some ideas for maybe 2015.... Well, even 2014 if people are really keen.
I was wondering how we could bring some more tactics/coaching into this game... Some ideas I've been thinking of:
- 'Resting' players. Each week, if you want, you can choose one player to 'rest'. (Excluding finals)
This player can't play that week (but must play an AFL game), and the week after they score with a 10% bonus. Example, Buenos Aires rest Dane Swan against Beijing in Round 2. In round 3, Swan scores 110 points, plus a bonus 10%, equal 121. I like this idea as I think it has the combined impact of risk and giving the weaker teams a greater chance of victory.
- 'Bank' a players score. Bank a player's score this round, for next round instead. (Excluding finals)
For example, Sam Mitchell is taking on Creepy Crowley in the AFL in Round 12. You want his score in Round 11 to count for him. So you choose to rest Mitchell for Round 11 (before he plays), and have his score count in Round 12 instead. This again adds an element of tactics and risk.
- 'Gamble' on a players performance for a round. Bet on one player bettering there projected score from the SC website. (Excluding finals)
Dayne Beams is projected to get 110 on the SC website. You think he can do better than that. You gamble on him to do that - win the gamble, and get an extra 40 points, lose the gamble and lose 40 points.
- 'Co-Captains' - not sure on who to select as Captain this week? Pick both! (Including finals)
Tossing up between Jack Steven and Nat Fyfe as a captain this week? Choose both! Each get 1.5 times there score, and if one doesn't play, the other gets regular captain bonus (2 times score). So no need for a Vice.
- 'Substitute' - Any player subbed (green sub or red sub in first half), is replaced with an emergency (including finals).
A risky proposition if you choose to use it! Great if a player doesn't get on the field until the 4th quarter or is injured after 2 minutes, terrible if they score 100+ as the green sub.... If an emergency is also a sub, the original player in the XV stays.
- 'Flood' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'flood' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 5 defenders and 3 forwards. Instead of 4 defenders and 4 forwards.
- 'Attack' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'attack' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 3 defenders and 5 forwards. Instead of 4 defenders and 4 forwards.
- 'Go Tall' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'Go Tall' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 2 rucks and 3 midfielders, instead of 1 ruck and 4 midfielders.
- 'Go Small' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'Go small' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 5 midfielders, and no specialist ruck, instead of 1 ruck and 4 midfielders.
These are certainly interesting!
I like a few, don't like some others.
The co-captain and positional strategies are cool, not so much a fan of the rest.
That's my two cents.
Like most of them Oss!
Really dislike the 'Gamble' one though. SC predicted scores are often terribly wayward. Just not really a fan of it.
Especially a fan of the co-captains though.
Nice Oss, some cool ideas
I Like
- Resting' players. Each week, if you want, you can choose one player to 'rest'. (Excluding finals)
- 'Co-Captains' - not sure on who to select as Captain this week? Pick both! (Including finals)
- 'Substitute' - Any player subbed (green sub or red sub in first half), is replaced with an emergency (including finals).
Don't really like
- 'Bank' a players score. Bank a player's score this round, for next round instead. (Excluding finals)
- 'Gamble' on a players performance for a round. Bet on one player bettering there projected score from the SC website. (Excluding finals)
- 'Flood' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'flood' strategy. (Excluding finals)
- 'Attack' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'attack' strategy. (Excluding finals)
- 'Go Tall' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'Go Tall' strategy. (Excluding finals)
- 'Go Small' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'Go small' strategy. (Excluding finals)
Nice Oz, very good ideas! I like the 'resting', 'co-captains' and 'substitute' rules as I think they will really improve the way the game is played.
As for the position changes I also think this is a pretty cool concept but I'm just wondering does it make the 'interchange' position a bit unnecessary though? For example, the 'Go Tall' strategy, Beijing will most likely be using two ruck men a week (Kreuzer named on the ball, Grundy on the interchange) so not sure the rule is really necessary. Probably wouldn't hurt to add the rule but yeah, not sure if it's necessary!
Cool concepts!
I would like to see co captains and the sub rule trialled this year Oss. Not a big change so we can see how it goes and then decide to keep or scrap for next year,
Need to do a lot more analysis on others especially the 4 strategies and how they will work. Especially if opposing team is also going the same strategy. Just needs some work to sort these out and to whether they can work in our competition.
Bank and resting may be feasible but not a real fan
Gamble I think should be discarded as the predicted SC scores are a lottery imo anyway.
My initial thoughts,
Interesting idea ossie, the co captain idea is ok.
Not a massive fan of the position changes and gamble though.
Good stuff though, some of the other ideas could be implemented.
Quote from: Toga on February 18, 2014, 02:24:16 PM
As for the position changes I also think this is a pretty cool concept but I'm just wondering does it make the 'interchange' position a bit unnecessary though? For example, the 'Go Tall' strategy, Beijing will most likely be using two ruck men a week (Kreuzer named on the ball, Grundy on the interchange) so not sure the rule is really necessary. Probably wouldn't hurt to add the rule but yeah, not sure if it's necessary!
Interchange is a good point Toga, these position strategies in my mind are for:
- people who want to take that extra advantage against an opponent they think will be close
- people, who for a series of unlucky events, find themselves short in a position (multiple injuries/suspensions happening at once)
Positive response, what I think I'll do is send all these ideas for a vote and see where we end up.
Love em all other than gamble and bank!
Quote from: ossie85 on February 18, 2014, 02:53:52 PM
Interchange is a good point Toga, these position strategies in my mind are for:
- people who want to take that extra advantage against an opponent they think will be close
- people, who for a series of unlucky events, find themselves short in a position (multiple injuries/suspensions happening at once)
Positive response, what I think I'll do is send all these ideas for a vote and see where we end up.
Good points Oz, I think the OOP argument is probably strong enough for the positional ideas to work then. ;)
Quote from: ossie85 on February 18, 2014, 01:17:51 PM
So... nobody panic... I'm just mentioning some ideas for maybe 2015.... Well, even 2014 if people are really keen.
I was wondering how we could bring some more tactics/coaching into this game... Some ideas I've been thinking of:
- 'Resting' players. Each week, if you want, you can choose one player to 'rest'. (Excluding finals)
This player can't play that week (but must play an AFL game), and the week after they score with a 10% bonus. Example, Buenos Aires rest Dane Swan against Beijing in Round 2. In round 3, Swan scores 110 points, plus a bonus 10%, equal 121. I like this idea as I think it has the combined impact of risk and giving the weaker teams a greater chance of victory.
- 'Bank' a players score. Bank a player's score this round, for next round instead. (Excluding finals)
For example, Sam Mitchell is taking on Creepy Crowley in the AFL in Round 12. You want his score in Round 11 to count for him. So you choose to rest Mitchell for Round 11 (before he plays), and have his score count in Round 12 instead. This again adds an element of tactics and risk.
- 'Gamble' on a players performance for a round. Bet on one player bettering there projected score from the SC website. (Excluding finals)
Dayne Beams is projected to get 110 on the SC website. You think he can do better than that. You gamble on him to do that - win the gamble, and get an extra 40 points, lose the gamble and lose 40 points.
- 'Co-Captains' - not sure on who to select as Captain this week? Pick both! (Including finals)
Tossing up between Jack Steven and Nat Fyfe as a captain this week? Choose both! Each get 1.5 times there score, and if one doesn't play, the other gets regular captain bonus (2 times score). So no need for a Vice.
- 'Substitute' - Any player subbed (green sub or red sub in first half), is replaced with an emergency (including finals).
A risky proposition if you choose to use it! Great if a player doesn't get on the field until the 4th quarter or is injured after 2 minutes, terrible if they score 100+ as the green sub.... If an emergency is also a sub, the original player in the XV stays.
- 'Flood' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'flood' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 5 defenders and 3 forwards. Instead of 4 defenders and 4 forwards.
- 'Attack' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'attack' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 3 defenders and 5 forwards. Instead of 4 defenders and 4 forwards.
- 'Go Tall' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'Go Tall' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 2 rucks and 3 midfielders, instead of 1 ruck and 4 midfielders.
- 'Go Small' - 3 times a year, you can use your 'Go small' strategy. (Excluding finals)
You can name 5 midfielders, and no specialist ruck, instead of 1 ruck and 4 midfielders.
Not a fan of resting, bank, and gamble but the rest I like. Especially the positional strategies.
Ok here's my opinions on the different suggestions...
Resting
I like it in theory, but in reality I just don't see it working properly. Stronger teams will be able to 'rest' a player against a weak team if they are then playing a strong team the following week, but weak teams can't really do this, which just widens the gap between the best and the worst. Considering you are meant to be aiming to win every game a strong team would have the capability to win against a weak team even with 'resting' a player, but doesn't really work for the weak teams. Obviously they would like to have a player 'rested' when they come up against a similar rating side, but that means leaving their best player out against a strong team the week before, and couldn't you really construe that as a form of tanking? Since they're not playing the side most capable of getting a win?
Bank
I'm not a fan of this at all. Who a player is facing off against each week is just luck of the draw. Messing around to say that a players round 10 score can count in round 11 isn't right in my opinion.
Gamble
Agree with others that this rule is not good. As they have said the SC projections are usually so random. Getting bonus points for a 50/50 guess isn't a good thing.
Co-captains
I'm not opposed to this, but that's mainly because if you choose the correct sole captain you are going to score more than picking co-captains, therefore you're not actually getting an advantage over the other team by picking 2. I'm not a fan of getting bonus points as you can see with my opinions on bank and gamble, but this doesn't give you bonus points so it's fine by me.
Substitute
I like this rule. Imagine losing the grand final because you lost a player in the first minute of the match. I'm assuming though the sub has to be of the same position as the player he replaces?
Flood & Attack
Don't mind these rules, think they can work well if used right. Obviously helps counter problems when you only have 3 players named in a position for that round.
Go Small or Tall
I don't like these ones however. Basically I don't think a team should be able to go in to a game without naming a ruckman. If that happened in the AFL the team would get decimated at the stoppages. Since this is meant to be realistic the same thought goes here. Obviously if a team doesn't have a ruck named for them they have to play a guy OOP, resulting in a loss in points, which reflects how they would go without a ruck playing.
Anyway they are my thoughts on the issues. Resting, Co-captain, Sub and Flood/Attack are not bad and deserve some more discussion, the others I don't think should go ahead.
I like:
Resting, Co-Captains, Substitute
I don't like:
Bank, Gamble, Positional Strategies
I sort of think half the challenge and half of what makes a good team is being able to play 4,4,1,4,2. It means that in their recruiting methods, they saw what positions need addressing and what positions could be traded out. If you end up not having 4 (quality) forwards or 4 (quality) defenders most weeks, then, well, you should suffer the consequences for bad preparation. I know injuries are an exception for this, which is why I would settle for Flood or Attack strategies, provided you only have 3 forwards/defenders available to play.
Think I like the Substitute rule the best.
Seems like we are pretty much on the same wavelength purps. Agree that the flood/attack should only be allowed if you can't name 4 players in that position. If you can then you must name them
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 18, 2014, 04:29:57 PM
Resting
I like it in theory, but in reality I just don't see it working properly. Stronger teams will be able to 'rest' a player against a weak team if they are then playing a strong team the following week, but weak teams can't really do this, which just widens the gap between the best and the worst. Considering you are meant to be aiming to win every game a strong team would have the capability to win against a weak team even with 'resting' a player, but doesn't really work for the weak teams. Obviously they would like to have a player 'rested' when they come up against a similar rating side, but that means leaving their best player out against a strong team the week before, and couldn't you really construe that as a form of tanking? Since they're not playing the side most capable of getting a win?
But that's the point I think HB, if a strong team chooses to rest a gun against Beijing/NDT/whoever, that gives us more of a chance of pulling off an upset! ;)
Quote from: Toga on February 18, 2014, 05:34:06 PM
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 18, 2014, 04:29:57 PM
Resting
I like it in theory, but in reality I just don't see it working properly. Stronger teams will be able to 'rest' a player against a weak team if they are then playing a strong team the following week, but weak teams can't really do this, which just widens the gap between the best and the worst. Considering you are meant to be aiming to win every game a strong team would have the capability to win against a weak team even with 'resting' a player, but doesn't really work for the weak teams. Obviously they would like to have a player 'rested' when they come up against a similar rating side, but that means leaving their best player out against a strong team the week before, and couldn't you really construe that as a form of tanking? Since they're not playing the side most capable of getting a win?
But that's the point I think HB, if a strong team chooses to rest a gun against Beijing/NDT/whoever, that gives us more of a chance of pulling off an upset! ;)
Yeah but at the same time you're more likely to rest against the strong team so you get an advantage the following week. Effectively tanking that game and giving the strong team the win even though they rest a player
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 18, 2014, 05:38:11 PM
Quote from: Toga on February 18, 2014, 05:34:06 PM
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 18, 2014, 04:29:57 PM
Resting
I like it in theory, but in reality I just don't see it working properly. Stronger teams will be able to 'rest' a player against a weak team if they are then playing a strong team the following week, but weak teams can't really do this, which just widens the gap between the best and the worst. Considering you are meant to be aiming to win every game a strong team would have the capability to win against a weak team even with 'resting' a player, but doesn't really work for the weak teams. Obviously they would like to have a player 'rested' when they come up against a similar rating side, but that means leaving their best player out against a strong team the week before, and couldn't you really construe that as a form of tanking? Since they're not playing the side most capable of getting a win?
But that's the point I think HB, if a strong team chooses to rest a gun against Beijing/NDT/whoever, that gives us more of a chance of pulling off an upset! ;)
Yeah but at the same time you're more likely to rest against the strong team so you get an advantage the following week. Effectively tanking that game and giving the strong team the win even though they rest a player
Oh no... not the 'T' word! :o
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 18, 2014, 05:38:11 PM
Yeah but at the same time you're more likely to rest against the strong team so you get an advantage the following week. Effectively tanking that game and giving the strong team the win even though they rest a player
To be honest when I said I was a fan of the resting rule I didn't even think about any of us weaker teams using it all that much, more of a weapon for the competition's big dogs.
Mega coach Q here.
Say Thunder are playing Dublin followed by a mid table team, idk say PNL.... Realistically very unlikely we will win the game vs Dublin, so we rest our guns, and then we have a massive boost against PNL the following week.
Do you encourage this tactic Os?
Quote from: Master Q on February 18, 2014, 08:36:48 PM
Mega coach Q here.
Say Thunder are playing Dublin followed by a mid table team, idk say PNL.... Realistically very unlikely we will win the game vs Dublin, so we rest our guns, and then we have a massive boost against PNL the following week.
Do you encourage this tactic Os?
You only can rest 1 player. Its a calculated risk, which would be in the rules, but I wouldnt encourage any particular tactic but I do encourage tactics.
Email sent to everyone asking for a vote - only the 6 replies so far, but early days.
Obviously no rules have been approved or rejected yet, but its pretty clear for some which will eventually be approved/rejected already.
In regards to:
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 18, 2014, 04:29:57 PM
Resting
Stronger teams will be able to 'rest' a player against a weak team if they are then playing a strong team the following week, but weak teams can't really do this, which just widens the gap between the best and the worst. Considering you are meant to be aiming to win every game a strong team would have the capability to win against a weak team even with 'resting' a player, but doesn't really work for the weak teams. Obviously they would like to have a player 'rested' when they come up against a similar rating side, but that means leaving their best player out against a strong team the week before, and couldn't you really construe that as a form of tanking? Since they're not playing the side most capable of getting a win?
That's the way I see it working - strong teams resting players against weak teams. I see that lessening the gap between weak and strong teams, not widening it.
You are correct weak teams can't really do this - but as Q points out, weak teams can still rest players against strong teams, but if that increases there likelihood of winning the next week against another weaker team, I don't see that as tanking.
In my mind, tanking is done when people are trying to take advantage of drafts/other rules and basically not trying to win. Yes, you're right this could lead to teams tactically being weaker for certain games, but they would then be tactically stronger for the next game...
In AFL, say Hawthorn resting players against GWS wouldn't be seen as tanking. Or the Gold Coast not risking Gary Ablett for certain games also not seen as tanking (in my opinion, Ross Lyon's tactic of resting half his team on the eve of finals should be seen as tanking, but that's an extreme)
We've had 9 of 18 coaches vote so far....
And one rule has an impressive 9/9 record, and I'm not gonna vote against it, so it gets approved!
From 2014 - CO-CAPTAINS will occur!
10 coaches have voted, and the Substitute rule now has a 9-1 record - enough to get it approved!
More detail on Substitute rule:
- Coaches choose before the round starts whether they want to use it or not.
- If they use it, any player who starts with a green vest, or is red vested in the first half, will be replaced by an emergency.
- Standard emergency rules apply, and can only be replaced by an emergency in the same position.
- If no suitable emergency is available, instead of having a player OOP, the player WILL NOT be substituted and the sub score stands. (Heath Shaw is red vested in first half, but you don't have an interchange/emergency to replace him in defense, so his score stands)
- If an emergency is also subbed, they won't come in as a sub
- A substituted player will have its score counted towards the Reserve team.
Quote from: ossie85 on February 22, 2014, 08:33:09 AM
10 coaches have voted, and the Substitute rule now has a 9-1 record - enough to get it approved!
More detail on Substitute rule:
- Coaches choose before the round starts whether they want to use it or not.
- If they use it, any player who starts with a green vest, or is red vested in the first half, will be replaced by an emergency.
- Standard emergency rules apply, and can only be replaced by an emergency in the same position.
- If no suitable emergency is available, instead of having a player OOP, the player WILL NOT be substituted and the sub score stands. (Heath Shaw is red vested in first half, but you don't have an interchange/emergency to replace him in defense, so his score stands)
- A substituted player will have its score counted towards the Reserve team.
so what do you get for not using it?
just you wrote coaches "can" choose but i mean if there is no disadvantages to using it of coursecoaches will use every round
There are some risks involved!
No guarantee the player you sub out won't score more than the emergency....
A green sub could come on after 5 minutes and score 100+
Quote from: ossie85 on February 22, 2014, 09:10:30 AM
There are some risks involved!
No guarantee the player you sub out won't score more than the emergency....
A green sub could come on after 5 minutes and score 100+
ahh true
like say for PNL Enright was subbed off at 3 qtr time on saturday so we play Mcpharlin instead and he gets injured in first qtr and subbed on on sunday that is the risk as well
Quote from: DazBurg on February 22, 2014, 09:18:30 AM
Quote from: ossie85 on February 22, 2014, 09:10:30 AM
There are some risks involved!
No guarantee the player you sub out won't score more than the emergency....
A green sub could come on after 5 minutes and score 100+
ahh true
like say for PNL Enright was subbed off at 3 qtr time on saturday so we play Mcpharlin instead and he gets injured in first qtr and subbed on on sunday that is the risk as well
McPharlin would only come on if Enright was subbed off in the first half daz :)
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 22, 2014, 09:24:26 AM
Quote from: DazBurg on February 22, 2014, 09:18:30 AM
Quote from: ossie85 on February 22, 2014, 09:10:30 AM
There are some risks involved!
No guarantee the player you sub out won't score more than the emergency....
A green sub could come on after 5 minutes and score 100+
ahh true
like say for PNL Enright was subbed off at 3 qtr time on saturday so we play Mcpharlin instead and he gets injured in first qtr and subbed on on sunday that is the risk as well
McPharlin would only come on if Enright was subbed off in the first half daz :)
ahh ok yeah sorry my bad
bt you get what i was going for ;)
Quote from: DazBurg on February 22, 2014, 09:18:30 AM
Quote from: ossie85 on February 22, 2014, 09:10:30 AM
There are some risks involved!
No guarantee the player you sub out won't score more than the emergency....
A green sub could come on after 5 minutes and score 100+
ahh true
like say for PNL Enright was subbed off at 3 qtr time on saturday so we play Mcpharlin instead and he gets injured in first qtr and subbed on on sunday that is the risk as well
^ HB's point about after half time...
But McPharlin wouldn't be subbed on if he himself is also subbed, you'd be stuck with Enright if you had no other option
What happens if before the round you choose to use it, but then nobody in your XV is Green or Red vested? Does this mean the sub rule doesn't come into effect in this case? Because hard to decide before the round if anybody will even be the sub/subbed.
Quote from: Hellopplz on February 22, 2014, 07:19:34 PM
What happens if before the round you choose to use it, but then nobody in your XV is Green or Red vested? Does this mean the sub rule doesn't come into effect in this case? Because hard to decide before the round if anybody will even be the sub/subbed.
That's right, only used if needed
With 11 of 18 coaches voted...
3 rules (all with a current 1-10 record) have been voted against:
- Bank
- Gamble
- Go Tall
.... WILL NOT be happening.
With 7 votes to come (Master Q/Toga, Jayman/tbagrocks, Nails, JBs-Hawks, pothead, pyronerd, roo boys!), only these rules are in limbo:
- Rest
- Flood
- Attack
- Go Small
Voting closes 11:59pm Wednesday
After 12 votes...
"Go Small" now fails with a 2-10 record
Resting, Flood, Attack still in limbo
Last day to vote....
Haven't voted:
Master Q/Toga
Jayman/tbagrocks
Nails
pothead
pyronerd
roo boys!
Just thought of a concern regarding the resting rule.
Since the top clubs are also playing in the Champions League we can't really choose to rest a player against a weaker team since we then go in with a weaker team against a club from one of the other leagues and risk losing that match. This will then affect all the clubs later in the season when the WC is played...
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 26, 2014, 05:39:23 PM
Just thought of a concern regarding the resting rule.
Since the top clubs are also playing in the Champions League we can't really choose to rest a player against a weaker team since we then go in with a weaker team against a club from one of the other leagues and risk losing that match. This will then affect all the clubs later in the season when the WC is played...
Oh shower, good point.
Also very slack of the coaches who haven't voted yet. Especially those teams who have 2 coaches...
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 26, 2014, 08:13:19 PM
Also very slack of the coaches who haven't voted yet. Especially those teams who have 2 coaches...
Beijing have now voted, but IMO having two coaches makes it harder as I prefer to communicate with Q before sending in our votes and sometimes it can take a while!
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 26, 2014, 05:39:23 PM
Just thought of a concern regarding the resting rule.
Since the top clubs are also playing in the Champions League we can't really choose to rest a player against a weaker team since we then go in with a weaker team against a club from one of the other leagues and risk losing that match. This will then affect all the clubs later in the season when the WC is played...
thinking either i just take the scores as they stand without the sub or possibly just keep it and clubs will need to decide if they want to go hard for the champs/world cup. Just like in the soccer some teams rest players in the champsions league etc.. and go for the league title.
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2014, 06:12:00 AM
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 26, 2014, 05:39:23 PM
Just thought of a concern regarding the resting rule.
Since the top clubs are also playing in the Champions League we can't really choose to rest a player against a weaker team since we then go in with a weaker team against a club from one of the other leagues and risk losing that match. This will then affect all the clubs later in the season when the WC is played...
thinking either i just take the scores as they stand without the sub or possibly just keep it and clubs will need to decide if they want to go hard for the champs/world cup. Just like in the soccer some teams rest players in the champsions league etc.. and go for the league title.
^ if Buenos Aires rest Dane Swan, he should nominate the player that is coming in for him.
His Champions League score is then calculated as if Dane Swan is playing.
The next week, the 10% bonus is removed?
Fair?
Nah it should just be the risk the top teams take
^ we can discuss the above more, but official results!
14 coaches votes (with Pacific, Buenos Aires, New York and Toronto not voting).
Resting
Approved. 8-6
Some details to smooth out with how Champions League scores are calculated. But basically, it will be:
- Is completely optional
- A player nominates which player (only one per week) they would like to rest.
- This player MUST play AFL that week.
- You can't rest a player if you can't field a team. If you don't have anymore emergencies to complete a team during the round, the rested player will be the next person in at QUARTER points and they will no longer be rested.
- For purposes of my processing, a Rested player's score WILL count in the Reserves.
- The rested player MUST play the next round (avoids coaches 'resting' players not in best XV).
Bank
Failed. 2-12
Gamble
Failed. 2-12
Co-Captains
Approved. 14-0
You have the option of either:
- Picking a Captain and Vice-Captain as per normal
- Picking 2 Co-Captains, no Vice-Captain
If picking Co-Captains, each captain's score is multipled by 1.5 (rounded up). If one Co-Captain doesn't play, the other Co-Captain acts as the sole captain and has the score multipled by 2.
Substitute
Approved. 13-1
Coaches choose before the round starts whether they want to use it or not.
If they use it, any player who starts with a green vest, or is red vested in the first half, will be replaced by an emergency. This can happen for up to 3 players.
Standard emergency rules apply, and can only be replaced by an emergency in the same position.
If no suitable emergency is available, instead of having a player OOP, the player WILL NOT be substituted and the sub score stands. (Heath Shaw is red vested in first half, but you don't have an interchange/emergency to replace him in defense, so his score stands)
A substituted player will have its score counted towards the Reserve team.
Flood
Approved. 9-5
The coach nominates when they submit the team if they want to use the 'Flood' strategy (3 forwards, 5 defenders). This can only be used 3 times a year, and can only be used if they have 5 defenders named in AFL team sheets.
Attack
Approved. 9-5
The coach nominates when they submit the team if they want to use the 'Attack' strategy (5 forwards, 3 defenders). This can only be used 3 times a year, and can only be used if they have 5 forwards named in AFL team sheets.
Go Tall
Fail. 3-11
Go Small
Fail. 4-10
Happy to discuss....
Disappointed about Flood and Attack. I'm all for it if you only have 3 forwards (or defenders) available, but if you have 6 forwards and 6 defenders ready to go, and you chose one of the options because it makes you stronger, then IMO it goes against one of the main key attributes of the WXVs, the structure (obviously). Everything you plan for is ultimately linked to the 4-4-1-4-2 structure, I think a lot of the fun is in trading so that you make sure you have those 4 defenders and 4 forwards available to play, and exciting (in a dreadful fun sort of way) if you have to play John Butcher as a F4 along with 14 capable players, because he was the only available.
But majority rules, and that's completely fair. I get the feeling that most will use it because of limited available players anyway.
All looks good I think Oz! :)
Purps, I get what you mean, but I assume that because the Flood/Attack strategies have now been approved there will be a chance for us to re-evaluate them at some point in the next 12 months if people find we don't like it?
Quote from: Toga on February 27, 2014, 09:11:42 AM
All looks good I think Oz! :)
Purps, I get what you mean, but I assume that because the Flood/Attack strategies have now been approved there will be a chance for us to re-evaluate them at some point in the next 12 months if people find we don't like it?
^ sounds like a good plan to re-evaluate.
Agree to an extent with what purps is saying but am I correct in saying will only be allowed 3 times per year so these strategies will be exception rather than norm. When to use them however will be the strategy in itself.
Just for clarification now all changes now to apply for this season.
Quote from: Ringo on February 27, 2014, 10:20:35 AM
Agree to an extent with what purps is saying but am I correct in saying will only be allowed 3 times per year so these strategies will be exception rather than norm. When to use them however will be the strategy in itself.
Just for clarification now all changes now to apply for this season.
Yep, live and kicking.
Will let our Preseason Grand Finalists test them out first :P
Not a fan of the flood or attack but will be interesting to see how people use it.
I'm going to do it every week basically with watts,
Kind or reduces the value of F/B players. Which were going for a premium for this reason.
Quote from: Holzman on February 27, 2014, 10:52:08 AM
I'm going to do it every week basically with watts,
.... You can only do it 3 times a year.
And the Watts thing might not make sense?
If you have D D D and F F F F Watts, why wouldn't you play D D D Watts and F F F F?
I think he was just saying he was going to swap Watts between forward and defense each week depending on where a 4th player was needed.
Quote from: Purple 77 on February 27, 2014, 08:54:38 AM
Disappointed about Flood and Attack. I'm all for it if you only have 3 forwards (or defenders) available, but if you have 6 forwards and 6 defenders ready to go, and you chose one of the options because it makes you stronger, then IMO it goes against one of the main key attributes of the WXVs, the structure (obviously). Everything you plan for is ultimately linked to the 4-4-1-4-2 structure, I think a lot of the fun is in trading so that you make sure you have those 4 defenders and 4 forwards available to play, and exciting (in a dreadful fun sort of way) if you have to play John Butcher as a F4 along with 14 capable players, because he was the only available.
But majority rules, and that's completely fair. I get the feeling that most will use it because of limited available players anyway.
This was my line of thinking irt the team structures too.
Another question regarding the resting rule ossie...
Say I rest somebody one week then bring him back in and name him captain the following week. Does that 10% bonus include the captaincy or is it done separately? For example I rest Ablett then the following week he is captain and scores 120. Would his final score be 264 (bonus included) or 252 (bonus excluded)?
252
All bonus/penalties applied independently
Yeah that's what I figured. Thanks :)
Currently reconfiguring my spreadsheet....
These are my 'current' multipliers...
C 2
CC 1.5
CCH 2.5
CCHR 2.6
CCR 1.6
CH 3
CHR 3.1
H 2
HR 2.1
L 0.25
LH 1.25
P 0.5
PH 1.5
R 1.1
Reckon some would be able to work those out just from that...
Captain
Co-captain
Co-captain + Home Ground Advantage
Co-captain + HGA + Rested
Co-cpatiain + Rested
Captain + HGA
Captain + HGA + Rested
HGA
HGA + Rested
Late inclusion (not from emergency list)
Late inclusion + HGA
Out of Position
OoP + HGA
Rested
??
If those are right then you should also have CR on there shouldn't you? Which would be 2.1.
Great stuff :)
And yes! I missed one
Quote from: Honey Badger on February 27, 2014, 11:10:44 AM
I think he was just saying he was going to swap Watts between forward and defense each week depending on where a 4th player was needed.
Yeah that's it, having a F/B is like having the option to flood or attack each week.
Quote from: ossie85 on February 27, 2014, 08:17:14 AM
^ we can discuss the above more, but official results!
14 coaches votes (with Pacific, Buenos Aires, New York and Toronto not voting).
Resting
Approved. 8-6
Some details to smooth out with how Champions League scores are calculated. But basically, it will be:
- Is completely optional
- A player nominates which player (only one per week) they would like to rest.
- This player MUST play AFL that week.
- You can't rest a player if you can't field a team. If you don't have anymore emergencies to complete a team during the round, the rested player will be the next person in at QUARTER points and they will no longer be rested.
- For purposes of my processing, a Rested player's score WILL count in the Reserves.
- The rested player MUST play the next round (avoids coaches 'resting' players not in best XV).
Bank
Failed. 2-12
Gamble
Failed. 2-12
Co-Captains
Approved. 14-0
You have the option of either:
- Picking a Captain and Vice-Captain as per normal
- Picking 2 Co-Captains, no Vice-Captain
If picking Co-Captains, each captain's score is multipled by 1.5 (rounded up). If one Co-Captain doesn't play, the other Co-Captain acts as the sole captain and has the score multipled by 2.
Substitute
Approved. 13-1
Coaches choose before the round starts whether they want to use it or not.
If they use it, any player who starts with a green vest, or is red vested in the first half, will be replaced by an emergency. This can happen for up to 3 players.
Standard emergency rules apply, and can only be replaced by an emergency in the same position.
If no suitable emergency is available, instead of having a player OOP, the player WILL NOT be substituted and the sub score stands. (Heath Shaw is red vested in first half, but you don't have an interchange/emergency to replace him in defense, so his score stands)
A substituted player will have its score counted towards the Reserve team.
Flood
Approved. 9-5
The coach nominates when they submit the team if they want to use the 'Flood' strategy (3 forwards, 5 defenders). This can only be used 3 times a year, and can only be used if they have 5 defenders named in AFL team sheets.
Attack
Approved. 9-5
The coach nominates when they submit the team if they want to use the 'Attack' strategy (5 forwards, 3 defenders). This can only be used 3 times a year, and can only be used if they have 5 forwards named in AFL team sheets.
Go Tall
Fail. 3-11
Go Small
Fail. 4-10
Happy to discuss....
Reminder
Flood tactic will be handy for us this round with a couple forwards expected out
Same with us KB.