FanFooty Forum

AFL fantasy competitions => AXV Archives => Asia XVs => XVs Competitions => 2017 => Topic started by: JBs-Hawks on August 30, 2016, 06:20:30 PM

Title: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: JBs-Hawks on August 30, 2016, 06:20:30 PM
Soo with another season over and dusted and before we get into the trade period.

Does anyone have any rules they would like to bring into review, any new rules they would like brought into debate.

A new coach for Taiwan will be advertised for shortly and the trade period will begin after that is finalised!

Awards night will be coming soon too! Will Danger win it?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 06:35:51 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on August 30, 2016, 06:20:30 PM
Will Danger win it?
Id hope so or ill be calling for a recount
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Koop on August 30, 2016, 06:45:56 PM
Will be very interested in the Taiwan job when it becomes available.  ;D

Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: tbagrocks on August 30, 2016, 07:20:58 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 06:35:51 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on August 30, 2016, 06:20:30 PM
Will Danger win it?
Id hope so or ill be calling for a recount
He has done a remarkable job convincing everyone he is a nice person, but leading the stats? Someone had more ball in the AXV ;)
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 07:23:04 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on August 30, 2016, 07:20:58 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 06:35:51 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on August 30, 2016, 06:20:30 PM
Will Danger win it?
Id hope so or ill be calling for a recount
He has done a remarkable job convincing everyone he is a nice person, but leading the stats? Someone had more ball in the AXV ;)
2 players had more ball, but no1 had more points!!! :D
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Nige on August 30, 2016, 07:28:31 PM
I'd kinda like to just be able name teams in the format we do in all the other comps if that's a rule we can maybe change?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Jay on August 30, 2016, 07:32:58 PM
Quote from: Nige on August 30, 2016, 07:28:31 PM
I'd kinda like to just be able name teams in the format we do in all the other comps if that's a rule we can maybe change?
Our format is a Colliwobblers tradition!
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:07:57 PM
I have an idea to help with equalization

But i don't think it will be very popular lol



I don't think top 4ish teams should get first round draft picks...



The best way for teams to rise up is to give them more ammo to trade with, and less to the top teams.

A cap is ok too, but giving teams more to trade with is more effective

This is what I'd propose the draft to look like




1st Option                         

1st Round
1. 16th
2. 15th
3. 14th
4. 13th
5. 12th
6. 11th
7. 10th
8. 9th
9. 8th
10. 7th
11. 6th
12. 5th
Like normal

Then
13. 16th
14. 15th
15. 14th
16. 13th

2nd round
17. 12th
18. 11th
19. 10th
20. 9th
21. 8th
22. 7th
23. 6th
24. 5th
25. 4th
26. 3rd
27. 2nd
28. 1st
29. 16th
Etc...

Or a second more extreme option

1st Round
1. 16th
2. 15th
3. 14th
4. 13th
5. 12th
6. 11th
7. 10th
8. 9th
Like normal

Then the bottom 4 again to help them out
9. 16th
10. 15th
11. 14th
12. 13th

Then the rest of the 8
13. 8th
14. 7th
15. 6th
16. 5th

2nd round
17. 12th
18. 11th
19. 10th
20. 9th
21. 8th
22. 7th
23. 6th
24. 5th
25. 4th
26. 3rd
27. 2nd
28. 1st
29. 16th
Etc...

Now we could say that this is what priority picks are for. But teams who win less than 4 games only get a priority pick at the end of the 1st round for the 1st season, and then only after the 2nd season do they get one pick at the start of the 1st round (if they lose less than 4 again). So its not until 2 years that they get some real additional ammo to trade with

Normally i like these comps to reflect real life as much as possible but to keep interest levels up and allow teams to rebuild quickly i truly think this is the best way.

It will also make it harder for strong teams to bring in established players. A late first rounder is still great value in a trade and can be paired with other players for upgrades. Taking that away from teams like the Crocs will make it harder to improve further

Anyway feel free to rip it apart :P
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:12:19 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:14:28 PM
I'd be all for a cap as well btw
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:17:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:12:19 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:21:24 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:17:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:12:19 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:21:24 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:17:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:12:19 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Being a coach of NDT doesnt mean you know who which factor it was that made the improve/decrease (yes, decrease, it makes top teams harder to improve), lets be honest it was a factor of both (and a factor of good trading if your scully trade is anything like your last years ones). To, which one was the strongest factor i dont think we will ever know.

Plus if top teams have less depth than that depth is moved to other teams, which are then starters and helps even up the comp. Also it gives top teams a weakness, and they might rethink having a killer best 15 in search of depth since injuries do happen.

Basically you nailed what a cap does above, which is why i think its better :) Its the quickest way to even up the comp imo :D

Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:44:04 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:21:24 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:17:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:12:19 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Being a coach of NDT doesnt mean you know who which factor it was that made the improve/decrease (yes, decrease, it makes top teams harder to improve), lets be honest it was a factor of both (and a factor of good trading if your scully trade is anything like your last years ones). To, which one was the strongest factor i dont think we will ever know.

Plus if top teams have less depth than that depth is moved to other teams, which are then starters and helps even up the comp. Also it gives top teams a weakness, and they might rethink having a killer best 15 in search of depth since injuries do happen.

Basically you nailed what a cap does above, which is why i think its better :) Its the quickest way to even up the comp imo :D
I agree a cap can help. Just don't agree its the quickest way :P

On the bold though. Most depth moved from top teams is pretty weak from what i've seen. So its just shifting guys like say a  Frawley-type to a bottom team. Which really doesn't help them too much in the long run. His value won't dramatically increase and he won't help them tooooo much on field.

Plus bottom teams will value youth over establish depth

Also on the weakness (lack of depth). A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF. So top teams would most likely just risk it without quality depth.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:55:18 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:44:04 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:21:24 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:17:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:12:19 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Being a coach of NDT doesnt mean you know who which factor it was that made the improve/decrease (yes, decrease, it makes top teams harder to improve), lets be honest it was a factor of both (and a factor of good trading if your scully trade is anything like your last years ones). To, which one was the strongest factor i dont think we will ever know.

Plus if top teams have less depth than that depth is moved to other teams, which are then starters and helps even up the comp. Also it gives top teams a weakness, and they might rethink having a killer best 15 in search of depth since injuries do happen.

Basically you nailed what a cap does above, which is why i think its better :) Its the quickest way to even up the comp imo :D
I agree a cap can help. Just don't agree its the quickest way :P

On the bold though. Most depth moved from top teams is pretty weak from what i've seen. So its just shifting guys like say a  Frawley-type to a bottom team. Which really doesn't help them too much in the long run. His value won't dramatically increase and he won't help them tooooo much on field.

Plus bottom teams will value youth over establish depth

Also on the weakness (lack of depth). A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF. So top teams would most likely just risk it without quality depth.
Ah well we can agree to disagree :)

Alot of trades not happening in worlds atm because of the cap and also alot of older players being traded around because of it (alot better than frawley)

Also ofcourse the benefit of having to trade above the cap if you're under, making teams have to trade in more proven performers to become competitive quicker :P
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on August 30, 2016, 10:57:10 PM
Strong Clubs will have the same amount of premiums, but depth is hurt under a Cap.  Without a Cap, strong Clubs can have depth as well.
     A Cap stops the big Clubs from getting to big and over powered.

Stopping bad trades is what is needed to keep the Comp. relatively even.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:58:05 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on August 30, 2016, 10:57:10 PM
Strong Clubs will have the same amount of premiums, but depth is hurt under a Cap.  Without a Cap, strong Clubs can have depth as well.
     A Cap stops the big Clubs from getting to big and over powered.

Stopping bad trades is what is needed to keep the Comp. relatively even.
A few more good points :)
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 11:10:57 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on August 30, 2016, 10:57:10 PM
Strong Clubs will have the same amount of premiums, but depth is hurt under a Cap.  Without a Cap, strong Clubs can have depth as well.
     A Cap stops the big Clubs from getting to big and over powered.

Stopping bad trades is what is needed to keep the Comp. relatively even.
Agree 100%
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 11:20:00 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:55:18 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:44:04 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:21:24 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:17:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:12:19 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 30, 2016, 10:10:17 PM
The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Being a coach of NDT doesnt mean you know who which factor it was that made the improve/decrease (yes, decrease, it makes top teams harder to improve), lets be honest it was a factor of both (and a factor of good trading if your scully trade is anything like your last years ones). To, which one was the strongest factor i dont think we will ever know.

Plus if top teams have less depth than that depth is moved to other teams, which are then starters and helps even up the comp. Also it gives top teams a weakness, and they might rethink having a killer best 15 in search of depth since injuries do happen.

Basically you nailed what a cap does above, which is why i think its better :) Its the quickest way to even up the comp imo :D
I agree a cap can help. Just don't agree its the quickest way :P

On the bold though. Most depth moved from top teams is pretty weak from what i've seen. So its just shifting guys like say a  Frawley-type to a bottom team. Which really doesn't help them too much in the long run. His value won't dramatically increase and he won't help them tooooo much on field.

Plus bottom teams will value youth over establish depth

Also on the weakness (lack of depth). A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF. So top teams would most likely just risk it without quality depth.
Ah well we can agree to disagree :)

Alot of trades not happening in worlds atm because of the cap and also alot of older players being traded around because of it (alot better than frawley)

Also ofcourse the benefit of having to trade above the cap if you're under, making teams have to trade in more proven performers to become competitive quicker :P
Yep, that's what the discussion is for :)
Remember I'm all for a cap, just don't think it has as big of an impact as its meant to.

On your points above though, you simply trade in a Patfull-type to get above the minimum cap and then can trade freely again. But this type of player doesn't help a bottom team going forward. Its only one spot on your list but probably makes your list worse off lol
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Rusty00 on August 30, 2016, 11:26:39 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:44:04 PM
A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF.
:'( :'(
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: GoLions on August 30, 2016, 11:51:42 PM
Quote from: Rusty00 on August 30, 2016, 11:26:39 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:44:04 PM
A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF.
:'( :'(
I was so tempted to mention you here earlier haha
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 30, 2016, 11:52:29 PM
Quote from: GoLions on August 30, 2016, 11:51:42 PM
Quote from: Rusty00 on August 30, 2016, 11:26:39 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:44:04 PM
A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF.
:'( :'(
I was so tempted to mention you here earlier haha
haha yeah we were all thinking it :P
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Nige on August 31, 2016, 12:06:08 AM
I'm all for evening up the comp. Don't mind Rico's idea too much either.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nrich102 on August 31, 2016, 07:40:17 PM
I love ricos draft idea  :P

I like the idea of a cap as well, am all for that.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: fanTCfool on August 31, 2016, 07:48:46 PM
I'd say choose one, if any, but both may be a little bit overkill
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: SydneyRox on August 31, 2016, 07:53:22 PM
Can someone explain the cap system to me? In brief or detail?

Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Rids on August 31, 2016, 07:56:06 PM
Personally hate the idea of a cap. Just dont think people should be disadvantaged for trading and drafting well.

Nostra and I have been advocates though for a while now in regards to evening up the comp. We made quite a few attempts last year to highlight this yet it fell on deaf ears.

I dont mind the idea of priority picks. If people draft well then it is very easy to do a full rebuild over the course of 2 years and become competitive.  They also then have the option to trade those picks for more established players.

Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nostradamus on August 31, 2016, 08:14:59 PM
l want to be blunt.

The cap is an absolute nonsense.

I was one of the initial coaches of AXV and drafted strategically from the outset. the team that is now the Crabs is the result of a long laid plan. Since then Rids and l have traded and drafted accordingly.

Now it seems that this may all be undermined by a garbage rule from another comp. This is our unique comp, our unique scoring system and damn good as it is ......... why would we want to alter it to conform to another XV's system.

Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:17:01 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on August 31, 2016, 08:14:59 PM
l want to be blunt.

The cap is an absolute nonsense.

I was one of the initial coaches of AXV and drafted strategically from the outset. the team that is now the Crabs is the result of a long laid plan. Since then Rids and l have traded and drafted accordingly.

Now it seems that this may all be undermined by a garbage rule from another comp. This is our unique comp, our unique scoring system and damn good as it is ......... why would we want to alter it to conform to another XV's system.
At no point did we say we wanted to do it to be like worlds.....
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: fanTCfool on August 31, 2016, 08:26:21 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:17:01 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on August 31, 2016, 08:14:59 PM
l want to be blunt.

The cap is an absolute nonsense.

I was one of the initial coaches of AXV and drafted strategically from the outset. the team that is now the Crabs is the result of a long laid plan. Since then Rids and l have traded and drafted accordingly.

Now it seems that this may all be undermined by a garbage rule from another comp. This is our unique comp, our unique scoring system and damn good as it is ......... why would we want to alter it to conform to another XV's system.
At no point did we say we wanted to do it to be like worlds.....

I don't think Nostra mentioned Worlds either...
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:27:32 PM
Quote from: fanTCfool on August 31, 2016, 08:26:21 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:17:01 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on August 31, 2016, 08:14:59 PM
l want to be blunt.

The cap is an absolute nonsense.

I was one of the initial coaches of AXV and drafted strategically from the outset. the team that is now the Crabs is the result of a long laid plan. Since then Rids and l have traded and drafted accordingly.

Now it seems that this may all be undermined by a garbage rule from another comp. This is our unique comp, our unique scoring system and damn good as it is ......... why would we want to alter it to conform to another XV's system.
At no point did we say we wanted to do it to be like worlds.....

I don't think Nostra mentioned Worlds either...
What other XV comp was he talking about then?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: fanTCfool on August 31, 2016, 08:28:34 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:27:32 PM
Quote from: fanTCfool on August 31, 2016, 08:26:21 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:17:01 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on August 31, 2016, 08:14:59 PM
l want to be blunt.

The cap is an absolute nonsense.

I was one of the initial coaches of AXV and drafted strategically from the outset. the team that is now the Crabs is the result of a long laid plan. Since then Rids and l have traded and drafted accordingly.

Now it seems that this may all be undermined by a garbage rule from another comp. This is our unique comp, our unique scoring system and damn good as it is ......... why would we want to alter it to conform to another XV's system.
At no point did we say we wanted to do it to be like worlds.....

I don't think Nostra mentioned Worlds either...
What other XV comp was he talking about then?

I didn't say he wasn't talking about Worlds
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:29:22 PM
Quote from: fanTCfool on August 31, 2016, 08:28:34 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:27:32 PM
Quote from: fanTCfool on August 31, 2016, 08:26:21 PM
Quote from: iZander on August 31, 2016, 08:17:01 PM
Quote from: nostradamus on August 31, 2016, 08:14:59 PM
l want to be blunt.

The cap is an absolute nonsense.

I was one of the initial coaches of AXV and drafted strategically from the outset. the team that is now the Crabs is the result of a long laid plan. Since then Rids and l have traded and drafted accordingly.

Now it seems that this may all be undermined by a garbage rule from another comp. This is our unique comp, our unique scoring system and damn good as it is ......... why would we want to alter it to conform to another XV's system.
At no point did we say we wanted to do it to be like worlds.....

I don't think Nostra mentioned Worlds either...
What other XV comp was he talking about then?

I didn't say he wasn't talking about Worlds

Well that was an irrelevant conversation lol
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: JBs-Hawks on August 31, 2016, 10:46:28 PM
I dont like the taking away of good teams draft picks its like punishing them for being better at the game then others. Also takes away some of the fun of the game in researching and drafting if they dont have a decent pick to use.

The Cap I dont mind and it is proven to work in WXV but happy without it depends what everyone else wants

The best way to even out a competition is with good coaching. Ele and Ric took the worst list in any XV competition and just made it to the GF! Even look at tbag he went with young approach initially and spent a couple years down the bottom and this year he identified that it was his time to shine so to go with his youngsters he traded in some proven guns in Mitchell and Watson if he wasnt suspended and look he made a prelim final!

Also trading will be stricter on trading out old players for young players.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: tbagrocks on September 01, 2016, 06:37:42 PM
Quote from: Rusty00 on August 30, 2016, 11:26:39 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on August 30, 2016, 10:44:04 PM
A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF.
:'( :'(
Tibet missed at leased 4 in the prelim :-\
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Rids on September 04, 2016, 04:42:09 PM
Is there any update on when things will start happening in AXV? I now we are waiting for the new coach to be done but there are no threads for the drafts etc.

If people are time poor that is fine because I am sure others like myself are more than willing to help out to get things rolling.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on September 04, 2016, 06:22:29 PM
Quote from: Rids on September 04, 2016, 04:42:09 PM
Is there any update on when things will start happening in AXV? I now we are waiting for the new coach to be done but there are no threads for the drafts etc.

If people are time poor that is fine because I am sure others like myself are more than willing to help out to get things rolling.

Wondering similar things, also wondering about the outcome of the above conversations or any other rule changes, is there a vote? or Admins deciding? Also if there is, probably could have that done before trade period starts as a potenital cap/draft picks would have a instant effect on trading :P
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: JBs-Hawks on September 07, 2016, 09:00:40 AM
The majority has spoken, we are keeping as is!
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nrich102 on September 07, 2016, 09:04:35 AM
I'm quite disappointed, I really wanted change.

Can we have the numbers to see how much of a minority I was in?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: PowerBug on September 07, 2016, 10:32:51 AM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on September 07, 2016, 09:00:40 AM
The majority has spoken, we are keeping as is!
A few things:
1 - did the majority speak, or did more people say keep as is compared to the other two but it wasn't 9 of the coaches?
2 - I can't even remember if I sent anything through to you.
3 - I could've sworn that I had a rule change I wanted to discuss this off season but can't seem to remember what it was about.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: JBs-Hawks on September 07, 2016, 11:35:44 AM
No i didn't receive a vote from you but the majority of 9 was reached.

We can only vote on whats presented.....
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on September 07, 2016, 11:53:47 AM
Quote from: nrich102 on September 07, 2016, 09:04:35 AM
Can we have the numbers to see how much of a minority I was in?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: PowerBug on September 07, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on September 07, 2016, 11:35:44 AM
No i didn't receive a vote from you but the majority of 9 was reached.

We can only vote on whats presented.....
Yep just checking that 9 was reached :)

Oh well I forgot what it was anyway so no biggie :P
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on October 23, 2016, 07:49:55 PM
An idea that may even up the Comp a little(if a Cap isn't introduce).  Clubs nominate one(or two) players from their best ten averagers(position dependant).
   Now that Ten would have stipulations on them  i.e. under 30yo, have played X amount of games to qualify, perhaps can't be re-sold etc. etc.

All players go into a draft and are selected by all Clubs in the same order as the other drafts.
  Lower Clubs should get an upgrade to their best ten, higher teams will get a downgrade and Mid Clubs stay pat.

...Just an idea, don't be offended if you fear change. lol  :)
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: PowerBug on October 23, 2016, 08:27:33 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on October 23, 2016, 07:49:55 PM
An idea that may even up the Comp a little(if a Cap isn't introduce).  Clubs nominate one(or two) players from their best ten averagers(position dependant).
   Now that Ten would have stipulations on them  i.e. under 30yo, have played X amount of games to qualify, perhaps can't be re-sold etc. etc.

All players go into a draft and are selected by all Clubs in the same order as the other drafts.
  Lower Clubs should get an upgrade to their best ten, higher teams will get a downgrade and Mid Clubs stay pat.

...Just an idea, don't be offended if you fear change. lol  :)
I fear change!

I can't see it getting any support though utm :P
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: fanTCfool on October 23, 2016, 09:15:00 PM
Yep I'd rather have a cap than donate my good players for charity
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on October 23, 2016, 09:23:18 PM
Quote from: fanTCfool on October 23, 2016, 09:15:00 PM
Yep I'd rather have a cap than donate my good players for charity
You would still get a player in return, possibly a better one than you gave up. 
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: JBs-Hawks on October 23, 2016, 09:39:00 PM
Heres an idea

If you are awarded a priority pick it must be on traded for a player over the age of 23.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: iZander on October 23, 2016, 10:54:07 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on October 23, 2016, 09:39:00 PM
Heres an idea

If you are awarded a priority pick it must be on traded for a player over the age of 23.
Gee it would be so helpful if there was a way to force the bottom teams to do this as well as force the top teams to not get too overpowered....
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nrich102 on October 23, 2016, 11:15:14 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on October 23, 2016, 09:39:00 PM
Heres an idea

If you are awarded a priority pick it must be on traded for a player over the age of 23.

This idea is like communism, its amazing in theory, but in practice will never work. The team with the PP will get way unders for the pick because they will be forced to trade it.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:02:57 PM
Don't know if it's been brought up before.  Can we hold off finalising our squads until after the AFL draft?
   
   
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: PowerBug on November 27, 2016, 10:05:41 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:02:57 PM
Don't know if it's been brought up before.  Can we hold off finalising our squads until after the AFL draft?
Matt De Boer I assume the reason behind this?

it would have to do with the draft picks everyone can use I assume. Although could make a rule that if you use a pick in the NAT draft, who you select can't be delisted immediately? (I'm just thinking and rambling here I may make no sense lol)
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:19:48 PM
Quote from: PowerBug on November 27, 2016, 10:05:41 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:02:57 PM
Don't know if it's been brought up before.  Can we hold off finalising our squads until after the AFL draft?
Matt De Boer I assume the reason behind this?

it would have to do with the draft picks everyone can use I assume. Although could make a rule that if you use a pick in the NAT draft, who you select can't be delisted immediately? (I'm just thinking and rambling here I may make no sense lol)
De Boer is the reason it came to mind, yes.   Also that the WXV lists aren't due until the 30th.

There are other scenarios though...
   let's say you have to delist a player because of squad size and have two candidates, a forward and a defender.
In the draft you manage to grab some new forwards and decide that you now need the defender more than the forward.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: fanTCfool on November 27, 2016, 10:38:57 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:19:48 PM
Quote from: PowerBug on November 27, 2016, 10:05:41 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:02:57 PM
Don't know if it's been brought up before.  Can we hold off finalising our squads until after the AFL draft?
Matt De Boer I assume the reason behind this?

it would have to do with the draft picks everyone can use I assume. Although could make a rule that if you use a pick in the NAT draft, who you select can't be delisted immediately? (I'm just thinking and rambling here I may make no sense lol)
De Boer is the reason it came to mind, yes.   Also that the WXV lists aren't due until the 30th.

There are other scenarios though...
   let's say you have to delist a player because of squad size and have two candidates, a forward and a defender.
In the draft you manage to grab some new forwards and decide that you now need the defender more than the forward.

AFL clubs finalise their list before the draft. They might go into drafting looking for forwards but only have defenders available, that's the way it goes.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: JBs-Hawks on November 27, 2016, 11:00:14 PM
Could definitely put it too vote next year to follow a similar method to WXV, have all AFL drafts done  before the AXV ones start.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 11:13:47 PM
Quote from: fanTCfool on November 27, 2016, 10:38:57 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:19:48 PM
Quote from: PowerBug on November 27, 2016, 10:05:41 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 27, 2016, 10:02:57 PM
Don't know if it's been brought up before.  Can we hold off finalising our squads until after the AFL draft?
Matt De Boer I assume the reason behind this?

it would have to do with the draft picks everyone can use I assume. Although could make a rule that if you use a pick in the NAT draft, who you select can't be delisted immediately? (I'm just thinking and rambling here I may make no sense lol)
De Boer is the reason it came to mind, yes.   Also that the WXV lists aren't due until the 30th.

There are other scenarios though...
   let's say you have to delist a player because of squad size and have two candidates, a forward and a defender.
In the draft you manage to grab some new forwards and decide that you now need the defender more than the forward.

AFL clubs finalise their list before the draft. They might go into drafting looking for forwards but only have defenders available, that's the way it goes.
Sure, but we don't follow what the AFL do in many other areas.
  Apart from being able to start our draft straight away, what other benefits come from early list lodgement?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:30:35 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
What comp (or comps) has this rule?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:37:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Oh yeh sorry 2hr rule in worlds

Why madness?
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nostradamus on November 27, 2016, 11:42:11 PM
Definitely keep as is 2 hr & 24 hour combo is spot on for all rounds.

We all know when the drafts are and are capable of notifying others if there's a problem.

And if by chance anyone forgets well it's their own fault.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:45:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:37:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Oh yeh sorry 2hr rule in worlds

Why madness?
Because then the first round could potentially take over a week haha
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:49:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:45:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:37:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Oh yeh sorry 2hr rule in worlds

Why madness?
Because then the first round could potentially take over a week haha
Haha potentially but it wouldn't

Like Nost said we should be able to get hold of everyone within 24hrs

But like with SR today, a few hrs could have been costly. Especially if he had say pick 2-3

I wouldn't imagine it would ever happen but thought it should be considered just incase
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nostradamus on November 27, 2016, 11:54:25 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:49:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:45:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:37:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Oh yeh sorry 2hr rule in worlds

Why madness?
Because then the first round could potentially take over a week haha
Haha potentially but it wouldn't

Like Nost said we should be able to get hold of everyone within 24hrs

But like with SR today, a few hrs could have been costly. Especially if he had say pick 2-3

I wouldn't imagine it would ever happen but thought it should be considered just incase

l think you are misinterpreting my words.

I think the change you suggest is just catering for laziness and/or incompetence.

I want it to stay as is.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nas on November 28, 2016, 12:00:40 AM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man

Problem solved re SR as have his work email. Basically for all comps have said will contact him so that's covered. Plus as you say, you have him on twitter
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 12:01:52 AM
Quote from: nostradamus on November 27, 2016, 11:54:25 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:49:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:45:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:37:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Oh yeh sorry 2hr rule in worlds

Why madness?
Because then the first round could potentially take over a week haha
Haha potentially but it wouldn't

Like Nost said we should be able to get hold of everyone within 24hrs

But like with SR today, a few hrs could have been costly. Especially if he had say pick 2-3

I wouldn't imagine it would ever happen but thought it should be considered just incase

l think you are misinterpreting my words.

I think the change you suggest is just catering for laziness and/or incompetence.

I want it to stay as is.
No i didnt, i know your against it. I just used a part of what you said,  in that we SHOULD be able to get hold of everyone.

And its not to promote laziness mate. I only suggested it for the very very remote chance that someone isnt on for 24hrs in the early stages of the draft. It wouldnt be hard to do over a weekend

Like i said itd probably never happen so it wouldnt hurt anyone

And i only suggest it for first round so its not like it would hold the draft up for days/weeks
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nostradamus on November 28, 2016, 12:10:59 AM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 12:01:52 AM
Quote from: nostradamus on November 27, 2016, 11:54:25 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:49:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:45:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:37:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Oh yeh sorry 2hr rule in worlds

Why madness?
Because then the first round could potentially take over a week haha
Haha potentially but it wouldn't

Like Nost said we should be able to get hold of everyone within 24hrs

But like with SR today, a few hrs could have been costly. Especially if he had say pick 2-3

I wouldn't imagine it would ever happen but thought it should be considered just incase

l think you are misinterpreting my words.

I think the change you suggest is just catering for laziness and/or incompetence.

I want it to stay as is.
No i didnt, i know your against it. I just used a part of what you said,  in that we SHOULD be able to get hold of everyone.

And its not to promote laziness mate. I only suggested it for the very very remote chance that someone isnt on for 24hrs in the early stages of the draft. It wouldnt be hard to do over a weekend

Like i said itd probably never happen so it wouldnt hurt anyone

And i only suggest it for first round so its not like it would hold the draft up for days/weeks

Ahhh, l see the mistake there........

"Definitely keep as is 2 hr & 24 hour combo is spot on for all rounds.

We all know when the drafts are and are capable of notifying others if there's a problem.

And if by chance anyone forgets well it's their own fault."

......the "we" l was referring to was us all as responsible coaches taking personal responsibility if we had a problem in posting our picks or being online.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 12:16:00 AM
Quote from: nostradamus on November 28, 2016, 12:10:59 AM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 12:01:52 AM
Quote from: nostradamus on November 27, 2016, 11:54:25 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:49:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:45:40 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:37:05 PM
Quote from: GoLions on November 27, 2016, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:35:08 PM
Quote from: Nige on November 27, 2016, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 27, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Another thing to put forward that's in other comps.
-24hr rule doesnt apply to first round picks.

Missing out on your first rounder a pretty high cost if you're not in for that 24hrs initially
I'm probably being a bit harsh here, but I'm not a huge fan of the rule.

As a coach in one of these comps, there's only two real tasks that you pretty much have to do. Team selection and list management (which encompasses delistings/drafting/trading etc). With the drafts, we're all footy fans and every coach should know when the draft is and when the draft they're coach in is starting, so I feel like coaches really should be making the best effort they can to be on within 24 hours of their comp's draft starting to at least see where it's at and when their pick may come about. Don't get me wrong, I know people have lives, activity decreases and this time of year can be particularly busy, but I don't think it's too much to ask.

That's my two cents on it anyway.
Yeh it would rarely happen anyway and it's only the first round.

But with SR today. Wasnt on yesterday for the start of the draft and didn't get on until mid today. So would have been skipped if Jay had picked. Luckily i got hold of him in twitter

At such a high pick it's pretty costly and yeh would rarely happen or we wouldn't have to wait long for them to get back in generally. 

2hr rule after being online would still apply

But yeh something to discuss anyway


@GL
World's man
That's only the 2hr rule I thought? Not applying the 24hr rule would be madness imho :P
Oh yeh sorry 2hr rule in worlds

Why madness?
Because then the first round could potentially take over a week haha
Haha potentially but it wouldn't

Like Nost said we should be able to get hold of everyone within 24hrs

But like with SR today, a few hrs could have been costly. Especially if he had say pick 2-3

I wouldn't imagine it would ever happen but thought it should be considered just incase

l think you are misinterpreting my words.

I think the change you suggest is just catering for laziness and/or incompetence.

I want it to stay as is.
No i didnt, i know your against it. I just used a part of what you said,  in that we SHOULD be able to get hold of everyone.

And its not to promote laziness mate. I only suggested it for the very very remote chance that someone isnt on for 24hrs in the early stages of the draft. It wouldnt be hard to do over a weekend

Like i said itd probably never happen so it wouldnt hurt anyone

And i only suggest it for first round so its not like it would hold the draft up for days/weeks

Ahhh, l see the mistake there........

"Definitely keep as is 2 hr & 24 hour combo is spot on for all rounds.

We all know when the drafts are and are capable of notifying others if there's a problem.

And if by chance anyone forgets well it's their own fault."

......the "we" l was referring to was us all as responsible coaches taking personal responsibility if we had a problem in posting our picks or being online.
lol no need to be a dick about it mate, its just a suggestion



I just don't see how it has a negative effect on the comp.

It mayyy happen once every few years, but probably not. Since like you said we're all capable

Just in the event something unusual happens and it does happen, its there
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on November 28, 2016, 01:38:07 AM
Could just change the rule, from being skipped to receiving the next player in AFL order.
   That way in the rare occurrence that a Coach misses they will still get a top draft pick, especially if it's only a rule for the first round of picks.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nrich102 on November 28, 2016, 11:16:01 AM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 28, 2016, 01:38:07 AM
Could just change the rule, from being skipped to receiving the next player in AFL order.
   That way in the rare occurrence that a Coach misses they will still get a top draft pick, especially if it's only a rule for the first round of picks.
Yup, I'd be in favour of this, with of course the chance to change your pick before the next person picks
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: SydneyRox on November 28, 2016, 12:11:56 PM
As the person who caused some issues across a few comps, let me throw my 2c in.

It isnt always a case where you forget, cant be a**ed or just lazy. Their is a thing called real life that gets in the way and before you know it 2days have gone by.

Missing a 1st rounder in these sort of comps is a massive negative, and since most of the time the teams with the low picks are the worst teams who need the best players, skipping them doubles the effect.

Its not like we really need to rush it through, by mid Jan trading and everything else comes to an almost complete halt across all these comps.

Drafting and trading are the two best bits of why we are involved IMO and so we shouldnt be in a need to rush

So this isnt me having a whinge that I was almost skipped, this is just me agreeing that some sort of rule adaptation would be a good idea.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Rids on November 28, 2016, 12:32:01 PM
Quote from: SydneyRox on November 28, 2016, 12:11:56 PM
As the person who caused some issues across a few comps, let me throw my 2c in.

It isnt always a case where you forget, cant be a**ed or just lazy. Their is a thing called real life that gets in the way and before you know it 2days have gone by.

Missing a 1st rounder in these sort of comps is a massive negative, and since most of the time the teams with the low picks are the worst teams who need the best players, skipping them doubles the effect.

Its not like we really need to rush it through, by mid Jan trading and everything else comes to an almost complete halt across all these comps.

Drafting and trading are the two best bits of why we are involved IMO and so we shouldnt be in a need to rush

So this isnt me having a whinge that I was almost skipped, this is just me agreeing that some sort of rule adaptation would be a good idea.


I will play devil's advocate here. I think being a coach of a XV team means you have responsibilities to the comps, the other teams and coaches. Whilst I agree that life should always be a priority, it is often the case that you are directly postponing other people's lifes by not meeting those responsibilities. I must have checked fanfooty 1000 times over the 24 hour period in question. Saying that your own priorities mean that 2 days go by and not take into account that the same time also stalls for other people is prob not the greatest reasoning. I am in no way taking a pot shot here. But I have 2 weeks planned holidays mid to late Dec where the last thing I want to do is log on to fanfooty to take picks in drafts because others have forgotten etc.

I think moving forward though it is important for the admins to have some sort of way to contact all coaches to try and alleviate these sort of situations.

They dont happen often however so people need to try and understand each other's situations.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 12:40:50 PM
Quote from: nrich102 on November 28, 2016, 11:16:01 AM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 28, 2016, 01:38:07 AM
Could just change the rule, from being skipped to receiving the next player in AFL order.
   That way in the rare occurrence that a Coach misses they will still get a top draft pick, especially if it's only a rule for the first round of picks.
Yup, I'd be in favour of this, with of course the chance to change your pick before the next person picks
Yeh that's probably a fair compromise




Remember boys this proposal is a very minor adjustment to our rules and would rarely happen. The affect on the comp is literally minimal

But in the unlikely event that something extraordinary happens to a coaches life outside of FF, we have something there

It can't hurt to have it can it
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Rids on November 28, 2016, 12:44:24 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 12:40:50 PM
Quote from: nrich102 on November 28, 2016, 11:16:01 AM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 28, 2016, 01:38:07 AM
Could just change the rule, from being skipped to receiving the next player in AFL order.
   That way in the rare occurrence that a Coach misses they will still get a top draft pick, especially if it's only a rule for the first round of picks.
Yup, I'd be in favour of this, with of course the chance to change your pick before the next person picks
Yeh that's probably a fair compromise




Remember boys this proposal is a very minor adjustment to our rules and would rarely happen. The affect on the comp is literally minimal

But in the unlikely event that something extraordinary happens to a coaches life outside of FF, we have something there

It can't hurt to have it can it



The discussion is a good one to have and I am sure we can capture a few scenarios to vote on within it.

I understand both sides. Yes life should always be a priority. But delaying also can be a frustration trigger for others with hectic periods coming up. If everyone just give thought to each other then happy days!
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: Rids on November 28, 2016, 12:44:24 PM
Quote from: Ricochet on November 28, 2016, 12:40:50 PM
Quote from: nrich102 on November 28, 2016, 11:16:01 AM
Quote from: upthemaidens on November 28, 2016, 01:38:07 AM
Could just change the rule, from being skipped to receiving the next player in AFL order.
   That way in the rare occurrence that a Coach misses they will still get a top draft pick, especially if it's only a rule for the first round of picks.
Yup, I'd be in favour of this, with of course the chance to change your pick before the next person picks
Yeh that's probably a fair compromise




Remember boys this proposal is a very minor adjustment to our rules and would rarely happen. The affect on the comp is literally minimal

But in the unlikely event that something extraordinary happens to a coaches life outside of FF, we have something there

It can't hurt to have it can it



The discussion is a good one to have and I am sure we can capture a few scenarios to vote on within it.

I understand both sides. Yes life should always be a priority. But delaying also can be a frustration trigger for others with hectic periods coming up. If everyone just give thought to each other then happy days!
Yep that's the key :)
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on January 07, 2017, 02:57:47 PM
Has this rule been introduced yet?  If a player quits/delisted and returns to the AFL at a later date, that the previous AXV Club gets to match any bids for that player.
    If not, we should consider adding it.  Basically the same process as WXV.   It only occurs now and then, but still is a good rule to have.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: upthemaidens on January 07, 2017, 03:12:14 PM
While I'm at it :)    Remove the Rookie list and just make it a 46 man squad.  If we still have a rookie draft, then those players just go onto the seniors.

AFL might get rid of Rookie lists anyhow, but even if they don't we still should.
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: nas on January 07, 2017, 03:28:57 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on January 07, 2017, 03:12:14 PM
While I'm at it :)    Remove the Rookie list and just make it a 46 man squad.  If we still have a rookie draft, then those players just go onto the seniors.

AFL might get rid of Rookie lists anyhow, but even if they don't we still should.

Looked at mid November & maybe implementing next season.

http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,66981.5000.html
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Ricochet on January 07, 2017, 06:22:39 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on January 07, 2017, 02:57:47 PM
Has this rule been introduced yet?  If a player quits/delisted and returns to the AFL at a later date, that the previous AXV Club gets to match any bids for that player.
    If not, we should consider adding it.  Basically the same process as WXV.   It only occurs now and then, but still is a good rule to have.
Yeh i like this one too
Title: Re: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
Post by: Rids on January 08, 2017, 10:55:16 AM
Quote from: upthemaidens on January 07, 2017, 03:12:14 PM
While I'm at it :)    Remove the Rookie list and just make it a 46 man squad.  If we still have a rookie draft, then those players just go onto the seniors.

AFL might get rid of Rookie lists anyhow, but even if they don't we still should.


We will need to put this to a vote for the 2018 AXV season as teams would have traded and drafted accordingly. Rookie list will need to remain for the 2017 season.