2015 RULE DISCUSSION THREAD

[Rids]

Crabs traded Dion Prestia for Anthony Miles + nat 13 last year.

Even though we missed the finals this year, I would rate the Crabs list up there with the best. JOM, BCrouch missing all the year and Swallow the majority of the year really hurt us.

Not everyone shares the same philosophy.

[BB67th]

So now with the season over, we can turn our attention to the off-season matters. And we will be starting with voting on rule changes.

I plan to keep the rule discussion thread open until the end of the week to allow coaches to have their own say on rules and make any further suggestions for rule changes. If coaches would prefer to pm me any potential rule changes, they can do that too.

I have compiled a list of rules that have been brought up in the rule discussion thread, and those that I can recall being brought up mid season. I am sure I have missed some along the way, so please remind me if a rule you would like to be discussed is not in this list, and I can add it.

Rules to Vote on

Note: If there are any additional rules you would like to see changed, or any extra options for what a rule could be changed to, post in this thread or send me a pm before the end of this week.

Also note that there will be a forced change this season in relation to trades in the second trade window (following drafting). All trades in the second trade period will need to be like for like in terms of which list players are on. So a rookie can only be traded for a rookie and a senior for a senior.

- Sub Rule
- Change to AXV Rookie List (possibly abolished or senior list changed to allow rookies to be upgraded mid-season)
- Changes to priority picks system
- Introduction of a point cap
- AXV Grand Final held in round 22 of AFL Season to prevent being hurt by resting
- Free Agency system (Similar to what PB Suggested - see http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,104554.msg1670482.html#msg1670482
- Trade Approvals Process
- Penalties for not naming a team (Possibly not being able to win a match)

[Nige]

There's been discussion in some other XVs about a potential sub rule for next season despite the AFL abolishing their one.

I think one of the proposed ideas, which was seemingly very popular, was to have it based on TOG. So if a player spent x% TOG or less, they'd be 'subbed off' and replaced by an emg.

Personally I'm in favour of this, particularly after it appeared to be rather costly for me in the grand final (note: not blaming the loss on this, but it clearly played a part in me losing).



I know we've got pretty big lists as it stands and the rookie list itself is like 6 players. I reckon at the very least, we should just get rid of the rookie list (or cull it by 2 or something).



Grand Final should definitely be held in Round 22. Again, to use an example, Todd Goldstein (my ruck all season and captain at times) missed the grand final and as a result I had to play a ruck OOP in the biggest game of the year.



Also personally believe penalties for not naming a team should be slightly harsher than they currnetly are. I think the proposed idea of them being ineligible to actually win the game that week is fair though, because to me it seems unfair that the opposition goes to the effort of submitting their team but still end up losing.

[Toga]

The only rule suggestion I see missing from the list BB was my suggestion about naming the team - the current format can be a bit tedious so I suggested naming it in a different format. But I can understand if the current format makes it a lot easier for you to record scores then that's fine!

[Nige]

The only rule suggestion I see missing from the list BB was my suggestion about naming the team - the current format can be a bit tedious so I suggested naming it in a different format. But I can understand if the current format makes it a lot easier for you to record scores then that's fine!

Yeah, I agree with using the same conventional method used in all the other XVs.

[nrich102]

I'm against a sub rule. I think that we should go with what the AFL is going with and getting ridof it. Injuries are part of the game, and it is unfortunate when you get them but its part of the game.

I don't mind the rookie list tbh. Maybe 6 is a bit many but I reckon 4 would be a good number.

Should definently have the grand final in the second last round, not the last one.

[Rusty00]

I'm all for the Grand Final in Rd.22 as well given the mass restings that seem to happen these days.

I like the rookie list and would like it to remain. I like having it similar to the AFL and it adds more strategy by needing to have some late draft picks to upgrade rookies. Perhaps given we have 6 rookies, we could have the ability to automatically elevate one rookie midway through the season like the AFL. Perhaps just before the byes.

I'm for the idea of an automatic loss if you don't name a team and keep the scores as is so percentage isn't totally skewed.

Not really fussed either way on a sub rule.

I also think keep priority picks as they are.

[nrich102]

I think we do unlimited trades :P

[Ricochet]

I'm against a sub rule. I think that we should go with what the AFL is going with and getting ridof it. Injuries are part of the game, and it is unfortunate when you get them but its part of the game.

I don't mind the rookie list tbh. Maybe 6 is a bit many but I reckon 4 would be a good number.

Should definently have the grand final in the second last round, not the last one.

Yeh i'm against any sub rule as well

It'll be gone from the AFL next year and they will have to cop bad luck when they lose a player in the first quarter. Bad luck is a massive part of the XVs comps, fantasy comps and real life. We just have to deal with it.

Also there's been a few arguments about the injured player is replaced in real life by a bench player. A bench player in real life is a U1 or U2 in XV, so they're already a starter. The team still loses 1 person if they go down early.



Yep like the GF a week earlier



i'd push for priority picks for under 4 wins to help bottom teams



Leadership group idea just brought into worlds is pretty cool. Basically you nominate your 5 leaders at the start of the year and only they an be your Capt or Vice Capt. Just like in real life



i like the points cap in theory. We'd have to get it 100% right though

[PowerBug]

Leadership group very good idea :)

[Nige]

I think we do unlimited trades :P

Kinda latching on to this, not a huge fan of the 'list movements' thing.

For example, if one wanted to get an extra pick in to upgrade a rookie, it kinda sucks having to get in an extra pick just to elevate somebody.

Obviously this doesn't really matter if we're scrapping rookie lists (which I believe BXVs is doing).

[nrich102]

Unlimited trades would mean I could get the dongs better quicker.

[Memphistopheles]

I'm against a sub rule. I think that we should go with what the AFL is going with and getting ridof it. Injuries are part of the game, and it is unfortunate when you get them but its part of the game.

I don't mind the rookie list tbh. Maybe 6 is a bit many but I reckon 4 would be a good number.

Should definently have the grand final in the second last round, not the last one.

Yeh i'm against any sub rule as well

It'll be gone from the AFL next year and they will have to cop bad luck when they lose a player in the first quarter. Bad luck is a massive part of the XVs comps, fantasy comps and real life. We just have to deal with it.

Also there's been a few arguments about the injured player is replaced in real life by a bench player. A bench player in real life is a U1 or U2 in XV, so they're already a starter. The team still loses 1 person if they go down early.

I disagree completely

I think we need a sub rule or an emergency rule if you don't want to call it the sub rule. Otherwise an early injury in an AXV final could essentially end the game straight away. If it happened in a grand final it would be really disappointing to know that a team had no chance just because one of their players copped an early injury.

We only have 15 players who count for our scores in the XVs comp so a guy getting subbed out on 0, or less than say 30 points, is a big disadvantage in any contest and an early injury will likely decide the outcome of the match. In the AFL an injured player will not decide the match. The injured player sits on the bench and the club is down a rotation but, it ultimately doesn't affect things too much.

The Utilities aren't the bench. The emergency line is like the bench. Expect we can't rotate those players on. Which is fine unless injury strikes.

Whether the rule is a % of Time on Ground (TOG) or just a flat out rule that if a player doesn't come back on after quarter time, or half time - I think we need something in place. If it was the XXII's or even maybe in the XVIII's where you have 18 players) then it wouldn't be so bad but, with only 15 players' scores counting we need one.

[Ricochet]

I'm against a sub rule. I think that we should go with what the AFL is going with and getting ridof it. Injuries are part of the game, and it is unfortunate when you get them but its part of the game.

I don't mind the rookie list tbh. Maybe 6 is a bit many but I reckon 4 would be a good number.

Should definently have the grand final in the second last round, not the last one.

Yeh i'm against any sub rule as well

It'll be gone from the AFL next year and they will have to cop bad luck when they lose a player in the first quarter. Bad luck is a massive part of the XVs comps, fantasy comps and real life. We just have to deal with it.

Also there's been a few arguments about the injured player is replaced in real life by a bench player. A bench player in real life is a U1 or U2 in XV, so they're already a starter. The team still loses 1 person if they go down early.

I disagree completely

I think we need a sub rule or an emergency rule if you don't want to call it the sub rule. Otherwise an early injury in an AXV final could essentially end the game straight away. If it happened in a grand final it would be really disappointing to know that a team had no chance just because one of their players copped an early injury.

We only have 15 players who count for our scores in the XVs comp so a guy getting subbed out on 0, or less than say 30 points, is a big disadvantage in any contest and an early injury will likely decide the outcome of the match. In the AFL an injured player will not decide the match. The injured player sits on the bench and the club is down a rotation but, it ultimately doesn't affect things too much.

The Utilities aren't the bench. The emergency line is like the bench. Expect we can't rotate those players on. Which is fine unless injury strikes.

Whether the rule is a % of Time on Ground (TOG) or just a flat out rule that if a player doesn't come back on after quarter time, or half time - I think we need something in place. If it was the XXII's or even maybe in the XVIII's where you have 18 players) then it wouldn't be so bad but, with only 15 players' scores counting we need one.

Emergencies aren't the bench mate, our U1 amd U2 are. In AFL bench players have just as much TOG as starting 18. Barlow starts on the bench every week for Freo and has 75-80% time on ground just like every other player.

I can agree with having 15 contributors in XV compared to 22 in real life. But if Tom Rockliff goes down for Brissie in the first 5 minutes their chances of winning are completely gone.  It's the same thing. It's just bad luck

[Memphistopheles]

I'm against a sub rule. I think that we should go with what the AFL is going with and getting ridof it. Injuries are part of the game, and it is unfortunate when you get them but its part of the game.

I don't mind the rookie list tbh. Maybe 6 is a bit many but I reckon 4 would be a good number.

Should definently have the grand final in the second last round, not the last one.

Yeh i'm against any sub rule as well

It'll be gone from the AFL next year and they will have to cop bad luck when they lose a player in the first quarter. Bad luck is a massive part of the XVs comps, fantasy comps and real life. We just have to deal with it.

Also there's been a few arguments about the injured player is replaced in real life by a bench player. A bench player in real life is a U1 or U2 in XV, so they're already a starter. The team still loses 1 person if they go down early.

I disagree completely

I think we need a sub rule or an emergency rule if you don't want to call it the sub rule. Otherwise an early injury in an AXV final could essentially end the game straight away. If it happened in a grand final it would be really disappointing to know that a team had no chance just because one of their players copped an early injury.

We only have 15 players who count for our scores in the XVs comp so a guy getting subbed out on 0, or less than say 30 points, is a big disadvantage in any contest and an early injury will likely decide the outcome of the match. In the AFL an injured player will not decide the match. The injured player sits on the bench and the club is down a rotation but, it ultimately doesn't affect things too much.

The Utilities aren't the bench. The emergency line is like the bench. Expect we can't rotate those players on. Which is fine unless injury strikes.

Whether the rule is a % of Time on Ground (TOG) or just a flat out rule that if a player doesn't come back on after quarter time, or half time - I think we need something in place. If it was the XXII's or even maybe in the XVIII's where you have 18 players) then it wouldn't be so bad but, with only 15 players' scores counting we need one.

Emergencies aren't the bench mate, our U1 amd U2 are. In AFL bench players have just as much TOG as starting 18. Barlow starts on the bench every week for Freo and has 75-80% time on ground just like every other player.

I can agree with having 15 contributors in XV compared to 22 in real life. But if Tom Rockliff goes down for Brissie in the first 5 minutes their chances of winning are completely gone.  It's the same thing. It's just bad luck

No it doesn't.

Gold Coast won after their captain Ablett went down last year. Would the Crocodiles do the same if he was your captain? I very much doubt it.