2015 RULE DISCUSSION THREAD

[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

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.

You mean the game he went down in the 3rd quarter? He scored 90odd SB points..

If you're going to go down that way Memph then you need to question whether a captain's 150pt output is really worth 300pts?

At the end of the day your emergencies are your emergencies. Your Utilities are your bench. If someone goes down in XV, its the same if someone does in real life

[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.

You mean the game he went down in the 3rd quarter? He scored 90odd SB points..

If you're going to go down that way Memph then you need to question whether a captain's 150pt output is really worth 300pts?

At the end of the day your emergencies are your emergencies. Your Utilities are your bench. If someone goes down in XV, its the same if someone does in real life

I don't know how much clearer I can be.

If someone goes down in real life they are replaced by a player from the bench in the game aka there are still 18 players on the field If someone goes down in AXV they are not replaced aka the contest now becomes 14 scorers versus 15. If two players go down it's still 18 vs 18 in the AFL on the field but it's 13 vs 15 in AXV and so on and so on.

Big difference.

[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

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.

You mean the game he went down in the 3rd quarter? He scored 90odd SB points..

If you're going to go down that way Memph then you need to question whether a captain's 150pt output is really worth 300pts?

At the end of the day your emergencies are your emergencies. Your Utilities are your bench. If someone goes down in XV, its the same if someone does in real life

I don't know how much clearer I can be.

If someone goes down in real life they are replaced by a player from the bench in the game aka there are still 18 players on the field If someone goes down in AXV they are not replaced aka the contest now becomes 14 scorers versus 15. If two players go down it's still 18 vs 18 in the AFL on the field but it's 13 vs 15 in AXV and so on and so on.

Big difference.

I can't be any clearer either haha.

Emergencies in real life are the same as Emergencies in XV

Bench in real life is the same as U1 and U2.

AFL isnt 18 contributing, it's 22. The guys on the bench play as much as everyone else. If a guy goes down then others pick up his place but they also fatigue quicker or play out of position, etc and still severely costs the team. Goldstein goes down and the team doesn't get a replacement gun ruckman straight away from the bench

[upthemaidens]

I think it's fair to say a player going down early hurts a lot more in AXV then it does in AFL.
  Do you want games decided by luck? With the Sub vests, we should have done what WXV does.  Now that there are no vests next season, I'm not so sure.

The element of luck gives weaker teams a chance to win more often, which is probably good for the comp.
   Maybe we could implement a replacement rule during Finals only?  I wouldn't want a Grand Final decided by an injury.

[Ricochet]

I'm not saying it doesnt hurt when a player goes down early but you cannot discount how much losing a player early in real life severely hurts a teams chances of winning in RL.

If Ablett goes down in the first quarter then GCs hopes of winning are hurt drastically. Its the same if he only scores 40 for a quarters worth of XV.

If we still had the sub rule in RL then a sub rule definitely makes sense here because in RL it was 21 on 21. If someone got injured then the vest comes on and its still 21 on 21. Now if someone gets injured its 21 vs 22.

I understand the argument of 18 vs 18 memph but there are 22 players worth of output in RL. Players rotate that heavily and the game is that fast that if they lose one of those rotations early then they are severely hampered. Its just plain bad luck.

Why change it when we didnt even have the sub rule when there were subs in RL?

[upthemaidens]

I'm not saying it doesnt hurt when a player goes down early but you cannot discount how much losing a player early in real life severely hurts a teams chances of winning in RL.

If Ablett goes down in the first quarter then GCs hopes of winning are hurt drastically. Its the same if he only scores 40 for a quarters worth of XV.

If we still had the sub rule in RL then a sub rule definitely makes sense here because in RL it was 21 on 21. If someone got injured then the vest comes on and its still 21 on 21. Now if someone gets injured its 21 vs 22.

I understand the argument of 18 vs 18 memph but there are 22 players worth of output in RL. Players rotate that heavily and the game is that fast that if they lose one of those rotations early then they are severely hampered. Its just plain bad luck.

Why change it when we didnt even have the sub rule when there were subs in RL?

In real life sure it hurts GC if Ablett goes down, But it doesn't hurt them as much if i.e. Danny Stanley goes down early.
    Where as in AXV if you have Stanley on field and he gets 20pts. that's the game basically over.

[Ricochet]

yeh but 20pts is literally like 2-3 touches or 5min. If any player goes down in 5 minutes in RL then the oppo team gains a massive advantage, especially towards the end of the game. i agree it's slightly more of an impact in XV but i dont think it's that big. And let's be honest, how often does a best XV player go down in the first 5min?

I just think it's a rule that isn't needed (since we didn't even have it when subs were in the AFL) and doesnt reflect real life at all if we do bring it in now.

But just my opinion. That's the last I'll say on it :)

[Memphistopheles]

Why change it when we didnt even have the sub rule when there were subs in RL?

To prevent the situation where a final, or worse a grand final, is decided by an early injury.

Remember when SJ was knocked out at the first bounce? That would have cost his XVs team the game (had we been running then).

However, it didn't cost the Cats the game - they won that match by 27 points. I'm sure there are other examples.

[Ricochet]

Why change it when we didnt even have the sub rule when there were subs in RL?

To prevent the situation where a final, or worse a grand final, is decided by an early injury.

But then you need to look at Captains and other scoring? Matches are decided if Pendles has a bad game and only gets 80 (160) while Deledio gets 150 (300)

Its just bad luck

[BB67th]

Just a reminder that a vote on rule changes will be sent out tomorrow, so if there are any other changes you would like discussed, please mention them now.

[nrich102]

Trading future draft picks. Will probably be voted down but can we just put it to a vote?

[nostradamus]

Trading future draft picks. Will probably be voted down but can we just put it to a vote?

I'd hate this myself..........Rids and l took over a horrendous list in BXV, if trading of future picks had been allowed l have no doubt they'd have been gone too.

Imagine trying to attract prospective coaches in such circumstances.

[nrich102]

Trading future draft picks. Will probably be voted down but can we just put it to a vote?

I'd hate this myself..........Rids and l took over a horrendous list in BXV, if trading of future picks had been allowed l have no doubt they'd have been gone too.

Imagine trying to attract prospective coaches in such circumstances.

True, same would have happened to me at the Dongs, but I think that it could work well.

[nostradamus]

This might seem like a stupid question .......... but when does trading start ??

All other XV comps have started and there seems no logical reason why we haven't either.

[Ricochet]

This might seem like a stupid question .......... but when does trading start ??

All other XV comps have started and there seems no logical reason why we haven't either.

As soon as everyone gets their votes on the rules man. Couldn't start trading until rules were finalised just in case new rules changed peoples views on players/strategies/trades.