I’m happy to give what we got a chance. Maybe make a judgement and seasons end. No need for more changes again. I’m interested to see who we all delist. It could hurt a few coaches having to delist 4 players at seasons end. It’s hard delisting talent, especially those that you think could be the future
I've listed below another Rule that I think needs discussing. (b) To delist players, simply post the players delisted on the delisted thread. Relist is possible prior to the delistment cut-off time, and must involve public grovelling I don't agree with this (the bolded bit) and believe once a player is posted as being de-listed, then that's it, He's de-listed...... If you're not sure whether to de-list or not, then wait til the deadline and post accordingly just prior to that deadline.. My point is, that a delisted player may be of value to another team, and that prospective coach includes him in his/her trading/drafting strategy, only to find the players Coach re-lists him just prior to the deadline, thus throwing that strategy out the window. I don't like it and feel it should be removed from the rules for de-listing and I don't care how much grovelling is done....If you de-list someone, then that's it, finito, it's over, gone, you're outta here, nick off, don't come back and shut the door on the way out...
@choppers would you mind making this bit a little more clear please? I'm not sure I follow what you're saying!
I'll try but I'm a tad scotched out.... Once you post a player in the Delistment thread, then that's it......he's de-listed. That is what I'd like to see. I don't think there should be an avenue to re-list him back onto your team. Once you've made the decision to de-list, and post it to the Thread, it's final.
It was a sarcastic comment Chops, but thankyou anyway. I actually disagree with you, and I'm fine with coaches being able to relist a player if they want, prior to the deadline. Lets see what everyone else thinks...
Good excuse. Unfortunately some of us have to work early on Mondays, so can't drink the good stuff on a Sunday night.
My opinion is that Glenfiddich is a fine drop. I'm not too fussed but I'll side with @choppers on this one. I think coaches can go the way of @DamoH and offer up a potential delistee such as McKenzie for auction or just post something along those lines in the trade discussion thread rather than delist, re-list, trade for late pick shenanigans.
This then brings me back to the suggestion to make it total player changes over a year, rather than purely draft picks. Right now we all need to have a minimum of four list spaces free before the PSD. If we go down this path, then it'll make potentially delisted players more valuable as trade / auction opportunities. But then maybe I'm still just peddling my own personal agenda...
Ask, and ye shall receive: http://tooserious.net/forum/threads/poll-delistment-rule.90297/#oIYQso3mD3oziHXS.97
@JPK with what has been said in the auction thread as i can see both point of views maybe the rules for auctions need to be changed, one to stop wasting the auctioneers time and bidders time. Not sure on what other coaches thoughts are or the rate of success for auctions, but either the auctions could have a reserve stated or if no reserve the highest bid wins.
Auctions have been a bit hit and miss over the years. I like the idea but sometimes find it hard to see the same value in a player as the seller does. If you are after picks then its easy - Anything higher than pick 50 in the PSD for example. If you are after a certain player, then its a bit tougher - A 23-27 y.o Mid averaging over 90. You might be hoping for J Kelly, I could be thinking A Miles (for example). Player value is all very subjective and hard to set rules around.
Its always a good idea to discuss things like this. My personal view is that (as the rules state) the auctioneer doesn't need to state a reserve or a reason that a reserve may or may not have been met. When they see a bid, they have the right to decide whether or not they're satisfied with the bid. Simple as that.
I feel the same just throwing idea's out there. Too many rule changes going on to the point where we are now trying to rectify what we have put in place over the past 4 years IMO, equalization never works.
I’ll chuck a couple out there: 1. Amend 6(a), so that the 3 and 4th place positions in the draft are determined on overall season points for, rather than points scored in the semi finals. I feel this would better reflect the true finishing positions. 2. Delete 7(b)-(f) inclusive. They aren’t enforced and seem a tad over-the-top imho.
5 (c) ORFFU lists may be cut to fewer than 20 players. However, if you cut your list to less than 10 player’s questions will be asked about WTF you're doing with your team in this competition - rightfully so and serious questions will be asked about your commitment with the possible removal from ORFFU. 7 (d) Delisting players to below 20 on your list will raise serious questions about your commitment with the possible removal from ORFFU. Can you cut your list to below 20 ? which one is it?
I agree they aren't enforced but there is a place for them in the rules. We need to coaches to at least be checking in once a week
4 d) Trades can be vetoed if a majority of 5 non-participating teams cast a veto vote. This should be abolished. "if a majority of 5 non-participating teams cast a veto vote" It has caused many arguments with some taken it as a personal attack, if there seems to be some collusion this should be left up to the board to decide.
Discussion. If your emergency does not play , instead of copping a zero and you have another emergency play from another line, your highest scoring emergency gets half point. eg. defender is a late out, you have a named defender emergency who does not play. You have a listed midfielder emergency play, you then get half points. Hope that makes sense. In the real world players can play multiple position's.