Is there any need for us to revisit rules or anything?

Discussion in 'ORFFA' started by chris88, Jan 19, 2015.

  1. chris88

    chris88 1000 Monkeys at 1000 Typewriters Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,926
    Likes Received:
    882
    I'm not sure if this is entirely my place, but I wanted to raise it now before things kicked off in earnest ... given the discussions the good people of the ORRFL are currently having about rules (particularly squad sizes) and the like - do we need to do the same?

    I raise it only as maybe as an opportunity to discuss any further burning issues people might have before the season really gets going.
     
  2. ChiefRussell

    ChiefRussell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    710
    Likes Received:
    670
    Nothing from me, the less tinkering the better.
     
  3. graeme

    graeme Guest

    Nothing pressing from this neck of the woods. It would be nice if TiB answered messages or emails but we do not need a rule change for that. Have not heard or seen anything of Melbandy for quite some time. Please sign in some time amigo or else we are going to have to send a search party to look for you.
     
  4. Len

    Len Cockburn Knightrider Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    8,645
    Likes Received:
    3,855
    I have nothing to propose, happy with the status quo on our rules.. Andy said he would be on extended leave last year, and committed to 2015 so should see him back very shortly, bama is the other other one who hasn't been on or around since last season, but also has committed to 2015 and should be about very shortly..
     
  5. anthak

    anthak Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    8,079
    Likes Received:
    2,902
    I did like the proposal of draft day trading. Looks like it may be a goer for a trial at the MSD I also like my previous suggestion of being able to match pre-draft bids for previously owned players who were delisted in ORFFA due to real life delistment/retirement etc. Mitch Clark etc.... I can't remember how the discussion went, but I don't think it was gonna get up.
     
  6. TerryinBangkok

    TerryinBangkok Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    1,059
    <div class='Forum_Normal' id='spBody] 'It would be nice if TiB answered messages or emails but we do not need a rule change for that.' Nothing to see here. Move on.
     
  7. grav

    grav Guest

    yep i'm pretty sweet with current set up
     
  8. snoz

    snoz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    942
    grav wrote:
    </br> yep i'm pretty sweet with current set up There is nothing sweet about you G :)
     
  9. grav

    grav Guest

    Simonoz wrote:
    grav wrote:

    yep i'm pretty sweet with current set up There is nothing sweet about you G :) Flattery will get you nowhere snoz. I'm sure you'd change your tune if I gifted Broomy back to you. Ha, not happening...
     
  10. graeme

    graeme Guest

    My recollection is that currently each franchise is required to de-list a minimum of six players per year and that a minimum of four players must be de-listed before the PSD. Just thinking out loud - do we need the requirement to de-list a minimum of four players before the PSD? If this constraint were removed a coach might choose to de-list no players prior to the PSD. As a result he would have no picks in the PSD as a result of not de-listing any players. The franchise might have a pick as a result of a previous trade, but would generate no extra picks in the PSD. Subsequently, sufficient players would need to be de-listed prior to the MSD to meet the de-list at least six players per year rule. The franchise would then rebuild in the MSD. Thoughts appreciated.
     
  11. chris88

    chris88 1000 Monkeys at 1000 Typewriters Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,926
    Likes Received:
    882
    graeme wrote:
    My recollection is that currently each franchise is required to de-list a minimum of six players per year and that a minimum of four players must be de-listed before the PSD. Just thinking out loud - do we need the requirement to de-list a minimum of four players before the PSD? If this constraint were removed a coach might choose to de-list no players prior to the PSD. As a result he would have no picks in the PSD as a result of not de-listing any players. The franchise might have a pick as a result of a previous trade, but would generate no extra picks in the PSD. Subsequently, sufficient players would need to be de-listed prior to the MSD to meet the de-list at least six players per year rule. The franchise would then rebuild in the MSD. Thoughts appreciated.

    I would have no issue with the requirements for minimum delistings before the PSD being dropped as long as we retained the requirement of a minmum 6 delistings during the year.

    Most people would, you'd think, choose to delist before the PSD to pick up some of the new talent coming into the league.

    Can anyone recall a reason why we have the '4 and 6' rule we currently have?

     
  12. graeme

    graeme Guest

    My memory says we had the 4 and 6 rule to ensure there was sufficient depth in the PSD. The idea was also I seem to recall to cause some hurt in de-listing.. I agree with that concept but am happy to defer the hurt until the MSD.
     
  13. Len

    Len Cockburn Knightrider Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    8,645
    Likes Received:
    3,855
    The applicable rules to this draft:

    1. It is a requirement that you draft 6 compulsory picks per year, these can be done all in the preseason draft, or over both drafts.

    - A minimum of 4 of those compulsory picks must be taken in the preseason draft, that is you must enter the 2014 preseason draft with a maximum of 24 players.

    - It is not a matter of how many players you de-list, that is potentially irrelevant as the list size can be traded down or up in the trade period prior.

    - If you enter this draft with more than 22 players you must participate in the 2014 midseason draft.

    It is not appropriate to change this rule unless it is for next year, people have already traded picks for this PSD based on the value of the pick if all picks are active. It has also been previously debated that inactive picks should be considered differently, this is also not possible for the same reason. For the purposes of establishing value, and the reliability of that value in trade outcomes, pick 22 must always remain pick 22 (for example). There is no requirement to delist per se either, it is purely a matter of list size at the commencement of the appropriate draft. I wouldn't have an issue with making the change when the limits kick in if that was all that changed, but the current rule is already soft, a coach can effectively only cut to 24 instead of 22 if he cuts 2 draftees in the MSD instead of 2 players that were on his/her list at the commencement of the PSD. I tried to change it to a mandatory 22 when we increased the team sizes by 2 to ensure the viability of draft pools and ensure delistment pain but did not get the majority required. Further softening the draft requirements would be detrimental to the health of draft pools and the competition evening effect they are supposed to influence. For that reason, and because of the need for pick values to be knowable the only way this would work is if a coach declared prior to this years MSD trade period (when next years PSD picks become trade-able), that they wont pick next year at the PSD, that feels wrong on so many levels.
     

Share This Page