The wet singlet reminds me of the old 'Leyland Brothers' opening titles. Fitzy - something is either superior or not. 'More superior' is not an option. Not to imply that ORFFA is better - remember we pretty much have copied all their rules & stuff.
<blockquote>Quote from Fitzy on May 18, 2012, 15:44 I reckon percentage, more AFL like, even though the ORFFA is more superior... But I like Percentage alot more to be honest</blockquote> Fitzy, wash your mouth out. Please. . <img src="http://tooserious.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/m8df0-bar-of-soap-thumb18409891.jpg" />
<blockquote>Quote from Fitzy on May 18, 2012, 15:44 I reckon percentage, more AFL like, even though the ORFFA is more superior... But I like Percentage alot more to be honest</blockquote> It differs slightly from the AFL already as they have goals + points = total score, versus the total score of the opposition in head to head on field play. The ability of the opposition effects the percentage score. Here we are using total supercoach points, which are independant of the opponents ability. Therefore a team total score is a better indicator of a teams overall ability thus ladder position. IMO. I also dont really mind either way.
I like % better - even though I think Points For is fairer. Or maybe we could have a 'grand final sprint' type race to decide ladder positions. So the Cockatoos don't have to travel far, we could hold it at Stawell... We could even call it a gift if we want to be original.
<blockquote>Quote from Xenomorph on May 18, 2012, 15:49 The wet singlet reminds me of the old 'Leyland Brothers' opening titles. Fitzy - something is either superior or not. 'More superior' is not an option. Not to imply that ORFFA is better - remember we pretty much have copied all their rules & stuff.</blockquote> Yanno, I was going to say that. But then I thought nah, we got a lecturer in our midst. Doesn't know a cocktail from a rum and coke, but is a bit of a bottler on the use of the Queen's English and knows how to bring down the ruler on this rabble. So I held back, figured give Fitzy a break. . <img src="http://tooserious.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/m5zo5-monty-python-2.jpg" /> So when he's not pulling our ears, do you think he could put the weekly ladder up here, in it's rightful spot? Not instead of the front page, but here as well so that we have a more permanent record to refer to? Actually there was a nice little exchange in Latin today over in that thread where X. doesn't visit anymore.
Thanks TiB, meanwhile down at Venus Bay, we fattened up on fish and choked... not sure if we grabbed a win or not but I am sure of a disapointing score
Fish are good for the team Fitzy. Build stamina. Let's hope you scrambled a win and your opponent was not more superior than your team.
Thanks for your lack of support TiB. Your treachery will not go unpunished. <img src="http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4juDQw7COonwvDM2vZoS_dIzAgbMaX2v0HNFT6yv6s2_VoUjTPw" /> From the people that brought you the rare Norwegian Blue Parrot.
<blockquote>Quote from Xenomorph on May 18, 2012, 14:18 Yep - the emergency can only come from a player nominated for that line and then substituting for a player in that line. Let's say you have Sammy Mitchell nominated in your mids and then Sammy doesn't play. In order to act as an emergency and then have their score count, you would have to have an emergency named as a mid. An emergency named in the fwd's for example, could not act as a substitute for Sammy, and cannot act as an OOP emergency for half points. PR, CR & BB from ORFFL were all affected by this rule this week. I understand that ORFFL are voting at the end of the season on whether to change this rule so that OOP players can act as 1/2 score emergencies and if we wish we can have a vote too.</blockquote> Hi X (and others) Have read through this post and I must admit I am more confused now than I was a week ago (before the post existed regarding emergencies). My understanding was that you needed to nominate three emergencies in the positions that you wanted them to be emergencies for (including the interchange bench). An interchange player could not move into a forward, mid, ruck or defender spot if someone pulled out. I'm pretty sure that this is still the case. Where my confusion lies is in the whole OOP situation that you have mentioned above. I understand that if I play a player OOP, then I get half points. Is this not the case still for an emergency named OOP. In Round 1, I nominated James Polkinghorne (who is a mid) as my defensive emergency as I only had three defenders and Joel MacDonald as an emergency for Melbourne's side. I made the decision to start MacDonald on the field for the Chickens in the off chance he was a late inclusion so that I got full points. He didn't play so I was resigned to the fact that I would get half points for Polkinghorne, as I had clicked the little drop down box thingy next to his name and had him listed as a defender (at least I am 97.6% sure I did, if I didn't then ignore most of this). In any case I didn't get Polkinghorne's 20 points, it didn't matter for the week anyway, but I wanted to get clarification on whether I understand the rule correctly or not as you mentioned that I was affected by this rule in Round 1 and my understanding was that I shouldn't be as I had nominated Polkinghorne as my defensive emergency. Cheers, CR
I thought I understood it the same as you until I read this thread as well Now you understand my comments about it that I made in the round 1 review
I think thats what Xeno said as well CR? I believe you are correct? well at least thats also what I thought lol <blockquote>Let's say you have Sammy Mitchell nominated in your mids and then Sammy doesn't play. In order to act as an emergency and then have their score count, you would have to have an emergency named as a mid. An emergency named in the fwd's for example, could not act as a substitute for Sammy, and cannot act as an OOP emergency for half points.</blockquote> So you had Polkinghorne named as a DEF emg and he is a mid. So thats half points for mine if you had a defender pull out?
But there was also this comment: <blockquote>Quote from Xenomorph on May 18, 2012, 10:03 ... You don't get half points for an OOP emergency...</blockquote> Which I think needs to be explained a bit more.
I am pleased others are trying to come to grips with this "rule"; that is why I first raised the point in the thread above and asked again. I shut up then because I did not think anyone was interested. I suggest an emergency (as opposed to an interchange player) can only occupy their SC position. That is a defender can only be an emergency for a defender. That's how I read the ORFFL speil; e.g., a M/F must be specified as either a M or a F. He cannot cover both. That's the import of the one line stuff. It seems to me that the notion that it was possible to draft only midfielders and then use them in other positions should be a flawed strategy. I, for one, drafted (albeit badly according to TiB) from all positions because I wanted to be able to field as many players as possible in points scoring positions. Perhaps we now have a basis for a trade period where everybody has the opportunity to build a balanced team. I would like to see a system where the person wanting a trade lists the player available and the position they want to trade into. There is then 24 hrs or 48 hrs for everyone interested to make a bid through the trade page. Those wanting to trade can then enter a bid of a player (1:1 basis) and the best trade offered succeeds. Completely transparent is the only way - no back room deals between teams that have played each other already. OTY, its our league lets sort it out amicably. Please have your say, please.
OK CR - not trying to dud you points mate - this how I understood the rule to work and this is how it was explained to me. I have a bit of time to spend on this and the round review etc today so will get this worked out. If anyone has been left short of half a Polkinghorne, it will be be returned! Let's just get this sorted so everyone knows the score. Ladder and round review coming later today.
So what is the deal then? Can you have an emergency come on to fill a position that is not their SC position, if you have them assigned to the position that the non playing starter holds? And if so, do you score half or full points for such a player? (chels - you raise some good points re trading, but I think we should get to the bottom of this emergency ruling first, before discussing trades)
<blockquote>Quote from Xenomorph on May 22, 2012, 08:36 OK CR - not trying to dud you points mate - this how I understood the rule to work and this is how it was explained to me. I have a bit of time to spend on this and the round review etc today so will get this worked out. If anyone has been left short of half a Polkinghorne, it will be be returned! Let's just get this sorted so everyone knows the score...</blockquote> Does this mean the answers to my questions are Yes and Half? And that Polkinghorns half points were left out by mistake?
Also, Xenomorph, while you're fixing scores, you may want to check this too. <blockquote>Quote from chris88 on May 18, 2012, 13:42 <blockquote>Quote from Xenomorph on May 18, 2012, 13:27 For Against Percentage Darraweit Guim 1506 1094 143.1 </blockquote> Hey X - did I score 1566 or 1506? Did I muddle up my adding up? If so, huge apologies!</blockquote> And TiB's For and Against scores were round the wrong way too. Thanks
Surely thats right Ant? thats how I also read it. Xeno maybe just give an example? lol For instance this is what we all believe is the case - 1) Deledio (D) pulls out pregame. scores a (0) 2) Polkinghorne is a mid, but has been named as a D emergency. He scores (40) 3) As he was named as an OOP correct line emergency, he scores (20) or half points. Can you confirm this is the case?