ORFFA Weekly Ladder

OK guys - I have consulted the doyen of the Commish community and have been advised that you CAN play an OOP emergency. Thus CR has been dudded half a Polkinghorne & I think the Dinosaur also lost out.

So. Now I just have to fix up last week's ladder, work out this week's results and this week's ladder. Give me a few hours.

Sorry about the delay but it's the last week of semester and things are a little frantic. In fact I have had to resort to giving 'binary option' multiple choice tests.

<img src="https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRoep1KzC5T3UjoZ2zUAi1uNjlSh7I53xLZPESju8_VtPjwHuUF" />

 

X I am sorry to have to say that in my opinion that approach is just nonsense. What was the point of drafting any players other than the highest scorers? What was the point of bothering to read what were held up as the rules in the ORFFL thread?

If you drafted a team that covered all positions you have been screwed royally.

Your decision is certainly not logical; as to fair I have no idea what that means in this context.

You have made a ruling and I will stick by it, but I am not happy.

Ignoratio legis non excusat should be the dictum. Further, the doctrine of contra proferentem is that the person who wrote an ambiguous clause does not interpret it, it is interpreted against him. So asking the drafters of the "emergencies rule" for clarification is wrong in fact (and in law). Finally, an ability to read and understand English is quite a useful life skill.

Making rules on the run never works - draft two weeks ago and trade now is ridiculous. ORFFA was advertised as a long term league, and as such lti's are a fact of life. But the lobby that wants to take short term decisions and short term advantage decides to go short term again.

It should be made very clear who can be drafted. Is it only those who have been delisted? Does it include those who are SC listed but not drafted? Is O'Meara or any of the other exceptional 2013 players up for draft?

Perhaps it does not matter, when three of four of you realise you are the only ones who have delisted players you'll then decide who can be drafted.

 

X, let me give you a real example of how ridiculous your ruling is; this relates to the Waikiks.

I had only three defenders selected to play last week so I put Hannebery in as an OOP defender. He scored 120 and I got half that score. Had I put in Shaw who was not selected as a defender and put Hannebery in as an emergency OOP defender I would have earned 120 points. That's what Ant refers to as being "the most logical and fair way ..." Excuse me if I disagree.

BTW, I do not want the extra 60 points your ruling granted others as that would be tantamount to accepting your ruling makes sense.

 

Chels, I took relatively simple approach of asking the ORFFL Commish how the rule applies there. This is what he told me. Thus this is the rule we are going to apply.

I do not consider this to be making rules on the run. I had actually been advised previously by an ORFFL coach that the half points rule did not apply and this was confirmed by others.

Argumentum ad nauseum, if you will.

Draft rules are simple in this regard. You can only draft players who are currently eligible to play afl. (except for your Relton types) No one can draft O'Meara or anyone else who is not currently eligible to play. Thus the mid year draft will be el boringo.

Can I finish the results/ladder now?

 

X, I have not asked you not to finish the results/ladder.

I have suggested you think about what is the correct interpretation of the rules Hornsey posted in the ORFFL Admin thread. We discussed not slavishly following ORFFL.

I would appreciate your thoughts on my 18.16 post.

 

Chels. In your example of 18.16 had you played Hanneberry as an OOP emergency, he would have got 1/2 points, just the same as he did anyway. I don't know if I've made myself clear here, but an OOP emergency scores 1/2 points, not full.

Hanneberry was in no danger of scoring 120 unless you played him as a mid OR emergency mid.

Some were not given any points for an OOP emergency in rnd 1 and this needs to be fixed.

Just to be pure Silicon Oxide clear - when you play an emergency OOP, they get 1/2 points.

I don't see how this is a huge problem.

 

Chels, the way I understand the rules is that you were never getting full points for Hanneberry as a defender regardless of whether you started him on the field or had him as an emergency. Given that he is OOP as a defender, the fact of him starting on the field or being an OOP emergency entitles him to half points only.
I totally agree with you on the point that the competition should reward players who drafted well balanced teams because otherwise everyone would just draft teams of mids. Hence why rulings were made to penalise teams for playing players OOP by only counting half the players score (meaning it is better to play a defender in position and score 65 than playing a mid who scores 85). Allowing players to play OOP is there just to avoid donuts where possible as generally people hate this part of the game and players despite their best efforts to draft well rounded teams can lose 4 or 5 players in a position quite easily with the small list sizes. This should make games closer and more interesting.
But emergency players need to be selected in specific positions and if they come into play due to a late out, they need to be treated as if they were selected on the field. If they are OOP as a result, then they get half (like I should have got with Polks and X has cleared up, not the 0 I originally got for him). I don't know if people thought I was advocating for ful points for Polks, because I have only ever asked for half.
I hope this make sense. Am on my phone and it is very hard to proofread.

 

X, because I could not follow what you had ruled I asked questions. The extended posts in this thread prior to your ruling suggest the lack of clarity.

To be quite clear, I am anti OOP Emergencies as it makes a farce of what I see as the intent of the original draft. Had this interpretation been published (was it discussed among some select coterie?) I would have drafted only four defenders.

As Ted Turner noted after having what he felt was a legitimate protest dismissed by the NYCC: "there is no point complaining to your mother in law that her daughter can't cook."

Chief, really appreciate your post, it is probably the most clear discussion posted to date (my posts included, lool).

 

I disagree a tiny bit here Chels I dont think the aim of the OOP emergency is to encourage the selecting of unbalanced teams I think it was in recognition that some weeks we were going to have trouble fielding a full squad! This just helps that little bit in being able to actually field 15 players.

Always better to actually play a real D. As CR says a 65 from a real defender will smash even a 120 from a midfielder played OOP! So if people have truly selected teams of all mids they are going to get punished in the long run!

 

Well I tried to draft a balance team but managed to stuff it up! I thought I had drafted 7 backs but it turns out it was only 6. Sam Fisher's injury means my team is a bit skinny for defenders but that's my own stupid fault.

Might have to see about a mid-season trade....

 

Jols, did you run out of fingers when counting ???

 

Lol, Snoz. An important lesson mate - if you drink and count.....

......you'll probably get it wrong