What absence of TiB??? I think the 4/2 rule has been looked upon most favourably. We need to formally adopt it. 4 is only fixed as a minimum, not as a max. So, if you had a trade pick, you could possibly only delist 3. My understanding of the pre-season draft is that any AFL player not already listed by an ORFFA team is available for drafting. This includes the players delisted by other teams. Len can spank me if I am wrong. One for one is da rule, thus by default everyone understands it. Delisting. Correct. My personal preference would be that these traded draft picks equating to a delistment should be regularized prior to commencement of the season (i.e., the 'counted' delistment is not carried over to the mid-season draft), but will leave it up to Len who seems well on top of this stuff and has a firm grip on the bat. Regret to advise that trolling is currently not allowed under ORFFA rules. . <img src="http://tooserious.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/3d7j0-troll_2.jpg" />
<blockquote>Quote from TerryinBangkok on September 26, 2012, 18:17 I think the 4/2 rule has been looked upon most favourably. We need to formally adopt it. </blockquote> Has this ruling been made official. Presumably it is how we are moving forward, but just wondering. And what does the number 2 represent?
<blockquote>Quote from anthak on November 1, 2012, 02:27 <blockquote>Quote from TerryinBangkok on September 26, 2012, 18:17 I think the 4/2 rule has been looked upon most favourably. We need to formally adopt it. </blockquote> Has this ruling been made official. Presumably it is how we are moving forward, but just wondering. And what does the number 2 represent? </blockquote> Ant, At the time, I threw this post in pg 5 of the end of season trade block thread and got some answers from Len. No diff to what TiB has stated here although Len thought the 4/2 rule was adopted. The 2 refers to the delistment of 2 players prior to the mid season draft. Cheers
TerryinBangkok wrote: For ease of reference, here are the basic ORFFL Rules that we need to consider: TEAMS Teams should be named after a remote Australian town/place. Squads of 26 players during competition. Cut down to 20 before 2013 Rookie Draft (date TBC). Point 1 we need to consider. Playing sides will consist of 15 players. 4 Defenders, 4 Midfielders, 1 Ruck, 4 Forwards and 2 Interchange. The Interchange players can be of any position. They score points too. 3 Emergencies can be selected. Emergencies must be selected in ONE line only.They come in if a player is a late withdrawal. You can play someone in the wrong position, ie. Cloke in Defence, but they only get half the points. SC points and player positions. If you don't field a team, you don't get no points. If you do it again, serious questions will be asked about your commitment to Sparkle Motion Point 2 we need to consider. FIXTURE Teams will play each other once in the regular season. Play will not occur in the 3 bye rounds (11,12,13). Finals will be held in the final 3 weeks of the season (21,22,23). Points 3 & 4 we need to consider. FINALS Final 8, knockout style over 3 weeks (R21-23). Point 5 we need to consider. In the first week the Top 3 teams get to choose which team they play in the first week of the finals out of positions 5-8. Eg. 1st gets 1st choice, 2nd gets 2nd choice etc. DRAFT Draft will be run in snake order ie. Team A gets pick 1 and 36, Team B, picks 2 and 35 and so on. After the initial Draft Night, coaches will have 24 hours to take their pick. If they don't pick within the time limit, they will get the player with highest 2012 SC average left. Or coaches can give out lists/preferences in case of that contingency. Mid Season Draft will happen in the last Bye Week (R13). Draft will run in reverse ladder order as of the end of R10. Mid Season Draft is not compulsory to participate in. There is no salary cap. SC dollars do not exist in this universe. You cannot draft Jaeger or Crouch yet. No baggsies. TRADES Mid Season Trade Period will occur during Bye Weeks 1 and 2 (R11 and R12) Pre Season Trade Period is actually on right now, but you wouldn't know it. Ends at the conclusion of the NAB Cup GF. You can trade picks (to the mid-season draft, not the original one) and players, but it must be to a 1:1 ratio. Eg. Thomas and Pick 4 &gt; Selwood and Golby. This is largely to keep list sizes equal. Trading works on the 50% Veto system. If 50% of the non-involved teams veto said trade, trade does not go through. Teams will have roughly 48 hours to veto a trade proposed (eg. If a trade is proposed at 2.15pm on a Tuesday, ORFFL coaches have until 10pm on a Thursday to cast their votes. I'll be checking/ratifying at 10pm, basically). Point 6 we need to consider. Propose trades in the 'ORFFL Pre Season Trade Table' thread. LEAGUE COMPOSITION a) Ape the WXV at FF and have an 18 team comp with 15 players on the field (4,4,1,4 +2 Interchange). Play everyone once, exclude the bye rounds and have a 3 round final series ie. final 6. b) Keep it at a 10 team comp, with 18 players on the field (5,5,1,5 +2 Interchange). Play everyone twice, exclude the bye rounds and have a 2 round final series ie. final 4 c) Something else. Maybe with no finals, just points. I'm always open to ideas. Point 7 we need to consider. Point 1. We have debated the 6 delistings at length. The only consensus seems to be that everyone can delist more than the stipulated number should they so wish. The best I can offer as a merger of the various views is; 4 prior to pre-season draft, 2 more prior to mid-season draft. Numbers maintained at 26 total. Please head any views with Point 1. Point 2. Again we have discussed this, or rather agonised over this. Views range from the 3 strikes you're out, to draft penalties. We have on the table for consideration at the moment; 1 failure to enter a team without any advice or apology = drop in draft pick x 1. That is, if your pick was 36, it is now 37. 2 failures = 38, etc. Please address your views with Point 2. Point 3. Think most would be happy with this format, but of course it depends on how many teams we enter the new season with. Abiding view seems to be everyone must play each other at least once. Head views with Point 3 please. Points 4&5. Consensus seems to be a 3-week finals format or a 4-week (both assume a final 8). Views headed by Point 4 please. Point 6. Danny di Veto. From memory, ORFFA seems a bit more trusting. How about all trades have to posted for 48 hours and will automatically come into effect after that time provided a minimum of 3 vetos are not posted? Respond with Point 6 please. Point 7. Will pretty much be determined by how we look come Round 1. But, we should discuss it. Simon actually favours a 16-team comp, but has not expanded on this with respect to squad size, etc. Others seem to favour that we should at least strive to field 18 teams. Views marked as Point 7 please. Other curly ones: Point 8. We will have a roster for the Weekly Review, involving all 18 coaches. This will be managed by Chris, who will grab the ball as need be. Bama will post the bare results as usual, 'cause he's good at it. Chris and I can share the Previews. Happy with Point 8? Point 9. Transfer of franchise. Any new franchise has to be acknowledged by all remaining coaches. So too the withdrawal of any franchise has to be agreed to by all. Probs with Point 9. Think that's it. Address any or all, but please mark your 'Point' replies in bold. I have just realised that the match committee hasnt made a ruling on the finals format. and we should do so ASAP now that the season has started. I have compiled the feedback in this thread as follows: <blockquote style='margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;] FINALS Final 8, knockout style over 3 weeks (R21-23).Point 5 we need to consider.In the first week the Top 3 teams get to choose which team they play in the first week of the finals out of positions 5-8. Eg. 1st gets 1st choice, 2nd gets 2nd choice etc. Points 4&5.Consensus seems to be a 3-week finals format or a 4-week (both assume a final 8). Views headed by Point 4 please. Len: Points 3, 4 & 5In these structural elements as with almost all of a similar ilk I feel we should mirror the ORFFL, not because they are awesome, though they may well be, but because being structured the same allows for many possible future interactions. Bandit: Point 3, 4 and 5agree with Len here... lets try and align to ORFFL. I would however like to seepoint 5agiven consideration Jimbowen: Point 3,4,5Happy with this structure. Fitzy: Point 3,4,5Same as most here, agree with Len Simonoz: 3.4.5....Happy with whatever is arranged. Finals a must, if logistically we cant all play each other in one season then no biggie. JC: 3/4/5. Sounds good. </blockquote> And that was it. Does anyone know if there was any other discussion anywhere. Apart from in the Fixture thread where TiB pointed out the Match Committee needed to make a ruling and directed me to this thread for ideas. I think we will go with a final 8 over 3 weeks, as thats what the 6 coaches have already agreed to in this thread, 7 if you include TiB... and because, well, it seems to make the most sense... but I am speaking out of turn, cause the Match Committee members havent discussed this as a group yet: <blockquote style='margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;] Match Committee:Anthak (to chair) w. chels, jb and Fitzy (includes 2013 fixtures) </blockquote> And because Len, Bandit and Fitzy have all suggested we should allign with whatever ORFFL are doing, can someone from ORFFL (H maybe) please advise us what it is that you will be doing for finals. Cheers.
ahhhh, Ive just realised that the original post of TiB's was actually the ORFFL rules, so we dont need someone from there to advise what they are doing. Unless of course it has changed. But still would like to hear if anyone knows of a lace where there has been any further discussion on this. I do recall that there was more, but got no idea where. Maybe it was lost in the great flood? I think I remember some dissent to the top teams getting to pick their round 1 opponents - which would be handy input if there is dissent to that.
I am good with the structural aspects of 3 4 & 5 as indicated initially ant, but I was not a fan of the pick your own opponent idea, I don't get why it exists. 1 v 8 etc works for me. I think there was further discussion, but I don't recall it moving too much from what you have copied in?
Final 8. Prefer the 1 vs 8, etc. format. Not sure on the ORFFL reasoning, but think H explained it somewhere. Perhaps top 4 don't get a second bite......
While we might all prefer the AFL finals system with a second chance for top 4 teams, the1 v 8 approach with no second chance is almost the default setting. Let me explain for those who have not plotted out the deal (thanks to Fitzy for the approach); there are 23 rounds in the home and away season, we lose three rounds with byes (when consulted no one wanted to play those weeks), meaning we finish our round robin at round 20 (see the fixture list). That means we have three weeks left for finals - QED. One way to have a full round robin and an AFL finals system (historical note: the one that replaced the McIntyre System in 2000) is to play one round during the byes - perhaps a best score by your players in the two rounds they play during the byes. I am guessing it would be quite complicated but we could pit in place.
chels wrote: While we might all prefer the AFL finals system with a second chance for top 4 teams, the1 v 8 approach with no second chance is almost the default setting. Let me explain for those who have not plotted out the deal (thanks to Fitzy for the approach); there are 23 rounds in the home and away season, we lose three rounds with byes (when consulted no one wanted to play those weeks), meaning we finish our round robin at round 20 (see the fixture list). That means we have three weeks left for finals - QED. One way to have a full round robin and an AFL finals system (historical note: the one that replaced the McIntyre System in 2000) is to play one round during the byes - perhaps a best score by your players in the two rounds they play during the byes. I am guessing it would be quite complicated but we could pit in place. Or, if we wanted we could even skip the bye rounds and have a round were we play two separate teams, meaning we avoid bye rounds and have a 4 week final series, food for thought
wow Fitzy, that is a creative idea - sort of like a twins weekend? I know sNoZ is taking notes but with that sort of thinking you would be wasted in publishing (or academe I hear TiB thinking).
Creative thinking indeed and for that I applaud you. That said, I don't think 2 games in one round is for me. Would hate to think you'd chalk up two losses and ruin your season on the back of one bad week for your team. Doesn't seem right to me.
8 4 2 works for me, I like simple, as I get older I find simple means I don't have to look for my glasses...