@Len - Hard to figure out what to do for all the ORF and TSA leagues. Try to remove ESS MEL players ? I’m just seeing this now so not sure it can be done. Perhaps manually give these players their ‘average’ score instead?
Given we are playing head to head iin this league rather than points for averages are probably the only reasonable outcome. Could do a top 12 scoreres or similar Points for leagues are easy, sure they cop a zero this week but will get a double score later on
Yep - would rather averages manually inserted rather than top 12 scorers. Easy for Walesy to do as there will be no changes to the current setup as well. Maybe do a poll Len ?
I would actually prefer to use actual points scored in the Essendon vs Melbourne match even if it is played in 6 to 14 weeks time. Messy I know but workable if someone can use a spreadsheet to tally up the scores or it is possible to retrospectively load the scores into TS. Otherwise I would suggest that the scores calculated or Ess/Melb players be a sliding score based on the players current SC price reverse engineered using the SC MN to convert $$$ to points. Teams have had the benefit of one spike score already in 2020, and similarly others may have copped a bad one, using a 1 or 2 game average isn't really representative of an expected score. Obviously it is much more representative after 8-10 games so whatever happens this week does not necessarily have to apply later on. For instance if Gold Coast had been involved would it have been fair that the Nuffers get 125 this week for Rowell after his 171 last week already won us an earlier match, while the MN option would convert this to a 60 odd score that later in the season would be 80 ish assuming his price rises to the high 300s. Similar for more established players who will presumably revert to the mean this week while others who underperformed in Rounds 1 and 2 will no doubt go 130 plus this week.
Left field (maybe) option... Have emergencies cover donuts this week and then when the double point week for Ess and Melb players happens, teams with those players get their best score (kinda like we do with our SOO weeks). I dunno, I haven’t looked to see which teams get most affected by this. I know I have two Bombers playing and my opponent has one. All I know is this whole thing is a bloody shambles...
personally I reckon we should ask Walesy what is easiest for him to arrange. It might suck for him to have to implement a different approach across all the leagues. I dont really mind whatever is decided, even if I have to cop donuts.
"ROUND 3 - BEST 18 SCORING: With the postponement of the Essendon v Melbourne match, Best 18 scoring rules apply. Your team scores points from your Best 18 players (top 18 scores) selected in your Starting 22 only, from any position (including any Emergencies required)." Up to @Bandit but I think we do a scaled version of this or take player averages, neither is perfect by any means, but either allows us to move on this week and cogitate what ifs for the next time, because there will be next times
As it’s a ‘points for’ only league - just manually insert their 2020 average for now for any postponed game so that each week can easily conclude. Then when the game is actually played, we can go back and update with the actual scores. Walesy then doesn’t have to change a thing!
Whatever we decide to do, some will benefit some will lose. My 5cents worth re postponed games. 1, I'd prefer not to use a player's average score with so little data this season. Rowell is a prime example. 2. What to do about players in the side this week, but not selected in the rearranged game? 3. How to deal with late outs and ins. I have Michael Hibberd named as a D, currently he is an E in the postponed game, but I am sure he would have come in to play his former club. The season is looking increasingly unlikely to be completed. Thus there is still time for the 'hoppers to choke; as we know they will. However, @snoz 's side does appear to be the strongest, but who knows what might happen?
I reckon any average scores should only apply to the selected 22 for Melbourne. Otherwise we should be giving every player in the league who doesn’t play this week but was an emergency an average score as well. While for the bombers we have to consider that while McKenna was named is it fair that he gets an average score? If so none of the emergencies should get a score, but if he does not then do we assume that the Bombers play with 21 or how do we determine whether one or all of the Essendon Emergencies get a score (if so Iwould give each of them 50% of their score). As has already been mentioned the simplest method (ignoring TSleagues issues) is to plug in match scores when the match is eventually played and if there are 10 changes to the selected sides when it is played then that is the luck of the draw likely to impact 1 or 2 players at most for each ORFFA side.
Hahaha cheeky sod @graeme !!! The average score input this week is merely a placeholder score until the game is actually played, at which time said average scores are replaced by real scores. It helps us conclude the round. As to the other variables - players named this week but not for the rescheduled game - fucked if I know what to do hahahahaha
A progress score from Lovely Banks has the Lilacs @Jen leading by 150 points registering 846/11 with Amon, Westhoff, Jonas and Parish* to play vs the Nuffers on 696/9 with Clurey, Duursma, Ebert, SPP, T Mcdonald* (oop) and Redman* yet to run out. Already half a player down due to an oop ruck the Nuffers could lose another half a ruck pending the eligibility of Essendon and Melbourne players being fully determined as part of the ongoing discussion of scoring rules to be adopted across the ORFFA. Factoring in the current and potential numerical advantage this match appears to be well in favour of the Lilacs yet with 7 players yet to take the field in the late game the Nuffers are a slim chance but will need last ditch heroics from their Power quartet if they are to put themselves back in contention.
We are a long way short of all 18 teams nominating their jumper number (and player). Who else will be joining in with this great initiative ?
Jarrad McVeigh - club legend. In the week we play tribute to him, Great player, but more important a great man. Has moved seamlessly into coaching and this week helped the swans get up against norf. Kinda typical of the man that he still contributes and reminds us of his qualities. Will we be retiring the #3? Nah, the cows are happy to go against the flow. Tom Mitchell has taken the number over - yep, he hunts out anything of value - and it would be disrespectful to him to strip him of the number. Besides, there is a Sydney Swans connection there. So we salute you Macca; our tribute - the #3 lives on.
I figured you might and contemplated doing the same given both his very brief stint at Birdsville and his lasting impact on the competition.