Rules Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'ORFFU' started by JPK, Jul 27, 2018.

  1. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    1. I actually disagree with this, and like it how it is. The difference is only one place in the PSD, and reflects a teams' performance in the semis, as does the results in the grand final. Otherwise, why don't we extend the idea to the grand final, as it also better reflects the whole season and not just one game (meaning that this year, with Ararat in 1st and Korumburra in 7th, if Korumburra won the GF, they would have still gotten PSD 12 as per their end of season position, not PSD 2 or PSD 1 for being good enough to make the grand final).

    2. I agree that they are over the top. Maybe we can water them down a little, but I still believe we need something in the rules to "ensure" activity remains and control is not lost.
     
  2. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Yeah, that's an interesting conundrum... If you've got an idea for how they should be worded, let me know, and we'll look to update them both.
     
  3. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Starting to agree with this.
    I can't remember who it was, but someone mentioned in the mid-season, something along the lines of: vetos should only be used for the absolute obvious collusion trades, not the "why didn't I think of that" trade where someone just gets very lucky.
     
  4. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    I agree and disagree.
    Its best if we all have 15 scoring players each week, and no-one has any donuts. But surely with 28-player lists, and a little bit of management in the two player exchange periods each year, every team has ample opportunity to give themselves all the cover they need.
    There's plenty of players in the FA list who play a lot of games, but don't score many points. List management strategy is all about having the best 15 possible, but also adequate coverage for each line to prevent donuts.

    If we were to go down this path, and based on the fact that players are versatile and play multiple positions these days, I'd actually suggest that we only ever name two emergencies each, and one of them (don't know if it should be highest or lowest scoring) is taken at half-points for whatever position they need to cover.
     
  5. bryzza

    bryzza Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,386
    Likes Received:
    715
    +1 great example regarding Korumburra
     
  6. fresh

    fresh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    1,032
    Aren't picks 11-14 based on total points scored over the season? If not, why not extend the same methodology of points scored in losing finals to these picks?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. DamoH

    DamoH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    993
    Likes Received:
    791
    Yeah, this.
     
  8. eagle_eyed

    eagle_eyed Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,483
    Likes Received:
    723
    I thought 11-14 were based on where you finished in the finals; as such I was 14th after being the highest ranked loser in the first week of the finals.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. DamoH

    DamoH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    993
    Likes Received:
    791
    That's correct EE, but the point is still the same - we've got a different ranking system for 5-8 compared to 3-4.
     
  10. eagle_eyed

    eagle_eyed Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,483
    Likes Received:
    723
    Oh, I thought 3&4 were ranked by finals results too; highest placed semi final loser is 3rd. Never finished that high, probably why I’m wrong.
     
  11. bryzza

    bryzza Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,386
    Likes Received:
    715
    I was under the assumption the losers finals was just for fun to keep those coaches interests and have participation. I couldn't see any rules for losers finals.
     
  12. bryzza

    bryzza Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,386
    Likes Received:
    715
    I disagree about the 28 players assumption that more means better coverage and that list management comes into play. You can't control injuries and suspensions to multiple players and if we decided to have 32 man squads that just means more fringe players.
     
  13. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Losers Finals are just for fun. 11-14 is the first group kicked out in the finals (ie 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th placed teams).
     
  14. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    We have a 4-4-1-4 starting team, so 13 players who "have" to be in position - meaning that with a 28 man squad, you have 15 reserves. The best two of these 15 reserves are your two interchange players. The remaining 13 can be 4 defenders, 4 mids, 1 ruck, and 4 forwards (assuming no-one is DPP), which means you have a whole team of reserves just waiting to play.
    I'm not going to tell anyone how to manage their own team, but I believe that everyone should be able to have atleast 50% of their squad available to play at any given time, and if not, we all have two player exchange periods per year to make changes.
    As for the FA's, there were more than 20 players not on any of our lists who played more than 15 games this year. Yeah, some of them averaged less than 50ppg, but they're available. This is where team management comes into play - do you select a speculative player who might get a game and score well, or might miss because he's a hot-head and gets suspended, or do you select a steady best-22 player who is coverage for when your three first-choice players go down? (look at Michael Rischitelli - played 21 games, but only averaged 48ppg. Still better than a donut or a 50% OPP player in the mids, and only takes up 1 spot on your list. Or Mark Hutchings - 17 games at 66ppg, and a M/F, so can cover two lines, played nearly every game, so was handy cover above what an OPP would offer for most of the season, and still only took up one spot on your list).
     
    • Like Like x 5
  15. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Alright gentlemen, now that the AFL draft is complete, and to help coaches begin to properly manage their teams, we won't be entertaining any other rule changes, unless something urgent appears.

    So, all rules will stand as they currently do, with the only change being to the delistment rule. Hopefully now everyone can focus on Christmas, New Year, Family, and ORFFU.

    We can still discuss rule changes, but we won't be implementing anything else for season 2019. Hopefully this gives everyone the stability that is wanted, and the ability for us to monitor the effects of previous rule changes (equalisation policies like the mandatory 4 PSD picks) before making any further potential changes.

    Thanks all, and happy draft preparations.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2018
    • Like Like x 6
  16. bryzza

    bryzza Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,386
    Likes Received:
    715
    Coaches with the success the AFL teams are having by being able to recruit players to cover season ending Injuries that happen during preseason, I'd like to put it out there that we should follow suit to keep our league as close to the AFL as possible. It might seem that I only bring this up as I have lost two players in Mitchell and Roberton but it's nothing new and most of us have experienced this. To keep it fun and coaches engaged without the sinking feeling oh another season lost due to injuries, it should be time to discuss and what rules would need to be in place Alah essendon supplement scandal.
    Read more at http://tooserious.net/forum/threads/2019-discussion-thread.90301/page-10#KtJM2dBQJDeUXlwc.99
     
  17. Mick

    Mick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    901
    Likes Received:
    350
    I’d be up for 1 x injured reserve spot - to be used only when a player is officially out for a decent chunk of time (to be voted on - I’d say 6-8 weeks+). This would open up 1 new roster spot to be filled at the next draft. The injured player would be inactive until the next draft when you could delist, reactivate or continue to stash the player if he remained injured.
     
  18. JPK

    JPK Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,752
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    I personally don't agree with the idea. We now have 28 players on our list, and we only need to field 15 each week. There's 13 spare players, so thats enough for 4 spare defenders, 4 spare mids, 1 spare ruck, and 4 spare forwards (or nearly a whole second team). Plus we have a mid-season draft and trades to cover poor or non performers and pick up new players. I don't think we need any more coverage.

    But as commissioner, I will be impartial, and if there's enough support, we can vote on how to implement something like this.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  19. martyg

    martyg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    498
    I say no. If everyone got to pick up one new player right now (for instance) everyone would be picking a new kid who has shown potential in the JLT and not an old 28 year old from the free agents pool. We have enough players, just use one of them.
     
  20. bryzza

    bryzza Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,386
    Likes Received:
    715
    I agree with the age and would propose an age restriction minimum 22 years old but also if you lose a defender you must replace with a defender.
     

Share This Page