<p style='margin-bottom: 18px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 18px; color: #444444;]Hi All, <p style='margin-bottom: 18px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 18px; color: #444444;]Just a quick one to let you know I'm still alive and still keen to be involved in ORFFU. I've been MIA due to a fair bit going on lately, including the birth of my first child! My beautiful daughter Evie has turned my world upside down in an awesome way. Thanks for holding my spot in the league. <br style='color: #444444; font-size: 12px;[/img] <p style='margin-bottom: 18px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 18px; color: #444444;]It looks like you guys have taken it way Too Seriously of course and it's all coming together pretty quickly as a result. Thanks for all your time and effort. I've just had a quick flick through some of the threads but will attempt to have a proper read and catch up on the goings on over the next few weeks.Cheers
Good to see you're still around Mick and congrats on the new addition, they definitely change your life. When you get a chance have a say on the couple of rules that are still in dispute. Now if we can get a bit of input from hawks2008 and wrightbrendan we should be able to really get things finalised and ready to go.
I've probably missed this somewhere through here, but why can't each person just score their own teams? How hard is it for say me, to look through my players and enter their scores and in a match thread (or whatever), put down my own scores. If everyone does that, shouldn't it be easier?
No reason at all why everyone can't score their own team if they like. But I think it's a good idea to have someone responsible for making sure all scores are in because there might be times when people are unavailable for a few days. As someone said in another thread, we will need someone to do a ladder, so that will involve keeping track of total scores and wins/losses anyway.
Tomster, can you clarify twoof the rules that have been confirmed. 1. Captains = d) None - I think it needs to be updated as therules under 1. TEAMS (i) says 'There will be players who score more points than others (captain's)'. 8 Players not 2014 = c) Nothing - I think it needs to be updated as the rules under 6. DRAFT (d) says 'You cannot draft Martin or Hogan yet. No baggsies'.
YAD69 wrote: Tomster, can you clarify twoof the rules that have been confirmed. 1. Captains = d) None - I think it needs to be updated as therules under 1. TEAMS (i) says 'There will be players who score more points than others (captain's)'. 8 Players not 2014 = c) Nothing - I think it needs to be updated as the rules under 6. DRAFT (d) says 'You cannot draft Martin or Hogan yet. No baggsies'. Fixed number 1, but I think number 8 is OK... <div class='Quote' style='font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 18px;]Tylo wrote: No reason at all why everyone can't score their own team if they like. But I think it's a good idea to have someone responsible for making sure all scores are in because there might be times when people are unavailable for a few days. As someone said in another thread, we will need someone to do a ladder, so that will involve keeping track of total scores and wins/losses anyway. <p style='font-size: 12px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 18px;] I think most people can do their scores each week, we just need some designated score checkers to make sure there is no cheating, not that anyone would. I can keep track of the ladder if need be.
My votes 3. C 9. B P.S. Please don't take my lack of recent activity as a sign of lack of interest. I am getting married in a couple of weeks and the planning/organising is taking over my life!
Isn't it amazing that we are down to 1, after starting with 13? We should all be happy with the rules we have decided on. Only problem now is that the last rule left is tied at 8-8, and Mick is MIA (with reason) and Hawks2008 is MIA (without reason). Also, congrats wrightbrendan on the marriage!
wrightbrendan wrote: My votes 3. C 9. B P.S. Please don't take my lack of recent activity as a sign of lack of interest. I am getting married in a couple of weeks and the planning/organising is taking over my life! the wedding, much like the marriage that proceeds it, will go a lot smoother if you let the wife get everything she wants mate
I have changed my mind on 9, at 1/2 points (rounded up/down?), strange positions could be a way to replace rucks for the unlucky but unwise coaches to only pick 1 ruck when there are plenty of mid-range rucks. Seeing as an R2 could easily score better than half an M7's score, I will however vote yes on 9 but only if ever use it as a last resort.
I wouldn't mind changing my vote for 9 as well. Had a read through all the comments again and see the value of 1/2 points for oop players.Played a draft style game this year and about 1/3 of the teams got hit hard by injuries and had to cop a few donuts during the year which didn't do much for their season.
thats shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. disappointed holky and fresh! you let the other 9b'ers down! turncoats! mutineers! renegades! that rule is about as good as dream teams decision to allow 2 trades every single week. i hear the next evolution is they pick your team for you and everyone gets a participation award. terrible rule rewarding mediocrity
insider wrote: thats shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. disappointed holky and fresh! you let the other 9b'ers down! turncoats! mutineers! renegades! that rule is about as good as dream teams decision to allow 2 trades every single week. i hear the next evolution is they pick your team for you and everyone gets a participation award. terrible rule rewarding mediocrity Looks like this is the 'us and them' issue in the FU! As you say Insider, it looks like some of the 'us's' have jumped ship and become 'them's'. I'm reiterating my NO for unusual positions - we may not always like the choices that Champion Data make, but the umpires decision is final...
insider wrote: thats shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. disappointed holky and fresh! you let the other 9b'ers down! turncoats! mutineers! renegades! that rule is about as good as dream teams decision to allow 2 trades every single week. i hear the next evolution is they pick your team for you and everyone gets a participation award. terrible rule rewarding mediocrity and when you guys use those half points for a league victory... will you still complain then? I doubt it!
There there. Damo and I let it go when mandatory delisting got knocked over. You win some, you lose some. At least now we all know how it's gonna be and can look forward to drafting an unbeatable superteam.
insider wrote: thats shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. disappointed holky and fresh! you let the other 9b'ers down! turncoats! mutineers! renegades! that rule is about as good as dream teams decision to allow 2 trades every single week. i hear the next evolution is they pick your team for you and everyone gets a participation award. terrible rule rewarding mediocrity A word to the wise, those who rely on strange positions will actually score less than those who play normal. An R2 can easilybeat an M7's half score, even if rounded up. The top 50 ruckmen all averaged 58+ and the 100th midfielder averaged 81. Need I say more.
say more all you like holky. its just a bit of fun pal! my kindred spirit JPK and I will continue to skol our beers and fight the righteous battles whilst the snipers keep sipping on their chardonnays in the corner. bahahahaha gotta find some way to pass the time in the off season eh?&iquest;?&iquest;
insider wrote: say more all you like holky. its just a bit of fun pal! my kindred spirit JPK and I will continue to skol our beers and fight the righteous battles whilst the snipers keep sipping on their chardonnays in the corner. bahahahaha gotta find some way to pass the time in the off season eh?&iquest;?&iquest; An aged riesling thanks Insider.