Winds of Change Discussion Thread 2015 into 2016

Discussion in 'ORFFA' started by Len, Sep 10, 2015.

  1. Len

    Len Cockburn Knightrider Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,563
    Likes Received:
    5,985
    Anybody have anything they feel we need to discuss with regard to changing rules/approaches etc for next year? I know we have already had a truncated discussion around changing the season mix to 'fix' the finals, I suspect there is a good reason we haven't changed it after 4 years of discussion.
     
  2. Bandit

    Bandit Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,496
    Likes Received:
    3,194
    Do we want to do a State of Origin or something like format over the bye period? Maybe Vic/Tas vs Rest (so that's) 9 teams each? Both teams chosen by the coaches committee of the 9 respective clubs, scoring done by taking each players highest score over the bye period? No need to do anything fancy with the input of the teams, we just calculate them manually (I'm happy to do that) Just for shitz'n'gigs
     
  3. anthak

    anthak Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,186
    Likes Received:
    5,016
    Bandit wrote:
    Do we want to do a State of Origin or something like format over the bye period? Maybe Vic/Tas vs Rest (so that's) 9 teams each? Both teams chosen by the coaches committee of the 9 respective clubs, scoring done by taking each players highest score over the bye period? No need to do anything fancy with the input of the teams, we just calculate them manually (I'm happy to do that) Just for shitz'n'gigs Great idea.
     
  4. anthak

    anthak Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,186
    Likes Received:
    5,016
    One thing im thinking in terms of finals, which i would like feedback about... is...
    Ive got an idea instead of top 3 selecting their opponents. I had been thinking this for a while and then it played out this way in finals anyway. I think 1st should play the team ranked 5-8 with lowest total points scored, then 2nd play team with 2nd lowest total and so on. What do you all think?
     
  5. graeme

    graeme Guest

    Disagree Ant, the choice of opponent in the finals is a fantastic feature which allows strategy and banter. Would hate to send it ended. If we can manually score a 'state of origin' game during bye rounds then we could also score an ORFFA home and away series game over the same weeks. For example, and I think sNoZ has mentioned this previously, we could play three round over three byes with the best (say) 10 scores counting; or two rounds with each player's first score in the bye rounds counting and then their second; or one round with their better of the bye round scores counting. We could play round with the number of players whose scores count. Anything to get away from the impact of the mass resting of players during our finals. Hell, I would even accept a top four play off series if we could get away from Lyonism.
     
  6. dmandrews

    dmandrews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,493
    Likes Received:
    1,972
    <p style='margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;][span style='color: #000000; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 16px;]Two things I would like to see happen in the ORFFA for 2016 are: <ol style='list-style-type: decimal; direction: ltr;] <li style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;] <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;]A greater reward for the teams that finish in the top four, with these teams having a double chance and <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;] </li> <li style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;] <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;]The impact that players being rested at the end of the AFL season has on ORFFA teams during our finals series being reduced. <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;] <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;]Any changes to help achieve these outcomes would depend on how the AFL fixture is structured which is impacted on by byes and/or split rounds. If the 2016 fixture is structured in the same way as 2015 these outcomes could be achieved by playing ORFFA through the first 17 rounds of the AFL season and then a four week final series during AFL rounds 18 to 21, with the ORFFA finals structured in the same manner as the AFL finals with the top four teams receiving a double chance. No games between ORFFA clubs would be played in AFL rounds 22 and 23. <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;] <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;]If AFL rounds are played with less than nine games we can reduce the size of the ORFFA teams, as has already been suggested we could have 10 players per round if six AFL games are played in a round as is currently the case during the bye rounds. We would probably need to have some flexibility with the line by line structure of our teams in these rounds. The impact on each ORFFA team should even itself out over the bye rounds. <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;] <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;]I know some people will say why change the structure of the finals as it has worked pretty well for us so far, however I think the resting of players by AFL finals bound sides over the final couple of rounds of the season will increase in the next few years and if we have an opportunity to reduce the likelihood of the resting of AFL players playing a major role in determining which ORFFA club wins the premiership we should be pro-active and take it. Playing through thebyes would also allow the length of the finals to be lengthened, givingthe teams that have performed at an outstanding levelduring the ORFFA home and away season and finished in the top 4 an advantage over the teams that have finished in fifth to eighth position. <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 0pt;] <p style='color: #000000; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-top: 0cm; margin-bottom: 8pt;]As for other ideas, I do like the idea of state of origin as Bandit has mentioned above and this could be played in an AFL round in which no games are played betweenORFFA clubs. </li> </ol>
    <div id='radePasteHelper' style='border: 0px solid red; border-image: none; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow: hidden; position: absolute;]
     
  7. TerryinBangkok

    TerryinBangkok Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    5,710
    Likes Received:
    2,108
    Just toss this in as food for long-term thought. Over the last decade or three, the number of AFL franchises has gradually increased. This trend does not look like slowing down, with current talk of a Tasmanian side and possibly a NT side. By adding teams, the AFL are also adding to the pool of players. So far, they have deftly managed to squeeze an increased number of teams into a season. They do, however, have problems with their draw, wherein you only play some teams twice. Adding more teams will squeeze the season even tighter, to the point where they may have to discard the pre-season. There is also talk of having the byes later in the season to counter the need for resting. All of this will affect ORFFA. Remember also that ORRFL/ORFFA have traditionally followed the pattern of the AFL, i.e., 18 teams. Just suggesting that any changes proposed to the format need to be thought through in light of this.
     
  8. TheTassieHawk

    TheTassieHawk SC fanatic Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    7,604
    Likes Received:
    6,586
    pardon the interruption ORRA folks a further shout out to anyone who might be interested in joining a new ORFF comp if we get one started for 2016

    per the earlier blog we have PHIL, Illuminati, ViQBOz, Len, Anthak, Tyze1 and Bear. I am keen so that gives us 8.

    If we can get 2 more then we have enough for a 10 team comp which would be a reasonable number in my opinion, and would be a point of difference to the existing ORFF comps

    ORFFL. ORFFA, and ORFFU coaches are most welcome.

    if you are keen then please postin the earlier blog by AFL Grand Final Day

    http://tooserious.net/Blog/tabid/90/P...

    cheers TTH
     
  9. anthak

    anthak Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,186
    Likes Received:
    5,016
    TheTassieHawk wrote:
    pardon the interruption ORRA folks a further shout out to anyone who might be interested in joining a new ORFF comp if we get one started for 2016

    per the earlier blog we have PHIL, Illuminati, ViQBOz, Len, Anthak, Tyze1 and Bear. I am keen so that gives us 8.

    If we can get 2 more then we have enough for a 10 team comp which would be a reasonable number in my opinion, and would be a point of difference to the existing ORFF comps

    ORFFL. ORFFA, and ORFFU coaches are most welcome.

    if you are keen then please postin the earlier blog by AFL Grand Final Day

    http://tooserious.net/Blog/tabid/90/P...

    cheers TTH Looks like Stowie has put his hand up a cpl hours ago too
     
  10. anthak

    anthak Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,186
    Likes Received:
    5,016
    Getting back on track... Im not sure how i feel about the resting of players near the end of the season. I think im leaning towards the position that its a part of the game and we should not try and combat it with special rules or fixtures. I reckon bad luck if it happens. It could happen to any of us. And its not always in the last round of the season. I have toyed with the idea of a top 6 or top 4 for finals, to allow the top teams a greater opportunity to win the flag, but im hessitant in us moving away from a top 8 finals series. I like that we mirror AFL with that, in terms of numbers who progress. The main priority for me is that we each play all other teams once each during our regular season. I like the idea of us having a midseason break during bye rounds, and id rather us not play ORFFA games during byes. State of Origin is different and can be easily facilitated by just 1 or 2 people or as many as want to get involved. I support state of origin during the mid season break. Obviously a lot of this will be dependant on the AFL fixture, which your ORFFA FIXture committee will be keeping a close eye on to see what could be done. Its been good to read the views of others in this thread.
     
  11. anthak

    anthak Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,186
    Likes Received:
    5,016
    Im also curious to hear from others about the idea of us cutting down to 16 teams through natural attrition. The idea was raised by a couple of us recently, and independently of each other too. It would allow us to have a 4 week finals series and all play each other once each,whilst leaving byes free too. If we collectively decide to move to this format then we could not replace the next coach who quits, knowing upfront that we may have a 17 team association for a while.
     
  12. grav

    grav Guest

    Despite the Lefties being mildly impacted by round 23 restings, i'm inclined to sit in the status quo camp. For me, it adds some extra strategy to the whole caper. Loading up your roster with numerous players from one certain AFL team can have its benefits on many levels but it is not without its risks, late season resting being one of those. Many an ORFFA franchise has fallen foul of injury, form, resting etc, and in the wash up, my view is that bad luck is bad luck. We could potentially tinker the shit out of this league and its rules to shield everyone from said bad luck but I reckon if we removed much of the risk and chance of the game then the excitement and fun would dwindle with it. Feel free to take these comments with a grain of salt, as i'm not sure my views would be as amiable had I lost the GF by a point ;)
     
  13. TerryinBangkok

    TerryinBangkok Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    5,710
    Likes Received:
    2,108
    Just on the invitation from TTH and pertinent to this thread. It is my understanding, right from the get go, that coaches may only play in one league. I recall at the time I was a reserve for ORFFL, was going nowhere, and we decided to establish a new league. Despite tongue in cheek accusations of treachery from ORFFL, it was patently clear a coach could not be in both. I also recall there was considerable concern at the time that a coach could register on TS under another name and enter a second team in a league without anyone being the wiser (a fairly common practice in SC I believe). There was even an oblique suggestion that one ORFFL coach had done this. All water under the bridge, but the clear message at the time was one team, one league. Not sure if the ORFFL rules in fact make reference to this. My gut feeling is that loyalty to one's league was paramount. There was also the factor of locking new regular blood into TS. There has been exception, when a coach has dropped out and a coach from another league has been asked to play a minder role. This was frowned upon from certain circles the first time it occurred. Personally, I see it as a good solution, as long as it is short term relief. So now I ask myself. How important is this? What do the rules say? What do the coaches say?
     
  14. anthak

    anthak Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,186
    Likes Received:
    5,016
    Im happy to be a coach of a new team in another ORFF comp to help the league get underway, but I would not want to be permanent. However, in light of that, Im not sure a new league should start up with only 10 or so teams though, but I suppose thats up to the participants of that league to decide.
     
  15. Len

    Len Cockburn Knightrider Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,563
    Likes Received:
    5,985
    My belief is the intent is to start it with 10 coaches.

    That would make it as different from the FA as SC is from AFLF. At the time when the issue of coaches in more than one league was raised it had reference to the desire for us to gave inter-league competition. The idea of inter-league competition is now a dead concept and has zero relevance, therefore the only issues are 1. how many 'games' can you commit to and devote the required time to, and 2. the gaining of genuinely fresh coaches. Re 1. That is an individual judgment, as someone without young children and no real diversions I am online in leisure mode 5 to 8 hours a day, I can spare the time, though I have noted that I am only interested in being a player in the new league, I am sure that trying to focus on running two, or even two sets of drafts would be an issue. Re 2. There is virtually no chance given the leagues we already have running, and the fact that we have been asking for 9 weeks to get 4 or 5 new coaches that a new league can startup from new coaches only, ideally a blend of what ant is offering to do (startup a team for someone else to control when available) and what I am offering to do (startup a team and youse can all can keep your hands off) will result in the ones who do want to be coaches having that opportunity here and not being forced to seek it elsewhere.
     
  16. jimbowan

    jimbowan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    631
    Likes Received:
    416
    I am happy to stay put, I think it works well. All the solutions for change seem onerous to me as far as manual calculations and spreading scores across rounds. I can see it being no fun at all and people not even being able to track who is winning and who isn't or losing interest in those rounds entirely. Also I think the whole player resting thing is just luck of the draw, one of the worst affected teams this year still won the flag. I don't see it as an issue.
     
  17. Bandit

    Bandit Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,496
    Likes Received:
    3,194
    WRT player resting... I think it is the luck of the draw, just like injuries etc I also think we should try to mirror the AFL as much as possible. 18 teams, 8 team finals etc all sit well with me. I do not like the idea of a 16 team comp one bit
     
  18. Len

    Len Cockburn Knightrider Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    10,563
    Likes Received:
    5,985
    Whilst altering the means of playing finals so that we avoid resting is a reasonable goal, there is no solution that does not contain compromise of a different sort, ultimately it's a give to get scenario and as a collective we cannot seem to agree on a give that is better than the get. The only solution I have seen floated that allowed for 2nd chance finals without significant compromise to how we currently do things is the double round approach where we play two games on one weekend, this also has had enough detractors that a change to it would only give rise to a new bone of contention. On a related point we started this league as an 18 team comp, changing that changes an incredible amount of dynamics, my vast preference is that we keep it at 18 teams, this doesn't feel hard to do. As I said in the OP, I feel there is a reason we have never changes finals setup despite it being a topic of concern every year, to do so requires compromise of a different sort. Not that there are not bad and good arguments, simply that if we can't as a group agree that a different path is better we may as well stay where we are. Next year will be our first without the sub complication, that alone will be a big game changer for many teams at selection time, it's feasible that in twelve months time having been through a year without that BS that we may have a new perspective on the finals issue. For now, unless there is a likelihood of a quorum of 2 thirds agreeing to a single different approach we are pretty much at BAU for next year on finals. If an idea appears to be growing enough legs I'll setup a formal vote via password survey on it, until then though... Are there any other operational topics we need to consider?
     
  19. TerryinBangkok

    TerryinBangkok Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    5,710
    Likes Received:
    2,108
    Think there is two issues here. The first is; would coaches prefer a 2nd chance finals set up? That should be fairly easy to get a yes or no to. If a majority of coaches are in favour, then it should be up to the administration to suggest ways in which this could be done. That, I think, is where the contention lays. At the moment, neither issue seems clear.
     
  20. grav

    grav Guest

    TerryinBangkok wrote:
    Think there is two issues here. The first is; would coaches prefer a 2nd chance finals set up? That should be fairly easy to get a yes or no to. If a majority of coaches are in favour, then it should be up to the administration to suggest ways in which this could be done. That, I think, is where the contention lays. At the moment, neither issue seems clear. And the second issue is...Terry's keyboard has exploded.
     

Share This Page