Starting for the new season and seeking comments on this.
Currently we have no rules for players that have been forcibly de-listed from their franchise due to no longer being at an AFL Club and subsequently picked up at a following draft.
How should this be treated?
Automatically go into the National Draft/Rookie Draft depending on draft taken in:
Coach of Franchise that player was delisted from having first preference on him by using 2nd rookie draft pick. (This is only a suggested bid and could be further refined.
Any other suggestions welcome.
If a player is delisted by an AFL club (and therefore forced to be delisted by their BXVs club), but is then picked up by another AFL club during either the NAT/Rookie/Delisted Free Agency??, then their BXVs club should have first access to them should they want them IMO and shouldn't need to bid on their own player.
Quote from: SilverLion on September 29, 2018, 10:31:53 AM
If a player is delisted by an AFL club (and therefore forced to be delisted by their BXVs club), but is then picked up by another AFL club during either the NAT/Rookie/Delisted Free Agency??, then their BXVs club should have first access to them should they want them IMO and shouldn't need to bid on their own player.
Yeah i reckon just use last pick available
Quote from: GoLions on September 29, 2018, 11:02:33 AM
Quote from: SilverLion on September 29, 2018, 10:31:53 AM
If a player is delisted by an AFL club (and therefore forced to be delisted by their BXVs club), but is then picked up by another AFL club during either the NAT/Rookie/Delisted Free Agency??, then their BXVs club should have first access to them should they want them IMO and shouldn't need to bid on their own player.
Yeah i reckon just use last pick available
Yep, last Rookie pick, but somewhere say that your going to redraft the player?
Quote from: GoLions on September 29, 2018, 11:02:33 AM
Quote from: SilverLion on September 29, 2018, 10:31:53 AM
If a player is delisted by an AFL club (and therefore forced to be delisted by their BXVs club), but is then picked up by another AFL club during either the NAT/Rookie/Delisted Free Agency??, then their BXVs club should have first access to them should they want them IMO and shouldn't need to bid on their own player.
Yeah i reckon just use last pick available
yup, happy with this one.
Like Nas said, just at the start of the BXV draft, nominate you will use the final pick on them.
Quote from: SydneyRox on October 01, 2018, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: GoLions on September 29, 2018, 11:02:33 AM
Quote from: SilverLion on September 29, 2018, 10:31:53 AM
If a player is delisted by an AFL club (and therefore forced to be delisted by their BXVs club), but is then picked up by another AFL club during either the NAT/Rookie/Delisted Free Agency??, then their BXVs club should have first access to them should they want them IMO and shouldn't need to bid on their own player.
Yeah i reckon just use last pick available
yup, happy with this one.
Like Nas said, just at the start of the BXV draft, nominate you will use the final pick on them.
Yeah agreed, this is what it should have always been
#robbedofkelly
Think the mid-season rookie draft being introduced next year will also need to be considered. Not sure how this will effect fantasy comps in general.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-10-04/afl-brings-in-midseason-rookie-draft-for-2019-
With the mid season draft being introduced do we consider a mid season draft.
Will need to see what the AFL rules are as well before implementing.
Things to consider if it is implemented.
AFL proposes to do as it end of Rd 10 (TBC) - So what will the draft order be as at end of Rd 10 or ladder positions end of 2018.
If a draft is to replace a player with season ending injury how do we treat end of season is the drafted player automatically de-listed when the injured player is returned or does coach have the option of keeping the player providing list is no more than 47. eg Silver Lion could have selected Logan Austin to replace Sam Docherty. When Docherty returns next year what happens to Austin does SL have the option to keep him?
If a de-listed pllayer is picked up in the mid season draft what actions should we take eg Should the coach who de-listed be given a chance to redraft by de-listing another player or is that opportunity one.
Can this even be done on UF anyway?
Quote from: LF on October 04, 2018, 10:57:41 PM
Can this even be done on UF anyway?
Good question and we probably will not know the answer till UF announces rules for next season. Could mean some more manual work for Admin if consensus is to go ahead and UF do not allow. We may be able to do it through our Admin codes to add or drop players.
I think we should have the draft but only if a list has a player out for the season or retired during the year
and that player can remain on there list with say there last nat or 2nd or 3rd rook, up to the discretion of the coach
i cant imagine every team will want to use this draft so maybe just ladder order as is, i doubt top teams will tank a few weeks out from the draft if they have an LTI
My understanding the mid-year draft is only for teams who lose a player to retirement/LTI during the season. What if we just gave the affected BXV team the drafted player on a 6-month rental?
For example, if Dustin Martin does a knee and Richmond draft R. Roberts mid-season to replace him, the Hedgies would automatically obtain R. Roberts for the remainder of the season?
Depending on the AFL's plan for these players at the end of the season, they could be automatically placed in our rookie draft pool for the next season at the end of the year, and the BXV team who had them could claim them back with a bidding process if they desire?
A BXV draft involving multiple teams mid-season is far too complicated in my opinion, especially when the number of drafted players cannot be anticipated before hand.
Personally i think it might be better to hold off a year, see what happens with the afl side of things (how many get drafted, how many actually play, etc), and then make a decision for 2020 based off of that information.
Quote from: GoLions on October 05, 2018, 09:29:33 AM
Personally i think it might be better to hold off a year, see what happens with the afl side of things (how many get drafted, how many actually play, etc), and then make a decision for 2020 based off of that information.
This + we are increasing our playing list by 2 as well.
Quote from: nas on October 05, 2018, 09:40:36 AM
Quote from: GoLions on October 05, 2018, 09:29:33 AM
Personally i think it might be better to hold off a year, see what happens with the afl side of things (how many get drafted, how many actually play, etc), and then make a decision for 2020 based off of that information.
This + we are increasing our playing list by 2 as well.
Quote from: Nige on October 05, 2018, 10:36:51 AM
Quote from: nas on October 05, 2018, 09:40:36 AM
Quote from: GoLions on October 05, 2018, 09:29:33 AM
Personally i think it might be better to hold off a year, see what happens with the afl side of things (how many get drafted, how many actually play, etc), and then make a decision for 2020 based off of that information.
This + we are increasing our playing list by 2 as well.
Quote from: iZander on October 05, 2018, 11:22:08 AM
Quote from: Nige on October 05, 2018, 10:36:51 AM
Quote from: nas on October 05, 2018, 09:40:36 AM
Quote from: GoLions on October 05, 2018, 09:29:33 AM
Personally i think it might be better to hold off a year, see what happens with the afl side of things (how many get drafted, how many actually play, etc), and then make a decision for 2020 based off of that information.
This + we are increasing our playing list by 2 as well.
Looks like we are gaining consensus so will leave it and watch how it unfolds in the AFL and revisit for 2020.
Birmingham will be suing Hawthorn if they don't sign Ricky Henderson
Just read this rule on the AFL site for previously de-listed players
":Previously-listed footballers who spent a season or more out of the game no longer have to go through a nerve-racking draft experience to find an AFL home again as a Category A rookie.
They can instead sign with a club in the pre-season supplemental selection period (SSP) between December 1 and March 15, after all the drafts are over."
So basically this means that players can sign any time till March 15. This obviously will effect our draft especially if you want to redraft say Mumford, Weller, Wagner and Brooksby. Mumford and Clarke all looking set to join clubs under this rule.
Looking for suggestions as some may be picked up after our draft.
I am thinking something like this with last picks you nominate the player who you wish to redraft but also take the relative pick in the draft. If the player is picked up he goes to list and drafted player returned to the pool. If not picked up drafted player remains.
I would like to vote next year on bringing in a rule for the 2019 draft for bidding on these sorts of players to bring us into line with other comps.
For this year though, I'm happy to include the ones already announced as nominated former-club players before the draft. Anyone signed after the start of our rookie draft should, imo either
a) be taken by their former team, if applicable, with their final pick.
b) be taken by their former team, only through dropping their last NON-NOMINATED player from the rookie draft
c) if former club doesn't want to take them, be available in next years draft
c) be available in next years draft if they are coming directly from the state leagues.
Imagine if someone like a Matthew Nunn or Mitch Maguire is not taken in the National or Rookie draft, but gets picked up by say Sydney halfway into our rookie draft? That means someone at 40 or whatever is going to get a player who I would've considered taking top 10. I think the pool for the rookie draft should be all-but finalised BEFORE the start. Happy for former players of BXV clubs to come in & get picked up by their respective teams, but state league players coming straight in not as much.
Yeah, that looks good to me Koop.
With players taken after our draft I think they should just fall into the leftover pool for next year.
Though if a person wants to hold or draft them they should be allowed.
The other way could be to allow continual supplimentary picks until AFL lists are finalised.
So say, I hold Mav Weller and he doesnt get picked up, I can drop him and take a supplemental pick.
Its sort of the same thing that happens in most comps if a player retired after drafting etc, such as Tippett this year.
Sounds like a well reasoned approach Koop.
On this topic, does this mean that Keegan Brooksby is automatically added back onto my list?
Quote from: Rusty00 on November 20, 2018, 04:13:15 PM
Sounds like a well reasoned approach Koop.
On this topic, does this mean that Keegan Brooksby is automatically added back onto my list?
basically, with a late rookie pick if you want :) i think?
Quote from: iZander on November 20, 2018, 04:27:19 PM
Quote from: Rusty00 on November 20, 2018, 04:13:15 PM
Sounds like a well reasoned approach Koop.
On this topic, does this mean that Keegan Brooksby is automatically added back onto my list?
basically, with a late rookie pick if you want :) i think?
Yep just needs to be nominated before the rookie draft.
So, taking the case of Clarke as an example. I can delist an additional player now to allow a spot for Clarke, however if Clarke isn't picked up for whatever reason I would have to use a supplementary rookie pick, and would lose whoever I delisted.
Would I have to mention this somehow in my list lodgement as well?
My suggestion would be that if these players are picked up (as theoretically it can happen anytime between december 1 and march 15), and they have officially signed, is for the team that had them previously listed to then choose to make an additional delisting for them, or not take them at all. However, this delisting would be after the official delisting date, and the player delisted would be inelligible for this year's rookie draft.
I don't like the thought of having to delist a player now on the proviso that a player I formerly had listed is likely to be picked up, as I could be delisting them when I don't need to.
Nice reasoning Koop and very reasonable as it takes into consideration any former franchise players that may be picked up after our drafts and before the March deadline.
National Draft is due to start on November 29th which is fine. Just wondering though at conclusion of National Draft we pause and adjust any former players that may have been signed since December 1st as I suspect a lot will be known early.
Quote from: Ringo on November 20, 2018, 06:10:45 PM
Nice reasoning Koop and very reasonable as it takes into consideration any former franchise players that may be picked up after our drafts and before the March deadline.
Quote from: Ringo on November 20, 2018, 06:13:53 PM
National Draft is due to start on November 29th which is fine. Just wondering though at conclusion of National Draft we pause and adjust any former players that may have been signed since December 1st as I suspect a lot will be known early.
Quote from: Koop on November 20, 2018, 03:11:36 PM
a) be taken by their former team, if applicable, with their final pick.
b) be taken by their former team, only through dropping their last NON-NOMINATED player from the rookie draft
c) if former club doesn't want to take them, be available in next years draft
c) be available in next years draft if they are coming directly from the state leagues.
So to make sure I understand this clearly:
Scenario 1:
A player who was previously on a BXVs list but was delisted/retired from the AFL officially returns
before the commencement of the BXVs rookie draft (which includes if they're signed after the BXVs delisting deadline - ??), they are able to be picked up by their former BXVs team provided they want them, and are incorporated into their list lodgement as "auto-drafted".
E.g. Sam Collins
Scenario 2:
A player who was previously on a BXVs list but was delisted/retired from the AFL officially returns
during or after the BXVs rookie draft, they are able to be picked up by the their former BXVs team, however the team will either forfeit their final pick for them, or delist a player for them. If they delist a player for them, then the player delisted cannot be picked up in the BXVs rookie draft that year. And if they don't want the player in this situation, the player cannot be picked up in the BXVs rookie draft that year.
E.g. Mumford, Z Clarke, Brooksby, C Wagner, M Weller (all likely)
Scenario 3:
A player who has never been on an AFL list joins
during or after the BXVs rookie draft. That player cannot be selected in the BXVs rookie draft that year, but will be available the following year if they are still on an AFL list.
E.g. Mitch Maguire (hypothetically)
That correct? And if so, the other question I have is how do we lodge players in scenario 2 in the list lodgement thread?
In Scenario 2 eg Mumford and he has not signed by start of rookie draft list as follows and I am happy with this.
Last available pick in rookie draft even if a supplementary list as Mumford/Rookie Pick x. That way you are intimating you want Mumford on your list and Rookie pick x you are happy to return to pool.
Summary of Discord Discussion:
Scenario 1: A former BXVs and AFL listed player joins an AFL list after the delisting deadline, but before the start of the BXVs rookie draft.
The BXVs former owner can either:
a) Delist a player on their list, and take this player instead. The player delisted would then be available in the BXVs rookie draft.
b) Choose to take the player instead of using their final (including supplementary if applicable) rookie pick.
c) Choose to not take them. The returning player would then be available in the BXVs rookie draft.
Scenario 2: A former BXVs and AFL listed player joins an AFL list after the BXVs rookie draft has commenced, but before it is finished.
The BXVs former owner can do the same as in the first scenario, however if they delist a player, that player is not available in the BXVs rookie draft, and if they choose to not take the player, they would also not be available in the rookie draft.
Scenario 3: A former BXVs and AFL listed player joins an AFL list after the BXVs rookie draft has finished.
Same as above, but unable to take them instead of a pick as draft has completed.
In all of the above cases, nothing needs to be mentioned in list lodgement until the player officially joins an AFL list. At which time the former owner informs of their decision.
Quote from: SilverLion on November 20, 2018, 07:43:18 PM
Summary of Discord Discussion:
Scenario 1: A former BXVs and AFL listed player joins an AFL list after the delisting deadline, but before the start of the BXVs rookie draft.
The BXVs former owner can either:
a) Delist a player on their list, and take this player instead. The player delisted would then be available in the BXVs rookie draft.
b) Choose to take the player instead of using their final (including supplementary if applicable) rookie pick.
c) Choose to not take them. The returning player would then be available in the BXVs rookie draft.
Scenario 2: A former BXVs and AFL listed player joins an AFL list after the BXVs rookie draft has commenced, but before it is finished.
The BXVs former owner can do the same as in the first scenario, however if they delist a player, that player is not available in the BXVs rookie draft, and if they choose to not take the player, they would also not be available in the rookie draft.
Scenario 3: A former BXVs and AFL listed player joins an AFL list after the BXVs rookie draft has finished.
Same as above, but unable to take them instead of a pick as draft has completed.
In all of the above cases, nothing needs to be mentioned in list lodgement until the player officially joins an AFL list. At which time the former owner informs of their decision.
Delistings of any player during or after the BXVs drafts cannot be of a player taken by the team in this year's drafts to avoid compromising them.
OK so here is my proposal due to the possible comprimising of drafts with delisting of players:
If coaches wish to take the risk by naming possible redrafted players in their listings or leave a vacant spot in anticipation that is allowed.
If player not on AFL List or vacancy not filled by March 15th (conclusion of the rookie pps draft) then a further supplementary draft from the left over players will take place to fill lsit.
Quote from: Ringo on November 20, 2018, 10:28:19 PM
OK so here is my proposal due to the possible comprimising of drafts with delisting of players:
If coaches wish to take the risk by naming possible redrafted players in their listings or leave a vacant spot in anticipation that is allowed.
If player not on AFL List or vacancy not filled by March 15th (conclusion of the rookie pps draft) then a further supplementary draft from the left over players will take place to fill lsit.
Agree with this idea.
Only thing I'd suggest is if the player is redrafted, the BXVs team must get them if they've left a spot for them. Just prevents any potential exploit of the additional supplementary draft.
As we move towards the 2019 season it is the usual practice to ask if teams want a name or location change for the new season. So accordingly if you wish to change your team name or location advise in this thread so all are aware.
Quote from: Ringo on November 28, 2018, 09:53:10 AM
As we move towards the 2019 season it is the usual practice to ask if teams want a name or location change for the new season. So accordingly if you wish to change your team name or location advise in this thread so all are aware.
Would like to request a team name change of the Oxford Owls to the Oxford Lions :)
How'd you come up with Lions? ;)
Quote from: SilverLion on December 07, 2018, 12:05:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on November 28, 2018, 09:53:10 AM
As we move towards the 2019 season it is the usual practice to ask if teams want a name or location change for the new season. So accordingly if you wish to change your team name or location advise in this thread so all are aware.
Would like to request a team name change of the Oxford Owls to the Oxford Lions :)
Denied. Bradford will be the Bradford Brions and we cant have Brions AND Lions. And admin gets first priority. Ggs.
Quote from: GoLions on December 07, 2018, 01:05:05 PM
Quote from: SilverLion on December 07, 2018, 12:05:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on November 28, 2018, 09:53:10 AM
As we move towards the 2019 season it is the usual practice to ask if teams want a name or location change for the new season. So accordingly if you wish to change your team name or location advise in this thread so all are aware.
Would like to request a team name change of the Oxford Owls to the Oxford Lions :)
Denied. Bradford will be the Bradford Brions and we cant have Brions AND Lions. And admin gets first priority. Ggs.
:'(
Though I'll admit, the Bradford Brions does have a good ring to it.
Is Bronies available?
Quote from: SilverLion on December 07, 2018, 12:05:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on November 28, 2018, 09:53:10 AM
As we move towards the 2019 season it is the usual practice to ask if teams want a name or location change for the new season. So accordingly if you wish to change your team name or location advise in this thread so all are aware.
Would like to request a team name change of the Oxford Owls to the Oxford Lions :)
Oxford Hooters? :P :-X
gg
Looks like Ultimate Footy will open next week.
It appears we have an additional 11 players with DPP as per this post.
http://coachespanel.tv/2019/01/30/ultimate-footy-2019-new-positions/
Can players check the 2019 players in this thread and advise any discrepancies. OP is up to date with latest trades approved. Will be using this thread to finalise teams.
http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php?topic=99259.msg1484387#msg1484387
I will again purchase the Add ons to allow customisation.
Despite giving UF the spreadsheet they still stuffed up. Think it is basically because we have the rivalry rd in rd 7.
So ass we prepare for the season couple of things to discuss/finalise:
Any change of team names/home grounds
Any change in Rivalries
Any change in scoring.
Any other matters you wish to bring before start of season.
Quote from: Rusty00 on October 10, 2014, 10:13:38 AM
Oxford Owls - SilverLion
Def: Sam Docherty (Carl), Kade Kolodjashnij (Melb), Zach Tuohy (Geel), Thomas Jonas (Port), Patrick Ambrose (Ess), Zach Guthrie (Geel), Bailey Williams (WB), Sam Taylor (GWS), Mason Redman (Ess), Dylan Grimes (Rich), Mitchell Hinge (Bris), Jackson Thurlow (M) (Syd), Ethan Hughes (Fre), Connor Nutting (GC), Logan Austin (StK)
Mid: Bryce Gibbs (Adel), Oliver Wines (Port), Thomas Liberatore (WB), Stephen Hill (Fre), Jaeger O'Meara (Haw), Cam Ellis-Yolmen (Adel), Anthony Miles (GC), Bailey Smith (WB), Connor Rozee (Port)
Ruck: Ben McEvoy (Haw), Jonathon Ceglar (Haw), Marc Pittonet (Haw),
Fwd: Jack Gunston (Haw), Ryan Lester (M) (Bris), Tom Hawkins (Geel), Allen Christensen (Bris), Lin Jong (M) (WB), Sam Lloyd (WB), Tim O'Brien (Haw), Darcy Fogarty (M) (Adel), Elliott Himmelberg (Adel), Cameron Polson (Carl), Pat Kerr (Carl), Liam Ryan (WC), Aaron Vandenberg (Melb), Mark Hutchings (WC), Jarman Impey (Haw), Billy Gowers (WB), Zac Giles-Langdon (GWS), Tom McCartin (Syd), Shane McAdam (Ade) Darcy MacPherson (GC)
Few adjustments for mine, I've gotten these positions from the SC page in addition to the 11 added UF DPPs, plus a couple of extras unrelated to position:
Name changes:
Oxford Lions ;)
Aaron vandenBerg - lower case v, capital B
Zac Langdon - changed name?
Positional changes:
Sam Lloyd - add M
Allen Christensen - add M
Connor Nutting - add F
Jarman Impey - add D
Ryan Lester - remove F, add D
Aaron vandenBerg - add M
Jackson Thurlow - remove D
Connor Rozee - remove M, add F and D
Stephen Hill - remove M, add D
Jonathan Ceglar - add F
Darcy Fogarty - remove M
Mark Hutchings - remove F, add M
Hi All
Ultimate Footy is open,
Can you all log in and roll team from last year. Hoping this rolls into Btitish xvs as well. Need to do as soon as you can so we can then do the manual draft to allocate all players.
I have purchased features plus so we can do all the little admin things like adding players etc as you will notice when you roll team you have no players.
Apologies for the spam. AXV is looking for a new coach. Thread topic link is below.
http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,112758.0.html
Hi All we now have all 16 teams registered in UF,
Over the next couple of days we will be updating teams but to assist can you go in and nominate any keeper players from last year.
Draw will also be published in the near future with rivalry round being Rd 1. This may assist UF getting draw right.
You should now all be able to see your teams in UF.
Please check and advise any discrepancies. The following teams will be running with a 46 team list due to players not being delisted by the date:
Birmingham Dragons - Will Langford
Huddersfield Hawks - Jake Brown
Hebden Bridge Hedgehogs - Josh Murphy
Wrexham Knights - Jarrad Waite
Luke Lavender and Thomas Bugg retired after the delisting dates so Dragons and Steins will get a supplementary in the rookie draft.
Draw being worked on and should be up in the next few days.
Quote from: Ringo on March 13, 2019, 01:00:16 PM
You should now all be able to see your teams in UF.
Please check and advise any discrepancies. The following teams will be running with a 46 team list due to players not being delisted by the date:
Birmingham Dragons - Will Langford
Huddersfield Hawks - Jake Brown
Hebden Bridge Hedgehogs - Josh Murphy
Wrexham Knights - Jarrad Waite
Luke Lavender and Thomas Bugg retired after the delisting dates so Dragons and Steins will get a supplementary in the rookie draft.
Draw being worked on and should be up in the next few days.
Hawks still have Langford on their list but technically has retired
Dragons have Langford whereas Hawks have Langdon so above should be correct. Langford has retired but on Dragons list.
Looks like I missed the trades in trade period 2 so will fix that now.
Sorry to be a pest Ringo but Trade #22 has not been processed on UF. Murphy is listed as a Free Agent in the UF pool.
Quote from: Ringo on August 19, 2018, 08:55:45 PM
Trade Approvals/Rejections
Trade Period 1:
Trade 22
Hebden Bridge trade: NAT 41
Huddersfield trade: Thomas Murphy (NM)
Trade approved
Josh Williams (GC) who I assume you're meaning I didn't delist is mentioned on the second page of the delistings thread. (Can't quote ::) )
Quote from: Ringo on March 13, 2019, 02:41:39 PM
Dragons have Langford whereas Hawks have Langdon so above should be correct. Langford has retired but on Dragons list.
There is also this Hawks team called Hawthorn Hawks who have Langford. I believe they are an AFL team :p
Quote from: GoLions on March 13, 2019, 03:01:36 PM
Quote from: Ringo on March 13, 2019, 02:41:39 PM
Dragons have Langford whereas Hawks have Langdon so above should be correct. Langford has retired but on Dragons list.
There is also this Hawks team called Hawthorn Hawks who have Langford. I believe they are an AFL team :p
Just stirring
Quote from: Koop on March 13, 2019, 02:59:28 PM
Sorry to be a pest Ringo but Trade #22 has not been processed on UF. Murphy is listed as a Free Agent in the UF pool.
Quote from: Ringo on August 19, 2018, 08:55:45 PM
Trade Approvals/Rejections
Trade Period 1:
Trade 22
Hebden Bridge trade: NAT 41
Huddersfield trade: Thomas Murphy (NM)
Trade approved
Josh Williams (GC) who I assume you're meaning I didn't delist is mentioned on the second page of the delistings thread. (Can't quote ::) )
Not a pest as you are confirming teams. Somehow I recorded Josh Murphy instead of Tom Murphy, Now fixed. reason why I ask for the checks as I am not infallible with all the manual changes required.
With the final players now being added can you all check and verify teams in UF and advise any discrepancies. Have adjusted the approved trades from trade period 2 as well.
And looks like draw is correct in UF as it is unchanged from yesterday.
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on December 29, 2012, 03:13:56 PM
7.11 Rising Star
Rising Star Award will be presented to a Player under 21 years of age making his debut in the competition , Will be awarded to the player with the highest points average for season with a minimum of 5 games being played. A player who has has played 2 games or less in the previous season is eligible for this award providing the play a minimum of 5 games this year,
Apparently there has been some confusion on The Discord. This was changed like 4 years ago to same rules as AFL.
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:03:54 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on December 29, 2012, 03:13:56 PM
7.11 Rising Star
Rising Star Award will be presented to a Player under 21 years of age making his debut in the competition , Will be awarded to the player with the highest points average for season with a minimum of 5 games being played. A player who has has played 2 games or less in the previous season is eligible for this award providing the play a minimum of 5 games this year,
Apparently there has been some confusion on The Discord. This was changed like 4 years ago to same rules as AFL.
So 10 or less games in the previous year in Bxvs?
Quote from: SilverLion on March 14, 2019, 09:55:44 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:03:54 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on December 29, 2012, 03:13:56 PM
7.11 Rising Star
Rising Star Award will be presented to a Player under 21 years of age making his debut in the competition , Will be awarded to the player with the highest points average for season with a minimum of 5 games being played. A player who has has played 2 games or less in the previous season is eligible for this award providing the play a minimum of 5 games this year,
Apparently there has been some confusion on The Discord. This was changed like 4 years ago to same rules as AFL.
So 10 or less games in the previous year in Bxvs?
10 or less games in the AFL (assuming that's the rule there). Has nothing to do with games played in BXVs. Did this because we couldn't be bothered checking how often all the eligible non-first year players had been named the previous year.
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 10:00:34 PM
Quote from: SilverLion on March 14, 2019, 09:55:44 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:03:54 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on December 29, 2012, 03:13:56 PM
7.11 Rising Star
Rising Star Award will be presented to a Player under 21 years of age making his debut in the competition , Will be awarded to the player with the highest points average for season with a minimum of 5 games being played. A player who has has played 2 games or less in the previous season is eligible for this award providing the play a minimum of 5 games this year,
Apparently there has been some confusion on The Discord. This was changed like 4 years ago to same rules as AFL.
So 10 or less games in the previous year in Bxvs?
10 or less games in the AFL (assuming that's the rule there). Has nothing to do with games played in BXVs. Did this because we couldn't be bothered checking how often all the eligible non-first year players had been named the previous year.
Been checking my records and have been unable to find a vote to make rising star similar to AFL. If you can provide one will stand corrected but rule was still in existence in 2016 if you look at the Rising Star thread,
Quote from: Ringo on March 14, 2019, 10:15:08 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 10:00:34 PM
Quote from: SilverLion on March 14, 2019, 09:55:44 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:03:54 PM
Quote from: GoLions on March 14, 2019, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Ringo on December 29, 2012, 03:13:56 PM
7.11 Rising Star
Rising Star Award will be presented to a Player under 21 years of age making his debut in the competition , Will be awarded to the player with the highest points average for season with a minimum of 5 games being played. A player who has has played 2 games or less in the previous season is eligible for this award providing the play a minimum of 5 games this year,
Apparently there has been some confusion on The Discord. This was changed like 4 years ago to same rules as AFL.
So 10 or less games in the previous year in Bxvs?
10 or less games in the AFL (assuming that's the rule there). Has nothing to do with games played in BXVs. Did this because we couldn't be bothered checking how often all the eligible non-first year players had been named the previous year.
Been checking my records and have been unable to find a vote to make rising star similar to AFL. If you can provide one will stand corrected but rule was still in existence in 2016 if you look at the Rising Star thread,
We didn't vote for it. Was something we agreed on informally because it meant less work trying to go through and check how often players were named the previous year. Has been the case since I've been around.
2016 we started doing it with AFL eligibility.
Vacant WXV Position (http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,113003.0.html)
... also, Hurricances 2019 premiership is "a sure thing"
Quote from: Purple 77 on April 08, 2019, 08:08:47 PM
Vacant WXV Position (http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,113003.0.html)
... also, Hurricances 2019 premiership is "a sure thing"
(https://i.gyazo.com/741fd1041cc99c1693cd060c69a3e5be.png)
Change Steins to Hawks and it's like you never left!
I probably should know the answer to this, but figure l might as well pose the question.
As everyone would know, positional changes will be announced on UF soon.
My question is, will they come into effect in our comp too?
Common sense tells me they will, but it's not down to common sense it's be down to however it was voted on.
Dont think so, unless its changed? thats what common sense tells me
The original vote was to lock from Rd1 and i dont recall it changing since over the last couple years...Ringo to confirm though.
Confirmed we voted 2 years ago to keep the statrs as at Rd 1 and not move with UF Changes. This does not mean that you can not raise it again for vote for next year,
For the record we voted on this in 2016 and 2018 and in both cases vote was lost 9 - 7.
Quote from: Ringo on April 26, 2019, 06:05:38 PM
Confirmed we voted 2 years ago to keep the statrs as at Rd 1 and not move with UF Changes. This does not mean that you can not raise it again for vote for next year,
Cheers Ringo
Just putting these ideas out there for discussion and possible rule changes.
1. Most Valuable player - There have been a few queries on the UF method of applying 3,2,1 so do we change and do our own manual calculations. The sticking point with UF is that a losing team may have 2 of the best scores but UF appears to allocate the points 2 to winner and one to loser or all three to winner if a easy win.
2. Utility Emergency - UF now has the capability to nominate a Utilty so do we go down the track of amending our rules to name 5 emergencies including utilities with emergency replacements being like for like. This may remove the need for manual calculations around Utilities and simplify it.
Bit of advertising - vacant ADT coaching position: http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,113329.0.html
So a few things that I think are worth raising for next season.
Warning: MASSIVE slabs of text follow :P.
Firstly, a couple of amendments to the following rules:
Priority Picks:"3.4 Teams with less than 4 wins year 1 will have priority picks at end of Round 1 of National draft and if they also have less than 4 wins in year 2 then they will receive priority picks at start of National Draft. Tanking will not be tolerated and will result in forfeiture of Round 1 pick as well"
Needs to reworded to something to the effect of:
"3.4 Teams with less than 4 wins year 1 will have priority picks at end of Round 1 of National draft and if they also have less than 4 wins in year 2 then they will receive a priority pick immediately after their first national draft pick (prior to trading) instead of an end of first round pick. Tanking will not be tolerated and will result in forfeiture of Round 1 pick as well."
In addition, I'd like to put forward the suggestion that if a team wins a total of 6 games or less over 2 seasons they are also entitled to the first round priority pick instead of an end of first round pick. This would avoid situations such as the one we have seen with the Rams and Breakers this year. Furthermore I think we should scrap the ability of the admins to hand out priority picks that don't fit with these rules (if we implement my previous suggestion, I don't think there'd be a scenario where it would be required anyway).
I think the 6 game limit/less than 4 wins in each of 2 years should roll to each subsequent year as well. Just showing a couple of scenarios as an example (assuming the year previous to Year 1 the side won at least 7 games so nothings rolling over):
Year 1 - 4 wins, Year 2 - 2 Wins - Year 3 - 4 Wins - would result in no priority pick in the first year, a first round pick the second year, and a first round pick in the third year.
Year 1 - 1 win, Year 2 - 5 Wins, Year 3 - 3 Wins - would result in an end of first round pick in the first year, a first round pick in the second year, and an end of first round pick in the third year.
Year 1 - 0 Wins, Year 2 - 4 Wins, Year 3 - 3 Wins - would result in an end of first round pick in the first year, a first round pick in the second year, and an end of first round pick in the third year.
--
Rising Star:"Rising Star Award will be presented to a Player under 21 years of age making his debut in the competition , Will be awarded to the player with the highest points average for season with a minimum of 5 games being played. A player who has has played 2 games or less in the previous season is eligible for this award providing the play a minimum of 5 games this year,"
Needs to be updated to something to the effect of (points in red I think we need further clarification/discussion on):
"- For a player to be eligible for
a nomination for The Rising Star Award, a player must meet the criteria listed by the AFL for their Rising Star Award, which is currently as follows:
- To be eligible for the AFL Rising Star Award, each year's nominated players must be under the age of 21 at 1 January and have played no more than 10 AFL games to the start of that season.
- They must not have been suspended by the AFL or State League tribunals during the season (as with the Brownlow Medal, players found guilty of certain offences and fined or reprimanded by the Tribunal remain eligible to win the award)."
At the conclusion of the BXVs 15 round regular sseason, only the nominations of players who have played at least 5 games and have not been suspended since their nomination (as is the same for the AFL's eligibility <only suspensions up to BXVs Round 15 inclusive should count I think? if a player is suspended later than this and is ineligible for the AFL award it shouldn't impact ours as we will have already awarded it>) for their BXVs side are then listed to be voted for. The Rising Star Award is voted on by all 16 current BXVs Coaches (<insert voting format here>).
In the case where there is no new players eligible to receive a nomination in a round, <insert what we do for that here>.
In the case where there are multiple players tied for the most coaches' votes for the BXVs Rising Star, <insert what we do for that here>.
--
So one other thing I wanted to raise separate to the rule amendments is the scoring system we currently use and how it currently places a noticable disadvantage to true forwards. I bring this up as it is evident across the competition that the best forwards, understandably, are midfielders available as forwards. I'm not saying at all that this alone is a problem (all formats pretty much face this to some extent), as our scoring system is heavily weighted to benefit midfielders (and especially inside/contested midfielders), I just believe that as a result of this weighting it creates a gap between these mids available as forwards and true forwards that is larger than it should be, and one that is larger than the common counterpart formats.
I'll use the example of the top 10 average forwards across our comp compared to SC and DT (FWIW, I'm aware that most of them across all 3 formats probably won't be available as forwards next year - which in itself is part of the problem haha).
BXVs:
Travis Boak - 207.1
Patrick Dangerfield - 195.4
Josh Dunkley - 194.4
Tim Kelly - 180.4
Rowan Marshall - 172.9
David Mundy - 166.2
James Worpel - 165.8
Jack Billings - 160.2
Michael Walters - 157.6
Robbie Gray - 156.9
Average = 175.69
| |
SC:
Josh Dunkley - 114.1
Patrick Dangerfield - 114.0
Travis Boak - 112.7
Rowan Marshall 112.3
Tim Kelly 102.9
Michael Walters - 100.8
Caleb Daniel - 99.9
Scott Lycett - 99.1
Jack Billings - 98.2
Isaac Heeney - 93.9
Average = 104.79
| |
DT:
Josh Dunkley - 110.6
Travis Boak - 110.6
Patrick Dangerfield - 106.6
Rowan Marshall - 101.5
Jack Billings - 101.4
Tim Kelly - 98.6
Tom Lynch (ADE) - 95.6
Caleb Daniel - 94.5
Dustin Martin - 93.8
James Worpel - 92.8
Average = 100.6
|
Now on their own the lists stack up reasonably consistently with each other, with the list being dominated by midfielders across all 3 formats, however its the disparity between the top 10s down to the "true" forwards is where I think its more obvious where the issues are. Taking the top 6 in the Coleman medal as an example (as these are some of the better "true" forwards of the comp:
BXVs:
Jeremy Cameron - 129.6
Jack Darling - 110.3
Tom Hawkins - 109.8
Ben Brown - 108.1
Tom Lynch (RICH) - 93.4
Charlie Cameron - 99.5
| |
SC:
Jeremy Cameron - 93.0
Tom Hawkins - 86.2
Jack Darling - 80.8
Charlie Cameron - 77.8
Ben Brown - 76.9
Tom Lynch (RICH) - 66.1
| |
DT:
Jeremy Cameron - 87.5
Tom Hawkins - 71.1
Ben Brown - 69.8
Jack Darling - 69
Charlie Cameron - 66.1
Tom Lynch (RICH) - 58.9
|
It is clear that although the true forwards will pretty much always score less than midfielders (as is the nature of the majority of fantasy formats), the gap in our format is significantly more skewed than it should be. Isolating Jeremy Cameron as an example (who currently has a significantly higher average in both BXVs and DT than the others listed - likely due to a higher possession average); his average is 26% lower than the average of the top 10 in BXVs, compared to merely 11% in SC and 13% in DT. Using Jack Darling as another example, 37% lower in BXVs, 23% in SC and 31% DT. The difference, though less noticeable, still indicates that they are at a disadvantage more in BXVs than the counterpart formats.
Now I'm not saying to change anything drastic so these forwards are averaging as much as mids or anything, I just think the gap between them and the top forwards should be made to be at least a bit closer, in a similar fashion to other formats. One minor suggestion I thought of would be to increase the amount of points awarded from goals by a few points, for example an increase of a mere 2 points per goal would increase J Cameron's average by 6.35 points, Hawkins' by 4.9 points, Darling's by 5; and would only increase Dangerfield's by 2.1, Dunkley's by 0.9 and Boak's by 1 point.
TLDR; I think true forwards are disadvantaged too severely by our scoring format as it currently sits.
--
One last thing, will we be doing a mid-season draft and/or trade period next year? It was mentioned that we would re-assess it based on the AFL mid-year draft this year. :P
(Also sorry if I made any typos or maths errors haha, hopefully you guys get the gist of my post at least)
I'm with SL on the priority picks thing. As long as it (along with all other rules at EOS) worded properly, there shouldn't be any issue.
The wording on how the Rising Star says "Will be awarded to the player with the highest points average for season with a minimum of 5 games being played" but then it also goes on to say that we vote for the Rising Star. So what is it? Is it straight up awarded to the player with the highest average, or do we vote? Has to be one or the other.
Also, I agree re: pure/true forwards. Not sure what other point scoring options UF has as customisation that will help and there's obviously not a whole lot than can be done other than increasing points scored for goals, but as one of the only teams without any real hybrid fwd/mid types, it's very noticeable. I don't see it as an absolutely necessary change, but it would help slightly I think, and we did buff the scoring potential for defenders in the past so it's not a reach.
FisherSaints ruined this list, please help
WXV Coaching Vacancy (http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,113498.msg1997883.html#msg1997883)
WXVs Vacant Coaching Position (http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,113520.0.html)
As good a move as getting Fritsch, Thomas and Ross