UTG Season 3: Round 12 Team Submissions

[PowerBug]

Ellis, Brandon 74; Salem, Christian 66; Macmillan, Jamie 59
Cotchin, Trent 65; McIntosh, Kamdyn 37, Dunstan, Luke 78
Witts, Jarrod 110
Heeney, Isaac 118; Lynch, Tom J. 32; Michael Apeness 65
Sinclair, Callum (R) 110


Emg:  Black, Aaron (F) Baguley, Mark (D);, Ballard (F/M)

= 814

[PowerBug]

Go Pack Yourself

Paul Seedsman 68, Nick Vlastuin 68, Alex Witherden 127
Jack Steven 49, David Swallow 58, Jared Polec 88
Callum Sinclair 110
Jack Martin 50, Kane Lambert 87, Charlie Dixon 56
Jarryd Lyons DNP

Will Hoskin-Elliott 84, ---, Ben Brown 39, Billy Hartung 36

= 845

[PowerBug]

Leaderboard
PB - 900
Nige - 895
LS - 890
BB67th - 872
BM - 869
pyro -  849
GL - 845
Hawka - 825
Holz - 814
Koop - 812
wato - 808
TomK - 793

[fanTCfool]

A reminder to those coaches who named an M4 to name a U1 instead over the remaining bye rounds. This would likely make no difference to your submission but the added flexibility is available. Naming a M4 rather than U1 in Round 13 or 14 will result in that player's score not being counted.

Leaderboard
BM - 930
PB - 900
Koop - 900
Nige - 895
LS - 890
BB67th - 872
pyro -  849
GL - 845
Hawka - 825
Holz - 814
wato - 808
TomK - 793

[PowerBug]

challenge

http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,111272.msg1931114.html#msg1931114
Score wasn't counted in Rd 4 when it "made no difference" as the player in question was a mid anyway. Consistency should be applied in Rd 12.

The scorers in question should get the E1 score off the bench at U1, not their M4 moved to U1. You punish late submissions when it made no difference, yet you don't punish wrong submissions when it does. Apply the rules consistently.


And suddenly changing it for Rd 13 and 14 adds more inconsistency when prior to this everything has been consistent. Decision makes no sense mate, does not add up with everything else you've done this season

A reminder to those coaches who named an M4 to name a U1 instead over the remaining bye rounds. This would likely make no difference to your submission but the added flexibility is available. Naming a M4 rather than U1 in Round 13 or 14 will result in that player's score not being counted.

"Likely". You can't prove this, only got word of mouth (which is void as could easily be biased), and assumptions. Maybe their 4th mid would've gone to E4 and their E1 would've come onto the field at U1.

[fanTCfool]

As for Holz's submission in question, the mid-eligible Crowden would move to M3. I did not do the scores for that round, and did not make the correction at the time as it made no difference to the awarded Gold for the week. If I knew it would've been an issue now, I would've made the correction then. Any player can be named as a utility and Holz chose Crowden, therefore it is clear that Crowden was Holz's preferred selection on the field, in front of players that were not mid-eligible, and therefore moves to M3.

Punishing late submissions does not make "no difference" as players who name their side late lose 50% of their weekly gold as a personal penalty for failing to name their side on time, regardless of where they place during the week.

There is no "sudden change" for Round 13 and 14, I was merely being somewhat lenient this week purely because we switched back to the utility format after a long run without it, hence I figured it could have slid under the radar of some coaches. It can be confusing to switch between naming formats throughout the year, it is rather unusual in comparison to other competitions. It was clearly stated twice in the opening post for this week and via PM, however, I understand some will be too busy to read my passages and would only have time to quickly name their side.

BM's first emergency was a mid eligible player, so the latter argument isn't really relevant in this instance. Regardless of whether BM scores from his emergency or fourth mid, he takes out the highest score of the week and hence the most gold. Given the lengthy discussion this week, I imagine we won't have this issue again given the utility submission only affects the next two rounds before (thankfully) being put to bed for the remainder of the season.

As for Koop, it is clear that Polec is his preference over Houston. If Koop wanted to name Houston in front of Polec, he would have named the mid-eligible Seedsman at M4 and then Houston at D2, leaving Polec at E1. It is for this reason that I believe Koop's score should stand at 900. However, given that PB and Koop are tied at 900, but one made a submission error, PB should receive the second place prize and Koop receive the third, rather than splitting the gold equally.

[PowerBug]

fine

[fanTCfool]

Awarded Gold

BM - 100G
PB - 80G
Koop - 70G
Nige - 60G
LS, BB, pyro, GL - 50G
Hawka, Holz, Wato, Tom - 40G