WXV Rules Discussion 2020

[Purple 77]

Mexico City, Tokyo and Rio votes yet to be received

I sent mine through two days ago?

*checks*

yes you did - apologies

[Purple 77]

Alrighty, 17 votes in (remaining coach, would still like to hear your thoughts) but all votes have been decided

1. Indication of Traditional/Flood/Attack
A) Keep as is - must be nominated before the first partial lockout 7
B) Can be nominated/changed before and after partial lockouts, but before full lockout 10

2. Indication of rested player
A) Keep as is - must be nominated before the first partial lockout 10
B) Can be nominated/changed before and after partial lockouts, but before full lockout (obviously still cannot rest a player that has already played) 7

3. Minimum HGA
A) Keep as is - HGA score is the lowest scoring player 14
B) HGA score is the lowest scoring player, or 30, whichever is the highest 3

4. 'Default' WXV team submission (assuming the release of AFL team submission returns to normal next year)
A) Keep as is - best XV + 3 emergencies 1
B) Extra emergency - best XV + 4 emergencies 16

5. Rolling Lockouts (this is only in the context of rounds that require additional submission allowances i.e. for rounds where the default submission format is insufficient)
A) Continue to allow as necessary 5
B) Discontinue entirely and replace with 'best XV + 8 emergencies' submissions 12

6. Auto-correction of misstated emergencies
A) Keep as is - the admin uses teams list preferences to name missing emergencies 7
B) Discontinue - the admin no longer replaces omitted emergencies, and the team will be exempt from the '25% late inclusion' rule if otherwise eligible for the week 10

7. Salary cap modification
A) Keep as is 2
B) Introduce an increased weighting to most recent year performance 15

[Purple 77]

So we can now nominate flood/attack after partial lockouts, but before full lockouts.

However, restings must continue to be nominated before the first partial lockout

HGA will remain as the lowest scoring player in the team

The default WXV submission will have 4 emergencies

For those rounds requiring additional submission allowances, we'll use 8 emergencies rather than a rolling lockout

You lazy sods will now suffer the consequence of not naming your full set of emergencies :P

And the salary cap will be amended slightly with an increased weighting on the most recent year results.

Thanks everybody :)

[PowerBug]

Can we vote on allowing loopholing in partial lockout rounds?

Also there’s discussion on discord about flood/attack in general (and “small”). Will we be voting on that?

[Purple 77]

Can we vote on allowing loopholing in partial lockout rounds?

Also there’s discussion on discord about flood/attack in general (and “small”). Will we be voting on that?

The flood/attack stuff was never mentioned on this thread, so no - the time has passed for that.

Partial lockout suggestion I guess I might entertain given it's a follow-up discussion based on a rule that just passed... but I'm inclined to not want to, given we're about to kick off the trade period.

If two more people want to discuss that, say so here and we'll do it. But I'm no longer entertaining brand new suggestions until next year.

[PowerBug]

Can we vote on allowing loopholing in partial lockout rounds?

Also there’s discussion on discord about flood/attack in general (and “small”). Will we be voting on that?

The flood/attack stuff was never mentioned on this thread, so no - the time has passed for that.

Partial lockout suggestion I guess I might entertain given it's a follow-up discussion based on a rule that just passed... but I'm inclined to not want to, given we're about to kick off the trade period.

If two more people want to discuss that, say so here and we'll do it. But I'm no longer entertaining brand new suggestions until next year.

I mentioned loopholing back in August in the general discussion thread before this thread was a thing :(

Will set a reminder to wait for this specific thread next year, I thought new rule ideas were still being taken :’(

[Purple 77]

I mentioned loopholing back in August in the general discussion thread before this thread was a thing :(

Will set a reminder to wait for this specific thread next year, I thought new rule ideas were still being taken :’(

Yes - I'm not realistically monitoring discord and other threads noting down all suggestions; they had to be brought forward here.

And I did say in my PM to mention any rules you thought weren't captured in the vote BEFORE the results came out :P

if there is any new ideas you want to discuss between now and when I announce the results of this PM, I'll entertain them.

...

If you feel like I've missed one of your suggestions, please re-post it in the Rule Discussion thread

There's also this from the OP

We need all rule changes approved/rejected by Sunday the 20th of September (or whenever the AFL H&A season ends), which probably means I'll leave the final PM no later than say... I'll back us in for a quick response and say Saturday the 19th of September.

So this is on you :P

[PowerBug]

Can't argue with that ;D Will be more awake next year :-*

[Purple 77]

Alrighty, all votes are in.

A) Forced Democracy - keep as is - where all coaches have to vote 11
B) Optional democracy - no penalties for not voting, all votes are assumed to be a 'pass' unless told otherwise. The onus is on coaches to 'neg' a trade within a certain timeframe. 7
C) Partial dictatorship - I decide which trades I want the community to vote on (which will be most of them - the intention behind this option is to not bother coaches with 'transactional' trades like clearly fair pick swap for example). 0

Current method wins!

Stay tuned for the next vote where we review neg levels.

[Purple 77]

Alrighty!

11 votes in, and we have a result.

10 coaches voted for "Keep as is", so that's what we'll do.

Interestingly, the second preferences were split between "Hold to higher standard" and "Relax". So looks like we have the winning formula in place.

Some of you may have seen this as a waste of time.

But you're wrong!

It's a necessary reflection piece to make sure that what we're doing, is the preferred way moving forward.

Now, here's to no more votes til September/October!