British XV's - 2015 Discussion Thread

[Pkbaldy]

l like most of what has been suggested.

Except for not including clangers, as they help to accurately reflect a players true value to an AFL team. Also don't like the raising of the penalty of frees against to -3 to compensate.

To me it has the potential to penalise inside mids and players who have a real crack, whilst at the same time reward outside seagulls who can't kick straight and turn the ball over.

The rest l like :)

**Also worth noting l'm talking on Rids' behalf too, we've discussed it but he's interstate working and can't get online at the moment.

Well it's not our fault UF can't add Clangers. And if Ineffective Disposal is added it just damages the inside mids even more. Mainly if the forwards over extend their lead and it ends up in the hands of the opponent they get penalized... I'd prefer to punish the midfielder for tackling a guy too high... Because he is in control of where he tackles. But isn't in control of his team mates marking or gathering abilities.

[Ringo]

Personally in favour of -3 points for Frees against.  Reason being you penalise the team with the free against so there should be a penalty involved. Remember under Sportal F/A it was classed as a clanger and incurred -5. Think -3 is a fair compromise when we can not get clangers statistics.

With using UF advances stats we still have a unique scoring competition.

[iZander]

Happy to delete Ineffective disposals if that is the consensus (and heading that way).  Like the idea then of increasing FA to -3.

Keep the debate coming as I do not want to be dogmatic and implement points that you all are not happy with. Would also like some comment on the positive points as well eg is 4 to much for CP and Clearances.

yeah personally think +4 is a lot for CP if UP are not going to be rewarded at all

[GoLions]

I'm fine with 4 for CPs

[Nige]

I'm fine with 4 for CPs

[nostradamus]

Personally in favour of -3 points for Frees against.  Reason being you penalise the team with the free against so there should be a penalty involved. Remember under Sportal F/A it was classed as a clanger and incurred -5. Think -3 is a fair compromise when we can not get clangers statistics.

With using UF advances stats we still have a unique scoring competition.

We're happy to go with your best judgement on everything Ringo

[Spite]

I'm fine with 4 for CPs

Can I suggest a compromise at 3 then so everyone is happy? Haha

[Nige]

I'm fine with 4 for CPs

Can I suggest a compromise at 3 then so everyone is happy? Haha

But I'm fine with 4 and won't be happy with 3!  :P

[Ringo]

If agreement can not be reached on any scoring points we will have a vote to resolve.

Thanks for the open debate going on here with Contested Possessions and Frees Against being the 2 causing the most angst at the moment.

[iZander]

If people want 4 i don't really care, just increases the gap between forwards/defenders and mids further, thats my thinking behind it. Lets me honest, everyone is just trying to suit there team strengths anyway but i have no problem with + 4 for CP.

[LF]

Well I'm pretty sure in the original Sportal scoring system that CP's was 4 points so that is really what it should be imo

[Ringo]

LF is correct - Here is the original Sportal Scoring

Kick    3 Points
Handball    1 Point
Contested Possession *    4 Points
Uncontested Possession **    2 Points
Tackle    3 Points
Hitout    1 Point
Clanger ***    -5 Points
Goal    6 Points
Behind    1 Point

*** Clangers include any blatant unforced error including free kick against, 50m penalty against, dropped marks.
As frees against were classed as clangers should we also increase them to -5,  Probably not in favour of that but happy with - 3.

[nrich102]

I wouldn't be against Frees against being -5 points tbh. And RIngo and I have heaps of Lions boys in our squad,  and we all know the umps hate Brisbane  :P

[Spite]

If people want 4 i don't really care, just increases the gap between forwards/defenders and mids further, thats my thinking behind it. Lets me honest, everyone is just trying to suit there team strengths anyway but i have no problem with + 4 for CP.

We probably have the most to gain out of any team with CP being worth +4 and I campaigned for +2 so I'm not sure you can lump everyone into that...

[Pkbaldy]

Yup...

The team was initially drafted to suit +4 CP. I traded to suit +4 CP. Because that's what it should be.  No arguments.
BXV has always been about strong midfield, no doubt about that. So that's what people drafted/traded for.