2015 WXV Awards and 2015 Rules Discussion

[ossie85]

Hey guys!

Just helping Purple 77 out as requested. This thread serves THREE purposes:

a) Award nominations and fixture discussions

b) Rule suggestions - WHICH ANYONE CAN NOMINATE ANY RULE for discussion. I think all new rules need to be decided BEFORE trading begins, and that once they are decided, shouldn't be changed until this time next year (unless something drastic happens like a radical new AFL rule change or a tragedy of some sort)

c) Are you going to be around next year? Cos if you are thinking of retiring to the great fantasy land in the sky, now'd be the time to let people know :)


This is going to be a huge post. So I've numbered things.

Award Nominations

1. Coach of the Year

Purps asked me to do this as he is a coach and can't rightfully nominate himself for instance

I've decided that instead of adding my potential bias to this, will give this a simple criteria:
- If you've won more games during the regular season in 2015 than 2014, you get a nomination for coach of the year. If you had the same amount of wins, if you scored more overall points you get a nomination
- A wild card nomination if I feel that a coach has had to overcome particular adversity or done something special to deserve it.

The nominations will be announced after Round 17 is complete.

2. Coaches award

Each team can nominate a player on there team they think deserves special mention. You can use any criteria you like, it doesn't have to be the best player. Previous winners are Chad Wingard and Matt Jaensch, both from PNL.


Fixture

We've played for 4 years! The fixture for 2016 is likely to be very similar to the fixture in 2015 (with three groups of six based on ladder position).

You guys have any teams you want to start a 2 year 'rivalry' with where you play each other on neutral ground for 2 years? Let me know, or I'll make them up.

My Rule Suggestions/Thoughts

Ok, a lot of these are just me playing around (you should be use to this by now), and I fully expect people to hate some of these. That's fine! Not hugely sold on some myself. Suggestions are welcome.

ANYONE can nominate a rule change. And it will be voted on.

1. Preseason Training

I'd say that once the fixture is announced, each team can nominate which preseason training regime they would like.

a) Hard - train hard in the preseason, and your team gets +10% in the first 4 rounds of the season, but -15% in the last 4 rounds of the season (finals not impacted)

b) Normal - no bonus/penalty

c) Light - light training, and your team gets -15% in the first 4 rounds of the season, but +10% in the last 4 rounds of the season (finals not impacted).

2. Getting up for a match

I don't think we could have but #1 and #2, but how about this:

You can choose to train your team really hard for a week, and get a +10% bonus the next round, but a -20% penalty the round after.

Finals wouldn't count.

3. Salary Cap Change

Cap stays the same (30,000 max, 22,000 min - points scored over 17 rounds)

BUT, instead of taking just a players 2015 score, you take the highest score between 2015 and 2014? I.e. Tom Liberatore would be worth his 2014 value, not his 2015 value of 0.

4. Flood/Attack Changes

Talked about this before :P

Each team can choose whether they play with 5 forwards and 3 defenders, 4 forwards and 4 defenders or 3 forwards and 5 defenders ANY week (except finals)

If you have 5 forwards against the opposition 4 defenders, each forward gets +10% and the opposition defender loses 15%
If you have 5 forwards against the opposition 3 defenders, each forward gets +15% and the opposition defender loses 20%
If you have 4 forwards against the opposition 3 defenders, each forward gets +5% and the opposition defender loses 10%
If you have the same amount of forwards/defenders, no penalty.

And vice versa if you have more defenders than forwards.

5. Tag

A lot of people have had issues with a tagging rule, I've tried to incorporate that feedback.

You nominated a midfielder in your team to tag a midfielder on the opposition (that midfielder has to be named on the midfield or interchange). The tagger loses 15% just for playing a tagging role. The player being tagged loses 5% for each TACKLE the tagger makes. BUT if the player being tagged has the same or more tackles than the tagger, he breaks the tag and receives no penalty, while the tagger still loses 15%.

I.e. Liam Shiels tags Jack Steven. Shiels loses 15% of his score for playing the tagging role, and has 7 tackles, so Steven loses 35% of his score. BUT if Steven also has 7 (or more tackles), the tag is broken, and he receives no penalty.

6. Sub Rule

AFL is a real chance of getting rid of the sub rule. So what do we do?

- Remove the sub rule and just have bad luck?

- Retain the sub rule for players injured in first half?

- Something else?

I'm in favour of just reverting back to bad luck.

7. Ruck OOP

Trying to incorporate everyone's feedback. My main issue isn't so much about the scarcity of players, but who is playing OOP there. I.e. if Caleb Daniel is ever named OOP ruck that is just ridiculous.

My proposal:

If you name a player OOP in the ruck you still lose 50% of the score (as has always been the case). BUT, if that player is less than 190cm, not only do you lose 50% of your score, the opposition ruck gains 25%.


8. Leadership Group

Think it could be good that at the start of each season each team names 5 players in a leadership group and the Captain (and Co-Captains) can only be selected from those 5 players for the season (unless all 5 aren't available)


9. Trading Future Draft Picks

Think the same rules as the ones recently announced by the AFL

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-06/future-trading-given-goahead-but-with-restrictions

-       Clubs can trade one year in the future only.

-       Clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period. If they don't, they will face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks.

-       If a club trades a future first-round selection, it may not trade any other future selection from that same draft. But if a club keeps its future first-round selection, it can trade any of its future selections from other rounds.

10. Form Confidence

A bit quirky this one.

If you have a player that has increased his score for 3 weeks in a row, his next score gets a +10% confidence bonus (must have played all 4 matches consecutively, but not necessarily in the WXV seniors).

AND

If you have a player that has decreased his score for 4 weeks in a row, his next score gets a -10% confidence penalty (must have played all 4 matches consecutively, but not necessarily in the WXV seniors).

So in Round 1 Travis Boak scores 85, then 90, then 92, the 96 - his next score in round 5 will get a +10% confidence bonus.

While if David Armitage scores 120, 115, 104, 96, his next score in round 5 will get a -10% confidence penalty.






So, feel free to not read any of that.

[Holz]

This wont suprise you but im against any additional rules.

I would scrap every rule but the Sub rule and go back to who the worlds was when it started. Nice and simple.

[Nige]

I think we at Cairo deserve a Coach of the Year nomination for not throwing in the towel and/or rage quitting this season despite the stupidly bad luck we've endured.  :P

Fixture stuff is all gravy, I liked how it was this season, made it interesting (with a fair few teams going up or down, along with the upset here and there).

Don't like any of those rules/suggestions to be honest, I agree with Holz there.

[Ricochet]

I think we at Cairo deserve a Coach of the Year nomination for not throwing in the towel and/or rage quitting this season despite the stupidly bad luck we've endured.  :P

Nige pls, get through a 2nd/ 3rd year of pain and then come talk to us

[Nige]

I think we at Cairo deserve a Coach of the Year nomination for not throwing in the towel and/or rage quitting this season despite the stupidly bad luck we've endured.  :P

Nige pls, get through a 2nd/ 3rd year of pain and then come talk to us

Yeah, but we were fine last season.  :(

You guys have been consistently bad (not your fault) for a couple of years.  :P

[Ricochet]

I think we at Cairo deserve a Coach of the Year nomination for not throwing in the towel and/or rage quitting this season despite the stupidly bad luck we've endured.  :P

Nige pls, get through a 2nd/ 3rd year of pain and then come talk to us

Yeah, but we were fine last season.  :(

You guys have been consistently bad (not your fault) for a couple of years.  :P

haha thanks mate

[Ringo]

Are we going to start a separate thread here for nominations or do we nominate here.

Also agree with Holz some of these rules are getting too complicated to keep on top off so would like to keep it simple. It is hard enough now keeping up with Floot, attack etc. without adding in additional scoring. 

[Memphistopheles]

I like the same rule that I brought up in British with regards to the sub rule.

With only 15 scoring players on each team if one goes down early and scores say 0 it then becomes very difficult for a team to compete in the match.

Whereas in the AFL if a player goes down early with injury it might hurt them a bit late on but, it generally doesn't decide the outcome of a match.

Which is why I think having some rule for injured players would be good, to better reflect real life.

The rule proposal Ringo came up with in British was this:

If a player is replaced before half time or  if he spends less than 40% time on ground then substitution from emergency players is allowed at either full points if emergency is from same line  or half points if OOP emergency is used. Administrator to decide if TOG is injury related or not to remove cases where player is sparingly used.

[Purple 77]

Lol, I love every single one of those rules. Maybe it's just an admin thing bro?

Except I'm not a fan of future draft pick trading is all, given the high quantity of trades as it is.

[Purple 77]

The two rules that particularly catch my fancy is the tagger and confidence rules. I think they're magnificent.

Yep, Worlds has got a lot of rules. However I like to think we have all got accustomed to them? I understand Ringo has two lots of rules to keep track of in Worlds and British, but how is everyone else coping with all the rules?

I like to think Worlds will keep on advancing that little extra bit every year; allowing coaches to have more of a coaching role and controlling their luck to a degree. I don't expect all of those rules to be implemented and won't enforce against the consensus, but I encourage everyone to give at least one yes vote when voting time does come  :)

[Vinny]

I reckon the leadership group rule is pretty cool.

[ossie85]

Are we going to start a separate thread here for nominations or do we nominate here.

Also agree with Holz some of these rules are getting too complicated to keep on top off so would like to keep it simple. It is hard enough now keeping up with Floot, attack etc. without adding in additional scoring.

Yeah, nominate away :)

And not expecting EVERY rule to get up, cos that would be confusing, I agree

I reckon the leadership group rule is pretty cool.

Yeah, it bugs me a little that a player who has a break out season is named captain later in the year (I'm looking at you Max Gawn). I don't think it is very realistic

[Jay]

I'm happy to roll with the majority on most of those suggested rules. But I really don't like the future draft pick trading.

[Ringo]

Royals will nominate Dan Hannebery for their coaches player award. Dan has really stepped up again for the Royals this year and has assumed sole captaincy getting us a few wins with his outstanding forms.  The ideal player fro the Royals to build their team around.

[PowerBug]

I'm not part of Worlds but I got linked to read this. I think those rule changes are cool.

Future trading of draft picks is not a good idea though, unlike the AFL coaches here change hands so often I think that is one element that should be kept the same as it is. It really does not add anything except confusion.