Essendon Saga in British xv

[Nige]

Trading for even a remotely decent mid is nearly impossible.

There's no 'replacing' Heppell at all, I'm flowered regardless of whatever option we choose.

Pick 1 just gives me the best chance of selecting the best top up player possible which is fair considering I've objectively lost the best suspended player. Heppell averages 130, a top up mid might average 90ish at best, that's still a huge deficit.

It feels like I've committed a crime in having Heppell on my list for three years knowing this whole time he could be suspended. There's a line between bad luck and unfair, and I'm pretty sure I'm on the wrong side of it right now but those relatively unaffected, borderline inactive or who just want their own way couldn't care less.

[Ringo]

Keep the discussion coming.

I will just remind everyone that this is a unique situation here. The AFL has allowed the Bombers top up players and as we try to replicate in fantasy I think we should do the same.  This is in direct contract to their decision in not allowing for example Pies to top up for Keeffe and Thomas.

I am proposing that for the balance of trade period 2 that teams who are effected by the decision can have additional free movements according to the number of suspended players.  Still trying to decide whether or not to allow future draft picks or allow unrestricted trading ie not one for one so comments on these 2 ideas welcome.  Resaon for this is to try and allow some teams the opportunity to trade to correct.

Point is that in Bunnies case doubt that they can pick up a reasonable ruck from left over players and only hope is a top up player with R/F status.

[Spite]

Trading for even a remotely decent mid is nearly impossible.

There's no 'replacing' Heppell at all, I'm flowered regardless of whatever option we choose.

Pick 1 just gives me the best chance of selecting the best top up player possible which is fair considering I've objectively lost the best suspended player. Heppell averages 130, a top up mid might average 90ish at best, that's still a huge deficit.

It feels like I've committed a crime in having Heppell on my list for three years knowing this whole time he could be suspended. There's a line between bad luck and unfair, and I'm pretty sure I'm on the wrong side of it right now but those relatively unaffected, borderline inactive or who just want their own way couldn't care less.

You're right, you can't replace Heppell. That sucks and is really bad luck.

Again, we have a 121 mid in Stanton (who should be ranked above Watson on any sort of list because he averaged more - if you guys want to put Stanton below watson because "he should have done better without injury" then JT "should have done better because naturally improvement" but it's all theoretical so take their numbers on face value) and had JT so we were arguable hit as much or worse than you and I'm still saying man that sucks for us but they'll be back next season and shower happens

[Rids]

Trading for even a remotely decent mid is nearly impossible.

There's no 'replacing' Heppell at all, I'm flowered regardless of whatever option we choose.

Pick 1 just gives me the best chance of selecting the best top up player possible which is fair considering I've objectively lost the best suspended player. Heppell averages 130, a top up mid might average 90ish at best, that's still a huge deficit.

It feels like I've committed a crime in having Heppell on my list for three years knowing this whole time he could be suspended. There's a line between bad luck and unfair, and I'm pretty sure I'm on the wrong side of it right now but those relatively unaffected, borderline inactive or who just want their own way couldn't care less.

You arent the only one. Plenty of teams are affected by this but choosing the best of the left overs is not the best way forward. The Premiers losing one of their best mids should not be a terrible thing for one year. Your team has proven you have the depth to be premiers in the first place. Bottom teams with no depth losing best XV players are heavily affected by this ruling. We targeted Melksham as he went to a new club that offered better opportunities to become more relevant points wise. We have no choice but to suck it up as does every team affected.

What we need is to find a happy place. We wont be able to find a way to replace the suspended guys because they are irreplacable to their teams. At least trading to cover you get to control your outcome. It is what we are hoping to do at Grope Lane.

[Nige]

The Premiers losing one of their best mids should not be a terrible thing for one year. Your team has proven you have the depth to be premiers in the first place.

This is only bit I respectfully disagree with.

My team is nowhere near as good as people think it is. I was very lucky that things fells into place for me to get the premiership. The team I had last year just happened to be very well suited to the scoring system we had in place and that helped me score well enough to pick up vital wins. Any attention to some weeks will see that my luck ran out on occasion and almost in the final too, I was just lucky that Rusty was without some of his best players (again) or I would have been romped.

My mid depth (the line affected by Heppell's suspension) is my worst line without a doubt, I was scraping the barrel at the end of the draft to add numbers in hope they'll play. I'd happily sacrifice some of my forward or defensive depth to get a half decent mid to avoid praying Farren Ray somehow earns a guernsey for North.

I mean, add to the fact that guys like Gibson and Birchall, two of my starting defenders and better players in general are already gonna take a hit, and that's without looking into others as well, I'll be lucky to even make the 8 and come close to replicating the luck I had in 2015.

Note: The above has absolutely nothing to do with the Essendon saga, it's literally a reply to that quoted snippet from Rids' post about my depth.

[GoLions]

rip nige

[Ricochet]

I mean, add to the fact that guys like Gibson and Birchall, two of my starting defenders and better players in general are already gonna take a hit, and that's without looking into others as well, I'll be lucky to even make the 8 and come close to replicating the luck I had in 2015.

That's what happened to Hedgies when the scoring was changed from the original :(

[GoLions]

Just imagine if you agreed to one of my trade offers Nige, then you wouldn't have Birchall or Heppell :P

[Nige]

rip nige

rip nige

That's what happened to Hedgies when the scoring was changed from the original :(

I feel the pain. I also feel bad that I pretty much robbed Rusty of a premiership I was kissed on the pecker to get.

Just imagine if you agreed to one of my trade offers Nige, then you wouldn't have Birchall or Heppell :P

Eh.  :P

[Rids]

The Premiers losing one of their best mids should not be a terrible thing for one year. Your team has proven you have the depth to be premiers in the first place.

This is only bit I respectfully disagree with.

My team is nowhere near as good as people think it is. I was very lucky that things fells into place for me to get the premiership. The team I had last year just happened to be very well suited to the scoring system we had in place and that helped me score well enough to pick up vital wins. Any attention to some weeks will see that my luck ran out on occasion and almost in the final too, I was just lucky that Rusty was without some of his best players (again) or I would have been romped.

My mid depth (the line affected by Heppell's suspension) is my worst line without a doubt, I was scraping the barrel at the end of the draft to add numbers in hope they'll play. I'd happily sacrifice some of my forward or defensive depth to get a half decent mid to avoid praying Farren Ray somehow earns a guernsey for North.

I mean, add to the fact that guys like Gibson and Birchall, two of my starting defenders and better players in general are already gonna take a hit, and that's without looking into others as well, I'll be lucky to even make the 8 and come close to replicating the luck I had in 2015.

Note: The above has absolutely nothing to do with the Essendon saga, it's literally a reply to that quoted snippet from Rids' post about my depth.

Firstly, your depth in relation to the bottom teams is very good. We lose Melksham we play a first or second year player. Of course that is where we are at with the rebuild we have had to have.

Secondly, lucky one year unlucky the next. Would rather be in your position where the luck results in a premiership. This is what fantasy comps is all about. But at the end of the day other teams have been hit just as hard. Yes Heppell is clearly the best player but Rams were the best team in 2015 like it or not.

Thirdly, time to move on. It isnt about how the suspensions hurt one team. It should be about how the suspensions hurt the BXV competition.

Extra movements mean coaches take control of the situation. Then after the period if the coach couldnt get a trade to assist in covering then maybe a message to Ringo who can then look at a mini draft etc to assist is my suggestion.

This is a bad situation and we won't get a fix that will suffice. But we need to make a decision to get cracking.

[Ringo]

OK here is what will happen:

1) Coaches will have the option to rectify during the remaining trade period 2.
Trading rules will be relaxed a little in that if trading for the like position for a suspended player it will not count as a movement.
I would expect coaches to take advantage of this relaxation to strengthen teams and expect other coaches to try and accommodate as much as possible.
I will also allow a trade that can be reversed at end of period.
eg Team A trades Player X to Team B for player Y.  It is specified that this is a temporary trade and will be reversed at conclusion of season.
As administrator when assessing trades will take team situations into consideration.

At end of trade period 2 we will assess and decide whether a mini draft is still necessary but my thoughts are if coaches do not make an effort to rectify now in the trade period, given the concessions already made, they should not participate in mini draft if it eventuates.

[Spite]

OK here is what will happen:

1) Coaches will have the option to rectify during the remaining trade period 2.
Trading rules will be relaxed a little in that if trading for the like position for a suspended player it will not count as a movement.
I would expect coaches to take advantage of this relaxation to strengthen teams and expect other coaches to try and accommodate as much as possible.
I will also allow a trade that can be reversed at end of period.
eg Team A trades Player X to Team B for player Y.  It is specified that this is a temporary trade and will be reversed at conclusion of season.
As administrator when assessing trades will take team situations into consideration.

At end of trade period 2 we will assess and decide whether a mini draft is still necessary but my thoughts are if coaches do not make an effort to rectify now in the trade period, given the concessions already made, they should not participate in mini draft if it eventuates.

My fear is that "loaning" a player will result in some teams colluding.

[Ringo]

Still has to be approved by admin though.

As an example and this may or may not happen but say Bunnies trade Ryder to Breakers for Witts. Looks an uneven trade but for the sake of the competition and fairness would approve.

[iZander]

OK here is what will happen:

1) Coaches will have the option to rectify during the remaining trade period 2.
Trading rules will be relaxed a little in that if trading for the like position for a suspended player it will not count as a movement.
I would expect coaches to take advantage of this relaxation to strengthen teams and expect other coaches to try and accommodate as much as possible.
I will also allow a trade that can be reversed at end of period.
eg Team A trades Player X to Team B for player Y.  It is specified that this is a temporary trade and will be reversed at conclusion of season.
As administrator when assessing trades will take team situations into consideration.

At end of trade period 2 we will assess and decide whether a mini draft is still necessary but my thoughts are if coaches do not make an effort to rectify now in the trade period, given the concessions already made, they should not participate in mini draft if it eventuates.

My fear is that "loaning" a player will result in some teams colluding.

exactly what i just said to Ringo, in a more simplistic way :P

[Ringo]

Collusion will not be tolerated and will be hard to do as the players are reversed at end of season. Secondly if a team colludes or tanks there will be penalties at discretion of administrator to be applied and this may include such things as loss of draft picks. 

As an example no way would a trade of Stanton for Hanneberry be approved.