WXV Rules Discussion 2017

[Purple 77]

So with number 4, and this kinda ties in with number 5 depending on the result there.

If I'm 250k below the cap with 3 vacancies, and B is voted in for #5, am I then considered as being 250k below the min cap still, or 50k above?

50k above

But good question.

[Purple 77]

Not gonna lie, with 7 votes in, I'm getting pretty devo about some of the eventuating results  :-X

But, the people are speaking, so will have to cop on it on the chin and move on.

Which reminds me! If a vote doesn't go your way, please, do the same  :-X

[Purple 77]

Ha! Thank you Boomz for pointing out my derp moment :P in rule 12, it's meant to say "win less than 4 games", not lose less than 4 games :P

Everyone would get PPs except for New Delhi & Seoul haha

[Holz]

Ha! Thank you Boomz for pointing out my derp moment :P in rule 12, it's meant to say "win less than 4 games", not lose less than 4 games :P

Everyone would get PPs except for New Delhi & Seoul haha

ill vote yes for the rule as it stands, please.

[meow meow]

Not gonna lie, with 7 votes in, I'm getting pretty devo about some of the eventuating results  :-X

But, the people are speaking, so will have to cop on it on the chin and move on.

Which reminds me! If a vote doesn't go your way, please, do the same  :-X

Saying you're pretty devo is a minor form of protest, so I'll take that as permission to riot excessively if the Sunday bonus rule isn't voted in.

[Toga]

I'm a fan of getting 5 to use each year, and including Pinch hit, but I don't think you should get any bonus for any of them - only your opponent gets a bonus because you haven't been able to name a normal XV

- If you flood, your opponents lowest scoring forward gets a 10% bonus
- If you attack, your opponents lowest scoring defender gets a 10% bonus
- If you Pinch Hit, your opponents ruck gets a 10% bonus

Thoughts?

Full support for this idea, except I'd argue the ruck loss still needs to be slightly greater. Maybe 20%?

Yea I like it

[meow meow]

The 10% bonuses are kind of pointless. Just like resting. They won't amount to anything.

[Nige]

The 10% bonuses are kind of pointless. Just like resting. They won't amount to anything.

And a bigger bonus, especially for rucks (the upper echelon particularly) could be particularly OP.

[Purple 77]

The 10% bonuses are kind of pointless. Just like resting. They won't amount to anything.

However true, I think it's a nice little modifier.

Big enough for the coach to consider, small enough to have an unlikely impact on the game.

I like it.

[Purple 77]

11 votes in

Will hold off declaring that rules with 9 votes are a winner/loser for now, because I don't want to enforce my authority yet :P

Can say

11. Sub Rule
A) Keep - stops injured players from ruining your game
B) Scrap - I like the luck/unpredictability factor when a player goes down early and feel like getting a replacement is a bit soft


... we are keeping the sub rule, currently 10 votes to 1.

[upthemaidens]

The 10% bonuses are kind of pointless. Just like resting. They won't amount to anything.

However true, I think it's a nice little modifier.

Big enough for the coach to consider, small enough to have an unlikely impact on the game.

I like it.

Maybe allow for multiple restings per week instead of just the one?

[Purple 77]

Maybe allow for multiple restings per week instead of just the one?

I'll add to the list. Worth talking about.

Would only be permissible under current resting rules though i.e. you have 18 other valid players available

[Holz]

So didnt get through 50 but put up a sizable list. Did  players with A surnames excluding irrelevant ones then a few example.

So its Player, Ossie Average, Holz Average, Difference, Explination if needed

Ryan Abbott 0 0 0 players who haven't played dont change
Gary Ablett 114.5 114.5 0
Blake Acres 71 71 0
Marcus Adams 80 80 0
Taylor Adams 101 106 5 - small increase to reflect that Taylor has listed his average slightly this year
Callum Ah Chee 58.5 57.5 -1
Ben Ainsworth 62 62 0
James Aish 57 57 0
Alirr Alirr 65 64 -1
Karl Amon 59 59 0
Harris Andrews 67 70 3
David Astbury 69 74 5
Shuan Atley 66 68.5 2.5

Now no major differences in any of them a few have improved a few points to reflect their increased scoring this year.

Heath Shaw 102 84.5 -17.5 major dip to reflect the truth that Shaw is no longer a 100+ defender.
Josh Kelly 89 112 22.5 kelly has gone ul alot given is a star of this comp and one of the MVP in the league
Clayton Oliver 95 112 17 note he cost more then Kelly under ossie cap because he was a 2nd year player.
Todd Goldstein 112.5 107 -5.5 Goldy clearly dropped but Ossie has that 128 season lingering in his average.
Dustin Martin 110 118 8 Dustin been a star for years so hence still priced at 110 under ossie but he is a top 3 player and my system reflects this

Nic Nat 105 105 0 under both systems priced the same so no need to worry about the libba rule
Matthew Kreuzer 90 110 20 perhaps the only contentions one but Kreuz is the number 1 ruck in the comp and 90 is way too low. Note he costs 12 points less then heath shaw

If people have any requests pleas ask.

[Nige]

Has Purps not asked for at least 50 on multiple occasions?

[Purple 77]

With 12 votes in now, we have another two rules decided:

2. Sub rule for named OOP players
Currently, if you are forced to name a player OOP and he is available to be subbed out, he can't be subbed out because the rule states that a player can only be subbed out if his replacement can come on for full points. 

A) Change to: The OOP player can be subbed out for another OOP player, ONLY if the original OOP was named a result of having no available players to fill that position. Of course, the replacement will still have a 50% penalty for being OOP.
B) Keep as is

With 10 votes to 2, A wins, so that's our first difference for next year!

3. Ruck OOP (haven't forgotten about the 'Pinch-Hit' suggestion. That will be in the next PM)
A) Instead of a 50% penalty to your OOP player, award a 50% bonus to the opposition ruck, to make it more realistic.
B) Keep as is

With 10 votes to 2, B wins, so we'll continue to enforce a 50% penalty for ruck OOPs