WXV Rules Discussion 2017

[MajorLazer]

Yo Purpa with 7 I think you made a little goof. Think it was supposed to be both A&B not A&C but don't worry think we understood what you meant

[Purple 77]

Yo Purpa with 7 I think you made a little goof. Think it was supposed to be both A&B not A&C but don't worry think we understood what you meant

Thanks General condensed-light  :-[ I'd say it's because I can't see W, A, S, D, E and C on my keyboard, but yeah, that ain't true.

[meow meow]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/afl/teams/brisbane/brisbane-coach-chris-fagan-says-ryan-lester-is-the-lions-most-important-player/news-story/67f7342b42b57fb59183e238694514a9

[Purple 77]

Another vote in, so we can now declare this one

2. Alternate Team Formats
Currently, you are able to 'Flood' 3 times per year, and 'Attack' 3 times per year.
A) Change to 5 times in total for the year; where you can have any combination of these different structures i.e 5 floods, 0 attacks, or 4-1, 3-2, 2-3, 1-4, or 0-5
B) Keep as is.
C) Get rid of them entirely

With 10 votes to 3 & 1, A wins.

[Purple 77]

all votes in!



1. Different cosmetic WXV score multiplier
Currently, WXV totals are divided by 10 to present an AFL-like scoreline.
A) Keep as is, don't really care
B) Divide by 15 instead, to make scores lower and more 'AFL-like'

A: 17
B: 1

2. Alternate Team Formats
Currently, you are able to 'Flood' 3 times per year, and 'Attack' 3 times per year.
A) Change to 5 times in total for the year; where you can have any combination of these different structures i.e 5 floods, 0 attacks, or 4-1, 3-2, 2-3, 1-4, or 0-5
B) Keep as is.
C) Get rid of them entirely

A: 14
B: 3
C: 1

3. Pinch Hit
A) In addition to Flooding and Attacking, there is also 'Pinch Hitting' where you can name a third utility in place of a ruck without penalty. If 'A' wins in the rule #2 above, it'll form part of the 5 in total. If 'B' wins, you can name this strategy 3 times per year
B) Don't allow.

A: 8
B: 10

4. Alternative Team Format modifiers
A) If you flood, your lowest scoring defender gets a 10% bonus. The oppositions' best defender gets a 10% bonus. If you attack, your lowest scoring forward gets a 10% bonus. The oppositions' best forward gets a 10% bonus. If you pinch hit, the opposition ruck gets a 10% bonus.
B) Option A, but only the opposition receives a bonus, and you do not
C) Don't have bonuses

A: 4
B: 3
C: 11

6. Leadership Groups
A) Keep it: with all restrictions and allowances i.e. mid-season re-selection, injury demotions/promotions
B) Scrap it
C) Keep it, but get rid of the mid-season window where you can re-select it without consequence.

A: 6
B: 10
C: 2

7. Submitting a list lodgement where you are below the minimum cap (and started over it)
Penalties
A) Loss of 4 premiership points (will not benefit their future draft pick, i.e. if you finish 16th coz of penalty, but earned 14th, then you would get pick 5 and not pick 3) in the next year
B) Loss of first round draft pick in the next year
C) Both A & C

A: 4
B: 2
C: 12

8. Loyalty Discounts
A) Allow a plus/minus 5% salary to those players that have stayed at a club for 3 consecutive years
B) Don't allow

A: 7
B: 11

9. Trading Cap Space
A) Allow, will add strategy to the game (cap space will reset to normal in the following year)
B) Don't allow

A: 2
B: 16

[Purple 77]

The cap vote is not published?!

Why? Because I still feel there was confusion surrounding the vote, and there were a couple of coaches that came to me seeking clarification and suggesting the age discount vote should have been separate.

The results I got I feel are too subjective for me to make a decision, given the confusion of some coaches, and I feel it is best to re-send a clarification vote, which I will do shortly.

Apologies for not getting it right the first time, but I really think this is the best way to do it.

[Nige]

We're having a vote where if you don't care about rules or contribute to Worlds, you don't get a vote because Holz is upset at everyone who didn't vote for his cap.

[Holz]

We're having a vote where if you don't care about rules or contribute to Worlds, you don't get a vote because Holz is upset at everyone who didn't vote for his cap.

Dont twist my words.

I said if people had no strong opinion on a rule then there should be a vote for abstain.

That way if 7 people love a rule change and 2 people hate a rule change but then 9 couldn't care less one way or the other. Then the rule should change should get up. Its likely the people who dont care just vote to keep it as it is even though they would have no issue if it occured.

There are a few rules I would have abstained on.

[Purple 77]

Alright, lets just see what happens with these votes first.

[RaisyDaisy]

Flood/Attack stays with no bonus/penalty and pinch hit doesn't come in?

Sigh

[GoLions]

We're having a vote where if you don't care about rules or contribute to Worlds, you don't get a vote because Holz is upset at everyone who didn't vote for his cap.

Dont twist my words.

I said if people had no strong opinion on a rule then there should be a vote for abstain.

That way if 7 people love a rule change and 2 people hate a rule change but then 9 couldn't care less one way or the other. Then the rule should change should get up. Its likely the people who dont care just vote to keep it as it is even though they would have no issue if it occured.

There are a few rules I would have abstained on.

You assume that all the people who didn't vote for your cap don't care?

[meow meow]

Flood/Attack stays with no bonus/penalty and pinch hit doesn't come in?

Sigh

Until I see a short player compete in the ruck with the aid of a baseball bat I'll never vote for pinch hit.

[Holz]

We're having a vote where if you don't care about rules or contribute to Worlds, you don't get a vote because Holz is upset at everyone who didn't vote for his cap.

Dont twist my words.

I said if people had no strong opinion on a rule then there should be a vote for abstain.

That way if 7 people love a rule change and 2 people hate a rule change but then 9 couldn't care less one way or the other. Then the rule should change should get up. Its likely the people who dont care just vote to keep it as it is even though they would have no issue if it occured.

There are a few rules I would have abstained on.

You assume that all the people who didn't vote for your cap don't care?

Not at all it was a general statement. Nige posted that I was whinging about the cap rule not going up. All I did was voice an opinion on the general voting process. So to answer your question, no i dont assume people dont care if they dont vote for my cap change.

Hence why I said there where a few rules i would have abstained on.

like Rule 2

2. Alternate Team Formats
Currently, you are able to 'Flood' 3 times per year, and 'Attack' 3 times per year.
A) Change to 5 times in total for the year; where you can have any combination of these different structures i.e 5 floods, 0 attacks, or 4-1, 3-2, 2-3, 1-4, or 0-5
B) Keep as is.
C) Get rid of them entirely


honestly i have no opinion one way or the other on this one. So I think i just voted for B. I could have easily have voted A or C

[Nige]

Flood/Attack stays with no bonus/penalty and pinch hit doesn't come in?

Sigh

Until I see a short player compete in the ruck with the aid of a baseball bat I'll never vote for pinch hit.

Sir Daniel of Caleb could do it.

[GoLions]

We're having a vote where if you don't care about rules or contribute to Worlds, you don't get a vote because Holz is upset at everyone who didn't vote for his cap.

Dont twist my words.

I said if people had no strong opinion on a rule then there should be a vote for abstain.

That way if 7 people love a rule change and 2 people hate a rule change but then 9 couldn't care less one way or the other. Then the rule should change should get up. Its likely the people who dont care just vote to keep it as it is even though they would have no issue if it occured.

There are a few rules I would have abstained on.

You assume that all the people who didn't vote for your cap don't care?

Not at all it was a general statement. Nige posted that I was whinging about the cap rule not going up. All I did was voice an opinion on the general voting process. So to answer your question, no i dont assume people dont care if they dont vote for my cap change.

Hence why I said there where a few rules i would have abstained on.

like Rule 2

2. Alternate Team Formats
Currently, you are able to 'Flood' 3 times per year, and 'Attack' 3 times per year.
A) Change to 5 times in total for the year; where you can have any combination of these different structures i.e 5 floods, 0 attacks, or 4-1, 3-2, 2-3, 1-4, or 0-5
B) Keep as is.
C) Get rid of them entirely


honestly i have no opinion one way or the other on this one. So I think i just voted for B. I could have easily have voted A or C

It allows a bit more lenience to teams who get destroyed by injuries in either fwd or def, or extra flexibility to those who have plenty of depth in each line.