WXV Rule Discussion 2021

[RaisyDaisy]

Oh! I'm finally gonna do it.

Early Concessions void a win, should you go on to score more points than your opponent that week.

Lets make it happen.

Yes please!

PNL for bottom 4 confirmed

;D ;D ;D

[Urbaninfinnity]

I'd like future pick trading discussed.

I think allowing future 1st's to be traded, given the inherently volatile nature of fantasy football scoring, and with changing coaches from time to time would be irresponsible. However, I'd like to float the idea of future 2nd rounders onwards from the next year being available to use.

We obviously don't want another meow situation, but a couple of extra picks provides greater flexibility for coaches to do deals imo.

I'm all for this.

building off the point of the fun and the storyline.

Having another teams pick adds another layer of it. Like if someone had Moscow 1st rounder this year it would have been a great story line.

Agreed. It can be difficult to engage with keeper leagues when you're out of contention with nothing to gain by winning. Having your pick in another team's hands discourages tanking and, as Holz says, leaves you with a reason to remain invested with the competition until the end of your season. I actually don't see the need to restrict movement of first rounders, but perhaps a rule preventing trading first rounders in consecutive years (like the AFL and NBA have I believe) such that every team must take a first round selection within a 2 year period, even if it isn't your own. Whether or not first rounders are moveable I'd still be in favour of this change.

Dunno if a conclusion was reached on this, but I also think future pick trading would be a positive addition for the same reasons previously mentioned. Including the 1st rounder caveat Ryno suggested of course.

[Koop]

Get better depth imo.

[DazBurg]

Oh! I'm finally gonna do it.

Early Concessions void a win, should you go on to score more points than your opponent that week.

Lets make it happen.

Yes please!

PNL for bottom 4 confirmed

;D ;D ;D

actually i think you'll find we are one of the few i never actualy say we are going to lose
i might say we are playing crap or the other team are putting in a big effort

if that counts as conceding then NY as perma wooden spoons

[RaisyDaisy]

if that counts as conceding then NY as perma wooden spoons

Please Daz, I'm nowhere near your level

[DazBurg]

if that counts as conceding then NY as perma wooden spoons

Please Daz, I'm nowhere near your level

I complain we are scoring crap not that we will lose
Except against Seoul I said we would before the weekend even started
You go back and look even purps said lead to believe PNL was scoring poorly

Not losing

[PowerBug]

Can we vote on allowing loopholing in partial lockout rounds?

Also there’s discussion on discord about flood/attack in general (and “small”). Will we be voting on that?

The flood/attack stuff was never mentioned on this thread, so no - the time has passed for that.

Partial lockout suggestion I guess I might entertain given it's a follow-up discussion based on a rule that just passed... but I'm inclined to not want to, given we're about to kick off the trade period.

If two more people want to discuss that, say so here and we'll do it. But I'm no longer entertaining brand new suggestions until next year.

I mentioned loopholing back in August in the general discussion thread before this thread was a thing :(

Will set a reminder to wait for this specific thread next year, I thought new rule ideas were still being taken :’(

@PowerBug, you didn't set the reminder ;)

I'm in favour of allowing no restriction loopholing. You take the risk by missing out on emergency slots and missing late outs and copping 25% scores.

[Purple 77]

10 votes in (including mine)

9. Ability to name 'Bench warmer' (see post)
A) No
B) Yes
[to be clear, under current rules you are able to name a donut BEFORE a partial lockout, but not after. If you edit your submission after partial and leave a donut on the field, this counts as naming a donut AFTER submission and is against the rules]



A resounding 'No' on this one

[Purple 77]

11 votes in

Another option has received 10 votes...

3. Remove flood and attack
A) No
B) Yes

"No" has received 10 votes, so Flood/Attack stays.

[Purple 77]

Teams to vote:
- Christchurch
- London
- Rio de Janeiro
- Tokyo

[Purple 77]

14 votes in, the officially decided votes are:

1. Timing of additional draft pick allocation
Context: I tell you how many players should be in your list lodgement. Often, as AFL lists are finalised, more players become available to draft and thus I get you all to draft more players, beyond the number I told you in the list lodgement. In regards to the allocation of these picks, please vote:
A) Keep as is - I activate your next available draft pick; or 11
B) Allocate at the end of the draft, only after everyone has filled their list with the number of players I indicated at time of list lodgement. 3

3. Remove flood and attack
A) No 12
B) Yes 2

4. If a rule has been voted on, it can't be voted on again the following year.
A) No 11
B) Yes 3

5. The number of clubs involved in a single trade to be capped at 5
A) No 10
B) Yes 4

6. Ladder to be sorted by Premiership Points, and then Points For/Scored to sort the order
A) Keep as is - decided by % (points scored divided by points against) 11
B) Change to total points scored only 3

9. Ability to name 'Bench warmer' (see post)
A) No 13
B) Yes 1

10. Ability to Loophole emergencies on partial lockouts only
A) No 11
B) Yes 3

[Purple 77]

Votes in dispute

2. This suggestion:
Quote
live trading untill the PSD where list lodgement and desliting does not occur till after the nat. We have live trading of pick and players during the national draft then a break and PSD later. this means teams can actually do moves during the draft and not limited to players. it also makes the PSD more relevant.
A) No
B) Yes

7. Future trading of draft picks (2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th round draft picks)
A) No
B) Yes

8. Future trading of draft picks (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th round draft picks), where you cannot trade a future 1st in consecutive years
A) No
B) Yes

11. Early Concessions void a win, should you go on to score more points than your opponent that week.
A) No
B) Yes. I'll do this. Don't think I won't.

[Purple 77]

A reminder that the trade period will not start whilst we have rules still in dispute

[Purple 77]

Two more teams to vote.

One more rule has been decided

7. Future trading of draft picks (2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th round draft picks)
A) No 6
B) Yes 10

[Purple 77]

1 more team to vote

2. This suggestion:
Quote
live trading untill the PSD where list lodgement and desliting does not occur till after the nat. We have live trading of pick and players during the national draft then a break and PSD later. this means teams can actually do moves during the draft and not limited to players. it also makes the PSD more relevant.
A) No 10
B) Yes 7

8. Future trading of draft picks (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th round draft picks), where you cannot trade a future 1st in consecutive years
A) No 10
B) Yes 7



Given rule 11 doesn't effect trading, I'll go ahead and declare opening trading season on trades!