WXV Rule Discussion 2023

[Purple 77]

Hey all :D

The majority has revealed itself with a 'yes' (12-4) for rule discussion, so lets get stuck into it  :o

ANYONE can nominate a rule change, and it will be voted on. However, be sure there is adequate explanation to validate your proposed change.

Every now and then throughout the year, someone has brought up something they'd like Worlds to do differently. Now is the time to bring that up, and it WILL be voted on. We only have 3 weeks of the year to discuss rules and change them, so use this time wisely. Once the rules have been voted on, THAT IS IT for the next 12 months! (except for the review on the trade voting process that is held after the trade period).

We need all rule changes approved/rejected by Monday the 28th of August, which probably means I'll leave the final PM no later than August 26th.

As always...

THERE WILL BE A SALARY CAP! It is the only thing that I will enforce, even if against the majority. The only thing I'll entertain is what kind of cap system we implement.  It will not go away whilst I'm admin, so suggestions to get rid of it entirely are fruitless.

So with the above in mind, I'll leave the floor open for rule suggestions :)

[Purple 77]

I would like to propose we get rid of Small, Flood AND Attacks.

Whenever I see a 'Small' implemented, it looks so artificial that it irks me that there is no penalty. It's use in the latter rounds especially - with playing rucks available - flys in the face of the intent of the rule, which was to provide ruck relief (which I also don't think should be awarded without penalty, but that's another matter).

Reflecting on the above, I also think if we don't have Small, we should also do away with Flood and Attacks, at least in its current implementation where there is no score penalty/incentive to do it, otherwise it really is just a depth relief instrument. I think, after 13 seasons, we're now beyond granting these types of free passes and thus put more onus on getting the trade period right, in order to set up your list.

I have other suggestions I'll bring up later on Flood/Attack, but my official proposal is that we scrap Small, Flood and Attack.

[Purple 77]

Alright, I see it too.

Green vests should no longer count as a legitimate rest.

I propose that if you rest a player that is green or red vested, that their rest bonus the following week should be void.

[RaisyDaisy]

I like both of those suggestions Purps

Definitely need to get rid of "Small". We gave it a year, and it sucks

As for Flood/Attack, I don't mind if we get rid of them all together, although I'd also be open to keeping them, but tweaking the rules around them - perhaps they can only be used when there is no other player (so forced), and not tactically, or a % of the players score is deducted for using it? I think there's a few options there to look at.

I also think the "Tag" rule needs to be revisited, but I'll leave that to others to raise - it was barely used at all so clearly needs to be expanded/worked on, or scrapped

[fanTCfool]

I would like to propose we get rid of Small, Flood AND Attacks.

Whenever I see a 'Small' implemented, it looks so artificial that it irks me that there is no penalty. It's use in the latter rounds especially - with playing rucks available - flys in the face of the intent of the rule, which was to provide ruck relief (which I also don't think should be awarded without penalty, but that's another matter).

Reflecting on the above, I also think if we don't have Small, we should also do away with Flood and Attacks, at least in its current implementation where there is no score penalty/incentive to do it, otherwise it really is just a depth relief instrument. I think, after 13 seasons, we're now beyond granting these types of free passes and thus put more onus on getting the trade period right, in order to set up your list.

I have other suggestions I'll bring up later on Flood/Attack, but my official proposal is that we scrap Small, Flood and Attack.

Alright, I see it too.

Green vests should no longer count as a legitimate rest.

I propose that if you rest a player that is green or red vested, that their rest bonus the following week should be void.

+1

[Pkbaldy]

Lower the max salary cap.

[Holz]

Delistings after the National draft not before it.

This means the National Draft can start right away (not wait 4 days like this year).

The PSD draft gets delayed but people arent waiting for it like they are the Nat.

Also puts the pressure of teams to delist and pressure of Purp to get the national draft up with people wanting it earlier.

Also as a result delisted players do to the PSD draft, making it slightly more relevant.

[Holz]

Remove tag

[Holz]

Actual Tactical Flood/Attack.

Rule: if you have a extra man in attack/defence your line gets a 50% increase to the average of the line and vice versa. If you have 2 extra men in attack/defence your line gets a 100% increrase to the average of the line.

For example if you Flood v Traditional then you have 5 defenders to their 4 fwds. So you add up the average of your 5 defenders and they get 50% of that score added. The team with only 4 forwards adds up their average and gets the score reduced by 50% of the average. The opposite happens on the other side.

That way you look at your matchup and you can choose to Attack to weaken a Strong defence even if you personally have a stronger defence then a fwd line. So, it's not just down to making your team better you need to look at the opponent. If you Flood against a team with a strong backline, then you can actually make your matchup worse.

It reflects the AFL as when you have a extra man in defence your defence overall is stronger, but your forward line is weaker.

[Ringo]

My 2 suggestions for rule changes and happy to be over ruled as raising them for discussion

1.  Do away with Co-Captains and have a VC who score 1.5, Captain still scores double.
2.  Do away with the TOG rule and have a designated medi sub who is only used for injury at any time and the higher of the designated sub or player replaced is taken. Note does not include tactical subs only those replaced as a result of injury.  may need further tweaking but using my lowly Royals as and example twice during the season have had players injured in 3rd quarter.  using this rule i would either get their score or the score of my nominated medical sub whichever is higher.

waiting to see the proposal on small/flood/attack as I also would like some tweaking of it to make it more tactical.

[upthemaidens]

Remove small/flood/attack and tag.

   

[JBs-Hawks]

Coaches must make a minimum of 3-5 trades per season. To count as a trade each trade must contain a player who has played more than 10 AFL games in the season or first round draft picks.

Failure to reach minimum trades results in your next first round pick sliding by 5 places per the number of trades you failed to make. Only make 2 of the required 5 trades? Pick 1 is now pick 16.

[JBs-Hawks]

This forum is flowering shower

[GoLions]

Loopholing tightening. You can no longer name tactical donuts resulting in free coverage like some teams do with Ruck Forwards. Players in your starting 15 must be named in the 26 man afl squad of their respective team. If you name before teams and don't correct, at lockout your first available emergency slides into the hole and you play with 3 emergencies only

[Purple 77]

This forum is flowering shower

The absolute flowering worst.

m0nty - as the only thing that generates traffic on the entire site - for the love of god, let us post all forms of punctuation again, 24/7