WXV Rule Discussion 2023

[Purple 77]

17 votes in, results as follows:

1. Amendment to sub rule - see link
If an AFL sub is made on or before half time, then the AFL green vest player will have their score counted in WXVs

A) Yes (green vest is only eligible to be subbed if activated after half time) 10
B) No - Keep as is (green vested player is ALWAYS eligible to be subbed) 7


2. Subbed players can't be rested
Currently, if a player is eligible to be subbed but happens to be RESTED that week, their rest bonus still applies if they play the next week.

Under this circumstance, should the rest bonus be removed for the following week?

A) Yes 10
B) No - keep as is 7


3. Implement Medi-Sub, Remove Existing Sub rules - see here
Should we remove existing sub eligibility rules, and replace it by allowing a 'medi-sub' to be named which takes effect if a player (in the same position) in the XV receives an injury at any point in the match, and the higher score of the injured player and the medi-sub is taken?

A) Yes 2
B) No - keep as is 15


4. Change Timing of List Lodgement - see here
Should the list lodgement be moved to after the international draft?

A) Yes 3
B) No - keep as is 14


5. Remove co-captain option, and enforce C/VC/EVC model, where Captains still score x2, and VCs score x1.5

A) Yes 3
B) No - keep as is 14


6. Loophole 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 submit your team before AFL teams are published and don't correct your submission, players not named in the 26 are removed at lockout, and your first available emergency slides into the hole and you play with 3 emergencies only.

A) Yes 10
B) No - keep as is 7


7. Modified Tagging - please read this post

A) Yes 12
B) No - keep as is 5
(I'll offer to remove tagging in the next rule vote)


8. Flood/Attack Approach

There is a bit to wade through here. First of all, I want people to vote which method is preferred... I'm not asking you to indicate whether you want either implemented yet, just which method is preferred.

A) As suggested by Holz here 3
B) As suggested by me here (noting my recent edit) 14


9. Training in another position - see here

A) Yes 11
B) No 6

[Purple 77]

Amendment to tagging rule

If a tag is broken, then the tagger penalty is increased from 30% to 50%

[Purple 77]

... I swear someone suggested to merge the drafts. Whoever did, please do so here!

Me. FF is a cow.

I propose we merge the international draft and pre season draft.

This removes all confusion about which players are available in which draft, and just makes it simpler.

Would come into effect next year, not this year. It would also make Future 5th and 6th round draft picks available to trade.

[PowerBug]

What does this mean for when we begin to draft? Will we have to wait until after the AFL PSD is done? When does that usually happen?

[RaisyDaisy]

What does this mean for when we begin to draft? Will we have to wait until after the AFL PSD is done? When does that usually happen?

Nat Draft is Nov 20-21 and then PSD/Rookie is Nov 22, so it's all done in 3 days

[Purple 77]

What does this mean for when we begin to draft? Will we have to wait until after the AFL PSD is done? When does that usually happen?

Timing will be completely unchanged i.e. we commence only after the FINAL AFL list lodgement which normally occurs a couple of days after the AFL rookie draft.

[JBs-Hawks]

Propose - Tag can only be used apon a player 5 times per year.

Propose - Any tagging/flood/attack/small that gets through can be used in finals if you have allocation remaining.

[PowerBug]

New rule proposal:
If you name your squad using only last name, your opponent is allowed to substitute in the score of any player who shares that exact last name (exact same spelling, regardless of if they are in your WXV side or not, regardless of if they played AFL or not). They may apply this change at any point and as many times as they wish, from full lockout up until the final WXV scores are posted after the round ends.

Zeroes in this rule would be considered as playing zeroes, even if the player did not play.

[Purple 77]

16 votes in - all votes decided

10. Amend Flood/Attack
A) Yes: add +9%/-15% modifiers as I've suggested in this link 10
B) No - keep as is  6
(I'll offer the ability to remove in the next vote)

11. Scrap 'Small'
A) Yes - remove the ability to name the 'Small' team format (i.e. a U3 in place of a R1) 10
B) No - keep it 6

12. Amend Tagging (again)
A) Increase tagger penalty from 30% to 50% if a tag is broken 10
B) No - keep as is (30% penalty) 6
(I'll offer ability to remove in the next vote)

13. Amend flexibility of dual position players - see link
A) Allow players named in positions other than the utilities to 'cover' subbed/withdrawn players from other lines 3
B) Keep as is - said flexibility only to players named on the utilities 13

14. Minimum trade requirement - see link
A) Enforce a 4 trade minimum over the 1st trade period (i.e. a simple count of successful trades completed with no other requirements) 4
B) Keep as is - no minimum trade requirement 12

15. Merge International and Preseason Drafts - see link
A) Yes 14
B) No - Keep as is 2

[PowerBug]

Tagging Chat

Claim: I don't want to vote in this new form of tagging because it disadvantages premo mids. My opponents can just use their dud mids to tag.
This is false.

My TL;DR as requested on Discord:
- any quality of player can be tagged.
- the better the player you want to tag, the more you could gain, but the more you will lose out by if you are wrong
- Even the most optimal type of player (based off season averages) to tag Bont with was marginally successful, this rule does not disadvantage guys with premo mids.

If you care to know why, feel free to keep reading...

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Just to clarify, the proposed rule which we will finally vote on contains:
The Tagger - A midfield eligible player named in a position where they are considered mid eligible (i.e. Named in the midfield 4 or in either utility spots)
The Target - A midfield eligible player named in a position where they are considered mid eligible (i.e. Named in the midfield 4 or in either utility spots)

Two scenarios are possible based off the raw scores of the two players:
1. The Tagger scores more than half of what the Target scores
2. The Tagger scores equal to or less than half of what the Target scores.

Which gives two outcomes:
1. The Tagger has their score reduced by 30% (Raw * 0.7). The Target will have their raw score reduced to that of the Tagger's raw score.
2. The Tagger has their score reduced by 50% (Roaw * 0.5). The Target's score is unchanged.

With that also out the way, the fun experiment. What if Marcus Bontempelli was tagged every week this season, by the oppositions worst mid? Well...


It worked three times in total, each of those with a mid 20s gain. So this should be enough to say that this rule proposal is very different to what occurred in 2023.

How will it realistically work, and more importantly can I (the reader) use it to my advantage? The answer is yes, we can ALL use it, and we can ALL use it on mids of ANY kind. Firstly, some 'what if' tables








So what does this show? Any player, who isn't literally the worst mid going around, has the ability to be tagged. And ANY mid can tag, they just need the right opponent to tag. And the better the player the target is, the higher the stakes are.

So you could go with a low risk tag, send Phillipou (51avg) to Miles Bergman (65avg) and see if you can get a 10-15 swing in your favour. But you could also send Brad Crouch (97avg) to Marcus Bontempelli (127avg) and see if you can get a huge 30-40 point gain.

But (now for the attempt at AFL realism part) if you send Crouch to Bont and he breaks the tag, you've just used a great asset in Brad Crouch and made him tag, he's gonna be punished for not performing at his optimum output. If you are unsuccessful at sending Phillipou to Bergman though, your loss is smaller because Phillipou isn't that important to your WXV side anyway.

So, before you vote, just realise that you have the opportunity to use it, and if you have a gun mid, well the people who choose to tag them are risking a lot, there's a window of success where, whilst great if you hit it, is very easy to miss.

[PowerBug]

One more example for good measure.

Hunter averages roughly 70% of what Bont does makes him a prime tagging option as he falls nicely in that sweet spot to make a nice gain each week


Here's what happens if he tagged Bont every week of the WXV season (Note that rep round is excluded here as well):

Yep, there's a good run of successes, but there's also a huge risk if it goes wrong, whether it's from Hunter underperforming or Bont overperforming, both contribute. And overall it averages out to 2.75, in favour of the tagger. Not massive over the course of a season, but an element which can be a tactical gain in parts.

Happy to answer any further questions or bring in more examples if people want more.



-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

My TL;DR as requested on Discord:
- any quality of player can be tagged.
- the better the player you want to tag, the more you could gain, but the more you will lose out by if you are wrong
- Even the most optimal type of player (based off season averages) to tag Bont with was marginally successful, this rule does not disadvantage guys with premo mids.

[Holz]

Just so its here when people are looking over the rules.

In the example of Bont v Hunter or a 127 Target score.

A score of 63 for the tagger results in a 32-point loss.
A score of 64 for the tagger results in 44 points gain.

This results in a 76-point swing based off a 1-point SC difference.

This is a game changing impact based off something as meaningless as a late game handball. No other rule has such a impact off a few SC points.

The captain rule you lose if one captain massively outscores the other. a 1 point difference in scoring leads to a 0.5 to 1 point difference in scoring. The HGA rule leads to a 1 point difference per 1 SC points.

This tag rule can be a 40-80 point difference per 1 SC point.

If you say then that's just luck and what about injuries. First up there is a difference in a player getting injured and a player getting 1 more handball and also we have a sub off rule.

Also lastly the targets score going up the more the taggers score makes little sense.

If Bont drops a 127 essentially, I'm hoping my guy scores exactly 65 but then once they start scoring more then that I want my player to score less. As the target score increases by 1 SC point every point the Tagger scores but the tagger only scores 0.7 more.

Why should the other team benefit from the other teams scorer.

For example.

Bont Scores 127

If the tagger goes 65 then Bont goes 65 but the tagger scaled down to 46.
If the tagger goes 75 then Bont goes 75 but the tagger scaled down to 53

So Bont gains 10 points by the tagger scoring 10 more and the tagger gets only 7 more points.

If the tagger goes 120 then bont gains 55 points but the tagger only gains 39 points.

So really at a certain point your cheering on your player to score less.

[Nige]

Proposal: No rule discussion until WXVs finals are done. I don't care that people have to wait, or that a bunch of teams are out of the running, teams going deep deserve the spotlight. Especially given the desire to make WXVs more complex than ever, just park it for a few weeks, there's so much offseason to have these inane and robust discussions. Spend four weeks crafting your thesis on what a tagging rule looks like and then you can share it once we've celebrated our premier.

[Ringo]

Agree to a certain extent with this proposal but is it beneficial to have a rules discussion going with trade period or do we just put trade period back a week or two,

[PowerBug]

Hi Holz,

I hear your concerns on the way that there's this tipping point, and the tipping point has the potential to be extreme when tagging a big dog. So to that, I suggest that you re-read my above post and I have shown that you would be able to tag many different types of midfielders with this, you could go for someone who typically averages around the 70 mark, and if you do that your tipping point is a lot smaller, as you were wishing for. The better the player that you wish to tag, the bigger the loss is going to be if it goes wrong.

As for the "I want my player to score less" part, something like this is necessary under the current structure of the proposal. If it keeps getting higher and higher as the Tagger's score increases, then there's no downside to using Bont as a tagger, sending them to Mason Wood, and just pocketing a small gain/neutral result. The idea needs to be that a player "punches up" to tag someone better than them, and if they are within a certain score range (looks to be 51% to 70-75%) there's a benefit to the tag.

This rule in its current form provides:
- A wide range where there's a successful tag applied. Tagging a 110 score has a range 30 SC wide where there's been a successful tag. [There was a drawback of the 2023 tag not being enticing enough to use, we now have this]
- Jeopardy if your tagger wildly underperforms or the target goes off. [It's not an auto-win feature which was a major drawback to previous designs of tagging]
- Diminishing returns if your tagger overperforms (and thus using such a player as a tagger was wasting their potential) or the target has an off day (and sending someone to that player was a waste of resources) [Ensures that the fundamental worse player tags better player idea applies]

I do understand your concerns around the tipping point, and perhaps there's scope for that gap to decrease in volatility in the future, but I hope you can see that this proposal provides way more positives than negatives and will get use in 2024 because it does provide an opportunity for reward whilst still containing risk of it going wrong.