any merit to a "wildcard" trade round?

[fever]

as the name would suggest, each team gets one wildcard to play per season, where they're allowed to make double (or more?) trades in the round. you still only get 24 trades for the year and can only play it once.

[ajjewell]

Imo it would be good but it would have to be used before sc finals

[CFC 1979]

just thinking it would be good for the GF ;D

[eagles929406]

would be great, especially when you have 4 players out injured in the one week

[Boomz]

people would waste it early and regret it later :-X

[LF]

nope i think it will just give those who don't know what they are doing a chance to"fix" their team and giving a disadvantage to serious players who have done the hard yards in setting their team from the start.

[Torress]

i don't like the idea either. other fantasy games have that, 1st to come to mind the premierleague but thats a very different game. its good the way it is

[MTTY]

I think something they could add to the game is the following

Backs- 6 Starting Players, 1 sub, 3 bench players

Mids- 5 Starting Players, 1 sub, 3 bench players

Rucks- 2 Starting, 2 bench

Forwards- 6 Starting, 1 sub, 3 bench

with 3 emergencies.

The way it would work is that you submit a sub in each position bar ruck, as it is highly unlikely that a ruckman would be sub, then the sub will get half of his score, but to add to that if one of your starting players are the starting sub then you will get YOUR subs full score. This would nto apply if your player gets subbed off in any case, and having two starting players start as the sub would really be bad luck.

Thoughts?

[hannebery2rohan]

dont think anything like that would be included. maybe if they allocated it around the half way point of the season for just 1 week or something and you could only use 1 trade per line. (1 for fwd, 1 for mid, 1 for rck, 1 for def).

although, those that want to use 2 trades in the midfield for example, would be locked out from using the 'wildcard' round and would be restricted to the norm of only being able to use the 2 trades. i guess the tactical side of it would be using a lot of trades pre-wildcard round to downgrade before bringing in 3-4 premiums during the wildcard round.

just an idea that popped into my head, but wouldn't like to see something like this included anyway.

[AFEV]

I think something they could add to the game is the following

Backs- 6 Starting Players, 1 sub, 3 bench players

Mids- 5 Starting Players, 1 sub, 3 bench players

Rucks- 2 Starting, 2 bench

Forwards- 6 Starting, 1 sub, 3 bench

with 3 emergencies.

The way it would work is that you submit a sub in each position bar ruck, as it is highly unlikely that a ruckman would be sub, then the sub will get half of his score, but to add to that if one of your starting players are the starting sub then you will get YOUR subs full score. This would nto apply if your player gets subbed off in any case, and having two starting players start as the sub would really be bad luck.

Thoughts?

Not bad. I'd just prefer if your player is subbed on/off then the other subs score is added to your players score.
For instance Player X is on for 3 qtrs and scores 60 points and is subbed for Player Y. Then Play Y scores 50 points in the last quarter. You would get 110 points. Eases the pain a bit if your player is injured in the first quarter, especially a premium -_-

[ajjewell]

I think something needs to be done in respect to the subs, not sure what though, but either Mtty's or Sids idea seem to be a logical way of dealing with it

[fever]

nope i think it will just give those who don't know what they are doing a chance to"fix" their team and giving a disadvantage to serious players who have done the hard yards in setting their team from the start.

still think so this week with selwood, pendles, swan, mundy, montagna, sandi, adcock all missing?

it'd come in f'ing handy. as is my season is basically ruined as far as overall is concerned.

[LF]

nope i think it will just give those who don't know what they are doing a chance to"fix" their team and giving a disadvantage to serious players who have done the hard yards in setting their team from the start.

still think so this week with selwood, pendles, swan, mundy, montagna, sandi, adcock all missing?

it'd come in f'ing handy. as is my season is basically ruined as far as overall is concerned.

yes i still think so
i`m in enough trouble this week as well not as much as you but i still don`t believe in a wild card round.

[stewfoss]

I think something they could add to the game is the following

Backs- 6 Starting Players, 1 sub, 3 bench players

Mids- 5 Starting Players, 1 sub, 3 bench players

Rucks- 2 Starting, 2 bench

Forwards- 6 Starting, 1 sub, 3 bench

with 3 emergencies.

The way it would work is that you submit a sub in each position bar ruck, as it is highly unlikely that a ruckman would be sub, then the sub will get half of his score, but to add to that if one of your starting players are the starting sub then you will get YOUR subs full score. This would nto apply if your player gets subbed off in any case, and having two starting players start as the sub would really be bad luck.

Thoughts?

Not bad. I'd just prefer if your player is subbed on/off then the other subs score is added to your players score.
For instance Player X is on for 3 qtrs and scores 60 points and is subbed for Player Y. Then Play Y scores 50 points in the last quarter. You would get 110 points. Eases the pain a bit if your player is injured in the first quarter, especially a premium -_-

i dislike that a lot. with that. lets say, selwood has a blinder 3 qtr's and scores 120, and is subbed at 3 qtr time. but i, in all stupidity, dont have him. silly me.
BUT! i do have josh cowan (who is a bucket load cheaper) who is subbed on. i then essentially get selwoods score, for cowans price. this could ruin matches

[eagles929406]

i'd love a wildcard right now, out selwood,sandi,swan,zac smith     id' trade em all