Is it worth having a player in your lineup that may not play round 1

[Spuds11]

Thinking of leaving one certain non starter for a captains loophole every week thoughts

[lupine]

Does that leave you in danger of a "0" Not sure but  if there was a late withdrawal  on the sunday  you could be left a player short , because you've used it to cover the non player ?

[xumtinglong]

I assume this to be a midfielder? If that's the case you are risking up to $200K to exercise the loophole. Given that the Capt choice is Swan or GAJ each week - how many would beat their scores during the loophole week.

My answer - NO!

[Spuds11]

It's a possibility but the score you potentially get from a great vc score is worth the risk might even give you a leg up on the completion  and if the vc fails just lock in your gun and remove your non scorer from the field

[LMA12]

potentially yes lupine, depends when the lock out starts, whether its 1 hr before the match or 1 minute before.
if its 1 minute before then you'll be able to see player X wont be playing and so you just sub him for your playing benchman. and sub player Y for your non playing bench and captain him up while having your other player as sub. its a little confusing but it should be fine as long as you dont have more then 1 out

as long as you pay a bit of attention and make sure you know late changes before the game then you should be fine.

also personally i wouldnt be using a midfield rook as xumtinglong said thats 200k wasted.. id use a ruck or a forward.

[Pokerface]

I think youll have plenty of opportunity with non playing players anyway without looking for more. ruck and forward rookies won't be regular.

[nostradamus]

Nope

[Converted]

DON'T do it!

[tor01doc]

Yes, if you are going for SJ or possibly Leue, but other than these and maybe a few exceptions (of which I can't think just now), no.

[SydneyRox]

The loophole isnt worth it. If you want to score the most points, which is obviously what you are trying to do by pushing this loophole. You will be better to go for a rookie player who can make you some cash to increase your team value.
As pockerface has said, there will be plenty of players who will be in and out of your team to take advantage of the rule in following weeks.

Starting with an extra one is only limiting your side.

[antman]

dont think its worth it in the first round and elmo is strarting to grow on me ;D

[Capper]

I would rather have a player on the bench scoring points and making me money than having someone scoring a 0 incase i use the captains loophole

[Ringo]

Only if insurance for rucks is what I am doing - So Rowe or McBean will be possibly my only non scoring rookie for Round 1.  Will be even better if one of them plays.
In the early rounds you are looking for rookies to make money so why have one sitting there just to cover Captains loophole.  In majority of cases you would be looking at a non playing mid rookie for loop hole as Ablett is probably a permanent captain lock.  Mid filed rookies will rise quicker in cash so no real advantage for me as i want to get my 22 prems as quickly as possible.

[SydneyRox]

In majority of cases you would be looking at a non playing mid rookie for loop hole as Ablett is probably a permanent captain lock.  Mid filed rookies will rise quicker in cash so no real advantage for me as i want to get my 22 prems as quickly as possible.

The rookie can be anywhere, and if you are going so far to pick a non playing rookie. R4 is the best bet.

The non playing rookie is the guy who gets put on the field last minute and made captain when you decide your VC has made enough.

[shaker]

Well if you are going to use the loophole you have to have one and it does not matter where they are.