British Announcements

[kilbluff1985]

Why do you guys leave it so late to debate rule changes bit silly doing it after votes been sent out

[Justin Bieber]

So hypothetical, last year tom Nicholls would of replaced players of mine. So essentially a ruckman would come on for a defender ? Is that right?

[JBs-Hawks]

See how ridiculous it is that the sub takes any players score? Lez is the biggest winner for this and he thinks its bad :P

[Ringo]

http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,85566.0.html

This rule change was first mentioned in August and if you chose to ignore or comment then you have to wear the consequences of the vote being put out and passed. There were no adverse comments on the idea so that is why it was put to the vote, 

There are also other rule changes mooted in here as well so if you have chosen to ignore this thread maybe you should read it as that is where discussion is taking place to improve the competition.

Excuse me for being blunt but I start these threads for a reason and if you choose to ignore then you should have no complaints.

To clarify some of the misinterpretations that is going on here

You will nominate 4 emergencies one for each line. If you not have a ruck emergency you can nominate a player out of position to cover that position but will only score half points if used and that player can not be the designated sub, You will have to declare this on team lodgements as well.
Emergencies are to be named in order you prefer and one is named as a sub, Can be any of the emergencies.
So we name in order
X Mid and sub
Y Fwd
Z Ruck
W Defender

So basically now this will be the order for replacement
will be like for like eg Def to Def etc
then if a Utility is out then the highest listed player remaining on the list is used. Eg in this example say mid and sub has not been used but a replacement utility is required then X is used to replace the utility and because Player X is the designated sub then sub rule will not apply. Also sub rule will not apply if Player X had replaced a mid.

Assuming now none of your emergencies are required Player X as sub scores 60 points but your lowest scoring forward scores 50 the the subs score of 60 will be taken. Lowest score of 50 is still applicable for HGA.

Hope that clears up some of the misinterpretations here,

[Vinny]

It sucks for teams that don't have good players outside their best XV so I don't think it's fair. But in saying that, it has already been voted on.

[JBs-Hawks]

Soo if this rule is to replicate AFL.

My Sub scores 120

My ruckman is my lowest scorer with 60, so we lose my ruckmen and my 180cm midfielder comes on and plays the whole game in the ruck and scores 120 as a ruckman. My team ends up scoring 2000 and beats my oppponent by 10 goals, all this without having a ruckman.

[Ringo]

To comment on Lez's example we see it with subs all the time where more mobile players replace KPP so just mimicking AFL. And as I have said before there are risks involved with weakening D4 or F4 and some of you will be the first to complain because the rule did not allow you to make finals.

Another thing to consider is as Administrator in this trade period if I see any weakening of line to load up on midfielders under the rules of fair trading and team balance trade will be rejected.

Also in the example that JBS quoted if his M7 was capable of scoring 120 I would query his team lodgement especially if other mids scored less. 

I think we can treat obvious attempts to flout the rule similar to tanking and invoke penalties as it is being used against the intention of the rule.   

[PowerBug]

If it sucks then why did you all vote for it!? ::)

[Vinny]

Haha what's Lez's lowest averaging player's average? 90?

[Ringo]

Interesting how everyone is asking about Lez's team possibly as a result of his trash talking but he had only 5 players in his team average over 100 for the year 3 averaging 90 - 100 so just saying so only 8 of his xv averaged above 90

[kilbluff1985]

Haha what's Lez's lowest averaging player's average? 90?

mines 80 i expect to be 90 this season

[Ringo]

Another thing to consider is we have 6 Thursday lockouts before Final Teams are announced so there is a possibility of further emergemcy being used in non sub role so I think it will sort out but will review at end of year,

[Vinny]

Haha what's Lez's lowest averaging player's average? 90?

mines 80 i expect to be 90 this season

Hi Whatlez  :P 

[kilbluff1985]

Haha what's Lez's lowest averaging player's average? 90?

mines 80 i expect to be 90 this season

Hi Whatlez  :P

how you doin

#Goodguy/10

[Justin Bieber]

If it sucks then why did you all vote for it!? ::)

I didn't vote for it

Soo if this rule is to replicate AFL.

My Sub scores 120

My ruckman is my lowest scorer with 60, so we lose my ruckmen and my 180cm midfielder comes on and plays the whole game in the ruck and scores 120 as a ruckman. My team ends up scoring 2000 and beats my oppponent by 10 goals, all this without having a ruckman.

Soo if this rule is to replicate AFL.

My Sub scores 120

My ruckman is my lowest scorer with 60, so we lose my ruckmen and my 180cm midfielder comes on and plays the whole game in the ruck and scores 120 as a ruckman. My team ends up scoring 2000 and beats my oppponent by 10 goals, all this without having a ruckman.

Haha no ruckmam or key position players.

Haha what's Lez's lowest averaging player's average? 90?

mines 80 i expect to be 90 this season

Hi Whatlez  :P 

Hey

Interesting how everyone is asking about Lez's team possibly as a result of his trash talking but he had only 5 players in his team average over 100 for the year 3 averaging 90 - 100 so just saying so only 8 of his xv averaged above 90

Haha trash talking. Well considering I've added Dal Santo + Judd + Mayne + Butler(89.33). With Trent McKenzie to only improve over 90 to premium, I think its this year people are refering to.