EXV: Rules and Changes Discussion

[Vinny]

Hey guys,

Thought I'd start a thread to discuss rule changes or just general improvements people would like to see in the competition. Could kick it off with this rule that some seem to have want but it would be great if we could get some clearer opinions. :)



Sub Rule:

It seems like it won't be happening in the AFL next season so does everyone want to just not have it or bring it in anyway?
The sub rule was possibly going to work like this:

You have your four emergencies named. (One per position or just any 4 was undecided.) Then of your four, you designate a sub. Your lowest scoring player then comes off for your sub and that is really it.

Thoughts? Feel free to suggest any other rules or improvements you feel will help the competition. Holz will ultimately make the call but he'll need your opinion on things.

[Nige]

I don't think we need one per position.

Just three emgs from any line, one as sub.

[Vinny]

Fair enough, which would mean say someone is out, changes occur in this order.

1) Utility covers out player and first emergency goes to utility.
2) If Option 1 is N/A, Emergency of that position covers.
3) If neither Option 1 or 2 are possible, first emergency comes on as OOP.

If your designated substitute has to come on acting as an emergency, you do not get a sub.

Correct?

This is just if we have sub rule, if enough want it.

[Nige]

Yep.

[LF]

Don't think we should have the sub rule now if AFL is scrapping it.

[Justin Bieber]

Don't think sub rule is needed as luv said.

On what you said about lowest scoring on-field player being subbed off for an emergency, takes a bit of strategy out of it. If they just have a horrible game, let the team cop it for naming them, rather than getting an emergency who scored more. If it was just for injuries then maybe, but don't think sub rule needed anymore.

[Nails]

IMO teams that have gone through a rebuild in the 2015 pre-season automatically get 200 bonus points per game for being daring.

[Scrads]

So really the sub rule means you name a 16 man team and only your best 15 will count (unless you are unlucky enough that your sub gets your lowest score). It would make sense to make your best player your sub, which probably goes against what the rule is intended for.

Not to mention if the AFL scraps the rule it isn't really anything relevant. It's a no from me at this stage.

[Nails]

So really the sub rule means you name a 16 man team and only your best 15 will count (unless you are unlucky enough that your sub gets your lowest score). It would make sense to make your best player your sub, which probably goes against what the rule is intended for.

Not to mention if the AFL scraps the rule it isn't really anything relevant. It's a no from me at this stage.

Your third/fourth best - can't captain a sub I don't think.

[Scrads]

So really the sub rule means you name a 16 man team and only your best 15 will count (unless you are unlucky enough that your sub gets your lowest score). It would make sense to make your best player your sub, which probably goes against what the rule is intended for.

Not to mention if the AFL scraps the rule it isn't really anything relevant. It's a no from me at this stage.

Your third/fourth best - can't captain a sub I don't think.

Point taken but the theory of my point still stands.

[Holz]

If afl stays with the green best will definitely be doing the sub.

Not really a big fan of changing rules. I think just better activity from me and a few more interesting side things.

[LF]

Are we having a sub rule now that it is staying

[Holz]

Are we having a sub rule now that it is staying

Yes, I'll read the ideas people suggested when I'm back and if anyone else has ideas happy for them to list them now.

[LaHug]

My idea for the sub rule:

• You name one sub (can be any position).
• If one of your players is vested (green or red), your sub replaces their score.
• If two or more players are vested, your sub replaces the lowest scoring vestee.
• If your sub is vested themselves, they only replace your on-field vestee if they scored higher.

Pros:

• Stops unlikely injuries or odd vestings costing you games.
• Can't easily be manipulated like some other sub rules suggested.

Cons:

• Can be manipulated with Friday night games (e.g. I have a rookie forward named as green vest on Friday night so I quickly field him and make my sub the higher scoring midfielder I couldn't fit in that week).
• We'd need to find a solution to what happens if you have a vested player but they still scored more highly than your sub (who wasn't vested). It'd either be that you cop the lower score or that subs only come into play if they score higher. Both valid but would need to be decided in advance.

Thoughts?

[LF]

Maybe go check out BXV rules as sub rule was used last season and worked well.
I actually like it that way it's simple.