News Fixture Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sherman41

Club Legend
May 3, 2006
2,003
1,715
Ballarat
AFL Club
Collingwood
Would be a joke if Round 15 was included.
Unless extra trades are handed out.

There are lots of teams within my cash leagues that’s have 3-4 bulldogs players. Be an absolute get out of jail card for those teams if the round didn’t count in SC finals.

Teams have rounds to plan.Hopefully that comes into consideration when giving extra trades.
 

Unknown Identity

Professional Strawman
Oct 7, 2009
17,143
25,393
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys Chicago Bulls
There are lots of teams within my cash leagues that’s have 3-4 bulldogs players. Be an absolute get out of jail card for those teams if the round didn’t count in SC finals.

Teams have rounds to plan.Hopefully that comes into consideration when giving extra trades.
We don't really have rounds to plan without extra trades.

It's compromised if that round is included, nobody could have planned for it. Some will be far worse off than others.
 

Silky23

Team Captain
Feb 2, 2020
438
839
AFL Club
Collingwood
Tim Michell stating on Twitter that at first glance Round 15 will indeed be a bye round so Round 14 would be the start of Finals.
 

Snarls Barkley

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 7, 2012
6,463
7,245
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
San Antonio, West Ham, Renegades
Surely R15 is a bye. Won't affect me as much as some people but I'll be struggling to get 18 with extra trades. Only have Neale, Grundy and Dusty in the other byes
 

Scythe94

Ballistic and Dynamic
Aug 12, 2017
2,320
5,472
Sydney
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Orlando Magic, Arsenal

- Unlimited trades
- The ability to reverse trades from earlier in the season and be awarded bonus points that you missed out on
- Scoring the gull based in his impact on the game
- New knees for Max Gawn
- An AFL mandate that somebody, sometime, ever goes within 25 metres of Jack Macrae
 

Snarls Barkley

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 7, 2012
6,463
7,245
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
San Antonio, West Ham, Renegades
There are lots of teams within my cash leagues that’s have 3-4 bulldogs players. Be an absolute get out of jail card for those teams if the round didn’t count in SC finals.

Teams have rounds to plan.Hopefully that comes into consideration when giving extra trades.
I agree with you in these situations when we know at the start of the season. Too harsh to spring it on you with three weeks and say deal with it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

hoddo

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2005
5,391
6,603
Geelong
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Chelsea, Oakland Raiders, Celtics
Round 15 is a mess no matter how SC decide to handle it. Seems to me there are 3 options.

1) Make round 15 null and void so it doesn't even exist as a round in the eyes of SC, except for player price changes. R14 takes its place as the first week of SC finals.
2) Give a large number of extra trades to allow people to cope with the unexpected lack of players in that round.
3) Lower the number of counted scores that round to maybe best 15.

All these options are deeply flawed, but in this crazy season we should be used to having to accept the best of bad options (unfortunately sometimes the worst of bad options).

The problem with option 1 is that it disadvantages all those with predominantly players not playing in round 15 as their players will have had a bye and those missing in round 15 effectively wouldn't have had one. I'm sure there are other problems.

The problem with option 2 is that it saves the bacon of people who simply traded badly and too often and allows them to get back on track with those who traded well and sensibly.

The main problem with option 3 is that it simply won't happen. In a normal season the byes have 6 teams missing and it's best 18. I can't see that precedent being broken.

Overall I can see option 2 being by far the most likely. It's unfair, but other options seem far worse/unlikely.
 

Raveneyes

Premium Gold
Jul 23, 2007
12,186
21,657
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool, Melbourne City FC, CIW
We don't really have rounds to plan without extra trades.

It's compromised if that round is included, nobody could have planned for it. Some will be far worse off than others.
I disagree. If you are compromised now, you were unlikely to be compromised much in Round 3, or Rounds 10-12.

Round 3 was a time when nobody could have planned for it. Those teams without Gawn, Petracca, Oliver, Viney, Devon, Zerrett, and Ridley etc would have got a big leg-up on those that did. I had 4 of those. Many had 5 or more.

The last 'Festival Of Footy' fixture release was no different. I missed a lot of players and subsequently dropped thousands of places.
Round 3, 10, and 11 rankings drops highlighted.

1597386544201.png


Now with this draw I have finally got an advantage back.
I know it's SC finals time, but I will miss some league finals due to being compromised early. So no advantage for me there.

I'll add that teams compromised now would have had more time to plan than those previously affected, as they knew the byes were coming, though not in what format.

Round 15 is a mess no matter how SC decide to handle it. Seems to me there are 3 options.

1) Make round 15 null and void so it doesn't even exist as a round in the eyes of SC, except for player price changes. R14 takes its place as the first week of SC finals.
2) Give a large number of extra trades to allow people to cope with the unexpected lack of players in that round.
3) Lower the number of counted scores that round to maybe best 15.

All these options are deeply flawed, but in this crazy season we should be used to having to accept the best of bad options (unfortunately sometimes the worst of bad options).

The problem with option 1 is that it disadvantages all those with predominantly players not playing in round 15 as their players will have had a bye and those missing in round 15 effectively wouldn't have had one. I'm sure there are other problems.

The problem with option 2 is that it saves the bacon of people who simply traded badly and too often and allows them to get back on track with those who traded well and sensibly.

The main problem with option 3 is that it simply won't happen. In a normal season the byes have 6 teams missing and it's best 18. I can't see that precedent being broken.

Overall I can see option 2 being by far the most likely. It's unfair, but other options seem far worse/unlikely.
Nah best 18. I had to deal with it, give me my chance now.

Additional 4 trades over bye rounds, and 3 max per round.
 

Andrew Birch

Mid Price Maestro
Dec 3, 2017
11,954
30,989
AFL Club
Melbourne
Round 15 is a mess no matter how SC decide to handle it. Seems to me there are 3 options.

1) Make round 15 null and void so it doesn't even exist as a round in the eyes of SC, except for player price changes. R14 takes its place as the first week of SC finals.
2) Give a large number of extra trades to allow people to cope with the unexpected lack of players in that round.
3) Lower the number of counted scores that round to maybe best 15.

All these options are deeply flawed, but in this crazy season we should be used to having to accept the best of bad options (unfortunately sometimes the worst of bad options).

The problem with option 1 is that it disadvantages all those with predominantly players not playing in round 15 as their players will have had a bye and those missing in round 15 effectively wouldn't have had one. I'm sure there are other problems.

The problem with option 2 is that it saves the bacon of people who simply traded badly and too often and allows them to get back on track with those who traded well and sensibly.

The main problem with option 3 is that it simply won't happen. In a normal season the byes have 6 teams missing and it's best 18. I can't see that precedent being broken.

Overall I can see option 2 being by far the most likely. It's unfair, but other options seem far worse/unlikely.
If we're given an extra 4 trades, 3 per round in Rds 13, 14, 15, 16 should be suffice for best 18 in Rds 14, 15 & 16
 

DaveyBoy123

Norm Smith Medallist
Jan 26, 2003
6,367
10,258
Melbourne, Australia
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Southampton, San Antonio, Buffalo
LOL, I only have 2 premos missing Rd 15. One of them is Simpkins, who really isn't a premo.

That's just my luck if Rd 15 ends up being a bye.
Somehow, I'm the same; Stewart & B.Smith... & they're barely premos.

I'm more worried about Rd-16 because you know it will be up against good SC opposition. I've only got Grundy & Dusty from those 2 teams atm, but was strongly thinking of Taylor Adams this weekend. Unsure I can do that now.

I was really hoping Collingwood's bye would be early, as I doubt Grundy gets through to rd-16 without a rest.
 

hoddo

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2005
5,391
6,603
Geelong
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Chelsea, Oakland Raiders, Celtics
I disagree. If you are compromised now, you were unlikely to be compromised much in Round 3, or Rounds 10-12.

Round 3 was a time when nobody could have planned for it. Those teams without Gawn, Petracca, Oliver, Viney, Devon, Zerrett, and Ridley etc would have got a big leg-up on those that did. I had 4 of those. Many had 5 or more.

The last 'Festival Of Footy' fixture release was no different. I missed a lot of players and subsequently dropped thousands of places.
Round 3, 10, and 11 rankings drops highlighted.

View attachment 935346

Now with this draw I have finally got an advantage back.
I know it's SC finals time, but I will miss some league finals due to being compromised early. So no advantage for me there.

I'll add that teams compromised now would have had more time to plan than those previously affected, as they knew the byes were coming, though not in what format.



Nah best 18. I had to deal with it, give me my chance now.

Additional 4 trades over bye rounds, and 3 max per round.
I agree (and actually said in my earlier post) that it will be best 18, but to be fair it's a lot easier to deal with rounds where there are just 2 or 3 teams missing than it it to deal with a round with 6 teams missing.

Absolutely agree that extra trades is the best solution and an extra 4 seems a fair compromise. I suspect it will be more though.
 

Top Bottom