VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

7/10/25 2:53pm [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 29/05/21 9:41am
Author: Brendan
Subject: My view
In reply to: Slade 's message, "Rule change suggestion" on 28/05/21 2:43pm

Why bother drafting rucks higher in the draft if the rule stipulates I can just play next available tall on my list?

Rucks take time to develop, they chew up list space, and if I could just throw Darling in the ruck, then I wouldn't bother with developing rucks - I'd just go to the draft and chase the next best at the time (often a Mid or running/intercepting back).

I only have 2 eligible best 22 rucks... if I lost them, I would concede a penalty HAPPILY - it's my own fault for not trading/drafting appropriately. It's something Whippets are planning to work on. First priority was trying to get a good spread over the best 22.

It's possible that the 50pt pen is too high, that's what I'm thinking. Perhaps if the coach plays someone 198cm or higher then the pen could be 25 only. This is somewhat closer to realistic.

IF I'm a carlton coach and I play the following:

MARC PITTONET* - Play him in ruck, he wins his fair share and to advantage - No Penalty

HARRY MCKAY - Play him in ruck, he matches his opponent but doesn't move around the ground as well, doesn't get the ball into the hands of walsh/crippa as precisely because he's not a trained ruckman - 25pt Penalty

EDDIE BETTS - Play him in ruck, he gets spanked - 50pt penalty

*Pitto stinks anyway and should just have a 90pt penalty always haha

On gameday for any footy team, if your ruckman goes down, the replacement will not add the same amount of value... and you lose an asset from another part of the ground (your werribee scenario) so the team takes a hit... if you then lost the ability to play that general TALL player in ruck then you're royally cooked and play a medium/small guy who barely competes.

We cant just let it go if a coach doesn't have one available, because its a keeper league and these things take time and work (trading and drafting) to ensure you have the right balance... no penalties and you'll just get the same lack of engagement in the off season (some are not interested in trading, busy etc, thats fine - but then even more important that these coaches find the gems in draft pool, not just next best mid/def etc)

I see your point though slade, It's not the first time this has come up and won't be the last but we actually applied a change based on the previous time this topic landed and this is where we're at.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Forum timezone: GMT+11
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.