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 4:50pm [ 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 2:34pm
Author: Slade
Subject: Case by Case
In reply to: Brendan 's message, "My view" on 29/05/21 9:41am

It should be a case by case situation. Like looking at ruck stocks at a particular team, for example a team like me has 5 rucks so Ox and I have put in the effort to get more rucks but unfortunately are not being played except this week where I have Phillips and Sinclair playing but in previous weeks that has not been the case.

Say Sinclair gets dropped again and Phillips gets injured or something, I should be allowed to put McCartin or somebody in the ruck, should I not? If it is clear that a side has only got 1 or 2 rucks and is playing a KPP ruck every single week and there is no chance that their rucks are going to play AFL any time soon then their should be questions asked.

If you really want to have perfectly balanced teams, rucks should be redistributed or something. 18 AFL teams, 14 SL teams, there should be plenty of #1 rucks going around and there is BUT too many coaches are entirely unreasonable with trading their second choice ruck who is #1 at their AFL club. Surely you see the issue here.... We have Kookaburras, Sharks, Whippets, Dogs and Roos with 3 rucks or less.

We also have myself, Rams, Cats, Magpies, Staghounds and Kings with 5 or more rucks. These balance rules have forced hoarding rucks and made the gap between the bottom and top teams larger and larger.

Just use commonsense look at it case by case and be flexible rather than being an unreasonable tyrant with these rules. Honestly you mods are making the competition way less fun. Do you want that?? Do you want to have coaches such as Ox leave with these rules a contributing factor to his departure?

All D9 and I are asking for is commonsense to prevail and you mods to be reasonable especially with teams that 50 points is the difference between winning and losing. It's not hard to end this whole discussion and make a better comp... Why are you making out to be so hard?

[ 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.