Discussion 2021 Round 11: Teams & In Game Discussion

[GrainFedBeef]

I'm delighted it's not, I don't really know how everyone has managed to have that bye as the problem but it's the one that I need zero trades to have 20 playing right now while needing more than a little luck for r13 and should just scrape in now thanks to this for round 12!

I also have to say... WHY THE **** are they doing best 18 again, it's such an absolutely horrific solution. You just double down the punishment on those who have a lot of players from those two teams as they have to rely on rookies to try and cover for premium spots while the teams who don't have them get to field extra premiums. You then also lose the cash generation on rookies. So basically a lose/lose/lose equation for those with them and a huge win/win/win advantage for those without them.

I normally hate everything AFL Fantasy does but giving them the average score if they played last week is just a much neater solution to the problem.

I say this as someone who only has 1 player from those teams this year but I remember how it quite literally ended my season last year with 10 players from the two teams meaning that even after two trades I could only field about 17 players, most of whom were rookies so while I scored 1500 odd I dropped a solid 400+ points on most teams that week.

Oh well... a year later I'm on the other side of the coin and now have a great reason to target Touk who I really wanted to bring in anyway and I can probably save the r13 bye now that the r12 bye became easier to navigate with the Touk/Titch solutions

Yeah, wasnt the best system. Other teams had byes however due to unplanned nature, others brought in Melb Ess players.

Similar to when Port GC played in China yet we all knew not to have those players at start of the year.

 

[baz_machine]

Living on the other side of the world (Denmark - for those that don't realise, Denmark is the same size as Tassie, and population as Victoria), I'm constantly amazed at the different reactions each country has. I'm not saying what is right or wrong, but just listing for comparison.
Australia- someone in a crowd at a sports match tests positive, and the whole sport gets thrown into disarray. It's like the players being located in the stadium are some sort of high chance of having been infected by someone in the crowd. Given the way the infection travels, that would seem about as likely as catching it from your next door neighbour, whom you haven't been closer than 20 metres to, in the past 12 months.
Victoria (6.6 mill people, 227,000km^2) - Victoria has had a total of 20,563 cases, of which 23 are currently active, and 1 is in hospital. In the last week Victoria has recorded 17 new cases. There have been 971,000 vaccinations administered.
Denmark (5.8 mill people, 43,000km^2) - Denmark has had a total of 276,000 cases (13 times more than Victoria), there are currently around 13,000 active (around 600 times Victoria), 148 in Hospital (148 times more than Victoria), in the past week Denmark has recorded around 7,000 new cases. There have been 1,750,000 vaccinations administered (twice as many as Vic.)
Denmark carries out around 160,000 tests/day, and are currently recording around 1,000 positives/day (0.6%)
Victoria carries out around 13,000 tests/day, and are currently recording around 2 positives/day (0.015% that's 1/40th of Denmarks rate)

Okay, now here's the part I struggle to understand. I re-iterate, i'm not saying who has it right ........

Looking at those numbers above, who would think that
Denmark is actively, but slowly, re-opening life and business. Things are nearly sort of back to normal.
Victoria is talking of closing everything down for 5 days.

I can't get my head around, the reaction to someone in a crowd testing positive, leading to the players, being locked down, and 20 new cases in a week means everything closes down, while Denmark is slowly doing the opposite, with 400 times as many new cases each week.

When you factor in the Australian state responses change from Suppression to Eradication after the Melbourne lockdown last year, you understand why.
I don't think that was ever announced as official policy but the state responses are pretty obvious.

 

[Locus Levy Lunacy]

I'm delighted it's not, I don't really know how everyone has managed to have that bye as the problem but it's the one that I need zero trades to have 20 playing right now while needing more than a little luck for r13 and should just scrape in now thanks to this for round 12!

I also have to say... WHY THE **** are they doing best 18 again, it's such an absolutely horrific solution. You just double down the punishment on those who have a lot of players from those two teams as they have to rely on rookies to try and cover for premium spots while the teams who don't have them get to field extra premiums. You then also lose the cash generation on rookies. So basically a lose/lose/lose equation for those with them and a huge win/win/win advantage for those without them.

I normally hate everything AFL Fantasy does but giving them the average score if they played last week is just a much neater solution to the problem.

I say this as someone who only has 1 player from those teams this year but I remember how it quite literally ended my season last year with 10 players from the two teams meaning that even after two trades I could only field about 17 players, most of whom were rookies so while I scored 1500 odd I dropped a solid 400+ points on most teams that week.

Oh well... a year later I'm on the other side of the coin and now have a great reason to target Touk who I really wanted to bring in anyway and I can probably save the r13 bye now that the r12 bye became easier to navigate with the Touk/Titch solutions

Not sure I follow the bolded part.

If you have Mitchell, Impey and Miller, you have to cover them with rookies whether there is 22 playing or 18 playing don't you? Actually in some cases people might be up to 19 or 20 pseudo-premos where they can cover them without having to use rookies (if it is best 18).

Making it 18 is probably to help those who may also have Kozi, CJ, Farrar, Phillips etc. who would potentially be looking at donuts if they had to field 22. Surely it's better to have rookie cover than be stuck with donuts?

The penalty for those with lots of Hawks and Suns would seem to be greater if they are forced to field 22 wouldn't it?

 

[Professor]

Touk Miller: Legitimate option?
Have owned him in the past, love him as a player, does he have role stability after Rowell's return?

He's a good player, but not great imo. Comes out fast with a 12 touch quarter, has 20 by half time, goes missing in the 3rd and finishes with 25-30. For the amount of touches he gets, he should be scoring higher, haven't looked at his disposal efficiency. The other thing to note is his scores vary based on the role he plays, he gets off the chain playing pure mid, but when asked by Dew to tag, his scoring does drop off. With Rowell due back soon, his role may revert back to the tagging option.

 

[Bones]

Not sure I follow the bolded part.

If you have Mitchell, Impey and Miller, you have to cover them with rookies whether there is 22 playing or 18 playing don't you? Actually in some cases people might be up to 19 or 20 pseudo-premos where they can cover them without having to use rookies (if it is best 18).

Making it 18 is probably to help those who may also have Kozi, CJ, Farrar, Phillips etc. who would potentially be looking at donuts if they had to field 22. Surely it's better to have rookie cover than be stuck with donuts?

The penalty for those with lots of Hawks and Suns would seem to be greater if they are forced to field 22 wouldn't it?

You are correct insofar best 18 is better than having to field 22 but it still disadvantages teams, but I believe @wogitalia’s point was a fairer system would be allocating averages to the Hawks and Suns players.

 

[Bermi]

Not sure I follow the bolded part.

If you have Mitchell, Impey and Miller, you have to cover them with rookies whether there is 22 playing or 18 playing don't you? Actually in some cases people might be up to 19 or 20 pseudo-premos where they can cover them without having to use rookies (if it is best 18).

Making it 18 is probably to help those who may also have Kozi, CJ, Farrar, Phillips etc. who would potentially be looking at donuts if they had to field 22. Surely it's better to have rookie cover than be stuck with donuts?

The penalty for those with lots of Hawks and Suns would seem to be greater if they are forced to field 22 wouldn't it?

RE: ........The penalty for those with lots of Hawks and Suns would seem to be greater if they are forced to field 22........
That's true for my team after I did the sums.

 

[Zagbag]

Living on the other side of the world (Denmark - for those that don't realise, Denmark is the same size as Tassie, and population as Victoria), I'm constantly amazed at the different reactions each country has. I'm not saying what is right or wrong, but just listing for comparison.
Australia- someone in a crowd at a sports match tests positive, and the whole sport gets thrown into disarray. It's like the players being located in the stadium are some sort of high chance of having been infected by someone in the crowd. Given the way the infection travels, that would seem about as likely as catching it from your next door neighbour, whom you haven't been closer than 20 metres to, in the past 12 months.
Victoria (6.6 mill people, 227,000km^2) - Victoria has had a total of 20,563 cases, of which 23 are currently active, and 1 is in hospital. In the last week Victoria has recorded 17 new cases. There have been 971,000 vaccinations administered.
Denmark (5.8 mill people, 43,000km^2) - Denmark has had a total of 276,000 cases (13 times more than Victoria), there are currently around 13,000 active (around 600 times Victoria), 148 in Hospital (148 times more than Victoria), in the past week Denmark has recorded around 7,000 new cases. There have been 1,750,000 vaccinations administered (twice as many as Vic.)
Denmark carries out around 160,000 tests/day, and are currently recording around 1,000 positives/day (0.6%)
Victoria carries out around 13,000 tests/day, and are currently recording around 2 positives/day (0.015% that's 1/40th of Denmarks rate)

Okay, now here's the part I struggle to understand. I re-iterate, i'm not saying who has it right ........

Looking at those numbers above, who would think that
Denmark is actively, but slowly, re-opening life and business. Things are nearly sort of back to normal.
Victoria is talking of closing everything down for 5 days.

I can't get my head around, the reaction to someone in a crowd testing positive, leading to the players, being locked down, and 20 new cases in a week means everything closes down, while Denmark is slowly doing the opposite, with 400 times as many new cases each week.

Australia will be a victim of its own early success. For as long as these State Premiers think the only acceptable number of Covid cases is 0, we will never have anything resembling normal life - let alone open borders.

This year, we'll see Europe, UK, USA etc. all learn to live with the virus (possibly due to their early failures and high vaccinations), while we sit in our protected bubble - it's incredibly frustrating.

 

[Uncle Drew]

You are correct insofar best 18 is better than having to field 22 but it still disadvantages teams, but I believe @wogitalia’s point was a fairer system would be allocating averages to the Hawks and Suns players.

That actually does the reverse and gives those with Hawks and Suns players a huge advantage as they effectively don't have a bye. Also feels wrong to me giving players points who don't actually play.

 

[NT.Thunder]

So would I get Bowes average allocated?

 

[Bones]

He's a good player, but not great imo. Comes out fast with a 12 touch quarter, has 20 by half time, goes missing in the 3rd and finishes with 25-30. For the amount of touches he gets, he should be scoring higher, haven't looked at his disposal efficiency. The other thing to note is his scores vary based on the role he plays, he gets off the chain playing pure mid, but when asked by Dew to tag, his scoring does drop off. With Rowell due back soon, his role may revert back to the tagging option.

Aww Prof! Bringing a pin to my balloon party 😩

 

[Bones]

That actually does the reverse and gives those with Hawks and Suns players a huge advantage as they effectively don't have a bye. Also feels wrong to me giving players points who don't actually play.

It would if you didn’t exclude them for their Rd 12 bye.

 

[NT.Thunder]

So I'm a 193/0 going into round 11, sweet!

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Both Bom Trowne and Ralphy running with the Suns v Hawks match going ahead this weekend.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397700824101310466

View: https://twitter.com/TomBrowne7/status/1397700824101310466?s=20

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397705303345438721

View: https://twitter.com/superfooty/status/1397705303345438721?s=20

 

[NT.Thunder]

Interesting, I did hear NT may be positioning for the dreamtime game.
Sounds like there's still a lot to play out.

 

[sethlad]

Tiges v Crows now in Sydney,day tba

 

[KLo30]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397710240531959809

View: https://twitter.com/Sammy__Edmund/status/1397710240531959809?s=20

 

[Lost In The Sky]

This situation and Fixture is changing minute by minute... Who knows where it will end up.

 

[wolfbunny]

just on ABC news Melbourne player was at one of the exposure sites forcing all Melb players into isolation until a negative test result.

 

[Lost In The Sky]

Tom just covering every base so high chance something he says is right...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397706879707467779

View: https://twitter.com/TomBrowne7/status/1397706879707467779

 

[Herbie66]

Tiges v Crows now in Sydney,day tba

Sunday at Giants Stadium according to Jon Ralph