2021 Round 18: Teams & In Game Discussion

Ben's Beasts

Leadership Group
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
11,453
Likes
29,362
AFL Club
Melbourne
So Mills and Greene at risk of missing two games. Dunkley will miss two games. Plenty would have the first two and there would have been a few who brought Dunkley straight back.

If it was best 18 due to players missing due to covid in the past then it really should be best 18 until all players are available again from covid related absences.
 
Joined
25 Jul 2012
Messages
33,710
Likes
61,619
AFL Club
Collingwood
I think the AFL is pushing for it to be backdated to the date of exposure, however I think the rule as it currently stands is that when you walk into hotel quarantine you don't walk out for 14 days which would be 2 weeks from yesterday.

The fact that the players in question have returned multiple negative tests should help but the biggest risk is that the government doesn't want to create a precedent that others try to challenge down the line.
Tom Morris just reporting that the AFL have told the Giants & Swans it will be back dated.
 
Last edited:
Joined
25 Jul 2012
Messages
33,710
Likes
61,619
AFL Club
Collingwood
So Mills and Greene at risk of missing two games. Dunkley will miss two games. Plenty would have the first two and there would have been a few who brought Dunkley straight back.

If it was best 18 due to players missing due to covid in the past then it really should be best 18 until all players are available again from covid related absences.
Completely different circumstances to the Essendon v Melbourne game which was cancelled though.
 
Joined
9 Dec 2020
Messages
593
Likes
2,676
AFL Club
Essendon
So Mills and Greene at risk of missing two games. Dunkley will miss two games. Plenty would have the first two and there would have been a few who brought Dunkley straight back.

If it was best 18 due to players missing due to covid in the past then it really should be best 18 until all players are available again from covid related absences.
I understand where you are coming from, but as long as it's not whole teams wiped out/games not being played then I think they have to treat these covid situations the same they would if a player was injured or suspended for an infraction (eg, drink driving, betting etc). Completely appreciate the frustration but sometimes it's not about the best on field 22 but the best overall 30 and the bench depth you have. Why should someone who has forward cover be punished because others don't? Similarly down back? Those with Bramble now have to face a decision of strong mid cover vs utilizing that cash for an on field upgrade.. to me those decisions are critical parts of what makes a good (and lucky) SC player.
 

Ben's Beasts

Leadership Group
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
11,453
Likes
29,362
AFL Club
Melbourne
I understand where you are coming from, but as long as it's not whole teams wiped out/games not being played then I think they have to treat these covid situations the same they would if a player was injured or suspended for an infraction (eg, drink driving, betting etc). Completely appreciate the frustration but sometimes it's not about the best on field 22 but the best overall 30 and the bench depth you have. Why should someone who has forward cover be punished because others don't? Similarly down back? Those with Bramble now have to face a decision of strong mid cover vs utilizing that cash for an on field upgrade.. to me those decisions are critical parts of what makes a good (and lucky) SC player.
That’s fair enough, but where do you draw the line though?

There are that many exposure sites now that it’s inevitable there will be more players that will miss games due to covid.

Plenty of the players won’t be SC relevant but we have three already. What if that number jumps to ten or more SC relevant players?
 
Joined
25 Jul 2012
Messages
33,710
Likes
61,619
AFL Club
Collingwood
Trying to remember was it Best 18 last season when Houston & Ladhams got suspended for their Covid breach ? 🤔

Dunn & Sidebottom , couple of Melbourne players earlier in the season , probably some others who escape my memory now.

I guess if they make it a standard Best 18 though , it should have been made when Nash was withdrawn on Saturday.

Why it should be Best 18 though if individual players miss is beyond my understanding.

Decision shouldn't be based on whether a player is popular (ie highly owned) or not either.
 
Last edited:
Joined
24 Feb 2015
Messages
3,132
Likes
11,379
AFL Club
GWS Giants
Tom Morris just reporting that the AFL have told the Giants & Swans it will be back dated (opening up a can of worms for "normal" people)
It's usually backdated. We've been done a few times and had several people from work need to Quar and it's always been 14 days from the time the person was expsoed to the tier 1 site. I've had this discussion several times also with Vic health and they've always told from the exposure time.
But yeah, there certainly has been a lot of confusion around the rules and interpretation.
 
Joined
25 Jul 2012
Messages
33,710
Likes
61,619
AFL Club
Collingwood
It's usually backdated. We've been done a few times and had several people from work need to Quar and it's always been 14 days from the time the person was expsoed to the tier 1 site. I've had this discussion several times also with Vic health and they've always told from the exposure time.
But yeah, there certainly has been a lot of confusion around the rules and interpretation.
I probably shouldn't have posted without first checking all the different state laws , regulations and rules around it.

Thanks for the clarification.

ok that is consistent then with Dunkley having to quarantinee until the 28th then.
 
Joined
9 Dec 2020
Messages
593
Likes
2,676
AFL Club
Essendon
That’s fair enough, but where do you draw the line though?

There are that many exposure sites now that it’s inevitable there will be more players that will miss games due to covid.

Plenty of the players won’t be SC relevant but we have three already. What if that number jumps to ten or more SC relevant players?
I guess then the issue is, how do you define SC relevant players? If it's based on popular ownership that punishes anyone who has a pod player miss.. but the alternative probably sets the bar too low and gets things to the territory of permanent best 18 which I think is unfair to those who've planned around having cover or have held onto trades in case of injuries.

There are probably some exotic solutions they could look at but I'd imagine the complexity would be high given there is only a handful of rounds left.

I'd be interested to see what everyone actually thinks is a viable solution and if we could come up with something that everyone thinks is fair..
 

Bomber18

Leadership Group
Joined
11 Nov 2012
Messages
21,914
Likes
40,126
AFL Club
Essendon
So Mills and Greene at risk of missing two games. Dunkley will miss two games. Plenty would have the first two and there would have been a few who brought Dunkley straight back.

If it was best 18 due to players missing due to covid in the past then it really should be best 18 until all players are available again from covid related absences.
Tom Morris just reporting that the AFL have told the Giants & Swans it will be back dated.
View: https://twitter.com/tommorris32/status/1416915118495989765?s=21


Yep - seems like Mills and Greene miss R19.

Dunkley’s also is backdated (to 14 July) so he misses R19 only
 
Joined
17 Mar 2020
Messages
51
Likes
376
AFL Club
Richmond
It's usually backdated. We've been done a few times and had several people from work need to Quar and it's always been 14 days from the time the person was expsoed to the tier 1 site. I've had this discussion several times also with Vic health and they've always told from the exposure time.
But yeah, there certainly has been a lot of confusion around the rules and interpretation.
I was in a situation returning from nsw late last year when the northern beaches outbreak happened, the first 5 days after returning was fine but then I was told to quarantine for 14 days backdated to when I left the ‘red zone’. Under the impression that all 14 days quarantine periods are from when they were in the exposure site, not from when the directive to quarantine happens
 
Joined
3 Dec 2014
Messages
4,083
Likes
5,796
AFL Club
Essendon
2321, season cooked. Why oh why did I use my second-last trade to go Whitfield to Haynes. Poor, reactive trading to cover Mills and save my first donut of the season.

Dropped to rank 90 now, Intelligent Design now ranked 91 so the battle for the SCS cash group title is well and truly on.

At least I'm a game clear (plus percentage) on top of the SCS02 ladder, so I'll get a good home final to start.

My biggest priority is still to hold onto a top 100 finish but I don't think that's very likely anymore. To win SCS02 will be amazing. Got some very good competition in that one, particularly @Leroy and @GrainFedBeef who are sitting 2nd and 3rd. Among plenty of others who's SCS usernames I don't know.
 
Joined
3 Dec 2014
Messages
4,083
Likes
5,796
AFL Club
Essendon
Also sorry for all my whinging and complaining the past two weeks. Things were good when I got up to rank 42. I'm having a big cry that I made some bad decisions and had some bad weeks. I love this SCS community, bunch of legends. I'll get over it, just want to apologise for the negativity.
 
Joined
9 Dec 2020
Messages
593
Likes
2,676
AFL Club
Essendon
Also sorry for all my whinging and complaining the past two weeks. Things were good when I got up to rank 42. I'm having a big cry that I made some bad decisions and had some bad weeks. I love this SCS community, bunch of legends. I'll get over it, just want to apologise for the negativity.
Don't stress mate.. it always burns more the closer to the top you are! Besides, while some (myself included) can't relate to your high ranking I can absolutely sympathise with decision regret - so if anything, we are all united with you there in one way or another!
 
Top