Ideas for next season

First topic message reminder :

If you have an idea for a change, please put it on here, with a heading saying what aspect of the game it relates to, and then in detail what the idea is.

SirJohnnyEnglish wrote:I see a few issues with the game which I have been holding off on really commenting on till the season was finished.

I (and others) have strong suspicions of tactical predicting in the last few months of the season. I have seen some predictions completely against the grain, games 'accidentally' missed off predictions and have suspicions of predictions being held off to have a greater impact on the result.

I have seen grudges being held in predictions as well. It looks to me like some predictions have been given as payback for results given against them. There has been heavy player slating in some predictions as well in response to player discussions on the home page or in other predictions.

The wumming on the home page continues to grow and grow. Very hard to have any conversation on there these days without it kicking off. I appreciate there's some rugby opinion there but Pooly needs to tame in the wum attempts. It reads as if your disagreeing for the sake of it at times. The over hyping of players needs to stop as well. Many of the arguments start off the back of it. The double teaming on Pooly in these arguments should  stop as well.  

The wumming is an issue but so are the personal attacks. On any other part of this forum bans would have been given for some of the jibes this past season. If people want me to ban for wumming then they will have to accept me banning for unnecessary personal attacks.

Would private predictions be posted after results?

Otherwise no feedback?

I guess feedback could be posted so it is anonymous, although after reading everyone's predictions for 6 odd months I think its fairly obvious who would have written each

Anonymity makes sense didn't think that

Have to have feedback so people know where they have lost the game and need to improve.

If predictions are done privately feedback would be published with results similar to how the football leagues work on here

As in, take the two outliers on either side of the predictions so that is more of the average. So if you get 8 predictions

+2
+1
+1
0
0
-1
-1
-6

Take away the two end results and its a draw rather than a win?

For me I wouldn't want to fiddle around with results too much otherwise they are just going to become manufactured. I can't see anything wrong with how we do results at the minute, just the way they are operated perhaps.

Can I make a suggestion for Foreign Bids?

If a bid is acceptable price wise and has stood for 24 hours it should be accepted when SJE gets on. This saves the issue of SJE struggling to get on frequently on some days.

EG Pooly bids on X and the price is acceptable and has stood for 24 hours. SJE hasn't managed to get on and I trump Poolys bid after 24 hours has passed Pooly should get the player regardless.

Think it makes it fairer myself.

Or possibly rounds of bids?

In round one (after Worcester and Welsh have had their picks) you can only sign one player. Round one will end when everyone has signed somebody (within a time limit so it doesn't get boring for others)

It would stop people jumping in on bidding wars after they've already made a signing. I think a couple of rounds of bids would make it a bit fairer before opening it up into a free market.

I think the rounds of bids makes sense after Wuss and Welsh pick

Sounds like a good idea to me there Steve

It is a conflict of interest as of my final standing in the league, but I do think the draft picking is a good idea. At least we are scaling it back from last season, where we did two rounds if I remember correctly. At least then next season we can launch back into a straight open window.

I was hoping to finish higher in the league so my transfer strategy has altered!

Do you mean a draft pick as in everyone gets to pick a player in turn after the Worc/Welsh picks, with no cash involved? Not too keen on that tbh

Don't agree on a draft.

Sorry Steve that's what I read it as, only skimmed it!

I take it you mean, we essentially get first refusal on who we bid on?

So everyone gets to sign one guy during that window after CJ and Prop get their two signings - stops people doing multiple bids if they have more money and pushing up prices through bidding wars? Sounds fair.

Would also be good if you couldn't pull out of a bid if there is a bidding war if you are winning, or if you do then the person you are in the bidding war gets the player at the price he bid before the bidding war kicked off.

I took it as meaning as soon as you've successfully bought a player you can't buy anyone else until every other team has bought someone. Means the teams with more money can't buy multiple of the first choice players

Bidding wars can continue as and when

Would be good if everyone got involved on the predictions and other issues. I've put a copy of my post in the opening post.

CJB,
I'd be reluctant to disregard predictions entirely though. In your example the 2 point margin doesn't particularly look out of sync but would be disregarded. Also think it alienates someone like Fluxy who regularly gives 4-7 point winning margins backed with in depth reasoning. What would be the point of predicting for Fluxy if he knew his predictions routinely had no affect on results.

Steve,
The 24 hours is a minimum guideline. Deciding on prices is subjective enough with me making the call (more so on academy age players) but to have others decide what is a reasonable price just adds to it and could see different amounts being paid depending who's online to accept.

I like the idea of a round for bidding. Spreads the talent further around the league. Still think there should be an open window as those with the most cash are the ones who have got full predictions in every week and should be allowed to benefit for that. But 1 or 2 rounds would keep the league fairly even. I've read it the same way as Bam so do say so if you mean something different

I don't mean others deciding the price. Just its frustrating when you get outbid after 48 hours or so. And it shouldn't be on you to get on every day as that's not manageable or fair.

Perhaps if you saw a bid you could say that can be accepted after 24 hours.

I think all non-international academy players should have a standard price. Playing one game for an injury hit Reds is no indication of talent. 5 mil or so.

Maybe have bids locked after 24 hours, then SJE can accept/decline whenever he gets online?

Sounds like I don't have to predict ever again!

Would private predictions allow predictions to be more honest?

I know in the past (back on 606v1) I predicted lesser margins on games because people would always predict last and predos would noticeably be affected by the predictions on there game.

I think bigger margins could come happen.

Also, should predos state whether they think a TBP will be scored?

Some valid points raised Johnny.

Tactical voting - I noticed this creeping in towards the end of the season from a few people. It's quite hard to police but agree with some that you do private predictions towards the end of the season maybe?

Payback predictions - probably best if I don't comment having called one individual out on this early in the season. It exists but how do you police it?

Player slating in predictions - can understand pointing out weaknesses as its part of the prediction. One or two tend to go ott and only seem to mention weaknesses of one team and nothing else. Perhaps a warning then small fines?

Wumming - I'm obviously pretty central to this and openly admit I push certain people's buttons. In my weak defence it's 99% of the time in response to ott bigging up of players.

I'm all up for player debate and if you're going to big numerous players up you have to expect people to disagree, it's a rugby forum.

From my side I can certainly try to reel in the wumming if other individuals can reel in the unnecessary bigging up. Me and Matt obviously dislike each other, perhaps we should have our own page?

The whinging after a debate about spoiling the game is a bit melodramatic and perhaps team Chratt (Matt/Chris) could tone it down a bit if I can?

Despite Matt suggesting I target Chris's players I can honestly say I don't. I don't rate Simpson and struggle with Daly at 13 but past that he has some of my favourite players and I would love a deal or two with him

Thank god the "idea" of getting kicked out of the game for having an opinion on a rugby player has been put to bed.

End of the day, it's a game and an opinions game at that. People are going to disagree with your opinion of your own players, there's no need to personally attack or get overly wound up. If you don't wish to hear people's thoughts on certain players, don't bring them up constantly on the main board.

There's some great lads on here and it would be shame if the cheating, wumming and attacks spoilt it.

Absolutely 100% concur with everything said by SJE.  Some of the tactical/grudge predicting was ridiculous by the end of the season.  We all want to win, but seriously, it's a game, and we're all adults, it should be played honestly and fairly.  

With regard to the foreign transfer window, I do think it should be done in rounds to start, so round 1 prop and CJ both get 1 signing, then the same round 2, then round 3 everyone can sign 1 player, same round 4, then open.

I think signings from the released list/championship should be set at 5, with an additional 5 academy aged signings allowed (EQ ones, not academy aged foreigns, as they would still be considered as foreigns).  I also think that academy numbers should be upped from 20 to 23, so if you wanted to, you could have a complete academy matchday 23.

I don't agree with discarding the best and worst predo.  It has been previously pointed out that this essentially discourages anyone who routinely gives bigger margins (like Fluxy) and I don't think that's right.

I'd agree with encouraging the wider margin, I know for me I've been hesitant about making bigger margin predictions due to fear of a backlash if I'm honest. So maybe the hidden predictions would be useful, either that or setting it as a poll for each game with set margins to select although that may be alot of work!

I'm not commenting on the draft part as I feel I benefit from this and its up to the guys with the stronger squads to come up with ways to help.

I like ozzy's idea of 5 & 5 for the bids and also the option to extend the academy as this seems to be where the majority of bids seem to be in foreigns now.

With regards to the homepage I avoid commenting as much due to the constant petty bickering, I know I've mentioned it to a couple of people during pm conversations too so it would be nice to clear the homepage and make it more enjoyable again.

With regards to when the world cup is on how about we have a competition with the 12 teams here against some super 15 teams to truly test the strength of our squads and for a bit of a relaxed introduction competition.

Prop I like your idea with friendlies against super 15 sides. Makes a difference to playing teams we would play in the league. Pick the Super teams strongest side and we can all play three sides from down south.

I would like to support Petes idea, which I had originally suggested with regards to academy and domestic bids. I would say academy bids are restricted to English based academy players.

Ozzy3213 wrote:Absolutely 100% concur with everything said by SJE.  Some of the tactical/grudge predicting was ridiculous by the end of the season.  We all want to win, but seriously, it's a game, and we're all adults, it should be played honestly and fairly.  

With regard to the foreign transfer window, I do think it should be done in rounds to start, so round 1 prop and CJ both get 1 signing, then the same round 2, then round 3 everyone can sign 1 player, same round 4, then open.

I think signings from the released list/championship should be set at 5, with an additional 5 academy aged signings allowed.  I also think that academy numbers should be upped from 20 to 23, so if you wanted to, you could have a complete academy matchday 23.

I don't agree with discarding the best and worst predo.  It has been previously pointed out that this essentially discourages anyone who routinely gives bigger margins (like Fluxy) and I don't think that's right.

Agree with all Pete said. As I have stated before most games of rugby are decided by more
Than a point. I went 4 point margin in the final and when I saw all the 1 point ones felt bad that my score had such a big impact.

Only problem with one or 2 giving decent margins is that it means it completely trumps the ones giving 1 or 2
Point ones. Think people need to be realistic about score lines and predict without fear of being had by revenge predictions. Not sure how you do it but like Pete I noticed some horrendous predictions towards the end of the year and people omitting scores etc.

Like increasing academy also

I quite like the academy age as it is. It means you have to juggle your squad and the top teams often release good players to accommodate youth.

I wasn't saying up the academy age Pooly, I'm suggesting upping the number of players you can have in your academy.

Ah apologies, I thought you wanted the age upped to 23.

No mate, I agree with you, it's good that the academy players hit an age and we have to then make a decision on them.  I've been lucky this year, as I think I only had two that needed promoting and I'd already decided to release one of them anyway.

If the majority wanted it happy to bring the limit up to 23 but think 5 & 5 bids is way to excessive. That's 60 academy players a season and we will have to be looking at England u16s/18s for signings.

Its looking like private predictions is the way forward. Predictions would be sent to me by pm (within the normal deadlines), I will then post the result and feedback up on the match thread. Should help with 'revenge' predictions. I hope the tactical predicting and digs in predictions because of disagreements will be cut out and will be watching very closely for them.

For the off season like the super 15 idea. Thinking 4 groups of 3 English, 1 Oz, 1 NZ, 1 SA. Play each other twice with top 2 going through to Cup QFs, 3+4 Plate, 5+6 Bowl etc. Starting the first week of July brings us up to the end of September which works well with the new season starting mid Oct. Would want someone to help with league tables though.

I can do the league tables and fixtures for the summer tournament if you want mate.

SirJohnnyEnglish wrote:If the majority wanted it happy to bring the limit up to 23 but think 5 & 5 bids is way to excessive. That's 60 academy players a season and we will have to be looking at England u16s/18s for signings.

I don't think it's that bad.  Not everyone would pick up 5 as finances and space in the academies may not permit.  Also there are plenty of players outside of the England age grade set ups who can picked up as well.

Will not turn that offer down Pete

For £1m a player don't think finances are an issue. Finding details on academy players outside the England set ups can be pretty hard and the odds of them coming through as 1st team players is minimal. Becomes complete guess work (even more so then now!) unless you've an inside scoop. I'm all for giving Welsh/Irish a few extra bids to try and close the gap on EQ but personally think you should have to decide between propping up your EQ or taking on that released player who could make a difference. Theres a couple of gems out there now and as more players get released as they age out of the academies expect that always to be the case.

Would it be worth upping it to 7 bids then?

Would all predos be published once completed?

Yep with no names attached Luke so you know I'm not fiddling the results

I'd agree with Pete on the academy side, but also see your point SJE - not sure if we could just say you are allowed to promote x number of academy players at the start of the season, so that way people can take a few gambles and see if any do come through for the EQ side of things. Especially now that Welsh aren't in the league and all the clubs have good academies.

Chris we are not bringing the old system back. It only serves those sides with the best academies in real life and doesn't help to spread the EQ. The likes of Sarries, Saints, Quins dominate England underage teams and would be at a distinct advantage EQ wise on here.

Not sure I'd agree with you there when you look across the AP and the young English players who are actually making it - take Saints for example look at their match day 23 and there isn't one academy player that regularly starts for them who has come through the ranks in last 2 years. Compare that to Newcastle, Exeter etc who put a lot of youngsters in that regularly get good game time.

Personally don't think saying you could call up 2-3 players would make much difference, especially when most teams have pretty packed academies.

I think the current system works. There just needs to be a little consideration for those of us near the bottom where perhaps an extra released player bid (or two!) will help both the academies at the bottom of the league as well as remain competitive overall.

Taking the team for tomorrow's game as a quick example Worcester have not a single player in the 23 compared to 3 for Chiefs, Bath & Sarriers. Why should Prop be at a disadvantage on here because of Worcesters real life academy? As someone whos watched the u20s keenly over the last few years you know certain academies have tended to dominate the sides.

I never played under the old system, but the current one does seem fair to me and anyone can bid for any player

Looking at how close this season has been I would say not much needs changing. I agree with private predictions as I always think margins are too small and petty rivalries and payback predos happen.

In old days it was more fair but we must adapt and PM predos work better I believe.

Also think we need to balance predos where no explan happens. As its 1 pt only. Would argue if no explan we don't accept predo as participating
In the game should mean predicting at least 3 lines per team

Agree it would be a good way of wiping out the cheating/payback predo's etc. Big change in the game though, sad it's come to this

Worcester have a great academy SJE - go through their squad and they have some excellent youngsters and have put more investment into their youth system then nearly every other AP team. There isn't a weak academy in the AP these days.

The age system for u20s is a bit of an odd one for England as they largely ignore players from likes of tigers, Irish even though they have some v good players.

If you want more EQ I think it's an easy way to do it, would give everyone a chance of finding the next star in their teams, I've gone through a lot of other academies to get guys like Ford, Tuilagi, both Vunipolas, Daly, while I don't think I have a single player (apart from Lawes), who came through saints academy, so it's not trying to protect guys from my academy, just looking at a fairer way to spread out EQ into squads and saying call up 2-3 players from your own academy doesn't seem like an overly bad way to do that.

I think it works fine as it is and I have probably one of the best academies (Sarries)

Worcester haven't a single England u20 at the moment. Why should Prop be at a disadvantage because of this? How is he supposed to close the gap EQ wise? It only benefits the best academies and seems a pretty self serving ploy to me.