“The Essendon v Melbourne catch-up game is now expected to be played later in the season. We will include it in the round that it is played closest to — meaning that Essendon and Melbourne will likely play twice in a round. If this is the case, your team will receive the benefit of the HIGHEST of the two scores that any player achieves from either match. If your selected player/s plays only once, you will receive that score.
So if Max Gawn scores 90 in the first match and 130 in the second match, the second score (130) will be his SuperCoach score for the round — or 260 if you have him as captain.
If we are faced with further match cancellations or postponements in any round — or at least where one or more teams are unavailable in a round — the game will immediately revert to Best 18 scoring to minimise the impact.”
Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom
Get fucked…..
thats fucking bullshit
How is it “bullshit”? If Gawny gets say 170 and a concussion 11, you get the 170. Makes really good odds on making him captain for that week too.
If you were expecting to get double (god knows why), how does that help you, because everyone would just start loading up on Melbourne and Essendon players, so you would gain NO benefit out of what you have lost.
All it would mean is whoever trades in the most star Essendon and Melbourne players wins the competition.
I have no idea why people would think you get both lots of points. Frankly it’s a stupid idea.
So what happened to…
“We understand those with stars such as Devon Smith, Max Gawn and Jack Viney or rookies such as Harley Bennell and Trent Rivers will be disappointed they won’t be part of their Round 3 score.
We hope the pay off will be already having these players in your team will give you an edge when they play a double in a few rounds’ time.”
Evidently they change their minds like the wind, and felt they hadn’t pissed us off enough already!
Changed their minds? You need to read that again. They only mentioned playing a double, nothing about counting points twice.
That article that Mutley is quoting was updated/edited after it was originally posted on Saturday night. Although never confirmed – as in, this is 100% what is happening – it did indicate players would get double points.
To Harbour Heroes point above, initially the expectation was that the Melb v Ess game would be played this week (Wednesday just gone), so in fact people with existing Melb/Ess players would benefit, because with a two-trade limit, you can’t really ‘load-up’ over 3-4 rounds.
They haven’t mentioned how price increases will occur but I imagine they will use the highest score of the round also.
Given there in no double points, it’s far less appealing to loading up on Melb/Ess players now that their average won’t get a 7% boost from this round. Still an advantage getting a second roll, but it feels like it’s not compensated as much as high Melb/Ess owners would have wanted.
Will be interesting to see how close the games are fixtured and how much rotation happens.
While there’s no perfect solution, and the guys at SCHQ would absolutely have the best intentions, I’m not sure there’s much advantage in getting the best score. If Gawn scores 170 and 150, you’re still missing out on a 150. On the flip side, if Gawn has his TOG reduced to manage him through a mid-week game, and only scores 80 and 100 as a result, thats a further disadvantage.
Many would’ve also turned Dusty or Kelly into Gawn/Petracca prior to the postponement, which means you’re only getting one score from THREE games (R3 + the lowest upcoming score).
Supercoach Website: Lets talk to the winner of the 2020 Supercoach season, how did you do it! It was such a tough year, what was your strategy?
Phillip, Winner of Supercoach 2020: I wouldn’t call it a strategy but I had no Melbourne or Essendon players in my side earlier in the year.
SW: Well there we have it. What an amazing strategy for our winner in 2020.
I’m willing to offer 100/1 to anyone, that the 2020 SC winner won his round 3 matchup.
Thats 50% of players. 100/1 is ridiculous odds for an even money bet. Get on !!
Not necessarily, the current leader had 7 ESS/Melb players.
The person coming 6th and less than 50 behind had 7 also, but much higher scoring players: Ridley, Rivers, Viney, Bennell, Gawn, Smith and Petracca. Also benched Josh Kelly and managed to pump out 2092 despite missing all of those.
I will take that bet because you are offering 100/1 for a coin toss. The 2020 SC winner will be someone who makes 30 very good trade decisions and built a winning team over the course of the whole season. They will not be someone who was Steven Bradbury in one round.
What the actual f*ck? So I just copped 3 premos not playing and am never going to get their scores back?
Just give pre-R3 owners their scores when they play instead of putting people who started them further behind.
What a farce.
Should of gave us bloody averages as Fantasy did.
Bringing in Petracca has cooked me i have Cameron’s 22 as cover and Simpkin went up 60k got doubled fked..
Or at the very least just give us the scores they get when they play. Dons-Dees owners are now getting one round less of scores.
That’s the thing isn’t it. Impossible to do well at overall if you’re getting one less game out of those players. I’ve got six, including four premos, so there goes 2020.
That would be the best solution, but retrospective changes seem too hard.
Dunno why, they have everybody’s teams already in electronic storage, and know exactly who should be compensated.
Making it a future moving feast reqrds people who didn’t miss out in the first damn place.
What would’ve been fair was the score for that round counts plus 50% of the second score. E.g Expect a gawn 220.
I think what they’re trying to avoid, is people being able to manipulate the system, which is reasonable. Any future benefit, such as 50% or double points could be significantly manipulated. For example, if the Dees v Dons game just gets tacked onto the very end of the season, then whoever is leading SC at that time would have an extreme advantage.
The fairest system would be to cancel R3 scores, however if we end up having games across different 4-5 rounds postponed, then this gets messy as well.
That’s the thanks I get for 6 zeros and a overall rankings plummet?
Changing my team name to The Dead team now.
Sorry if I’m in your league. Have zero interest in the SC game now.
I had 500+ points missing with the game called off, more when I was planning on taking Gawn captain as well add that too Dusty, Kelly, Whitfield, Rozee & Sturt being one of my 18 fair to say it was a far from enjoyable round, I would have preferred them to lock the Dons & Dees and just give us averages/projected but I get with why they didn’t. I was never a fan of the double point round that’s not AFL supercoach IMO.
Cop this on the chin & turn up this week & have another crack.
I lost out heaps too. The late announcement and my shift work meant I couldn’t adjust to the late changes.
I was happy to cop the best 18 even though I was at a disadvantage but with the double points it would make it back a little. Now there is no double points it’s a lose lose. 4 premos and 2 rookies, season over.
Seems a logical response to me. Would’ve been a bit ridiculous IMO if players got two scores in a round. You’d have got teams loaded up with Melb/Ess players and getting scores of 3000+ for the round.
I know some people with a heavy Melb/Ess premo line up got burnt by the weekends decision but i do feel this is the best decision to keep the rest of the SC season normalish. If double points was to have happened the shape of the season would’ve shifted dramatically and we’d all have been trying to load up with Melb/Ess premos to get the big sugar hit of points. It’d have completely shifted the goal posts.
I also like that they’ve made it clear that if it happens again they’ll do the same thing so we all know where we stand. We’ve all got the potential to be burnt in the same manner.
I feel that those canning the decision, saying they’ve lost interest, etc… are looking too much at their own team’s scoring and not at the whole picture. The match didn’t happen so getting scores for the match would’ve opened themselves up for a whole different set of people criticising them.
Exactly. Now I can reverse trades and bring in Fyfe for Dunkley instead of Oliver
RB, as you say, everyone could load up on dees/dons players if they were getting two games in around. And, EVERYONE could have that choice. I and others had NO choice but to have 6 onfield donuts R3, and NO choice but to lose 10/10 leagues, and NO chance to get those 4 pts back in a shortened season.
I think you made some good points above Wighty. Like they said above, they were on a hiding to nothing at SC HQ. They couldn’t please everyone, no matter what decision they made. Of the range of options that i had i feel that i’d have likely made the same one that SC HQ made if i were in the same boat. You (and others) clearly would’ve gone a different approach. Neither is right and neither is wrong. Just hope too many people don’t give up the ghost on their SC season no matter how bad they copped it on the weekend.
Wighty, with Top 18 scores only, did you only cop 2 of those donuts instead of all 6?
Jeannot below explains it beautifully RIYP. Being forced to keep Whitfield and Sturt scores was just as much a part of the problem.
The likes of Ridley, McGrath, Oliver, Gawn, D Smith, Bennell, all of whom I have, would have stepped into the breech nicely as part of my best 18, but they weren’t available to me !!
Yep. I had Gawn, Smith, Bennell and Rivers all sitting out the round. I lost my LOEC3 league game because I had Gawn and my opponent had Ceglar. Oh well. Bad luck.
Wighty, I am not actually trying to convince you that this is fair or even the best decision from SC. I don’t think it was. But, the decision is made and is not going to be overturned. You must know that. So for your own sake I hope you can Let it go and continue to play the game. Maybe overall is now out of the question but surely there is still some challenge/fun to be had?
You still have 10 possible league premierships you can win. Good luck.
Spot on Wighty!
Not having the choice is indeed the injustice.
Roo Bloke, many of us who had 5+ Melb and Essendon players (including 3 premos) scored around 1600 points when the average was 2000 ish; that’s 400points to catch up on. Bcoz of no fault of our own, we held Dusty and we couldn’t field 18 players. When many no owners could benefit from getting rid of Whitfield’8 and few low scores for a best 18.
How is that fair?
SC has decided, we accept it. It doesn’t make it fair. Do not try to justify it.
Unfortunately when the news broke that the game was cancelled many had already used trades and/or the emergencies had already been locked out.
Double kick in the groin
Average was more like 1800-1850
… as with many things in life the most disenchanted with a situation are often the most vocal whilst those that are laissez faire or accepting of something are quite likely to comment less, vocalise less and show support less. It’s a human nature thing. Whilst there’s people voicing concerns and frustrations at this decision please be aware there’s likely a whole heap of people that have either accepted it on the chin, rolled with the punches or actually agree with the decision.
Namaste.
hahaha….. often say that i’m a lover not a fighter.
Two thumbs down for this comment and thumb down for praising the Salamander for taking over the SCT Cup …. hmmm …. i’ve obviously stepped on a few toes by representing the alternate view today.
Tough crowd some days!
Gee, you got 4 thumbs down for that. Tough crowd indeed.
True, I had 6 mel/essendon players and dunkley, whitfield, sturt, cameron, suffice to say round 3 was less than optimal for me but I knew when this season started that supercoach and the AFL more broadly was going to be heavily affected by Covid.
Supercoach is part skill part luck, this season just dials up the luck more.
My only major complaint would be they could have mentioned the rules before round 2 commenced
Why didn’t they make it, if Gawn gets 120 one game then 140 the next. Highest score of 140 is counted for the head to head round only. But the total score of 260 is added to your overall ranking.
Does that seem more fair?
I’ve tried to defend how the SC guys have dealt with this situation so far, but this is very disappointing.
Both games should have counted, and the sticky issue (players loading up on Ess/Melb after last round) should have been dealt with by differentiating between those that had the Ess/Melb player when they were meant to play (they get both scores) and those that picked them up later (they don’t get the Ess/Melb game score). I’m not aware of any programming issues that prevent this approach, but it seems like the fairest way out of a messy problem – and there may be more instances of this yet.
Because DT got there first !!!
Why didn’t they just use players averages…
I believe this was for three reasons –
1 – averages are real, pre-determined scores, which isn’t ‘fantasy’ football;
2 – people could just lock in a 139 Captain score from Gawn, and;
3 – averages and/or projected are wildly skewed after two games, such as Viney (136 avg) and Shiel (129).
Not saying this approach is right/wrong, but just what I’ve heard from Twitter.
Not if the decision was made after the round like DT did.
This is a good point Wighty. I guess SCHQ were eager to get news out on Saturday, and had already committed to Best 18, so didn’t want to backflip on that decision.
It’s also not future proof. For example, if the Bris/Adel game on Sunday gets postponed, and the precedent for awarding averages has been set, then people could bring in Neale and captain him.
They could ‘lock’ players in postponed games, but this assumes the have prior knowledge that a game is going to be postponed. It would also disallow people from trading out a player that they may have already planned on.
Ultimately, a ton of people are being disadvantaged, but no one is gaining anything or able to cheat the system. Maintaining this integrity would be paramount at SCHQ, I imagine. If someone misses the 50K due to bad luck, then its just that – bad luck. However if someone gains an unfair advantage to win the 50K, that’s a problem.
Bugger. Like most I was hoping I’d get both scores.
Oh well, at least now we know. That means we can start planning.
On a brighter note, this makes my life easier when it comes to running the SCT Cup – I was wondering what I would have to do to ensure fairness if one team had players playing twice in a round.
I’ll say it MANY times across the season but here’s my first. A MASSIVE thanks to you for taking over the SCT Cup. It’d had got to big for me to fit into my life. It was taking 5 hours per week to do (and more in the first few rounds), 5 hours i just didn’t have anymore so i super appreciate that you took this massive job on. It’d have been a shame for it to have disappeared so again, thank you.
Not at all – glad to step up!
I was in position to make the cup till that carnage last week.
*sigh
Same here mutley.
Like most I had 4 Dees -1 Bomber,
Whitfield and Sturt, argh what a mess, but trying to be Upbeat as you carnt do much about it, I still scored nearly 2000 points.
Went from 24000 to 13000,
So I’m determined to quietly maintain my rage, and still have a crack at winning this bloody thing,
Probably got Buckley’s chance but I’m going down fighting.
Going to be tricky without having those bye rounds to launch up the ranking but you’re still in with a show to finish very high up, I went from 2000 to 22000 so I’m pretty cooked.
What a load of nut jobs who think they are qualified to make these decisions.. this is beyond embarrassing for SC. I hope SCHQ take a good hard look at themselves because next time one of them are short changed with something/anything, I hope they get the response “That’s unfortunate”. Such a joke.
I think we need another poll !!
Just to be clear, if in a round that dons/dees play twice, only the best score will apply ?? So the pts lost in r3 really will be lost ??
Schizenhaus. Player injuries, selections, resting players etc…
SCHQ…its no disgrace to say that DT got it right first. Just give the average scores up to R2 and I dont think there will be too many complaints.
Best score for their DWG counts. Two bites at the cherry, particularly Gawn against Bellchambers with the C on him.
I, like many, would be annoyed if they now changed and used average scores as the players didn’t actually play a game. Whilst i’d love to have got Viney’s points on the weekend, he didn’t play so i shouldn’t get them.
Let’s agree to disagree on this one maybe??
If you cant make it fair with what you’v got then Scratch the round, shouldn’t advantage or disadvantage ANY ONE.
Okay you don’t want to scratch the round, understandable, give the appropriate compensation for people disadvantaged, don’t come out and say “Bad luck, you guys just miss a round’s points”.
That is Joke material.
I am ok with them capping it to best 18, and majority of cases it would have been ok, but they probably should have included the bench scores as players were locked by this stage and people just couldn’t get their scores include which is probably the most unfair aspect of the situation.
With the ownership of Petracca (19%), Gawn (25%), Viney (18%) – most teams would have had 1 or 2 premiums missing which the top 18 was suppose to cater for. There were of course small percentage of players (and the ones being very vocal about the situation) who would have owned all 3 and when you take into account DSmith and rookies, fell short on field (which bench players would have alleviated for some).
The issue with giving averages to the 3 above, would be the small percentage of players would have been given a significant advantage over the rest of the population.
Petracca , Viney and Gawn are averaging a combined 80 points than their previous best years and there is probably even be a diehard Essendon fan out there that also had Shiel/McGrath and is looking at 150 additional points than history should suggest.
The thing with fantasy football is there is no idea what players will score until after the game. There is injuries, tags, position switches and just generally having a bad games and 2 games is a very small sample size to be giving an average score.
Rather than giving a small portion of their player base a small advantage and outraging majority, they have given a small portion the raw end of the stick.
I definitely think it could have been handled slightly better, but they haven’t missed the mark by that much.
Its not that simple. By doing what they did in the MIDDLE of the round, they significantly advantaged many and disadvantaged many.
What of those players that had to make a decision early to trade a player out – they had a choice of Cameron into Forward or Pittonet as a non playing ruck? Many would have gone Cameron on the basis of no point paying an extra $100K and not getting the points etc BUT, if they’d known this was a likely outcome, I know what choice I would have made… those that didn’t, all of a sudden hear the outcome and go bang – pittonet comes in and scores 137 … the same with the ability to bring in the Fyfe’s Neal’s etc of the world – two players you’re looking at a potential 300 point turnaround over everyone else … I watched this happen in many of my leagues … there was many that significantly advantaged by bringing in Pittonet and Fyfe / Neale types, that others could not
Fundamentally the concept and outcome should be and should have been FAIR TO ALL. The ONLY scenario that covered that, in those circumstances (making the announcement mid round after 4 + games locked out) is to treat the round as if it did not occur – at least in SC scoring sense. Reset players and prices to round 2 position and then EVERYONE is on the same playing field … you get the advantage of seeing how some players played in real life (might make you choose to bring in a T Brown instead of ?definitely now, S Sturt etc) – but at least that way there is no fundamental biased winner or loser. AND this is not under the banner of LUCK … this is a fundamental shift that they have made that impacts just about everyone … many for the worse.
You can make any argument you want … there is only one situation FAIR TO ALL in these circumstances – different matter, if as it is now, its known this is how it would be treated before play started or a round started.
The race for OA is now significantly tainted and biased – I’m sure some legal expert out there could make a case on that basis … imagine if the end of year result is that close – someone that misses out may well have a legitimate argument that they have been unfairly treated in this outcome.
Sadly I am over it and over this season. Good luck to all that benefitted an continue on, and good luck to all that got screwed but still continue .. my hat off to you … but for me, its something I cannot stomach. I’m an accountant by trade … I’m bound by a code of ethics … and this is not an ethical outcome.
You might like to have a look at my “final” comments below, after research on R3 top 10 scorers. One of them played for the first time and had no dons/dees onfield..obviously got his team up after the news broke. Thats fair !! Good try at the weekly prize. Another rose 90k spots !!!
EXACTLY WHAT I SAID IN A PREVIOUS THREAD.
Geez suck it up. It’s a game that requires more luck then winning powerball.
So if the comments abound are just sad. Adapt and overcome, sooking won’t help you!
Says a bloke who had a great round 3 hence no frustration. Easy to say “it’s only a game” when your horse wins and your mate has 6 scratches at the barriers. Never a winning chance. To many disadvantaged for the rest of the season. Not only once. But twice now there’s no double. Round. No guarantee you’ll be able to hold the players you have to currently to benefit from the double chance that really isn’t a plus at all. Not even close it’s actually another disadvantage. So get shat on twice and told by the bosses to suck it up and cop it. Disgraceful to fuck over all the loyal players who put in a lot of time (some money) into their teams have to play out the year knowing they didn’t get an even playing field. Like riding in the Tour De France when the 25% of the field is allowed performance enhancing and you have to ride a bike with a busted wheel and a 20kg backpack
No great round here. I had Gawn, Petracca, Smith Bennel and Kelly and Dusty out last week.
I just know the complaining and blaming the world doesn’t help you. No predicted that would happen, it wasn’t 100% fair. But hey that’s life.
It also wasn’t fair that Whitfield got knocked out in the first qrt. Sucks to be me again.
My point is, this is a game of chance and it isn’t fair, if everybody did great all the time, it would be boring.
A bunch of adult children crying over spilt milk.
I was pretty disappointed over the weekend. It’s not that I haven’t accepted the decision, I have and I’ve got no hope of a respectful position in overall. I haven’t got involved in any competitive leagues this season and just can’t find an avenue to get myself involved. I didn’t even look at my team on Sunday or move the captain off gawn. My rookies were already locked out. Traded in petracca and rivers!
Had dusty, Kelly, Whitfield, gawn, petracca, viney, rivers, McGrath, Smith, Townsend.
I’ve got a keeper team on ultimate footy and that’s all I really care for this season now.
This is my final offering (at least until the next one !!!) about this.
I had a look at the top ten SC team scores R3. Between them, they had 22 dons/dees players…2.2 per team. However of these 22, the winner only had dons Mcbride. Another team had MaQuillan, Hird, McBride. The best player anyone had was D Smith, and he only appeared four times out of ten.
The winner scored 2293, well below what could normally be expected. My team had been coming along well (was ranked about 6000 with a bullet) and I was ranked higher than the now leader.
The leader rose 40632 spots, and I fell 29030 thanks to having 7 dees/dons versus 1 for the leader. The average of the top 10 rose 48063 spots, with a biggest move of 91078 !!! The average is worked out on nine teams as one team made its first appearance, and you guessed it, this team selected no onfield dons/dees !! Wonder how many other times that happened.
The conclusion is sooooooooo obvious, as is the unfairness of the SCHQ decision to fix it !! I dont need to elaborate…do I ?
Wighty, are you aware that it is now Round 4?
yep, and left to its own devices, my team is going well !!
2280 this week. The 550 lost from last week would have me top 100 now.
Probably not. It wasn’t just you Wighty. Everyone would have scored more points last week. Swings and roundabouts, but good to see you have moved on.
Yes, RIYP I get that others would have had players too. Many hopelessly disadvantaged but I think I might have taken the cake.
Moved on as you say…..shy little grin as I look at all the carnage that many SCers will be dealing with this week…I have avoided the lot.
SC karma.
Top 100?.?.?.? I think you would be in “everyones Top 10” for one reason or another, at the moment Wighty…..LOL
Whatever decision they made would have impact people differently- some better some worse. In hindsight – SCHQ- should have provided the rules of how they would act under the circumstances of a game being deferred – they had a number of weeks to determine this. In that way coaches would have diversified their premium risk across teams.
We know now how they will act. I am assuming coaches are now looking to remove any single team biases.
It is likely to occur again. If you are super long a team – the risk is that you will be caught out.
harden up potty mouths
that’s fantasy footy
A classy response….not. We all give our views, strongly at times, but always with respect…unlike that comment.
Wighty’s right. I rose 30,000 ranking places last week. Only missed out on Olivers score.
The sound of sense and sensibility, and comes from someone who got a big advantage.
Footy is Back who cares. Best 18 is the fairest way. 50% happy 40% not happy, 10% don’t care.
It’s one week out of a season. Now I don’t go into the season with plans on winning the whole thing,WHAT ARE THE ODDS. I’m in it for the leagues, won 4 out of 10 last week. Still have chance of making finals.
Stop your whining and just appreciate the footy is back on and you can support your team.
It’s just a game.
CMON THE PIES.