The AFL has today confirmed that Essendon defender Connor McKenna has tested positive for COVID-19.
Tomorrow’s Essendon vs Melbourne game has been postponed until further notice. Tomorrow’s other two games will go ahead, albeit in new timeslots:
- Gold Coast v Adelaide will be played at 3.05 pm.
- Port Adelaide v Fremantle will be played at 8.00 pm.
All other matches will go ahead as scheduled.
Nothing has been said about how this will impact Round 4, so assume that everything will go ahead as normal there until we hear otherwise.
UPDATE: Gillon McLachlan has confirmed that not only will the Essendon vs Melbourne game not be played later this week, it also won’t be played during the current 4-week block of matches, meaning that it won’t happen until at least after Round 5, or early-to-mid-July.
There are also question marks over whether or not next week’s Essendon vs Carlton match will take place as scheduled; things should become clearer in the coming days.
SuperCoach HQ has also clarified the scoring situation for this round, with bye-round-style best-18 scoring to be used for Round 3.
Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom
263 thoughts on “AFL Announcement”
Guessing everyone with C on Gawn should find a replacement then?
I was going to go Rowell into Gawn.
But I might have to go Neale into Rowell.
All my other Captain options have played
Wtf happens with sc??
Not sure yet. Will update the post as soon as we hear anything.
The entire reason the AFL decided to go with 15min quarters is so they could play more games with shorter turnarounds. Surely they’re going to mass test everyone involve and then play the game mid-week? It could be done.
That would depend on the test results, if they get more positives it really puts a cat amongst the pigeons
You can’t take it that simply. The virus has a known 7-10 day incubation period … to play mid week, after a player has tested positive and taken part in all training sessions would be extremely folly … surely. There would have to be some serious question marks over all the Bombers.
I’m looking at 2 donuts in the middle if they still count this as a round. ?????
They won’t, the drop out rate would be huge.
Don’t panic everyone, there will be some sort of contingency put in place. This wasn’t an unexpected situation.
I’m trying to think of a fair way to sort it out, maybe give the points the player is priced to average?
If they give donuts, will there be a week later in the season where they get 2 games in a week and you get points from both games?
Best-18 scoring (like the bye rounds) would be another option.
best 18 wouldn’t be fair, brang in trac over sympkin means one less premo out there
If you have 18 scoring
Ridley, mcgrath, smith, gawn, oliver rivers.
I forgot late recruit Bennell….3.30 Saturday 🙁
Surely the SC round is listed as incomplete, then completed once all games for the round are played, whenever that is. Would be totally unfair to get donuts for games not yet played.
That would be fair from a scoring perspective, however unfair from price changes perspective which has a knock on effect on trades.
Doughnut up fwd =[
Might have to rethink my plan of getting rid of all GWS players
Either the round is scrapped or the players from that game get season average or projected scores. I don’t see any other options that allow for the variation in the number of players from that game that different Supercoach teams have.
I’m being a negative nancy, but this season is pretty cooked with short quarters and delayed games. It will be difficult to find a fair outcome for SC.
I wonder if I can still use Zerk Thatcher as a loophole. He wasn’t named, but now the game doesn’t go through it raises more questions
Can i use Rivers or Bennell as (C) loophole?
I wouldnt risk it, as they might just use their averages for this week’s scores
So it’s safe to use Gawn then?
That’s what I am unsure with. It would be a great captain choice, but it is a wait and see thing. They could also do nothing or treat it as a bye round.
Currently got the VC on Grundy, my only other options are Cripps or Dangerfield. I’m leaning towards Cripps if Grundy doesn’t hit 120
I’ve got gawn, petracca, viney, rivers, McGrath, Smith and Townsend on ground.
If it ends up being angled against me too much for supercoach with whatever they decide to do I’m more than likely not going to bother with it this season. I already picked a team with byes in mind.
And I don’t get to watch the bombers play which is a downer.
So unfortunate for everyone involved that this has occurred already
Yeah it sucks CJ, I’m in the same boat. 7 out for the round plus the loophole options.
Best 18 scoring this round everyone
is that on field or best in entire squad?? Taking players off field and playing “less likely scorers etc … what about if you can’t even field 18???
It’s the same situation as the byes. Best 18 onfield scores, ie if you have a non-playing player onfield but a relevant emergency, then the E can be included among the best 18.
Well that’s screwed me. All my opponents have Whitfield, and I brought in Gawn this week. 🙁
I have whitfield but also 7 bombers/dees. Will only have 17 scoring, one of which is whitfield. Sucks.
its still a completely unfair situation to many people … many people may also have held players like Dusty, Kelly, McInerney etc and or traded out some players that they wouldn’t normally have – look at CJ84 above, he wont field 18 … if he’d known in advance he may have been able to trade some demons etc to get 18 … at least the byes are known in advance and you can plan for them … this is not that situation. Others may benefit the other way if held trades and bring in key players that will score well …
Its a poor and unfair decision on many and impacts not just this round but possibly other if trades used that would not normally have been used etc …
I’ve sent similar to the SC site … doubt it gets anything, but hopefully others can respond as well and they can just exclude this round … that’s the fairest for all.
This isn’t aimed to you Chillo – just making the comments. They will lose me for this year if this stands … i’ll scrape 18 on field, but it will be ugly …
so who down voted?? Say why please.
I didn’t downvote Macca, but I don’t see a better alternative to best 18. You can’t give players arbitrary scores that they didn’t actually get, and scrapping the round altogether isn’t really fair either. This is the best of a bunch of bad options.
I’ve got 6 players from that game that won’t be playing this weekend, so I’ve got as much right to complain as anyone. But I won’t. It’s just a game based on a game, after all.
The best option is to exclude the round completely … it’s more than the best 18 … it’s trades made or not made … its the so called ‘benefit’ when double (will it really) as others can trade in then …
To compare to a bye round is incorrect as you can plan for that … this is mid round and significantly disadvantages many …
I get the bare 19 (before tomorrows matches mind you!!) which includes Whits 8 – so that’s my only exclusion … if I’d known best 18 I wouldn’t have brought Cameron in with last trade – I would have brought in a gun etc … and so on …
Just finished long letter to SC…..wish I could cut and paste it here.
Agreed Macca. The planning is a big part. Swings & roundabouts do not apply in this case. Those who are disadvantaged this round will not get to enjoy an advantage when the catch up game is played because other coaches will trade in Melb & Ess players prior to the round to also benefit.
With you. Macca. Ill effectively have 16 onfield with whitfield having to be counted. Reckon only fair way is to allow all playing emergencies to be used in best 18.
I thought the E doesn’t count for bye rounds? The E question is not clear on the HS announcement. Please help
It def does Steven…..I think it comes up on your team page when you login.
Awesome thank you. Cos I was playing the sub with starcevich on the bench and want to swap Zerk with Dodeee and take the Starc points instead
My guess/hope is it’s your entire squad.
Only got 16 on field at the moment
My concern as well Macca.
Looking as it needs to be best 18 IMO.
Playing emergencies will replace non playing and be included in scoring.
How this round’s scoring will work:
Got 26 trades left, tempted to do Oliver to Fyfe to avoid a donut
Best 18 doesn’t help me I still get donuts. I know it’s not ideal but you can’t change a round that much half way through it. I’ve setup rookies to loop. I’m completely disadvantaged and already used trades. I could lost 500 points easily this round now
just made that point above mate and mentioned your situation …
Cheers macca, I can still see myself playing. I only play for overall and I’m really in trouble this round.
I’m probably just a bit salty
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.
Not quite, because everyone else can now load up on them, cancelling that out.
This is some bullshit.
which is a ridiculous statement to make – it doesn’t … people will lose out on any trades they’ve just made that they wouldn’t have … or those players could have been removed if people had known … and so on … it disadvantages many … and some may be given a huge advantage if they haven’t traded yet they can bring in some big scorers … it’s completely unfair … people need to write into them and complain … go to the help section and contact us and send something in folks …
Exactly Macca. The fairer thing to do is to scrap the round. Some of us wasted our trade bringing Gawn to captain. Have we known, we wouldn’t have wasted our trade or have brought in one or 2 different players. For that I am pissed off, because I will be obliged to take the score of Pickett, Long, Brander, King, Taylor, Starcevitch, T.Brown, Sturt, to crap in 17.
Looks like a special season this year and the last man/woman standing will probably win.
Having said that, I am just glad SC is not cancelled altogether.
On the bright side, you’ll likely get an extra game out of Gawn et. al. during a later round, so it’s not all bad news.
So will everyone else
perspective guys…ffs.. people are still dying with covid 19…in case you missed it SC is just a game…life isn’t…enjoy every minute you have and stay safe
People are just blowin’ off some steam, relax. Think the footy and SC have been a welcome release for people after a couple of tough months. Take it easy on em’.
Could’nt agree more. No one loves footy more than me but we should of had a year off.
agree on this
Things would have been sooooo much easier if it was the Thursday game………
I guess it will be bad luck for some only won’t it?
I couldn’t be happier. I will field 21, I’ll get rid of Whitfield’s 8 and most likely Taylor’s 44 and Pickett’s 50.
I suspect I’ll shoot up the rankings, but then in that double game round the people that have lots of these players will benefit. Imagine having Gawn skipper that week! Many won’t be able to trade him in….
the point though is, many will do that specifically for that reason … it’s an extremely flawed outcome … and severely disadvantages many chasing overall… and, as you indicate, may benefit people like yourself. … you can’t compare it to a bye round, as you can plan for that … this is in the middle of a round where people have made decisions that they wouldn’t have otherwise made
eg traded in Cameron for his 28 to get an extra player … which now you cant exclude … it goes on
Yeah, but I like many made their trades before this decision was made. So it’s just luck. Good for some, bad for others.
Just like if a player goes down early in a game and scores 8. If you have him it’s a disaster, if not you’re happy. It can’t be helped which side of the coin you landed on!
I’m ok with it, except the Gawn/Goldy thing…That hurts the most.
The problem is it’s not one or two mistakes you have to peg back, It’s completely season ruining for a lot of people and heaps of leagues will be running ghost ships now(and no one will blame people for bowing out).
Not blaming SC, the afl should just be cancelled. I’m not bitter but it seems this stuff will keep happening.
(I’m fielding 21 btw)
It’s a tough one TOF: I think the season is so compromised that it is unfair to award a premiership, especially if a few players are diagnosed with COVID and further disrupt the team’s prep. However they need to play for cash flow reasons and it is nice for us to have some sport to watch.
I think it is simply going to be remembered as an all round shit year!
I’m not sure what would eventuate from this idea or how to properly implement it, but i think all melb and ess players should cost double to trade in.
So now you can keep them with bench cover and get the double score. Or trade them out but not get them back in again.
Every game they miss their score multiplies by 100% then 50% then 25% to make up for the scores the Players covering them scored.
Too complicated lol?
Yep, too complicated!
Feilding 20, but no Gawn , Oliver, Dev smith plus townsend and rivers not sure what I think yet!
Oh to be so lucky……I’ll raise you a Mcgrath Ridley and Bennell.
Won’t be double points I would think melb vs ess game points just won’t count
I think the fairest thing to do Is give unlimited trades so people can fix there team then it’s fair for those who’s premium players are dropping out of there total score and people that have disadvantaged by captaining Gawn can maybe move to gat a Fyfe for a captain score
Thats fine IF you still have quality premiums playing today. Which a lot wont. Stuck with a C on Gawn and mediocre VC on another player from yesterday before this hit the fan. I arrived home last night to find opponents in leagues with the heads up rearrange their squads. I feel like spitting the dummy. So much research into this year has been taken out of my control.
Surely rules must not change mid round.
How is best 18 fair ?The decision has been made to quick.Lose a game and say it’s the same for everyone !Same for everyone is to go back to the end of Round 2 ,reverse trades ,update increases or decreases and start again in round 4!
Cancel this round, reset everyone to rd 2 teams, ignore the dons dees game when it happens.
Correct Wighty, cancel the round. That way no one is unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged. As Macca said, the danger is people will lose interest and drop out.
you guys need to write to the contact us section under the help icon on the SC site and express your views … it’s the only way anything has a chance of happening. I’ve done so and demanded my SC Gold be refunded …
Either I can’t find the contact us option or they have removed it lol
It is there….I wrote this morning…its on the home page on the right side with all their goobly gook is a “contact” option.
I love this game and we all get passionate (Upset) about things that go against us like late outs, concussions, or role changes etc. But FFS let’s not lose perspective. I hope Conor and everyone else is ok and safe. We all Knew that a player testing positive would impact the AFL fixture and consequentially SC. There is no perfect solution for SC but top 18 is as reasonable as anything. Stop whinging. Get a grip. Play the game or don’t.
Thanks ranceinyapants but it’s about integrity, any sport you play is a game and a game has to have integrity, Furthermore there is a cash prize for this game so some some may take it more seriously than others, completely understand what McKenna is going through (I’m a bombers supporter) but that doesn’t mean you lose the games fairness along the way and make a drastic and decision that prepares you to fail as opposed to epuipping someone to win fairly.
I wrote a formal complaint expressing my dissatisfaction for the decision made mid round, I also asked for my SC gold to be refunded in full.
If any are struggling to find the contact us page here is the link;
With you. Macca. Ill effectively have 16 onfield with whitfield having to be counted. Reckon only fair way is to allow all playing emergencies to be used in best 18.
Top 18 is reasonable if you know in advance. Look at the various scenarios mentioned here. Some with several donuts, others fielding 20+……some still with trades to remove dons/dees players, Gawn/Oliver set as c, some forced to take whitfield scire, others not even though both started him. And on it goes.
Scrapping the round is the only way to maintain integrity at all. And when they play, next dons/dees gane doesnt count.
Imagine if someone loses OA by a whisker and was forced to take whit score….same with the cash leagues.
Abandon the round is surely the right move.
After a sleep on it, gotta agree with ya Wighty.
Rd 3 has to be voided.
Just hope none of “our” Dees and Bombers get injured or suspended in the catch up game. (Not counting of course)
My team is currently in the same boat as Macca.
22 scoring players to choose from including Whitfield and other lows, and ess and dees premiums I cannot coz I benched ‘em.
Guys I do get what you are saying. Top 18 declared mid-round does change the playing field and isn’t fair. Just like it didn’t seem fair that Whitfield copped an early knock and score an 8. But we Know it can happen and so accept it as part of the game. We haven’t been faced with a situation like this before. So I am choosing to treat this as just another chaotic curve ball from the SC gods. Yes there is money involved. There still is. It is a game of choices, circumstances and heaps of luck. This whole situation is circumstances and luck. This could happen again anytime and impact coaches either positively or negatively. This is the new norm for the game in 2020. This is last comment from me on the topic. I know those who feel aggrieved will not be dissuaded. It is your choice. Accept it and move on or not. Good luck all.
Sorry RIYP but it’s not the same. If it happens on the footy field, then it’s random. So be it. This is a deliberate decision made by the organiser of the game, changing the rules mid way through the round. It is not random. The only fair decision is to void the round. No points, no player price changes.
Why is that fairer ?
I was having a great week after a terrible round last week. I’m still likely to increase my rank.
Why should I be disadvantaged due to the cancelation of just one game ?
I also have players due to increase in value dramatically.
How is it fair to just pretend they didn’t play and keep their value the same ?
You really think we should start R4 with no price increases ?? REALLY ??
Now, guys I know it’s not perfect, but honestly dealing with this Mid round ??
I really think they have made the best choice given the options.
The show must go on.
Wouldn’t voiding the round also be a deliberate decision? By your own argument that would also be unfair but with much more impact. Love the passion but it is not logical or fairer to suggest the entire round is void. Might as well shutdown SC now if that is the rule because this is very likely to happen again.
Ugh, going to have to field only 16, got 4 rookies on the bench that have already played.
Had 6 melb/bomber players.
I view this season more like a lottery, if it finishes, who has the least corona donuts will win.
I suspect the season will get cancelled eventually.
I have 7 Demons & Bombers. My SC season just ended. Fielding 17 including Whitfield.
Not complaining about Whitfield as that is part of game. But I am jealous of coaches who do not have many Dees & Dons as they don’t suffer from Whitfield injury.
what do people think this means from the announcement
“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.”
When the missing game is played it will go to your overall score?
Only problem, teams without Ess or Dee players will trade them in to get the double points during that round. Completely not fair.
My team is facing a lot of donuts this round.
Round 2 should just not be counted. Would make it fair on all teams.
I’m putting the cue away for this season.
See you all in 2021. Hopefully the crowds are back!
It wouldn’t be fair on all teams. Some are having a good round and wouldn’t want it cancelled. There is no solution that would be fair on all teams. I’ll be sticking it out as it is just a game.
you made his point for him David – excluding the round IS fair on everyone – the current decision is NOT fair for everyone … that is the very definition of being FAIR to ALL!
I just don’t get it ????
How is cancelling the round fair to everybody ??
How can eight games just not count ??
All because ONE game is postponed ??
I get a lot of peeps traded early and IF they had of known things could of been different.
Guess what. Nobody new. This happened Mid Round.
There is no playbook for this.
Say its Racing..
Should we cancel all the other races because race seven was cancelled. Should we return all the other bets ??
Say you won on race one.
Should you have to give back that cash, because the race six races later was cancelled ?
I just don’t understand the logic ??
We get it TF. You’re having a good round. You don’t want to loose your points. Cos that makes it fair on everyone.
It seems like it, and already with 7 dees/dons, I’m happy if so given this weeks’ chaos. Loading up too much would impact on other rounds around the double up.
Geez I’m getting wound up…best I go to church now !!
They could have just used average or projected scores and blocked trades for Essendon and Melbourne players if they wanted to avoid anyone taking advantage of knowing what they would score in advance. Another imperfect solution but probably fairer all round.
I only mention this cause my day job is a software engineer, I do wonder how much the decision was influence by the ability for their computer system to implement the decision.
They had the bye system already in place.
Obviously as players of supercoach, that’s not our problem to deal with.
Well said GP
Going with the “Bye” set up of best 18 players is probably the only fair solution given the game was cancelled mid round.
If we we had known prior to the start of the round , they could have allocated extra trades or found another solution.
There really is no way we can scrap a full round when its half way through. The show must go on !
Price changes need to happen so we can move onto R4.
No Whitfield, meant I had a fair advantage over a lot of teams in my leagues.
Nearly all my opponents are now most likely able to ditch his 8 from their score lines. After my dismal showing last week I was actually looking ok this week considering I kept/ benched Dusty and Jelly.
I guess I shouldn’t complain as I know guy’s like Wighty are eating donuts.
Hopefully they will get something back when the game is eventually played.
For those thinking its unfair as people get to trade in extra Don’s or Demons that week.
I say we all only get two trades, and we all get to trade in extra players if we chose regardless of how many we already own.
Those that are top heavy in Melb and ESS players will still be advantaged that week.
Having said all that I will be moving heaven and earth to get in Max Gawn to Captain my side the week he plays twice !!
Somehow I’m still managing to have 19 warm bodies on field even after all the chaos. ( did I just type that! who the F#ck really knows this week!!! )
lets hope I can manage to drop Cameron’s 28 and post a half decent score.
I really need a few league wins after last week.
PS.. To all those who have been annoyed by this weeks Footy / Super Coach drama’s.
May I remind you all that we lost a great man in allsaints recently, and I’m sure he would be the first to remind us all that..
It’s just a Game people.. A game about a game,but a game none the less.
Great comments FT…especially the perspective at the end. Re the top heavy comment re Ess/Melb players later on, yes that is true. But, its not going to win me back the 7 of ten league games that I am sure I would have otherwise won this round. Thats effectively an 8pt play, and is why cancelling is the right move.
I understand you’re frustration Wighty.
I really do.
I just can’t see how you can ignore the results of eight other games. Why should we miss out on all those price rises due to the fact just one game was postponed.
Yes it sucks, but scrapping the whole round ?
maybe people should of prepared for any/all teams to not play at some point and spread there players out …seems some have to many players from 1 team
Possible Wazza…certainly an issue with bye rds, but otherwise, its pick the best team. I’m not sure which of Ridley, McGrath, D Smith I shouldn’t have in my team at this early stage of the year.
ROUND 3 – BEST 18 SCORING: With the postponement of the Essendon v Melbourne match, Best 18 scoring rules apply. Your team scores points from your Best 18 players (top 18 scores) selected in your Starting 22 only, from any position (including any Emergencies required).
Does this mean all our players with an E on them can be part of starting 22 regardless of what position they are covering. I stuffed up my Gawn ruck E for captain loophole and left it on Brown (80) and also have Pickett with E in mids. Very lucky I can now take Neale captain score as I Gawn won’t count.
I think they have to cover for a donut on their line.
So Picket and Tyler brown can only cover for midfield spots.
Hmm that does not seem fair for people who have a number of EssenDOM and Dees players. I only have Bennell in my mids from that game so its not a big deal for me as I have 21 players this round.
I can’t really comment if it’s fair or not cause I’m only fielding 16 players soooo I’m kinda biased. 😛
This round is being played under the same rules as a bye round.
Hope that helps some supercoaches out in terms of understanding what’s going on.
What happens if you haven’t put a E on the whole bench with all the players out today?
If you can move an E onto that line then it will trigger as per normal.
My bench has played already so won’t allow any E to be put on I had 1 selected but I require 2-3 to cover?
I’m in the same boat. I’ve got one emergency selected and two other players that have played on the bench that I can’t get on the field.
Just received a legal comment that because there is money involved in competition, the round should be voided.
Re Gambling laws
SC won’t fall under the definition of a gambling service, so that’s irrelevant.
So because I have Whitfield who scored 8 his score will most likely not be counted into my overall score as it is the best 18??
Yes I agree,
This round should be deleted .
There is so much disadvantage for some teams. We trade to the week for best advantage now for example I am screwed I won’t get 18 , but will be missing premium scores that are ave very high.
Unfortunately this makes me now lose interest in the season.
Ess and Melb game is not playing so it just makes sense to remove the whole round.
Unfortunately I think this may happen again ending the season.
SC is free to play and offers prize money. That is not gambling.
On certain Betting sites you can bet on SuperCoach points.
Round should be really cancelled. Unfair to many teams and punters.
Really why has gambling got to do with any of this ???
If you are stupid enough to bet on ANYTHING then you should know there is a fair chance your going to lose. Why should we cancel a round of SC because of you ??
Just because things don’t turn out the way you like, are you going to pack up and quit ?
SC is a game.
It costs NOTHING !
Other people Gambling on AFL should have no effect whats so ever on the game of Super Coach.
Really why would it !
I’m sure the people running the game, ( Super Coach ) are trying their level best to give the fairest outcome for the most people.
Really, why would they do otherwise ?
So take up any issue with the betting site. Nothing to do with SC. What happens if a horse is scratched from a race eh? Is the race abandoned because people might have bet on it? Or Is it up to the betting agent to have bets refunded? SC is free to play. Your zero cost will be refunded immediately. Play the game or don’t.
Did I mention I gamble on the game? No. Relax a little.
Never punted in my life.
I just prefer the game to be played fair.
You suggested cancelling the whole round. I think that is an overreaction. I am relaxed and saying let’s just get on with playing the SC game. Everyone crying foul and demanding the whole round is void are the ones who should try to find some perspective.
We play nine games a week. One was cancelled.
What so we scrap the whole round ?
We just forget about the other eight games and pretend that 16 x 22 players never even played this round.
Then we just forget about their price changes too ??
Have some perspective people .
So down voters.
What do you propose ?
its been said many times Freo – the only FAIR result to all is to scrap the round. If the decision was known before the round had started, then its fair game … if it was known this may be the outcome, then everyone had a chance to make a call …. the fact that four games had been played, affecting trades already made, impacted many – I myself would have made completely different trades had I known this would be the result – Pittonet for one would have come in as would have a premium like Fyfe or Gaff …
The current decision is not FAIR to ALL … there is only one scenario fair to all …
You’re missing the point Freo and Rance – if you are chasing OA – this single round will, depending on your circumstances, destroy those chances. If you have been disadvantaged by a ruling made mid round – note that point! – to the effect that you had already made trade choices and brought in low scoring rookies and left players sit like Dusty and Kelly, then you will lose substantial ground on players that are able to bring in the likes of Cripps, Fyfe, Piitonet etc – as they have / will score high – compared to say someone that brought in Cameron before the decisive was made – that is completely unfair
And the whole issue of ‘supposed benefiting later …’ is null and void, as you can bet those same players that get the advantage this week (as you yourself pointed out) will bring in Gawn and someone like Petracca (if still going well, or Smith etc)
And yes, its a game, but a lot of people put a lot of effort into this – they will be completely disillusioned by this outcome. The fairest TO ALL – is to reset the round and sides back to round 2 – reverse all trades and scores – no one loses anything and their systems can easily do this.
AND I note comments about losing Oli – you don’t have to remind me – I’d struck up a decent friendship with him and his loss hurts still and makes this whole season hard to stand for. One thing he was about was equality and fairness to all – this decision by the SC site is not that, as has been clearly articulated by many.
I get you point but…I’m really unsure how your way is fairer.
Surely cancelling 90% of the results this weekend due to 10% being postponed is not the fairest solution.
I totally realise if you are going for overall you maybe disadvantaged.I also realise that for any of us the actual chance of winning this thing is sooooooooooo slim as to be almost impossible.
Really if you just play SC for that oh so slim chance at $50K maybe you should just go buy a lotto ticket!
There really is no way it can be totally fair for everybody can it?
As for Teams being able to trade in Gawn or Petracca.
Those guys who already own them have the chance to trade in Zerrett / McGrath / Viney/ etc..for that week.
Its not like some people get more trades than others ?
I just can’t see how cancelling a whole round due to missing just one game can be fair?
Not only would we void this weeks league match ups but 90% of players this week would be denied a price increase.
Do you really want all you rookies to not increase in value this week , due to the fact that a select few were unable to play ?
I’m really perplexed at how cancelling a whole round is some how fairer than the current solution.
Yes – because its FAIR To ALL – we all start at the same point – no one is advantaged and no one is disadvantaged.
We all now know what may happen again … from here on its fair to all … right now, there will be people significantly advantaged in the chase for OA (not to mention cash leagues etc – and don’t forget, some of those leagues are cash for total points too) and some are significantly disadvantaged … there is only one scenario where there is no one receiving an advantage or disadvantage – again, this is made mid round – its different if known beforehand.
By resetting the position to the end of round 2 – its fair to all – noone wins or loses with trades, scores, price increases or decreases …
And lets not forget – there would have to be the very real possibility that Bombers will not be allowed to play next week either – the incubation period for the virus is known for 7-10 days – so playing before then, with no matter how many negative tests places other teams the bombers may contact in jeopardy too … not to mention enough scary thoughts about contacting the virus itself!
So what happens to those that have bombers players that miss another week or two? They are further disadvantaged by having to use trades to get scoring players in.
The concept should be FAIR TO ALL – right now, the current choice is not that. Yes, some may have had a good start, been advantaged by not trading early or by trading out Jelly and Dusty and getting players – but others are equally and generally more so disadvantaged by not being able to trade in … or having players without an E on them on the bench that could have helped the score etc …
Again – the concept should be FAIR TO ALL … right now it isn’t. Whether you’re advantaged or disadvantaged.
And I won’t listen to some of the arguments made above about “luck” with injuries etc of SC etc … its been argued well by a number of posters … this has occurred mid round … it fundamentally shifts the outcome outside of just plain luck. In a significant way …
I’m with Macca, and not just because my team suffers. I reckon THE most unfair thing is that people who were lucky enough to have trade/s in hand before the announcement, can get rid of dons/dees players and gain a huge advantage. Also, I believe the work I have done which led me to have 7 dees/dons has led to a further imbalance that is multiplied by having to take Whitfield’s score. I will be losing seven league games through no fault of my own, and conversely, there will be seven winners who will be winners through no additional skill on their part. Effectively 8 point turn arounds and absolutely critical in this shortened season.
Putting everyone back on the same footing is the only fair way for everyone. Yes there will be winners and losers, but if we ALL start r4 from an uncompromised position, what can be unfair about that ??
So we just forget about all those peeps that did well this week.
lets just scrap it because a few smart coaches held back trades incase of emergencies.
Or lets just scrap it because a few brazen coaches traded early and didn’t get to take advantage of the situation.
Oh why we’re at it lets throw the Baby out with the bath water…
This could have happened to any AFL team or teams, and therefore impacted any SC teams accordingly. Not predictable which I assume every reasonable person understands.
The unknown surprise is the mid round decision to use top 18 players and the score/team/trading consequences that we have to cop.
Can anyone honestly say how they would have selected their starting teams differently if SC had told us at the restart that top 18 would apply if this occurred?
In theory some will in hindsight say they would have tried not to have too many players from any given team but that is all guesswork. Really? Which players would you have picked or not picked? Remember when we picked our starting teams we were expecting byes anyway.
At the start of round 2 I think most would have accepted that top 18 would apply if a case like this happened. It would still suck but we would be crying bad luck, not that it is totally unfair. We would be saying “oh well. That is bad luck but we knew it could happen.
The rule is more fair and reasonable than cancelling a whole round. Would you honestly be suggesting that if this incident had worked in your favour. Would your so called logic and sense of fairness still be the same? It is called “sour grapes”.
It is round 3 in a crazy 2020 season. This will not be the last twist or surprise. If you don’t want to play an unpredictable game then you can choose not to continue this year. Otherwise, we are all in the same boat and can still enjoy what footy we have and play along in SC.
Yes I would argue the same – again if you cannot read, FAIR TO ALL.
When it restarted, people had five trades to change their initial plans and they left total trades the same – FAIR TO ALL.
People then chose the best value for money players – many traded in Petracca after his round 1 performance – they are disadvantaged (I dont have him) – many traded in Viney to free cash and so on … so by excluding this round, it is FAIR TO ALL … everyone gets to reset their decisions – some may not now bring in Petracca or Smith as they may have this week etc … and there is no advantage or disadvantage …
Further it is now known, moving forward, that this may be the outcome if it occurs again … people will now think and trade differently, choosing to possibly hold trades until later in rounds in case this occurs …
Let me guess … this outcome gives you a significant advantage doesn’t it Rance?? I may end up OK as a score … not great, maybe not totally bad as many are that won’t get 18 on field … but I argue, always, FAIR TO ALL.
edit – oh – you mention “starting teams” – yes it significantly changes how you go – when picking those with byes in mind, you spread your premos, without worrying about byes, you could afford lo load more premos from one club eg the three dogs etc … people did that when round 2 started and with the aid of 5 trades
It is about neutral for me Macca. I wasted a trade bringing in a demons player and another trade to avoid a donut. Already had Gawn and Dev Smith like many many others.
How can you say cancelling the round is “fair to ALL” when the ALL you refer to do not ALL agree?
That may be your opinion because it works out better for you but doesn’t make it so.
Here here Macca…especially the last para. My judicious selecting of dees/dons has hurt me when it should be an advantage. Def not ‘fair to all”.
Incorrect Rance – the decision currently benefits many and disadvantages many – thus it is not fair to all.
When all parties are neither advantaged or disadvantaged, it, by definition, has to be fair to all.
AND – it’s not better for me in the race for OA – I’m severely disadvantaged – I saw it in my leagues with the trades people were able to make late ie brought in Pittonet, Fyfe etc – its better for me than those that don’t even get 18 on the park … but again … its a very simple concept FAIR TO ALL … none benefit none disadvantaged … very very simple
How about a poll Macca.
What is the fairest/lessor of two evils in the event that a game is cancelled mid round.
TU apply Top 18 as per bye rounds
TD Void the entire round
I’m watching the footy now. Cheers
Rance – so much for “this is my last comment”made back after 10am …
Yes Macca. I happily admit you are right and I got that bit wrong. Hopefully we all capable of changing our minds occasionally. Footy and SC are passionate games. Whichever side of this argument you are on, we have that in common. Other than saying it would be my last comment I still stand by everything else. Cheers.
no worries mate!
I hear you Macca,
I know how much you care about SC, and I really appreciate how passionate you are.
You say cancelling the round is fair to all.
Before I go on, I must stress the fact I have not been hugely advantaged or disadvantaged by this situation. No Whitfield means I was set to win quite a few match ups. I have as much reason as any to want to scrap this round. I just don’t think its the right thing to do.
I had Short score 126 on Thursday night.
He is due for a great price rise.
What, lets scrap the round. His price doesn’t move.
T Brown scored 80 as a rookie. No what? lets forget about that. Lets just pretend it didn’t happen and keep his price the same.
I could go on and on…
Doesn’t sound too fair does it ?
I do agree with you on one thing.
This happened Mid round.
Everyone had the same knowledge.
You can’t get fairer than that!
We are all in the same boat here.
Surely scrapping the whole round does way more damage than it fixes.
your logic is too short sighted – what of those that traded earlier and chose to bring in rookies on the bubble eg Cameron that score nothing? or those that cannot trade now to bring in premos that will score well … they are stuck with low scores many not fielding 18 and they still have to trade those players out next week to try and come back … whilst the others ahead now, can trade even better for advantage,
The decision made mid round, by definition is not fair to all
by resetting, again, my point, no one gets an advantage and no one gets a disadvantage – I own brown … I lose out ,… but I neither get an advantage nor am disadvantaged …
Some leagues are set up with groups that have a pool of money to winners. That said supercoach has been compromised by a rule change unfairly affecting not all but some.
All those leagues would be entry free wouldn’t they Kym???
Nope….I’m commander in chief of a $100 buy in league. Had a good chance of going 3-0 but its gonna be 2-1 and motza of %.
Was tongue in cheek comment in response to SC format.
Ps please check your comp.
If I’m not there SC kicked me out coz of a late trade. (Frozen Input)
If Phil Hin wins let me know.
Money contributed by all entering, with a prize pool to winners Chameleon.
Thanks R, that bit didn’t get mentioned.
I’m guessing the gold pass cost has a different analysis too.
Gold Pass analysis still works.Unfortunately it can’t predict Covid-19 test results.
With the likelihood of the entire Essendon team being quarantined for 14 days. As per the usual Covid 19 protocol when coming into contact with an infected person.
What is the ramifications for SuperCoach let alone the whole AFL season. Do they continue playing and stockpile Essendon games or do they stop playing all games.
There are many massive consequences yet to be resolved.
I’m listening to the ABC Grandstand radio show. they’re saying the next Bombers game, which is against carlton, might get postponed as well.
Should’ve used average scores. Their reason for not doing that is people would load up on dees and bombers to maximise round 3 total
But, you’ll allow double points down the track when players will trade them in and do the exact same thing! We’re the SuperCoach rule makers on the piss yesterday ??
Whatever is decided will never please everyone, there is no easy solution. Just have to accept whatever is decided and move on. Cancelling the whole round wouldn’t be fair to those that were having a good round until now. I don’t have Whit but that advantage is gone since most will be able to remove his low score. It is just a game so I think a lot are overreacting. Go well all.
Totally agree DC
I also think the whole people will just trade in ESS and MELB players is over thought.
Everyone one of us only gets two trades the week before the “double game week”
This fact alone will mean anyone carrying extra Dons and ESS players this week should still be advantaged as long as they play the “double points” game sometime in the next few weeks.
If the game is not played for a month or more it will certainly dis advantage people with top heavy ESS / Dons teams.
The extra time will give people more of a chance to get in players like Max Gawn etc.
Either way, I see the out come as the lesser of two evils, as the alternative ( scrapping the round ) would of thrown up all sorts of problems. Mainly to do with league round match ups and price changes.
Surely this is the best way to go.
They wont play it before round 5, and in any event, it wont return the 4pts for this round that many who went heavy on dons/dees would be expecting.
Does it count emergency’s scores if you already have 18 on field.? Eg I have pittonett as the 19th player covering Gawn and t brown as the 20th covering Bennell, so do these players cancel out 2 lower scores ?
I agree they should just cancel this round, didn’t even know of the changes of best 18 until last nights games had already started. Have the c on Gawn still with no premiums to play , if had I known would have gone Neale
Emergencies will get triggered then the best 18 will be calculated.
So Pitts score will sub in for Gawn then it will get included into the final 18.
Same thing happened when Crows v Geelong was cancelled due to Phil Walsh stuff.
That game was cancelled prior to the round starting so people had all their trades and time to make decisions
Last time I promise.
Lets just say for arguments sake..
You downgraded Gawn to Pittonet before we knew this was all happening.
Lets also say for arguments sake, that you somehow managed to avoid owning Whitfield,Oliver,Viney, Petracca, D smith and Bennel.
Lets just say you had picked Simpkin, Neale etc instead.
Ah F#ck it
Your leading the round, There’s a fair chance of you in for
Then is it fair “TO ALL” that we cancel this round ??
Would we even be having this conversation ?
The defence rests .
yes – because its FAIR TO ALL!!! How simple can that not be?? No one benefits nor disadvantaged by the decision – that has to be fundamental to this game.
This is a decision that is made mid round, it fundamentally disadvantages many … and advantages many – i captained Neale, I lose that, I own Brown, I lose that … BUT its still fair!!! how hard is that to understand …
right now, they have made a decision, where everyone is not on a level playing field BEFORE the matches start … it fundamentally has impacted the outcomes, both ways … which is not fair to all
I argue the same both ways Freo – always!!! To go back to your Oli reference, he was all about that … it’s why he put so much effort into doing what he did … so those that didn’t have the time or access or whatever had the same chance, if they happened to be on this great site … to source help.
The defence rests!!
North’s will need to be quarantined as on same flight. This will include the teams north and bombers played last week and this week.
If they where to contact trace correctly.
Just wondering if my emergencies say for Harley Bennell and Devon Smith, with their points be counted as I had T Brown and M King and they scored decently. Also say an emergency scored 80, will that score be in the best team say over a on field player who only scored 30???
Hey Joel, answer is yes for both of your questions. Emergencies will count for any non-playing players on field as usual, and then best 18 scores after that.
Wish we knew best 18 earlier I’ve got brander and brown on bench no e so Taylors score gonna count
I think They should count all players scores regardless if you had emergency on them or not.
How soon before Ess can play again under COVID protocols?
Could Melb-Ess game be played Thursday to complete the round and push their round 4 games back to Tues following week?
Great question Baz. I think it’s going to be incredibly difficult to keep this season going without it becoming a complete farce. I think there’s an article in the HUN saying that the AFL will force the Bombers to play their games as close to scheduled as possible, even if it means they have to omit all the “close contact” players who must be quarantined under government instruction.
They discussed it on fox panel before the game started- bombers players in “close contact” will be excluded for 14 days – not known if that is some, many or all at this stage – but significant ramifications for bombers either way
Appears to be the entire back group…not overly clever if that is the case.
Dude from the AFL said on the radio it will be after this group of rounds, so sometimes after round 5.
Don’t check the site for one morning and the SCT world goes bananas.
I always class myself as very deep down the rabbit hole that is SC. Been on this site for a decade or so and written copious posts, articles and comp management. Really surprised to see so many people jumping around in angst at the SC best 18 decision.
I hate the expression but “it is what it is”. Whatever call they made was going to be shot down by someone. The idea of scrapping the SC round is absurd and clearly made by people that have a lot of Melbourne and Essendon players.
Those saying the AFL should be cancelled for the year, well, that’s a tad reactionary. Those saying that SC shouldn’t have happened this year, well, you didn’t HAVE to play, you chose to knowing things were going to be a little different.
Just relax everyone. We all love footy and we all love SC. Whatever curve balls are thrown at us this season, we’ll sort out as a SCT community so we can all benefit from the collective knowledge. Let’s hope that the AFL can get through a season of footy, albeit a different season.
Well said mate.
Very well said Roo Bloke.
Anyone down voting this well measured articulate response, can jump back in their troll holes. 😉
Have to disagree Roo- many will have Gawn, Petracca, Smith, Rivers, Bennell et al … but many may have been able to trade some of them out for scoring players … many can’t for various reasons – traded for the early rookies on bubble, or traded out Dusty etc for say Petracca.
The fundamental premise should be FAIR TO ALL. As it stands, it’s not, some advantaged significantly – with further to come if games continue and they could trade say Gawn out to PIttonet and then Gawn back in again when he plays twice etc …
It significantly undermines the chase for OA the way it currently stands.
And it was discussed by the Fox panel that the bombers players “in close contact” will now be excluded for days … no definition or knowledge at this stage if that is some, many or all … so what will that do to the Bombers and the comp?? Those players holding those bombers players and unable to trade out this weekend will be further disadvantaged by having to trade next week … whilst the ones benefiting will be able to trade to greater advantage next week.
Lets not forget the hit to %. Another thing that is unfair to some, and an advantage to others. It could be reversed somewhat by the rescheduling of the match, but shrewd SCers will be all over it before then as there will be many weeks to get the right dees/dons into their teams and keep the unfair advantage gained this round.
Well said Roo! I have 7 out because of the decision and was projected to win all my matches including Loec3. It looks like I will now lose all round 3 matches and will tumble down the overall (800 ish). Life goes on and I have put on my big boy pants and said, “I love AFL, I love this site and if this is the worst thing that happens in my week – it’s been a great week.”
Cancel the SC Round – would everyone agree – obviously not.
Play best 18 (like a bye) – would everyone agree – obviously not.
No right solution, therefore, perhaps, no wrong one….so no matter what, they made a decision in a year when crazy beats logic…
I note some of the comments suggest people work in IT industry, and I’m computer illiterate….just thinking out loud here….when the announcement re the Ess / Melb game was made….could SC ‘know’ who was in who’s team?
So for example, I had 4 melb/ess players…..so when they eventually play the game – I get the scores for those players only in that game on top of whoever else is in my team and they exclude captaincy – so as much as I have Gawn, I may put the C on him, but that C only counts in the normal fixture for that round and when he plays his ‘second’ game against Ess I only get normal points as I had him in my team….
People who didn’t have any Ess/Melb players….and trade in….only get single points for the normal fixture…nothing for the ‘extra game’…and have burned a trade or two potentially…sort of evening things up?
People who traded out melb/ess players at last minute…..to try and take advantage….get this round and nothing in the game when eventually played?
Not sure if that reads right……hopefully you get the gist….is it a possibility or would it be too hard to work out?
would be nice, but I imagine too hard to work out mate.
They certainly can trace what trades are made each week.
Horrible decision imo, very funfair to a lot of players including myself this week, trading in petracca over B. Smith, has left me one premo down… at least.
Just to get things clear. I have Devon Smith on the field and max king as my emergency
Whitfield is also in my forward line
So king will come on for Smith and then the better score out of King & Whitfield will be taken??? If that makes sense. So I shouldn’t be stuck with whitfields (8) this week.
Fox footy have just indicated that Essendon have all but accepted there will be other players isolated. AFL has indicated that as long as Essendon have 26 players to name, games will go on. Game v Pies in R5 probably pushed back to the Sunday to allow players to return.
BZT, all is forgiven.
That is extremely unfair on Melbourne. They should be the team that gets to play a depleted Essendon side.
Disclaimer – opinion based on reports that the Essendon player was breaching COVID rules.
Melb are the innocent party yet will be most disadvantaged. Disadvantaged now and again when the catch up game is played. The disadvantage would be somewhat offset if they got to play a depleted Essendon (should other players be unavailable).
Besides, what is wrong with the two teams playing their 3rd game against the opponent they were scheduled to play and set themselves to play?
It would be an injustice if the rescheduled match was when Melbourne had a heap of injured players and Essendon a full squad to choose from.
Why will Melbourne be most disadvantaged ?? Bombers will probably play with a skeleton team this week and maybe the next, plus not be able to train together, and maybe not at all other than at home.
Injuries are a lottery and could apply equally to Essendon as well.
Please explain !!
Hey Wrighty I think he is meaning if the Melb vs Ess game is played after the players have completed their quarantine period.
In that case then Melb don’t get the advantage of playing Ess without 8 players of their best 22. Which it seems this will be the most likely that Melb vs Ess will be played in between R4 & 5 as that’s the next lot of fixtures to be released.
Hope that clarified things.
I’m pretty sure the AFL said that there were to be no changes to the draw till after r5, and that after that, rds would be announced in blocks of two to deal with exactly these circumstances. Can’t see the AFL forcing bombers to play two rounds with skeleton teams.
Essendon are disadvantaged…but Melbourne is the innocent disadvantaged team.
Carlton & Collingwood may get to play undermanned Essendon.
My point is that if anyone gets to play an undermanned Essendon it should be the team that Essendon were scheduled to play.
I’ve already commented that I’m in for a horror week, so perhaps biased. I’ve been playing supercoach since it started. Probably spend too much time on it, haha just ask my partner!
I can see both sides to the argument. My OA aspirations are cooked, and whoever said previously that you are better off buying a lotto ticket than OA in SC? Man trying to conjure a way to OA glory is why I do this! I don’t have an option on what to do that is fair for everyone. The bombers might have to play very undermanned in the next few weeks, that is unfair if we lose all out better players. This time the cards have been dealt and I’m choosing to not play this year, which is better for my sanity. Accepting it and moving on for next year. Not in a cash league this year so just got nothing to play for
Are you in a league already CJ ? It seems so.
To all those that say we continue as if nothing has happened, CJ84’s comments about not playing this year, and I understand his sentiments, surely is the final nail in the “carry on” coffin.
There will be a huge amount of disgruntled players just give up on the season, making the rest of it a lottery for many. Imagine the unfairness of some players who come up against those who have abandoned the season, compared with those that have already played these same people in rds 1-3. Totally unfair and another reason to abandon r3…people like CJ84 are the proof in the pudding.
And CJ, this is not a crack at you, but is another good example why the round need be abandoned.
Mate takes a lot offend me I’m aware you weren’t having a crack. There is a part of me that feels I’m just being a sook I admit, and in a way I’m just giving up. And I’ve got no way of proving this but giving up is not something I do.
I’m not in any SCT leagues this year. Have been in the past. Only joined with my normal mates and a few guys from the office. Only want overall. Held dusty and Kelly, got Whitfield and no more Rookies to rely on as I went for a few non playing rookies to loop this year which has backfired.
Got gawn, petracca, viney, rivers, McGrath, Smith, Townsend on ground. I’ve been rank 50000 after 3 rounds many times in the past and finished top 1000. I’m just going to be so far behind the leaders now I don’t see how I can even go close to top 1000 in a shortened year.
Will still check scores, jump on here and comment but just won’t bother with me team
Fair enough mate. I was ranked about 4k before this round and was having a cracker Rd till Whit got injured, then the news. In two cash leagues so its soldier on !!
Anybody know the impact of draft teams? I only have Oliver left to play* but with no game will I get the lowest scoring bench player or is there a different ruling? My lowest scoring bench is darling on 61 but I also have Brayshaw (Freo) left to play and can sub him in for Oliver. Anyone have any info on this?
I have c on Gawn in my draft league. No reason to cancel round tho…..not unfair at all!!!
did you get a replacement score for him? my league I didnt get an emergency score for Merrett….only played with 6 and had 2 emergencies mids score over 100… not sure why i dont get the score which cost me the game as a result!
Stiff shit for all. The decision has been made. You can cry and kick the dirt if you want. Really throw the toys out and say I’m walking away. You’ll all be back next year.
It’s an effing game. Deal with it.
Such compassion is touching.
Rules check here.
If you have 2 “bye” players in your mids on field and you have two emergencies selected in your mids bench, do you get both emergency scores?
Hi everyone been out since 1200.
Looks like I’ve got a bit of catching up to do.
Wighty in answer to your question, a neighbor who’s in legal firm.
But as I stated I probably didn’t give the full info.
Bloody joke this best 18 has decision. On top of that, we didn’t receive any clarity on how the situation would work until after Saturday nights games, so instead of having the opportunity to captain Neale last night, I was stuck with my VC (Grundy), not knowing what the go with Gawn would be. Really poor, SuperCoach has fucked me and many others over.
Phew…….after all that…….have to agree with Macca.
So one more thing intrigued me?
If they are going to let you get both scores from a player when the player has two games in a week, how are they going to do the price changes? E.g if Gawn scores 150 twice totalling 300 will that be his weekly score used to make the price changes?
Have they thought this through?
Surely this is 3 strikes you’re out for Essendon now. The drug saga and now this. Not keeping 1.5mt during these times is unacceptable and the league should revoke their license ASAP. Massively unfair for Melbourne and SCers alike. Can’t blame this one all on James Hird can we?
CC, and what would you do with the two rounds already played, the draw ahead which is already so difficult, TV rights etc…. etc…..?? Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
McKenna has to cop it, but this is not an Essendon inspired breach.
By the way, remember those Crows players in the Barossa Valley……punished with ??????? There are those that still have it in for bombers and always will.
“There but for the grace of God go I”
By the way….”the drug saga and now this”….isnt that two strikes under your reckoning ?
Ess carry half the competition with the crowds and gate fees AFL receive then distribute to other clubs. Plus the audience Fox and 7 get too. I don’t think they are going anywhere.
If Melb/Ess play and my players score their avg, I win H2H game by about 150.
Instead, best 18 gets me a loss by 17.
Flat is an understatement….
try losing 400-500 points on the lead in the chase for OA – which in a short season, without byes, you cannot make up …
With you Macca…think I fared worse with seven dons/dees, and being forced to take sturt and whitfield scores, Dropped 29k to about 35k, scored 584 less than rds 1-2 average, and lost 10/10 leagues.
But that’s all ok Macca…just cop it on the chin, stiff upper lip, forget about OA and cash leagues, and just soldier on !!!
This of course is all our faults and not unfair to us at all is it ??
And of course, Grundy was c in draft league
How many dead teams will be in leagues now.
Only takes one dead team in a top league to fall down the ranks and make the rest of the teams hard work mean nothing.
Not to mention the huge advantage/disadvantage of having played a dead team or not. Yet another reason to abandon the rd, or apply averages.
Thats exactly what AFL DT have done which is much fairer to everyone….SC do it and I could even turn 10 losses into 8-10 wins.
Thanks to the SupercoachTalk crew for all their hard work on the weekend trying to get the info up ASAP to try and help everyone out.
I just posted this in the “How Did You Go – Rd 3” thread but realise now this is probably the more appropriate one:
As expected, got smashed by the Top 18 due to my abundance of Ess-Melb players and no ability to emergency bench players in response. Lost 12,000 spots overall and lost 8/10 league matches (I was projected to win 8 of them on Saturday afternoon).
I’m not re-prosecuting the decision taken by SC HQ. It’s done. Although I do want to make a point seeing they raised the game cancelled by Phil Walsh’s death as precedence. At least then we knew in advance it would be Top 18 and could make moves according; not in the middle of a round when nearly everyone has already made their trades and a lot of bench players were already locked out.
But the decision is made and it is what it is; there’s no going back I’m sure. I appreciate it must have been a tough situation and I don’t envy their position at the time. I do think they rushed it though, and they could have given themselves some time by immediately locking out all Ess-Melb players.
Nonetheless, my overall prospects for the year have been completely shafted and I can’t see any meaningful advantage coming to me later on as compensation based on the info SC HQ has told us. I’m therefore feeling very flat and disinterested at the moment. I’ve been playing SC and on this site for around 10 years but I’m now rethinking the time and effort I put into analysis/strategy as it now feels like its been wasted.
Despite the flatness, a massive shout out to the SCT community. The expertise and support this site provides is second to none. Make sure it stays that way then, even when there is no much difference of opinion.
Some of the soundest comments to date. Locking those dees/dons players immediately the news broke would have gone some way to a level playing field. I lost 10/10 and dropped 24k. Had to field Whit and Sturt.
So do we just trade in Melbourne players now for double points? Or are the points just for Melbourne v essendon.
I feel like best 18 is the only real option although I’m not that happy with it.
I’m pretty salty on this as it has pretty much cost me my season for overall and leagues. I’m most annoyed about the future.
What happens if Gawn and Oliver go down this week? They were fit this week but may not be in a few weeks time when the catch up game is played costing points and trades and giving coaches without them the advantage. Same with Essendon players, I don’t want to trade out Dev Smith as he won’t play for 1 or even 2 rounds then bring him back in.
I think best 18 will apply for all the future rounds. Round 4 will only be 8 games and this will no doubt happen again
Anyone playing SuperCoach Draft? Why did I not get an emergency score for Merrett?? It cost me the win and I don’t think thats fair!
Add it to the huge list of reasons to cancel the round, or at the least award average scores over rds 1-2 like DT has done.
Geez! Macca and Wighty have taken the weekends developments well
Just punting for fairness to all !!!
There are/were three SC options.
Do nothing, abandon the round, make it a bye round (i.e. change rules midstream which clearly was going to have winners and losers).
Which option do you really think is the FAIREST FOR ALL ???
Option 4 that DT has done apparently…..average season points from first two rds for the dees/bombers. Would have taken my 17 including whit and sturt from 1638 to 18 totalling 2090 using the best 18 rule.
Not finished yet……this is about social justice !!!
Macca says he is pulling up stumps !!!
This seasons a fucking joke anyway. Have a good tomorrow/week mate
Can we do a poll now that all sorts of views have been canvassed ? Not that the result will make any difference.
The options should I think be……
1. Let the round proceed with no changes to rules.
2. Cancel the round.
3. Best 18
4. Continue the round but dees/dons players get rds 1-2 averages ( there will be pluses and minus with this, but everyone is in the same boat). I can’t think of any rookies who were listed that hadn’t played a game, so that shouldn’t influence things.
I think option 1 would have been the least controversial because it wouldn’t have involved a deliberate rule change after round had started. Basically it would have been like late outs on a mass scale. Obviously this would have still ruined the round if you were loaded up with Dons and Dees but would be easier to be philosophical about an unpredictable bad luck situation. Still “fair for all”.
Option 2: Voiding the round was probably not seriously considered for a couple of reasons. Firstly because the game must go on to avoid mass drop outs. Secondly, there would still be have been grievances from those that Would have done well in the other 8 out of 9 games that had no reason not to go ahead. 6 hawks all tonned up on Thursday night. Try tell those coaches it was fair to cancel the round on Friday.
Option 3: Top 18 not a perfect solution primarily because it was not known prior to round commencing but Treating the game as a (late) bye does seem like the closest precedent. Yes it was a surprise but if it had been stated at the restart that any cancelled games would be treated as Byes then I think we would have thought that was reasonable.
Option 4: Continue the round using averages. I don’t have a strong opinion about this one. But could very easily argue against.
I don’t expect consensus but I think the closest precedents for this situation are to treat this as mass late outs (option 1), or a bye game (option 3)
Rance, I had Sicily and Wingard…was very happy on Friday night. still would have accepted round abandoned at 4.30 pm Saturday. Not sure anyone would have had six hawks…..I’m being accused of sour grapes for having three dons !!!
Would like to hear your reasons against point 4…the option adopted by DT. Re option 3, I dont think anyone would have framed their team differently if they new abandoned games would be treated as byes. Apart from the Adelaide Cats game a few years back….I think it was 1964 when a game/s were last cancelled.
As I said, no strong opinion on option 4. It just seems a more contrived/deliberate change than 1 or 3 for which there are already precedents. I have no idea whether implementing that in SC would be more difficult than DT or not.
Exactly my point re option 3. We were told and knew that a player testing positive could impact games at any time. And as you just said, nobody would/could have done anything differently if it was known that cancelled games would be treated as byes and top 18. The principle/point of integrity that people seem most up in arms about is that we didn’t know this in advance. Fair enough in principle but it doesn’t actually change anything. You would still have had your 3 dons, and your score would be the same. Same outcome. Only difference is whether you put it down to the SC gods or the SC administrators… if there is a difference.
FYI, I had/have 3 demons and 2 dons and dropped down more than 2000 positions. Could have been A lot worse but voiding the round would have actually been better for me.
8 games out of 9 went ahead. The round should count just as it does in the AFL. We are discussing how scoring could be handled. But cancelling the whole round because of 1 out of 9 games is just total overkill.
Why the TD for a simple democratic poll ??
Wasn’t me Wighty. Don’t worry about TDS. I’ve had few from you and your mates lately!
How do you know who votes TD?
The situation does suck all round. But pulling up stumps on principle (being a “social justice for all” crusader) or toys out of the cot because chances of taking out the 50k seemingly ruined?
Rance….I think your pants have just been pulled down !!!
Good one Wighty, bit of friendly banter is all just part of the fun 😉
That was exactly the context of my last post…..
Gotchya !!! You can’t see the cheeky smiles on the net when posting comments 🙂
What is Macca gonna do with the extra 16 hours a day he has now if he isn’t doing SC and SCT ?
Haha…plan for next year ???
How is it that AFL DT can make a decision that is Fair for ALL, implement it within a reasonable time frame and SC have resorted to an unfair and flawed outcome to the weekends finding, just makes you want to defect to AFL DT purely because there seems to be level headed people running the game there who are concerned about the integrity of the game.
Btw SC responded to my complaint for a refund to SC gold and they advised you would need to contact News call centre for accounts and subsription inquiries on 1300 696 397.
They are a disgrace….I hope they are watching these sites and comments. Someone needs to be put in front of a microphone.
Firstly I should say I have been effected negatively by SC decision. I had Viney, Bennell, Gawn (C), Petracca & Oliver from Melbourne and Smith from Essendon….All fine picks. Add to that, I also had Dusty, Jelly and McInnerley.
However, I don’t see anything SC do as being ‘fair’.
It’s unfair I didn’t get a score for my 5 Melbourne players, but it’s also unfair if you disregard this round, or even apply averages.
To me it’s not SC where my frustration is…it’s the AFL.
Simply, the competition should have been put on hold for 2 weeks and then restarted with Essendon vs Melbourne.
1.What has Hooker, Hurley & Saad done to deserve a 2-week suspension? Had a workout session with someone they didn’t realise had Covid? WTF?
2.Why should Carlton get to play a depleted Essendon side and Melbourne didn’t? Melbourne have a bye, at the start of the season that they couldnt prepare for, and then will have to play a double game, at the end of the season when other teams have a bye they can prepare for. That’s fair?
Rance, I had Sicily and Wingard…was very happy on Friday night. still would have accepted round abandoned at 4.30 pm Saturday. Not sure anyone would have had six hawks…..I’m being accused of sour grapes for having three dons !!!
Would like to hear your reasons against point 4…the option adopted by DT.
Had Viney, Rivers & Smith covered with “E” which gained me 188 pts , also lost Whitfields score for 2026 & Improved 32620 rankings & topped my cash league for a $20 profit. . Remember its just a game we play for free and envolves a lot of LUCK. Lady Luck smiled on me rd3.
Any reason a comment I posted at 6.41pm yesterday would be “awaiting moderation” ?? It was perfectly civil and respectful.
And then I tried to just now login to SC and got an error message…tried two ISPs….is something up at SC ?
Or am I a person non gratis ???
Login ok……still got the query re my comment last night.
Haha…the comment has now gone……we are being censored !!
Your reputation precedes you. Lol.
Looks like the pile on against bombers was wrong. Those that continue to take delight in doing so must be devastated. Not much Macca and I can do except watch everyone pile into the dees/dons for the DWG…easy to do given this year’s trades.
Fair ??? Of course it is…except for an unfortunate few.
And still no bomber has failed a drug test..covid 19 is not a drug test. But three clubs have that I can remember…one of them starts with C so I cant mention them here.
What are peoples thoughts on how the AFL will schedule games that are delayed for covid?
If they delay them as long as possible, aim for late in the season, they could have a pool of teams that have to play the extra games. Which works out if none of them end up with two delayed games (e.g if melb or essendon get another delayed game)
If they try and do it as soon as possible they minimize that chance.
THey released the rules for the delayed games