Round 1: Las Vegas Discussion / *Spoilers*

gregjm87 said:
I'd rather piss off GP but if it must be kept. 4 points for a regulation win 3 points for a GP win 2 for a draw 1 point for GP loss and 0 for a regulation loss.
Dragons don't deserve the same 0 points as the Cowboys. Nor do dogs the same 2 points as the knights.
Click to expand...
I would rather a golden try or 5 mins played each way and whoever is in front at the end wins...i.e. you kick a field goal and the game continues so other team could have a crack too. However a try ends it immediately.
 
tig_prmz said:
I think the challenge was worthwhile. The Dragons player didn't change his line at all. He turned and went straight towards the ball. Just because a player gets impeded doesn't mean the other player did something wrong. Anyone can run into someone and claim to be impeded.
Click to expand...
I thought Guffbo caught the ball and then ran straight behind his own player. I agree that the onfield call was 50/50 but I wouldn't chance a challenge on a judgement call.
A very optimistic challenge ,especially at that stage of th game. You gotta be smart with them.
 
gregjm87 said:
I'd rather piss off GP but if it must be kept. 4 points for a regulation win 3 points for a GP win 2 for a draw 1 point for GP loss and 0 for a regulation loss.
Dragons don't deserve the same 0 points as the Cowboys. Nor do dogs the same 2 points as the knights.
Click to expand...
My reasoning is more to piss off the field goal shoot out and the 2 points from a bad penalty killing a great game.

I like that system, but I dislike keeping the golden point part unless it is a try.
 
Tiger Tarl said:
I still reckon that a draw at full-time should mean both teams get one competition point, THEN they play golden point overtime (5 each way) for the other competition point. It makes the 'Golden Point' name have a double meaning and would make the ladder a truer representation as currently a team losing by one in Golden Point gets the same as a team getting beat by 50. Ie. Nothing.
Click to expand...
What happens when the game finishes a draw in golden point under your system?
 
gregjm87 said:
I'd rather piss off GP but if it must be kept. 4 points for a regulation win 3 points for a GP win 2 for a draw 1 point for GP loss and 0 for a regulation loss.
Dragons don't deserve the same 0 points as the Cowboys. Nor do dogs the same 2 points as the knights.
Click to expand...
100% this is the only fair way to go about things. You shouldn't get 0 points for a golden point loss, doesn't seem fair.
 
gregjm87 said:
I just posted something similar. In my opinion the problem with this though you can't have some competition games where 3 points are up for grabs and some only 2 points.
Click to expand...

In my proposal, the maximum points a team can get in any game is 2 for the win. No one gets three points. In this example, both teams get 1 point if scores are level at the end of 80 mins just like they would for a draw. THEN they play Golden Point to see who gets the extra 1 competition point for the win. So 2 for the winner after golden point and 1 for the loser because the game was drawn at end of regulation time. Does that make sense?
 
Tiger Tarl said:
In my proposal, the maximum points a team can get in any game is 2 for the win. No one gets three points. In this example, both teams get 1 point if scores are level at the end of 80 mins just like they would for a draw. THEN they play Golden Point to see who gets the extra 1 competition point for the win. So 2 for the winner after golden point and 1 for the loser because the game was drawn at end of regulation time. Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
No it doesn't make sense.

The maximum points available needs to be equal for each match. You can't magically make extra competition points for golden point games.

You can share points...in which case you need to increase competition points up for grabs for all games. The magic number is 4.

Regular games
4 points win
0 points loss

GP Games
3 points GP Win
2 points each GP draw
1 point GP loss

In all scenarios only 4 points is available for the match outcome however it is split.
 
weststigers said:
No it doesn't make sense.

The maximum points available needs to be equal for each match. You can't magically make extra competition points for golden point games.

You can share points...in which case you need to increase competition points up for grabs for all games. The magic number is 4.

Regular games
4 points win
0 points loss

GP Games
3 points GP Win
2 points each GP draw
1 point GP loss

In all scenarios only 4 points is available for the match outcome however it is split.
Click to expand...
They do it in ice hockey . Works fine . Really they’re saying a golden point loss is the same as a draw . And I’d agree pretty much with that logic
 
Tiger Tarl said:
In my proposal, the maximum points a team can get in any game is 2 for the win. No one gets three points. In this example, both teams get 1 point if scores are level at the end of 80 mins just like they would for a draw. THEN they play Golden Point to see who gets the extra 1 competition point for the win. So 2 for the winner after golden point and 1 for the loser because the game was drawn at end of regulation time. Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
Yes I understand your proposal. But some games then 3 points are won, 1 each plus 1 and some two points are won. Which means in my opinion some games become worth more than others. Which is why I don't like it.
An extreme example to prove the point. Imagine we are sitting 7th 1 point ahead of 8th and 2 points ahead of 9th going into the final round (worse for and against then both). 9th beats 8th in GP. Both jump us because their game became a 3 point game when it shouldn't have been possible.

Although I don't agree with your proposal, the reality is there are few enough GP games for me to really care about value distortions, and I think pretty much any suggestion is better than what we have now.
 
Last edited:
gregjm87 said:
Yes I understand your proposal. But some games then 3 points are win, 1 each plus 1 and some two points are won. Which means in my opinion some games become worth more than others. Which is why I don't like it.
An extreme example to prove the point. Imagine we are sitting 7th 1 point ahead of 8th and 2 points ahead of 9th going into the final round (worse for and against then both). 9th beats 8th in GP. Both jump us because their game became a 3 point game when it shouldn't have been possible.

Although I don't agree with your proposal, the reality is there are few enough GP games for me to really care about value distortions, and I think pretty much any suggestion is better than what we have now.
Click to expand...
Yep, it’s about the integrity of the competition really. Each game is worth only 2 competition points.

Unlucky if you lose in GP. You can be unlucky and lose in the 79th minute too (as we know)
 
EllisFan said:
Yep, it’s about the integrity of the competition really. Each game is worth only 2 competition points.

Unlucky if you lose in GP. You can be unlucky and lose in the 79th minute too (as we know)
Click to expand...
Yep. That's why I always suggest 4 point games with the different splits. Unlucky and losing in the 79th, well bad luck it's an 80 minute game. Unlucky and lose in the 81st well you deserve something because it's an 80 minute game.
 
gregjm87 said:
Yep. That's why I always suggest 4 point games with the different splits. Unlucky and losing in the 79th, well bad luck it's an 80 minute game. Unlucky and lose in the 81st well you deserve something because it's an 80 minute game.
Click to expand...
Personally you’re getting into AFL territory there 🤮
 
Lestronge said:
They do it in ice hockey . Works fine . Really they’re saying a golden point loss is the same as a draw . And I’d agree pretty much with that logic
Click to expand...
No. You are adding +1 competition point for games that go to Golden Point.

Why is a Golden Point game worth 3 points and all the others worth 2 points?

Assume the Tigers were involved in 3 GP games and drew all 3 after extra time.

We get 3 points

Then take a competitor that lost all 3 of their GP games..under that system they also get 3 points, but they have 3 more losses than us, yet we get the same points.

So basically a GP loss is worth the same as a GP draw.

You can achieve what you want to achieve, but 4 points needs to be the new comp points for a win to make all outcomes stack up fairly.
 
gregjm87 said:
Yes I understand your proposal. But some games then 3 points are win, 1 each plus 1 and some two points are won. Which means in my opinion some games become worth more than others. Which is why I don't like it.
An extreme example to prove the point. Imagine we are sitting 7th 1 point ahead of 8th and 2 points ahead of 9th going into the final round (worse for and against then both). 9th beats 8th in GP. Both jump us because their game became a 3 point game when it shouldn't have been possible.

Although I don't agree with your proposal, the reality is there are few enough GP games for me to really care about value distortions, and I think pretty much any suggestion is better than what we have now.
Click to expand...
I don't know mate, what am I missing.

If every game is worth 4 points then you award 4 points for a win and zero for a loss.

If you have a golden point game then the winner gets 3 points and the loser gets 1 point.

If it is still a draw at the end of golden point then both teams get 2 points each.

Every game is worth a total of 4 competition points.

Better still just get rid of golden point, sick of the shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 889 (members: 12, guests: 877)
Back
Top