Talk Fantasy Football

I'm considering lobbying against the 'MUST pick up the ball' rule.

My old brain seem to remember something Jervis wrote on this issue, but I don't have the reference anymore.

Can anyone offer advice as to possible problems changing the rule?

Benefits as I see them

1) One more tactical string to play on.
2) More natural IMHO to be able to choose.
3) More fluent gameplay.

Advice please.

there have been large discussions on this before

its the must catch rule that people seem more opposed to if you don't want to pick up the ball then don't move onto the square with it, i am perfectly happy with the must pick up the ball rule

it also stops teams with low ag to keep walking onto the ball and getting it to scatter onto a team mate who can then try and catch it and not cause a turnover, meaning basically they get a lot more chances to just pick it up without actually trying to pick it up

Yeah I think the arguement for it was to avoid teams trying to just kick the ball around the feild, or to a better positon for them.

ECBBL plays that both picking up and catching are voluntary.

Rarely can either be abused (i.e. surround the ball with players, move in and scatter for a "free" chance to get control of the ball) and it works pretty well.

The only problem is that a lot of newbies to the league (and some older hands) forget about it.

It makes possession a lot more important too, because if the ball is on the ground its very vulnerable to being picked up by your opponent. You can't just stand a few players around it to make it impossible to get.

In general I think most people prefer it - it does have some odd side effects. Sure Hands (especially on high AG players) becomes a lot less important as you can normally ruck the ball out of lots of TZs.

Personally, I don't think you'll see optional pick-ups returning to the official rules anytime soon. Thread here: viewtopic.php?t=2970&highlight=

From what i've seen it's:

"we don't want to have the guy who blitz's the ball carrier to CATCH the ball"

vs

"We want players to have to PICK UP the ball so they don't just kick it around the field"

notice the stupidity in them being opposing arguements yet?

Pardus wrote:From what i've seen it's:

"we don't want to have the guy who blitz's the ball carrier to CATCH the ball"

vs

"We want players to have to PICK UP the ball so they don't just kick it around the field"

notice the stupidity in them being opposing arguements yet?

Thanks for summing up some 7 pages of quite involved discussion so succinctly.

I split the thread originally because they are very different discussions which have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
So go on, please explain where the 'stupidity' is.

Forced catch thread is here: viewtopic.php?t=2837

IMHO the stupidity is that the aimless kicking the ball around and what have you is something that happens in rugby, and so makes sense to allow in the game*, whereas the tackler having to try and catch the ball is something that really does not make any sense - the guy is concentrating on stopping the ballcarrier. Only a show-off like Griff would try and get the ball as well

*I know Bloodbowl is based on American Football, but I only watch rugby, and so have to think in those terms

Chris

IMO must pick up the ball is a very good rule. Teams with low agility or no sure hands would definetely abuse the rule. Keep it as it is.

Hi.

Hmm...personally I could live with an optional Pick Up rule, with 2 additions at what happens, if you don't want to pick up the Ball.

• If you decide to not pick up the Ball, it does not scatter, it just lays there.
• If at the End of the Turn a Player stands over the Ball, it scatters once. Tho I could live without that one.

Greetings,

Thomas.

We play with opptional pick up but no abuse. Crowding players around the ball is good, but going for a kick to them (ie moving onto the ball without picking up) increses the risk of the ball ending up scattered out of what would otherwise be a proto-cage. We usualy find by the time the ball is on the ground there are players from both sides present in numbers and the last thing you want is your soccer move to take it to a guy who misses, then have it scatter to the opposition, especialy on the turn you blitz it free!

I'm quite confortable with the rules as they are... but... well, I really don't see why "kicking the ball" would be a great problem....
I would prefer the «don't need to catch the ball, but needs to pick» version....
But I really don't see teh Undeads becoming the ultimate team if they can «kick the ball»....


But there are many things I don't see, and they are there!!!

It's not something that would break the game, or even a valid tactic really. But if the circumstanses were jsut right then you could arange for an easier roll or get the ball to someone you would rather have it without making a pick up and hand off roll. So I would rather leave it the way it is.

Nothing better than having to think out how to blitz your opponent without passing the ball square. If that's impossible, then it's a brilliant defensive move from your opponent.

Otherwise you will get Longbeards (not just one, cause then EVERY player could stand on the ball square to move the ball) going for the square of the ball, espescially if it's near the sideline and his own TD line. What better way to get rid of the ball than trying to get it out of bounds!

Leave it as it is. It's better that way.

Thanx for all the input.

I just knew that posing the question here would be a good idea.

Formulating a question on a tongue that is not my native tongue unfortunately sometimes leads to vague sentences - for this my apologies.
Originally I tried to pose the question on the 'must catch the ball'. Not the must pick up the ball'.
As several of you have pointed out, there is a huge difference in terms and understanding between the two.

In my opinion the pick up rule is OK.

But the must catch rule isn't!