Talk Fantasy Football

Galak if you ar caught you can't play the rest of the match. The probality to miss a match to due a dodge is quite lower.

Heck I commit fouls with the eye on me all the time if I think it'll get a pesky player off the pitch. You just have to weigh the consequences - is the risk of the fouler being sent off worth it for who you are fouling? It's not something I do all the time but with a 50% chance of being caught it's not all that bad! Anyways I agree with Marcus' earlier post, fouling can be a great equalizer if use stratigically.

Wow! Nice long thread

Couple of points:

* Don't take anything I suggest as indicative of a BBRC position. Really, I've had Sneaky Player in my leagues for years (ages ago); it's an old standby.

* The question about fouling while the Eye is on you is simple: Is the risk worth the reward? I think most can agree that it isn't. You're never better than 5/12 to get the player out of the game, assuming you have enough assists to guarantee an AV break and have DP to hit the player on the back end. Meanwhile, unless you've nailed the Ref - in which case all bets are off - you're never better than 5/12 to escape detection. So in an unlikely best-case scenario, fouling under the Eye is an even proposition. In most cases, it's just not sensible.

* To me, this suggests that the Eye might be a little out of whack even at 4 or better. If you would like to open up fouling in your league, try 5 or better when under the Eye.

In fact, allow me to combine a few ideas that have been thrown around various forums, and present them here:

Base roll to get caught: 6+

Referee Modifiers:
* Eye on your team: +1
* Fouler uses the Dirty Player skill on the foul: +1

Now what do we have?

1. The Eye is still better than it was in the old days (when it never mattered), but not as good as it is right now.

2. Dirty Players always come with a "reputation" that makes them more likely to miss this game, but removes overly zealous "miss next game" penalties from the mix.

I think that the lesser effect of the Eye would better allow a full range of "tactical fouling," while the additional DP penalty would prevent abuse. Overall, I think it's at least as simple as the current system, because it mirrors the Agility Table and mods.

Thoughts? I realize some of you think fouling is A-OK right now, and I agree with you to some extent. Just remember that 4+ is just a number

-Chet

while i'm probably in the "fouling's fine" camp, i'm also in the "something improved is something improved" camp too (they're close, i guess, maybe i alternate which tent i sleep in or something)...

to that end, the version you're proposing doesn't bug me, chet... i've always had sort of a vindictive streak that wanted penalties to be called more frequently on players using DP (and keep in mind kids, that under the new rules, your DP wouldn't have to use DP unless he needed too, so a lot of times, he'd still be just a 5+ for the ejection)...

i could take it or leave it...

what i do like, though, is the idea of rolling for a duration, that is just the spice for my tea...

Acerak wrote: * The question about fouling while the Eye is on you is simple: Is the risk worth the reward? I think most can agree that it isn't. You're never better than 5/12 to get the player out of the game, assuming you have enough assists to guarantee an AV break and have DP to hit the player on the back end. Meanwhile, unless you've nailed the Ref - in which case all bets are off - you're never better than 5/12 to escape detection. So in an unlikely best-case scenario, fouling under the Eye is an even proposition. In most cases, it's just not sensible.

I think it could be argued that, if you set up the perfect foul under the eye and it's as close as you can get to an even proposition then the odds are perfect.

Consider: with the probabilities cancelling each other out on either side of the risk/reward equation, you can accurately assess your risk:reward ratio based on more intangible factors such as:

1. Is the player to be fouled less expendible than your DP (damn wardancers....)
2. Will a 1:1 tradeoff in players still leave you in a comfortable position?
3. Is the player to be fouled an immediate scoring threat?
4. Are you just plain bloody minded? (or french....)

Our league has been using the BB2K1 fouling rules for several months now and find them perfectly balanced. Players will foul under the eye when there is a notable tactical advantage to doing so and they consider the fouler expendible, but it's rare. As it should be IMHO.

As mentioned in earlier posts our league doesn't suffer from a proliferation of coaches who put the boot into a player before he's even hit the ground. Mostly because, as I mentioned, players who spend all their time fouling neglect the rest of the game to the extent that they lose - continuously, and they learn to play a more balanced game.

Marcus

and what about if you are french and plain bloody minded

Go to Berlin and mention the war...

always good for a laugh...

I think it could be argued that, if you set up the perfect foul under the eye and it's as close as you can get to an even proposition then the odds are perfect.

Consider: with the probabilities cancelling each other out on either side of the risk/reward equation, you can accurately assess your risk:reward ratio based on more intangible factors such as:

• Is the player to be fouled less expendible than your DP (damn wardancers....)
  
  Will a 1:1 tradeoff in players still leave you in a comfortable position?
  
  Is the player to be fouled an immediate scoring threat?
  
  Are you just plain bloody minded? (or french....)

I have to disagree, because I think you're comparing apples and oranges here: "the perfect foul" (by a player with DP) vs the rather permanent IGMEOY condition for all players. As a result, the DP with an automatic AV penetration is in position to consider those "intangibles," but everyone else is out. They can't make it worthwhile unless they do so under a very limited (i.e., easily pinpointed, defined, predictable) circumstance.

I think the current scenario makes the normal Eye condition a shade too strict. Not by much, mind you, but by enough. It also fails to differentiate between DPs and non-DPs, which would be a benefit (IMO) of the proposed alternative.

You could even incorporate a game-breaker like GtR into the modifier table:

* Fouling team is under the Eye: +1
* Fouling player uses the Dirty Player skill: +1
* Fouling team lost Get The Ref roll: +1

One advantage of this as I see it: a Dirty Player is just as noticeable as a skill-less yob who fouls while the Eye is on his team. There's a nice equivalence there that allows you to "foul tactically" without DP (5+ vs 4+ roll), yet makes it a bit riskier to run your strategy around DP even without the Eye on your team (5+ vs 6+).

Cheers!

-Chet

I had a few ideas about some fouling issues - but being more skill related I put them on that little used board.

what do you have against French People?
i have said that i dont like to foul with DP.
where is the blood?

but too much rules kill the rules i believe.

there is too much rules on foul action for myself, i just want to clear some or change some with the same final result.
do you get it?

but some ideas have been proposed here to clear them, and some are quite good (dont remenber who has done them).

but if you like to play with 10 rules for 1 action, go with it.
but stop to talk like this about French.We have nothing to do with what you said about French.

Hey Longshot,
I think it was joke, however you and me, we know how we play(especially with your orcs ) .
When i read this thread, i think that french coach are most peaceful BB coach of the world .

Just to clarify: no offence made to french coaches. I had made an observation that most of the french coaches I've played foul a lot. I got a bite out of that so continued it as a running joke that the french like to foul a lot.

No insult intended.

Marcus

ok then
apologize too

Trambi: did i ever foul with my elves? NO
i foul with my Orc but i only play it againt other beardies teams and with my gobbo (no DP)

Longshot : that is exactly what i mean !?

no, u didnt mean that to somebody that dont know me...