Competitions The Pieman 2024

Remove this Banner Ad

X_box_X said:
FWIW, I made quite a few opposition posters some money in this post.

View attachment 2014446


This post also confirms DW's strong suspicion I was at the game to see JOD preparing to play as a secondary key fwd.



In terms of a solution, I will propose the following:

Teams that are posted with less than 60 minutes until the opening bounce are penalised a certain number of points. If you think that's unfair, well we can simply reverse that idea and award teams additional points for entries made no less than 60 minutes prior to the opening bounce.

It's not perfect, but I think it's a lot fairer than the system we currently have in place.

Of course I was rewarded for having the luxury of being at the ground with nothing better to do than update my Pieman team. This can be considered an unfair advantage because not everyone has that same luxury. Others could simply have other plans such as work which makes it difficult to make changes to their team.

If you decide to implement a rule like this, I'd be fully supportive of it but we'd have to work out what a fair and reasonable penalty is. Perhaps it could even be a 20% deduction on your total score for that round? Too much? 10% then?

If it's only 10%, then I still finish with the (joint) highest score for the round.
Click to expand...
Thanks Xbox. I was thinking along the same lines of time restriction. I had a few different options in mind:

1. Close off all entries and updates 60 minutes before the bounce (when do they come out for the warm-up? is 60 minutes enough?) Seems a slight overreaction to the problem, but I'd be prepared to consider it if there's nothing better. People who miss the cutoff would still have their carryover team.

2. Not allow any multiple players (2x or 3x) to be entered in those last 60 minutes, whether it's a new entry or a change to a team already posted. That is, if you enter or change a team in the last 60 minutes you may only enter a 5x1 (chump) team. If you post multiples in spite of that rule you will be given Pieman subs for your excess multiples until you are back to a 5x1. You would however be allowed to retain a multiple if it was posted before the 60-minute period as long as the change you are making is elsewhere. eg if you had posted much earlier in the day that you wanted 3x Bont + McNeil + VDM you could change to 3x Bont + JOD + VDM. Or you could change it to 2x Bont + JOD + McNeil + VDM.

3. Cap the handicap value at say 20 for any multiples entered in the last hour. Not keen. Too crude a measure and it's harder to program and administer each week.

4. A different approach not based on time limits could be for me to allocate a maximum of say 35 for ANY players handicap every round. Not keen on it as it's an over-reaction - it's the baby and bathwater problem.

There could be other variations of course.

My preference is #2 (no multiples allowed in the last hour) although it might require me to apply a bit closer scrutiny to posting times each week. And if I'm away it might require people to observe the "honour system" because I think the timestamp disappears after a few days. I guess I could get a mod to track down when a specific post was lodged but I'd rather not have to do that.

Note that this does not stop anyone from changing their team to include a single instance of the player in question (say JOD), even 5 minutes before the bounce. So what I'm saying is that it's OK to get a little bit of an advantage if you see a defender warming up with the forwards. However getting that advantage as a 2x or 3x seems a bit excessive and could spoil the Pieman - possibly for the rest of the season - for those not able to get to the game. Imagine if I'd left JOD at 55 and he kicked 4 goals (could easily have happened if we had got the upper hand in the midfield). You'd have got 660 points which would pretty much have killed interest in the Pieman for the rest of the year (except for StringyDog!)

I'm not keen on your penalty % idea because it seems a very inexact response. It's also too broad a brush - people who are genuinely busy and rushing to get their team in, get hit with the same penalty regardless of whether there is a warmup change at all. They'd be better off just letting their team carry over from last week and not cop any penalty at all.

tl;dr - option 2 is the lightest touch, easy enough to administer, requires no code change and still allows a lesser benefit for anyone with last minute knowledge of important changes. A bit like Kermit's late entry (156 pts).

Further comments and ideas welcome.


I'm glad you were able to cash in with the bookies on JOD. I wasn't watching the pre-match coverage but I knew something was up when I saw the rush of Pieman interest in O'Donnell from about 7pm.
 
Last edited:
Interesting thoughts all. Not keen on the 60 min cut off on changes as the sub is often not known until after this anyway and it makes it difficult if you are trying to avoid having a player removed because of this. Like X-box-X, I had the benefit of being at the ground and seeing O’Donnell warming up as forward. But even when I’m not at the game, I often set my pieman lineup not long before the start to try and avoid the sub.

It’s not the first time someone has benefited from a defender going forward and it won’t be the last. There was the Rd 1 a few years ago when it made plenty of teams almost obsolete after 1 game.
Just because he played forward does not guarantee he gets a goal or goals, that’s the risk of pieman.

But I will go with the majority here as it’s just a bit of fun (and I have been known to allow my son and daughter to choose my lineup at times).
 
I find it funny that I was also the cause for the biggest rule change ever. The Billy Gowers rule which is the only reason I won in 2018.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Kermit said:
Interesting thoughts all. Not keen on the 60 min cut off on changes as the sub is often not known until after this anyway and it makes it difficult if you are trying to avoid having a player removed because of this. Like X-box-X, I had the benefit of being at the ground and seeing O’Donnell warming up as forward. But even when I’m not at the game, I often set my pieman lineup not long before the start to try and avoid the sub.

It’s not the first time someone has benefited from a defender going forward and it won’t be the last. There was the Rd 1 a few years ago when it made plenty of teams almost obsolete after 1 game.
Just because he played forward does not guarantee he gets a goal or goals, that’s the risk of pieman.

But I will go with the majority here as it’s just a bit of fun (and I have been known to allow my son and daughter to choose my lineup at times).
Click to expand...
Getting your kids involved is a good way to make them Bulldogs for life! :thumbsu:

I don't mind some advantage gained, but within the normal range of scores. I just don't want it to blow the comp apart early in the season, like Billy Gowers did in 2018 or the Bont did in the year I won (2014).

Admittedly the rules were different back then. You chose your team at the start of the year and you were stuck with them for the whole season.
 
Kermit said:
Interesting thoughts all. Not keen on the 60 min cut off on changes as the sub is often not known until after this anyway and it makes it difficult if you are trying to avoid having a player removed because of this. Like X-box-X, I had the benefit of being at the ground and seeing O’Donnell warming up as forward. But even when I’m not at the game, I often set my pieman lineup not long before the start to try and avoid the sub.

It’s not the first time someone has benefited from a defender going forward and it won’t be the last. There was the Rd 1 a few years ago when it made plenty of teams almost obsolete after 1 game.
Just because he played forward does not guarantee he gets a goal or goals, that’s the risk of pieman.

But I will go with the majority here as it’s just a bit of fun (and I have been known to allow my son and daughter to choose my lineup at times).
Click to expand...
Agree with this
As X_box_X said he did post the information on here before the game. I didnt go to the game and i saw the post and considered picking Jod but decided against it [stupidly], so people had the opportunity.
Luck of the draw i think and credit to X_box_x for picking him.
Happy to have it left as is.
 
I think good luck to you if you're at the game and see something - it's still a risk. The complication of the sub not being named until late makes a time restriction challenging - unless you're prepared to risk the Pieman Sub then you couldn't pick anyone named on the bench - even then it could change - or you could have a late change. The rest of you have been participating in this comp for a lot longer than me so if it's a real issue then maybe make it 45 minutes, so the starting sub is known? I think this was one of the worst kept tactical moves in the history of the game anyway and I would be wary of making a reactionary change that may make things more complicated. Happy for no change.
 
I know I was beneficiary so this may not hold weight but I think it adds unnecessary complication for something that rarely happens and it's just luck of draw, it was still a risk as a) O'Donnell is a crap forward and often these moves result in defender kicked nothing anyway and b) when Keith went off for a period of time early in game O'Donnell went back down back for that period and had Keith gone down would have stayed there so could have easily backfired but such is the risk.
 
Appreciate the feedback folks. It seems like nobody minds if someone has a chance of getting 600 points because they were at the game early and spotted an unexpected player warming up with the forwards.

So I won't make any changes to the Pieman rules, at least until end of season. I will review it then.

However I might give certain players what I'd describe as a "safe" handicap for the rest of the season. For instance JOD might get the handicap of a KPF (say 13-18) despite the fact that he is named on the team sheet as a KPD (usual handicap 50+) or on the bench. Other KPDs, like Liam Jones, will remain around the max which is usually 75.
 
dogwatch said:
However I might give certain players what I'd describe as a "safe" handicap for the rest of the season. For instance JOD might get the handicap of a KPF (say 13-18) despite the fact that he is named on the team sheet as a KPD (usual handicap 50+)
Click to expand...
You can obviously handicap players as you see fit, but that seems like an overreaction.

1. JOD is very unlikely to remain forward when Darcy returns, let alone when Darcy AND Naughton are both playing.

2. Everyone has the opportunity to select JOD so giving him a handicap of less than what his true value is going to be almost as effective as simply removing him from the pool so no one can select him. Who in their right mind would select a KPD with a handicap of less than 20?
 
X_box_X said:
You can obviously handicap players as you see fit, but that seems like an overreaction.

1. JOD is very unlikely to remain forward when Darcy returns, let alone when Darcy AND Naughton are both playing.

2. Everyone has the opportunity to select JOD so giving him a handicap of less than what his true value is going to be almost as effective as simply removing him from the pool so no one can select him. Who in their right mind would select a KPD with a handicap of less than 20?
Click to expand...
Well if he’s going to kick two goals every week I would!

When it becomes clear that JOD is again playing in defence regularly and there’s very little reason for MC to be tempted to play him forward, no doubt his handicap will start to increase again. But that could still be close to the end of the season depending on when we have all our regular KPFs back.

Nobody (apart from RandomDog) picks those 40+ players anyway - unless there’s some inside knowledge of a positional change - so it’s all a bit hypothetical. There’s really no impact if nobody was going to pick them. It may in fact make more sense to set upper limits to all handicaps at 40 or 50.
 
PIEMAN RD 14 v Fremantle
Round 14? Aren't we due to have a bye some time soon?

AFL Team | Round 14​


Western Bulldogs v Fremantle Dockers
Saturday June 15, 1:45pm AEST
Marvel Stadium, Docklands • Wurundjeri
Broadcast: Fox Footy/Kayo


B: Lachie Bramble, Liam Jones, Buku Khamis

HB: Taylor Duryea, James O’Donnell, Bailey Dale

C: Ed Richards, Adam Treloar, Bailey Williams

HF: Cody Weightman, Rory Lobb, Jack Macrae

F: Laith Vandermeer, Jamarra Ugle-Hagan, Rhylee West

FOLL: Tim English, Marcus Bontempelli, Tom Liberatore


INT: * Harvey Gallagher, Joel Freijah, Anthony Scott, Ryley Sanders, Caleb Daniel

EMG: Jedd Buslinger, Oskar Baker, Lachie McNeil

* One player to be named WB sub, usually from the Interchange bench.


Pieman Handicaps
Tricky this week. I'm guessing at least one of O'Donnell or Khamis will play forward so I have to handicap them both at the level of a forward. But who knows with Bevo?

1718274652468.png


Pieman Subs

The sequence of Pieman Subs will be:

Bontempelli​
O'Donnell​
Ugle-Hagan​
Treloar​
West​
​
Please pay close attention to the possibility of late outs this week as there are rumours (on BF at least) that there has been a bug going around the squad. Bont has reportedly not trained all week due to illness. With Richards back in the 22 they may decide it's not worth the risk. So if he is a late withdrawal (and possibly others) then O'Donnell becomes sub for a lot of Pieman teams. And if Bevo decides to return O'Donnell to defence this week (with Keath out injured) that leaves a lot of Pieman teams with one player unlikely to even get inside the f50.
 
RandomDog (who unbelievably is in the top half of the leaderboard ... and yes these are genuinely random picks every week) has selected:

Treloar​
Gallagher​
Ugle-Hagan​
Duryea​
Libba​
​
1718276932429.jpeg ​
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Ugle-Hagan
Weightman
West
Macrae
English
 
dogwatch said:
RandomDog (who unbelievably is in the top half of the leaderboard ... and yes these are genuinely random picks every week) has selected:

Treloar​
Gallagher​
Ugle-Hagan​
Duryea​
Libba​
​
Click to expand...
Re. Attachment 2018885..

Sorry Random Dog, Cross stopped playing at Whitten Oval in 2013.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

goodcop badcop
List Mgmt. 2024 Draft Thread
2 3 4 5
Replies
110
Views
6K
willofwest
W
dogwatch
Competitions The Pieman 2023
35 36 37 38 39
Replies
973
Views
37K
Bulldog rick
Bulldog rick
Hoges64
  • Poll
Prediction 2024 Final Ladder predictions competition
Replies
5
Views
173
perro_loco
perro_loco
dogwatch
Review WB Mid Year Report 2024
Replies
16
Views
893
perro_loco
perro_loco
Optimistic Dog
Prediction Bulldogs B&F 2024
Replies
6
Views
344
Snarls Barkley
Snarls Barkley
Mojorisin
Injury Injuries 2024
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
220
Views
16K
Angak
Angak
VitalDread
VFL 2024 VFL Thread
67 68 69 70 71
Replies
2K
Views
76K
goodcop badcop
goodcop badcop

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top