Factor opinion wrote: I'm not sure that there's a need to stoop to abuse here RL.
I still don't see how my maths is wrong. Nor is my opinion “wrong”, which is only that EP were competitive this year (and I think we agree about that). The fact is that EP had more points to play with in 2020 than any other club, but they did not use them all in 2020.
As for my “theory” ... well I have not expressed any theory, I've just pointed out what the rules are.
I have offered no opinion at all about what individual players are worth, but in my opinion, despite the expressed object of Rule 2, the rules cannot possibly accurately “value” individual players because each player is unique, but the rules can (and do) attempt make a generalisation about how players of particular playing experience might affect the competitiveness of a club who recruits them. We can all find examples that support our own “valuation” of a player’s contribution being different to the points allocated to them on recruitment (this includes players who have given greater “value”). You clearly have a view about Olango. What would you think if EP could get Grundy in 2021 for 12 points?
I don’t know why AFL allocated players are assigned 0 points but that is what the rule makers have done. However, in my opinion, it is very difficult to compare the “value” of an allocated (eg via alignment) player and a player who is actively recruited by a WAFL club. I have read many posts on this site from disgruntled Royals supports bemoaning the efforts of WCE players when they played for EP during the alignment. I suspect that many of those posts would think 0 points is about right, but I am not debating the alignment issues.
My point really is this – the object of the points rules can only be effective if the clubs use their allocated points wisely. But the rules do not mandate any level of competence in WAFL football departments. Like many rules hoping to even the playing field, they assume rationality and perfect knowledge (but we all know that is not the real world).
The objective Rule 2 is:
“The Senior Player Points List uses a points allocation system to assess the relative strength of each Player based on their playing background. Importantly, the Senior Player Points List imposes a ‘cap’ on the relative strength of a WAFL Club to ensure that no one WAFL Club has a list of Players substantially stronger than any other WAFL Club. The classification of Players in this manner ensures equalisation across the WAFL to the overall advantage of all WAFL Clubs.”
I think that we agree that it has been effective in EP’s case in 2020, and in my opinion, it has been effective for the competition overall.
Not trying to be abusive Factor its just that i don't feel that the extra 20 points we've been allocated has had much of a bearing on our competitive performances,especially when you consider that we've only used 10 of those extra points,which equates to 1 ex AFL listed players,and we must bear in mind that Jeremy Barnard was given the onerous task to fill the 12 to 14 player list hole which was the obvious consequence of the transition,and i don't believe an extra 20 points,which equates to 2 ex afl players adequately covers the massive player drain,but we always knew that the divorce would leave us in that post alignment position,and i attribute our competitiveness to the Developmental ability of our coach who won a championship in the elite under 18s competition in Melbourne,and the return of a favourite son in Barney who has openly admitted that his 15 year stint in melbourne has made him a much more rounded and knowledgeable footy person, has been a major boon for the club.
