If you could introduce one new rule....

..to FPL what would it be? Even if you could remove or alter an existing one?

I think 3 players from the one team is too many, would like to see it reduced to 2.

Thoughts?

KevIRL

Get rid of Vice captain

alchemist33

No wildcards but you can accumulate up to 15 free transfers if you want.

2-5-3

Mr.Nice Guy

I'd like to have the option of switching the captaincy to a player who hasn't played yet. I would limit it to once a gameweek.

I've seen this in other games like the World Cup one.

It would mean if you stuck it on Lukaku on Saturday and he gets you say 12 points, you have to weigh up whether to switch it to RVP who is playing on Sunday. It introduces a gamble element into proceedings.

OneColdHand

Some kind of rule to bring the bench into it.

For example, you are allowed to sub one player on the bench for one player on the field.
(and I don't mean the autosub of a player who doesn't play out for someone on the bench who does. I mean if one of your big name players has a 2 point special, you can sub him for one of your bench warming heroes who has bagged an assist).

It would mean the bench player are more important, and you would have to think about who you pick for all 15 positions, not just a strong 11. It would also allow you to take a few more punts on players, as if the punt doesn't work out, you can bring in a solid bench player instead.

This would also reflect a little bit what happens in a real game: if a player isn't performing, he is subbed for someone!

Might be tricky to implement, but was something I thought of last season after having a few high scoring players on the bench!

Mr.Prodston

OneColdHand wrote: »

Some kind of rule to bring the bench into it.

For example, you are allowed to sub one player on the bench for one player on the field.
(and I don't mean the autosub of a player who doesn't play out for someone on the bench who does. I mean if one of your big name players has a 2 point special, you can sub him for one of your bench warming heroes who has bagged an assist).

It would mean the bench player are more important, and you would have to think about who you pick for all 15 positions, not just a strong 11. It would also allow you to take a few more punts on players, as if the punt doesn't work out, you can bring in a solid bench player instead.

This would also reflect a little bit what happens in a real game: if a player isn't performing, he is subbed for someone!

Might be tricky to implement, but was something I thought of last season after having a few high scoring players on the bench!

Jimmy "Feck!ng" Kebe :eek: :eek: Oh how he haunts me still with those glorious 15 points on the bench just out of reach for being the second sub

F1ngers

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'd like to have the option of switching the captaincy to a player who hasn't played yet. I would limit it to once a gameweek.

I've seen this in other games like the World Cup one.

It would mean if you stuck it on Lukaku on Saturday and he gets you say 12 points, you have to weigh up whether to switch it to RVP who is playing on Sunday. It introduces a gamble element into proceedings.

Or if Lukaku got -2 for own goals or a red card, do you swap for a different captain? Decisions, decisions.

CSF

Surely all this would lessen the importance of picking the right captain, and benching the right players. Thus assisting those who make bad choices at the expense of those who make good choices. Why would one want that unless they typically make bad choices?

moreau

Get rid of January wildcard

That is all

8-10

Don't publicise the transfer in/out data. Thus preventing the likes of Fiso from predicting price rises.

Also a goalkeeper scoring should be worth at least 10pts

roryc

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'd like to have the option of switching the captaincy to a player who hasn't played yet. I would limit it to once a gameweek.

I've seen this in other games like the World Cup one.

It would mean if you stuck it on Lukaku on Saturday and he gets you say 12 points, you have to weigh up whether to switch it to RVP who is playing on Sunday. It introduces a gamble element into proceedings.

I would absolutely hate this, it's the main reason I don't really play the other FF games.

Iused2likebusts

moreau wrote: »

Get rid of January wildcard

That is all

id like to see that aswell and a points hit increased to 6 pts.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

roryc wrote: »

I would absolutely hate this, it's the main reason I don't really play the other FF games.

Its stressful enough as is, don't make me pick my captain twice ffs. My head would explode.

speedicut

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

points hit increased to 6 pts.

Good idea

Agueroooo

moreau wrote: »

Get rid of January wildcard

That is all

Not a bad idea at all.

Mr.Prodston

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

id like to see that aswell and a points hit increased to 6 pts.

Ouch, I don't think I'd like that. It's the perfect risk and reward as it is. The price of a clean-sheet/goal. If you gain extra points after that it kudos to you for taking the risk and spotting something.

I like being a renegade that plays by no rules but my own....and I have no rules :eek:

roryc

Yep, increased points hits would be interesting. A lot of the time players take risks which imo are -EV, yet when they pull them off it justifies their gamble. Results orientated thinking is a flawed way of measuring whether a points hit was correct or not. You may just have gotten lucky.

FG will insist points hits can work and he has a good record with them, but I still think they are not worth it in the long run. At 5 or 6 points a hit they are categorically not worth it. That said, at 4 points a hit it's definitely up for debate, which means the FF kings have nailed it.

deebag14

2-5-3!!

Mr.Nice Guy

CSF wrote: »

Surely all this would lessen the importance of picking the right captain, and benching the right players. Thus assisting those who make bad choices at the expense of those who make good choices. Why would one want that unless they typically make bad choices?

It would lessen the importance of the captaincy, yes. I believe that would be a positive thing.

There's not a great deal of skill required in picking the captaincy most weeks.

Double points for a captain often leads to people salvaging a good week through one star performer when in my view all-round knowledge, i.e. points from your total XI, ought to take precedence.

CSF

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

It would lessen the importance of the captaincy, yes. I believe that would be a positive thing.

There's not a great deal of skill required in picking the captaincy most weeks.

Double points for a captain often leads to people salvaging a good week through one star performer when in my view all-round knowledge, i.e. points from your total XI, ought to take precedence.

If picking the captain didn't require a great deal of skill, then it wouldn't have a large amount of importance to begin with, because everyone would have the right one, leading to those with the all-round knowledge taking precedence.

Nozebleed

the captaincy should be done away with altogether. many lads in our league had rvp as captain for almost the entire season. it was ridiculous. it would be far more interesting without the captaincy.

Mr.Nice Guy

CSF wrote: »

If picking the captain didn't require a great deal of skill, then it wouldn't have a large amount of importance to begin with, because everyone would have the right one, leading to those with the all-round knowledge taking precedence.

There's no great skill involved in having to choose between Bale or Van Persie (or Suarez the weeks he was available). This was the dilemma for most weeks last season and it is a glorified coin toss, particularly when you have all of these players in your team anyway.

It's like that gag from one of the Simpson's episodes where Moe is in a contest trying to be named best barman:

'And now for the final round where the points are worth double thus rendering the earlier rounds pointless.'

Nozebleed wrote:

the captaincy should be done away with altogether. many lads in our league had rvp as captain for almost the entire season. it was ridiculous. it would be far more interesting without the captaincy.

Agreed, but I can't see them ditching it altogether.

Thatsfootball

Be allowed maybe a few times per season to field 12 players i.e. you can't decide to play X/Y so you play an extra man, costs maybe 2 points and only allowed 5 times p/season.

Alternatively have a retrospective sub rule for once a season, but not on last GW, where you can sub on a player with a big haul in place of another who has played

alchemist33

Captaincy choice is one of the most rewarding and/or frustrating elements if the game. Taking it away would be a disaster, IMO. Nobody gets anywhere in a league by lucky captaining alone.

john.han

Assists should actually have to be assists.

Mr.Prodston

john.han wrote: »

Assists should actually have to be assists.

Shush...#JusticeForBale :pac:

Jax Teller

john.han wrote: »

Assists should actually have to be assists.

They do this season afaik

Actually maybe not

madma

the jammyness in the game is frustrating

id like to see a check in box or an automatic one, as in you need to have logged into your team that week for it to be counted cause theres so many that get lucky with subs and vice captain for instance so if they didn't log on that week to view there team..they get no changes like no subs or vicecaptain etc etc

madma

john.han wrote: »

Assists should actually have to be assists.

the problem there is they like to reward the big name players , like I remember rooney getting 2 assists one year and neither were assists..people were going mad. - + cause a lot of assists are deflected or bobbled off diff people, they like to give assist points as much as possible to bump up the points given in general otherwise there wouldn't be many assists and be a bit boring

CSF

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

There's no great skill involved in having to choose between Bale or Van Persie (or Suarez the weeks he was available). This was the dilemma for most weeks last season and it is a glorified coin toss, particularly when you have all of these players in your team anyway.

I strongly strongly disagree, and again as I said, if there was no skill involved, there would be very little variance in profit over the 38 game season rendering it a non-issue.

manual_man

$hifty wrote: »

..to FPL what would it be? Even if you could remove or alter an existing one?

I think 3 players from the one team is too many, would like to see it reduced to 2.

Thoughts?

That Lemlin v RoryC bickering would be put to bed. ONCE AND FOR ALL

IrishIrish

The option to cash in your Wildcard for a certain amount of points(16?) at any stage.

bodking

I think you should be penalised more for an own goal ( should be double the points for a goal ) and being sent of should be a straight 10 points and you shouldnt be allowed to transfer out untill you serve the match ban .

Mr.Prodston

bodking wrote: »

I think you should be penalised more for an own goal ( should be double the points for a goal ) and being sent of should be a straight 10 points and you shouldnt be allowed to transfer out untill you serve the match ban .

Wow. We're not the FA here :eek:

I don't want to get on your bad side :pac:

bodking

Mr.Prodston wrote: »

Wow. We're not the FA here :eek:

I don't want to get on your bad side :pac:

Lol im not that bad it just baffles me that an own goal is -2 it should be at least -5 , the amount of times that an own goal has swayed a match it should be penalised more harshly than -2 .
And a red card -3 is laughable at best and then you just transfer out :eek:

roryc

manual_man wrote: »

That Lemlin v RoryC bickering would be put to bed. ONCE AND FOR ALL

Easiest way to end it is if he does a Carlcon...

john.han

bodking wrote: »

I think you should be penalised more for an own goal ( should be double the points for a goal ) and being sent of should be a straight 10 points and you shouldnt be allowed to transfer out untill you serve the match ban .

That's very harsh, most own goals are the result of being unlucky, they are not necessarily poor defending, it's far worse defending for example to concede a penalty.

I think straight reds should be more serious though so would agree with increasing the points penalty, but not the transfer suggestion.

CSF

roryc wrote: »

Easiest way to end it is if he does a Carlcon...

Lads, there is only one way to solve this. WWE style. 2 man H2H league. Loser can never wrestle in the Fantasy Sports Arena. CSF Special Guest Referee.

Lemlin

roryc wrote: »

Easiest way to end it is if he does a Carlcon...

And why would I do a Carlcon and not you?

Carlcon was a top player and is a loss to the forum if you ask me.

You had your chance to get rid of me last year with our wager but you failed. I was hoping you'd give me a reason to retire from here.

Therefore you've no one to blame for my presence here but yourself.

Lemlin

CSF wrote: »

Lads, there is only one way to solve this. WWE style. 2 man H2H league. Loser can never wrestle in the Fantasy Sports Arena. CSF Special Guest Referee.

I already offered a wager last season to RoryC where if he beat me I'd never post again.

He didn't offer similar terms in response. Instead he is no longer allowed to whinge on the forum.

I say ban us both until after the season starts. That'll allow others not to have to read us sniping at each other.

And will teach us both not to do it in future. A good two week ban to let us think about our previous indiscretion.

Surely that will put an end to it for the season ahead.

Or even a month ban. It's only fair. It's going on years now so, like Manual Man says, it needs sorting for once and for all.

S.M.B.

I'd take a good 2 pages of roryc/lemlin bickering ahead of bulls**t Michael Turner in-jokes any day.

Now that's doing a good job of keeping me in retirement.

FutureGuy

Right lads. I think today I've had my fill of both Rory and Lemlin. Perhaps I have been too easy on both of you.

As a moderator, the worst thing is for two of your more active posters to constantly derail the thread. In addition, to defy the orders of a moderator is frowned upon. Finally, telling me what to so is also bull.

So here it is. Either if ye step out of line again, you are getting an unreversable 1-month ban.

I will stretch this to a lifetime ban if I see fit. I'm PMing you both now.

CSF

I really think my idea could be very exciting..

theRB

Clearance off the line: 3pts for outfield players

massdebater

No January wildcard. Instead replace it with a 'Captain Gameweek' where every single player of your starting 11 scores double points. This can only be used once in the season.

CSF

massdebater wrote: »

No January wildcard. Instead replace it with a 'Captain Gameweek' where every single player of your starting 11 scores double points. This can only be used once in the season.

What purpose does this serve?

massdebater

CSF wrote: »

What purpose does this serve?

It would be fun. Everyone would need to decide which gameweek their team will score the most points.

roryc

massdebater wrote: »

It would be fun. Everyone would need to decide which gameweek their team will score the most points.

There's enough luck in the game as it is.