Super Rugby AU Team of the Week

[dru]

1. Orr
2. Uelese
3. Johnson Holmes
4. Hanigan
5. Hosea
6. Swinton
7. Hooper
8. Naisarani
9. Gordon (Lomani better but doesn't qualify)
10. Deegan
11. Koroibete
12. To'omua
13. Magnay
14. Ramm
15. Maddocks

16. Horton
17. Robertson
18. Ainsley
19. Phillip
20. Dempsey
21. Tate
22. Hunt
23. Hodge

 

[Braveheart81]

Yes as long as it makes sense. E.g if someone picks Hooper at 12 it won’t count, but a 7 or 8 at 6 works. The general guideline would be that they can be chosen for another position provided it’s a position they could be considered for.

As a side note on that, it probably means that unless there is a collective mindset then said player probably won’t make the TOTW. However the votes still tally for that jersey number for the TOTY.

And another question.

How are bench votes counted vs starting votes? Is the bench vote completely independent (i.e. if you get selected in the 16 jersey 4 times and therefore never get selected in the 2 jersey and the other options have 3 picks at 2 and 2 picks at 2, does the player who got picked at 16 4 times effectively rank second there and makes the final team of the season?).

If we agreed that the bench was going to be hooker, LHP, THP, lock, backrower, halfback, inside back, outside back then the consensus bench options could be the player who finished second in each position/grouping. A starting vote could be worth 2 and a bench vote 1.

 

[Braveheart81]

1. Orr
2. Horton
3. Johnson-Holmes
4. Philip
5. Hanigan
6. Dempsey
7. Hooper
8. Naisarani
9. Gordon
10. Harrison
11. Koroibete
12. To'omua
13. Magnay
14. Ramm
15. Maddocks

16. Uelese
17. Robertson
18. Ainsley
19. Hosea
20. Wilkin
21. Powell
22. Deegan
23. Hodge

 

[Froggy]

1. Orr
2. Uelese
3. HJH (Harry Johnson-Holmes)
4. Philip
5. Hanigan
6. Dempsey
7. Hooper
8. Isi
9. Gordon
10. Deegan
11. Korobeite
12. To'omua
13. Paisami
14. Ramm
15. Maddocks

16. Horton
17. Robertson
18. Tupou
19. Hosea
20. Valetini
21. Powell
22. JOC (James O'Connor)
23. Hodge

 

[Silverado]

1. Orr
2. Horton
3. HJH (Harry Johnson-Holmes)
4. Philip
5. Hanigan
6. Kemeny
7. Hooper
8. Naisarani
9. Gordon
10. Deegan
11. Koroibete
12. To'omua
13. Magnay
14. Ramm
15. Maddocks

16. Uelese
17. Robertson
18. Ainsley
19. Hosea
20. Wilkin
21. Powell
22. Harrison
23. Hodge

 

[KOB1987]

And another question.

How are bench votes counted vs starting votes? Is the bench vote completely independent (i.e. if you get selected in the 16 jersey 4 times and therefore never get selected in the 2 jersey and the other options have 3 picks at 2 and 2 picks at 2, does the player who got picked at 16 4 times effectively rank second there and makes the final team of the season?).

If we agreed that the bench was going to be hooker, LHP, THP, lock, backrower, halfback, inside back, outside back then the consensus bench options could be the player who finished second in each position/grouping. A starting vote could be worth 2 and a bench vote 1.

Yes that’s basically what’s happening. In the weekly team the bench votes are just being used as the tie breaker. It happened last week with Blythe and Frost getting 4 starting votes each, but Blythe was on 3 people’s benches and Frost only one, so Blythe got the starting gig and Frost on the bench.

It will be similar with the team of the year, I’ll keep a record of the bench votes but they will only be used to break a tie, as except for the tight 5 they don’t actually reconcile with a starting jersey.

 

[Brumby Runner]

KOB, I really feel for you having to decipher votes from sources who seem to have different opinions of what the team represents.

In my case, I believed the team should have considered only the players who played that particular weekend and only in the positions they played. Others clearly have picked players in positons they didn't play, eg, Wilkin at 6 when he played 7, Dempsey at 6 when he played 8 and Ramm at 14 when he played 11 (quite excellently btw). I am not personally in favour of picking players out of the positions they played in because that requires a few assumptions to be made about how they would have played, not simply measuring how they did play against their direct competitors.

Others again have picked players on form in all rounds to date, not just this weekend. Think there still needs to be some clarity.

 

[Braveheart81]

Ramm at 14 when he played 11 (quite excellently btw).

Ramm was certainly wearing the 14 jersey.

 

[Brumby Runner]

But played on the left wing much to the chagrin I daresay of one Jock Campbell.

 

[KOB1987]

KOB, I really feel for you having to decipher votes from sources who seem to have different opinions of what the team represents.

In my case, I believed the team should have considered only the players who played that particular weekend and only in the positions they played. Others clearly have picked players in positons they didn't play, eg, Wilkin at 6 when he played 7, Dempsey at 6 when he played 8 and Ramm at 14 when he played 11 (quite excellently btw). I am not personally in favour of picking players out of the positions they played in because that requires a few assumptions to be made about how they would have played, not simply measuring how they did play against their direct competitors.

Others again have picked players on form in all rounds to date, not just this weekend. Think there still needs to be some clarity.

It's OK, I just cut and paste then one at a time and then a quick browse to check if any adjustments are needed, doesn't take long.

Reminder that its a Tuesday night cut off, collating the votes and announcing the team is my Wednesday morning project.

 

[Froggy]

I'm happy to follow whatever rules are in place (and I believe the first rules stated you could select a player in a different position to the one he played if it made sense, see KOB's post #2), however if we are actually picking our best side from the weekend's games, surely it would make sense to pick both Naisarani and Dempsey in the back row, especially considering Dempsey has played a lot of 6 (and may have even moved there when Holloway came on, I don't remember).
Likewise Ramm, who has played on both wings this season, could surely be picked on the other side if he and Korobeite were (in the opinion of the person selecting the side) the best two wingers on show.

 

[KOB1987]

I'm happy to follow whatever rules are in place (and I believe the first rules stated you could select a player in a different position to the one he played if it made sense, see KOB's post #2), however if we are actually picking our best side from the weekend's games, surely it would make sense to pick both Naisarani and Dempsey in the back row, especially considering Dempsey has played a lot of 6 (and may have even moved there when Holloway came on, I don't remember).
Likewise Ramm, who has played on both wings this season, could surely be picked on the other side if he and Korobeite were (in the opinion of the person selecting the side) the best two wingers on show.

Thats all true, and in principle there is no reason why a coach wouldn't pick 2 strike wingers, similar depending on the game plan may pick 2 set piece locks instead on one set piece and one work rate. In those two positions I'm just pooling the votes and will pick the two highest ranking wingers and 2 highest ranking locks, at least for the TOTW, for the TOTY it will probably be a bit more scrutinised. The #6 jersey is interesting this week, almost everyone has picked Hooper and Naisarani but there are 3 contenders for the #6 - Dempsey/Wilkin/Kemeny - with 2 of those being picked there 'out of position'. SO I just have to run with whoever gets the most votes.

 

[dru]

KOB, I really feel for you having to decipher votes from sources who seem to have different opinions of what the team represents.

In my case, I believed the team should have considered only the players who played that particular weekend and only in the positions they played. Others clearly have picked players in positons they didn't play, eg, Wilkin at 6 when he played 7, Dempsey at 6 when he played 8 and Ramm at 14 when he played 11 (quite excellently btw). I am not personally in favour of picking players out of the positions they played in because that requires a few assumptions to be made about how they would have played, not simply measuring how they did play against their direct competitors.

Others again have picked players on form in all rounds to date, not just this weekend. Think there still needs to be some clarity.

This is what I have at least been trying to do. Your example of Dempsey is good. Would have slotted him into 6 but he didnt play there.

 

[The Honey Badger]

KOB, I really feel for you having to decipher votes from sources who seem to have different opinions of what the team represents.

In my case, I believed the team should have considered only the players who played that particular weekend and only in the positions they played. Others clearly have picked players in positons they didn't play, eg, Wilkin at 6 when he played 7, Dempsey at 6 when he played 8 and Ramm at 14 when he played 11 (quite excellently btw). I am not personally in favour of picking players out of the positions they played in because that requires a few assumptions to be made about how they would have played, not simply measuring how they did play against their direct competitors.

Others again have picked players on form in all rounds to date, not just this weekend. Think there still needs to be some clarity.

Need to get everyone on the same format

why not

2 Props
1 Hooker
2 Locks
3 Backrow
1X9
1X10
2X centres
3 X Outside backs

That would give a bit of fleibilty without worrying what number on the back. It is never actually going to play as a team

 

[TSR]

Agree with the above. Why have too many rules. If people consistently pick players out of position it’s hardly going to make a difference in the long run because they are unlikely to win a spot based on the 20% of voters who do that.

If by the end a Harry Wilson, Jack Dempsey or maybe Matt To'omua (if he gets moved back to 10) is good enough to secure a spot in the cumulative TOTW in an alternate position on the basis they were so good that people didn’t feel they could leave them out is that really a bad outcome? I’d actually say it’s a pretty good one.

In the meantime if the odd left field selection comes in or a few people get their THs & LHs mixed up, what’s the harm really.

Let’s not overthink it.

 

[KOB1987]

I'm not opposed to that but really all that does is make different rules, not fewer of them. Stick to the original format but what I suggest is we give the bench elects half a vote each, so that if their cumulative vote is higher than the others they will get the gig. It might be a bit subjective as to what position they are picked sometimes but I will just use my initiative and will put it to the forum if needed.

 

[dru]

Just select from the positions they played. It isn't rocket science.

Clarity might come by making it a pole and you click for each number who you prefer. Ofc it would take some work each week.

Guys, just select from who played based on the number on their back. If you are watching the games it shouldn't be hard.

 

[Derpus]

Glad to see Maddocks put his hands up a bit - starting to look mighty thin at fullback.

 

[dru]

Glad to see Maddocks put his hands up a bit - starting to look mighty thin at fullback.

Maddocks would be my choice too. But Hodge and DHP. It isn't too thin.

 

[KOB1987]

Maddocks would be my choice too. But Hodge and DHP. It isn't too thin.

Jack needs to back up this week. Next week too. And the one after that. Etc. Both Jacks in fact.