DT TALK Live 2013 – Rd 7

Another massive week of DT (after a shocker last weekend)… Roy, Calvin and Warnie talk you through the big weekend ahead with a few laughs over a few beers.

WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Part 1: http://youtu.be/iuoXRLku0KA
Part 2: http://youtu.be/NTNUeXmizJ4

Congratulations to Tom as the winner of the Workwear Hub Caterpillar Insulated Twill Jacket in last week’s DT Headline Twitter competition. The winning tweet is below. Tune into DT Talk Live next week for the next WorkwearHub.com.au competition.

 

Please share this with your friends! Thanks to our loyal viewers! We love doing what we do and we hope we can help you with your team… and enjoy playing DT. Be sure to give us all a follow on Twitter and give us a like on Facebook… and even subscribe on YouTube.

16 Comments

  • Great episode fellas. Quite hilarious this week!

  • Think I may have hurt myself laughing at the bulimic pig.

    Absolute gold.

    Its moronic that you don’t have your own foxtel show.

  • Good work guys. Hey if (when) u get the tv show going, would u mix it up a bit and consider bringing back some of the old school skits?
    The live show is awesome but some of those skits where hilarious

    • For sure. The lack of them is purely a time factor. With our jobs and all of the work it is to manage the site and do our other things like Assistant Coach articles, our time is pretty thin. If someone have us the opportunity to spend more time than an hour or two on a Thursday night, then we’d massively want to make skits, etc.

      We always come up with ideas, but we just don’t have the time and resources to so them!

      • warnie, what should I do downgrade stevenson to vlastuin or laird?????

      • warnie, what should I do downgrade stevenson to vlastuin or laird????? lairds got lower be and is 50k cheaper but vlastuin probably higher scoring ability and job security?

  • Locking Swan Now that i have watched this

  • Hi Guys, I got a question for you blokes, I’m trying to decide between bring in Ablett, Stevie or Watson. Can you help.

  • I would love to bring in Ablett but if I bring in one of the others I have more money.

    I would love Stevie J, what do you guys think.

  • Great episode fellas!

    Quick one – looking at downgrading a Portlet to get in Vlast. Now I would normally have said Stevenson ahead of Heath and Pittard but with no bench cover its all pointing towards Pittard. Should I risk it and trade out Stevo or play safe with Pittard?

  • Very convincing Calvin! Just changed from Gablett back to Swan. Hope I don’t regret it…

  • what the hell is going on with Dixon he was named, now hes not grr

  • Further thoughts on Bye arrangements.

    Objectives:
    – want a simple solution that everyone can understand,
    – details should be clarified in advance by VS,
    – coaches shouldn’t be forced into “unwise” trades just to survive bye rounds,
    – coaches with better teams, and better planning, should still be able to get a bit of advantage.

    Option 1:
    – Simplest solution is to have best 18 scores out of 30, no captains or emergencies.

    Option 2:
    – Best 18 from 22 (i.e. we have to have players on ground).
    Some coaches with better teams during a round might feel disadvantaged if they have more players than needed on a line. But the bigger issue here is treatment of emergencies (discussed later).
    – This is where we are with VS now, although they haven’t clarified enough details.

    Option 3:
    – Best 18 from 22 with Captains.
    Nominating a captain means you have ’19’ scores which isn’t a big deal. The major issue here is what happens if Captain gets 5 and is your 20th best score on the ground? My view is if you have Captains, then you have to have C & V as locked in scores, then take your next 16 best scores on the ground.
    I think this would create a bit more interest and provide some incentives for better planners/coaches, e.g. 2 captain candidates in each bye round.

    Option 4:
    – Best 18 from 22 with Captains and Emergencies
    – Your score would be Capt x 2 + Vice + next best 16 on ground + any nominated emergencies (in order of highest) to make up 16 if necessary.

    An issue here is if you have excess players on a line as emergencies, are they only called on if a player on that line doesn’t play or are they covering everyone. Similarly is the first cover for a non player on the field the other 21 players on the field, or just an emergency on that line? In my view we should be exhausting the players on the field first to be consistent with ‘best 18’ approach.

    We may be at the mercy of what VS has already coded, and what they are willing to change. However, I think it is important we at least get VS to clarify more details so it is fair for everyone when they are doing their planning.

    • I was a massive fan of just best 18 scorers from your 30, so we didn’t have to worry about position.

      As it is understood, bench players won’t count at all… I don’t think emergencies come into play at all to be honest (I could be wrong), and this is what gives it some strategy, albeit not a huge benefit to people being smart.

      Interesting point on Captains – I didn’t think about that. I guess if their score isn’t in the top 18 scorers (even when doubled), it just doesn’t count.

      FROM VIRTUAL SPORTS ON DT SITE:

      BYE ROUNDS – ‘Best 18’ Scoring – to better-reflect the actual competition, during the multi-bye Rounds 11, 12 and 13, you’ll score from your best 18 players only in any position, from your selected, on-field Starting 22. You’ll still need to ensure that your best available players are in your starting 22 line-up.

      • The way I understood it, it’s something like Option 3, isn’t it?

        I don’t see how you can have Emergencies in this situation, for the reasons that Nix mentioned. And in the end, they should only count if you had 22 NAMED players prior to lockout, otherwise you are just rorting the system in terms of heading into the MBR’s with a poor structure.

        A team that had 4 DEFS playing but 9 MIDS playing in one round shouldn’t have the option to play that 9th midfielder. That’s just bad coaching.

        Also, re. Captains, this is how I intuitively interpreted how it worked: If your Captain produces a score that’s in your best 18 scores, then it gets doubled. Say that your ‘C’ scores 5 points, assuming this is the 19th or 20th best score in on your field that week, then it doesn’t count (effectively a 0), meaning that your Vice-Captain now assumes the captaincy (as they would in any other week where your Captain score is 0).

        Not sure whether this is ‘fair’ or something that we should be trying to promote, but I think of it this way: if you are awarded the advantage of dropping off your weakest scores if you structure your team well (ie have as many players in each round as possible), then why shouldn’t this extend to your Captain?

        For instance, it would suck to have to take Captain Swanny’s injury-affected 5-point total (doubled to 10 with Captaincy), when you have structured up solidly and your 19th scorer gets 65 or something – but doesn’t count because you were forced to include your Captain in the Best 18.

  • Counting only 18 scores gives everyone up to 4 donuts without penalty (tick)

    ‘Best 18’ rather than ‘nominated 18’ gives coaches with more players in a round some advantage, without them having to agonize over who to put on the ground/nominate (tick).

    Captaincy isn’t effected by Byes, because you have the option to pick a new captain each week. Even if you only have 10 players you can still pick a Captain and Vice. The quality of candidates varies, but that is manageable as you want to spread your guns across the byes anyway. There is no more risk of a Captain getting a 5 in Bye round, compared to any other round, so coaches don’t need any extra protection during byes. With 6 teams missing, DT teams will be more similar, so captain choice will be an important POD. So my view is if you have captains they are locks (+vice) and captain works same as normal, or you don’t have them at all.

    Emergencies – yes I agree they add a complication that isn’t all that helpful, although I still see that coaches with players on bench who play are going to feel they didn’t get any advantage from that. But I think we just have to live with that now that VS have made it 18/22 not 18/30.

    I’ve already changed my spreadsheet for the coming week so it gives coaches a count of players who could play in each round (excluding bench overflow). My team has bench overflow in 2 rounds – both times Currie (NM ruck) who hasn’t played yet anyway, so I can hardly complain about not being able to field him during Byes.

    I can probably change spreadsheet further so that it automatically lists coaches players for each bye round with their projections/averages and a total of highest 18 so coaches can see what their scores will look like during bye each round (if everyone got their average).