MML Board Meeting Minutes 19th May 2018

1. Call to Order:

The meeting was called to order.

2. Call of the Roll:

Present: Preach, Josiah_Frost and ReznorRulesYou

Late: Thunden

Absent: More_Shots

3. Determination of Quorum:

The meeting was deemed quorate.

4. Commissioners Proposals, Proclamations & Communications:

None at this time.

5. Proposals and Communications from Board Members:

None at this time.

6. MML Blitz:

No Blitz business, for board attention or action, at this time.

7. Consideration of, and Action Upon, Referred Proposals:

i) Proposal from DwarfGiant: If teams are tied at the end of season after taking into account head to head record for relegation deciders would it be possible to have a playoff in rather than a coin toss? There is probably plenty of time post season to arrange and play the game. It would certainly add excitement (and seem fairer). Sponsored by Thunden, seconded by Josiah Frost.

Preach moved to vote, seconded by Josiah_Frost.

Votes in favour: None. Votes against: Preach, Josiah_Frost and Rez

Action: Not Passed.

8. Submissions from Coaches Council:

None at this time.

9. Submissions from Admins:

i) Proposal from Chasejj:
We have been barring mixed and custom teams from the farm since they were introduced to Blood Bowl 2. Proposal that we make this official and add a clause to the farm rules stating that mixed and custom teams will not be granted access.

Moved to consider immediately by Preach, seconded by Rez.

Votes in Favour: Preach, Josiah_Frost and ReznorRulesYou. Votes Against: None.

Action: Motion Passed.

10. Submissions from Coaches at Large and the General Public to include:

i) Proposal from Twelfman:

(Proposal is lengthy and in order to do it justice, full copy, is included at the end of the minutes, in full.)

Action: Proposed by Preach and seconded by Josiah_Frost to be put forward for consideration.

ii) Proposal from Serious_jest:
That the MML adopt the rules contained in the following link:

https://forums.focus-home.com/topic/1199/champions-cup-financial-fair-play-rules

Action: Not Sponsored.

11. Unfinished & Miscellanous Business:

None at this time.

12. Announcement of the Next Regular Session:

To be arranged.

Addendum to the Minutes:

As indicated earlier in the minutes the following is a copy of the proposal from Twelfman in full:

Proposal: Use Strength of Schedule as the primary tiebreaker for ties in competitions.

Strength of Schedule normally takes the points of all played opponents and adds them together. This gives you an indication of how hard a playpool you have had. In a league, this doesn’t work as you all play each other. Instead, you can use the points of the coaches you have beaten.

Imagine as an example there were six coaches in a playpool, two of which were MML champions with powerful teams (A&B) and two were brand new to the game with rookie teams (E&F). The other two are average coaches. The top three coaches will progress to the next round.

Now imagine the two middle coaches, let’s call them coach C and D. Coach C beats the two newbies and loses to the two champions, and coach D beats the champions and loses to the newbies. They drew vs each other. They both have the same points.

W/D/L = 2/1/0
A-6
B-6
C-5
D-5
E-2
F-2

You could use head to head, which is what I believe is used now. This does work in many cases, but it can sometimes go wrong. Imagine instead it looked like this:

A-6
B-6
C-6
D-3
E-2
F-1

Coaches A, B, and C all have one loss and one win versus each other, so head to head doesn’t work. Currently as I understand it, the MML uses a random system to determine who would progress.

With SoS, let’s say that coach A beat coach D and E, B beat E and F, and C beat D and F. This would mean their Strength of Schedule (total points of beaten opponents) would be:

A = (B)5+(D)3+(E)2 = 10
B = (C)5+(E)2+(F)1 = 8
C = (A)5+(D)3+(F)1 = 9

This shows that those three wins from Coach A were against coaches that placed higher, and therefore were more likely tougher opponents, meaning the wins are more impressive. Coach B played the weakest coaches of the playpool (standings wise), and therefore had the ‘easiest’ run. Coach C played coaches that were not as tough overall as A, but tougher than C. In this case, A and C would progress.

You can also include draws, though it might be good practice to half or /3 the points for the draws (depending on how the league awards points.) In this example, a draw is 1/2 a win, so I’ll divide by two.

Assume in the above example everyone drew their other games.

A = 10 + (F)0.5 = 10.5
B = 8 + (D)1.5 = 9.5
C = 9 + (E)1 = 10

C still pips it ahead of B. If though C had say 4 draws and B had 1, but the same points, this could play out differently. You could layer it, so if Wins alone doesn’t sort it, you can use Draws.

If it were like this:

A-7
B-7
C-7
D-0
E-0
F-0

That’s where it gets a bit more interesting. This is where net TD could be used (TD scored – TD conceded). If still a tie, net TD+CAS. If still a tie, then a coin toss.

Also supplied, are the following illustrations:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qkg1KT6Mk-Cewu9WWstMrhgoox7vE_3JGLaZADhkvXk/edit
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G-0ST3E4wvHNGpIXt57BvOn5ClFu5tigSSNam7aJEsc/edit#gid=0

 

 

One comment

  1. What I don’t like about Twelfman’s proposal is that it rewards the those who beat the teams with best records but doesn’t punish them for losing to the teams with the worst records.

Join the Conversation