Fantasy Scoring Proposed Changes

Yellow and Red Cards

Firstly, the yellow and red card situation last year was, at best, an annoying distraction and, at worst, game-ending. I can’t actually recall many close outcomes that were decided by cards, but at the time they often felt overly punitive. I understand the purist view that referees apply the laws consistently, but the intent here is that fantasy scores should primarily reflect player performance, rather than refereeing decisions—particularly where many calls are marginal. There is also no universal fantasy standard for card penalties; the -7 for yellow and -15 for red are simply historical settings, so there is no strong reason they cannot be reduced slightly.

Expectations:

• Reduced yellow and red penalties significantly lower volatility, especially for forwards who are more card-exposed.

• Cards still matter, but no longer dominate a player’s total score for the week.

Forward Changes

Secondly, throughout my experience with draft fantasy, locks have consistently been a hit-or-miss position—often one you could ignore for an entire season without materially affecting your results. While some locks clearly outperform others, average scores live in the single digits, with a real risk of negative returns, making the position largely a gamble. Loose forwards and front row players perform better by comparison, but if locks are lifted, the loosies and front row also need to be adjusted so that positional tiers and relative value are maintained.

I've made the same changes to Locks and Loose Forwards, with a slight change to the Front Rows.  I've also backtested the changes against last years data to get an idea of how they might affect their scores.

Changes:

Locks and Loose Forwards

• Turnovers won - increase score from 2 to 4 points,

• Tackles made - increase score from 1 per 3 to 1 per 2,

• Tackles missed - increase score from -3 per 4 to -2 per 4, and

• Lineout steals - increase from 2 to 4.

Front Row

• Turnovers won - increase score from 2 to 4 points,

• Tackles made - increase score from 1 per 9 to 1.5 per 9,

• Tackles missed - increase score from -3 per 4 to -2 per 4, and

• Scrums won (penalty) - increase from 1 to 2.

Backtesting Results and Expectations:

Locks

• Strong proportional improvement in average (5.2 → 8.2), lifting locks from marginal to consistently useful.

• Negative outcomes are reduced (min −3 → −1), limiting weeks where locks are liabilities.

• Ceiling moves slightly (37 → 39), but the main benefit is consistency rather than explosive scores.

• Locks become viable starters rather than depth-only picks.

Loose Forwards

• Largest absolute gain in average scoring (10.0 → 13.7), reflecting the emphasis on tackles and turnovers.

• Downside risk is largely removed (min −7 → −1.5), making the position much safer to start weekly.

• Ceiling expands significantly (33 → 39.6), rewarding elite, high-involvement performances.

• The role now clearly profiles as a premium forward position with both reliability and upside.

Front Row

• Average increases from 11.3 to 18.4 show a meaningful uplift driven mainly by scrums and lineout steals.

• Floor improves sharply (min −19 → −10.1), indicating bad games are far less damaging.

• Ceiling rises modestly (41.7 → 50.8), reinforcing the front row as a steady contributor rather than a spike position.

• Overall effect is greater stability and relevance without overpowering the position.

Overall Outcome

• Forward positions are substantially stronger, more reliable, and more clearly differentiated.

• Floors rise meaningfully across all three groups, while ceilings expand in a controlled but intentional way.

• Loosies remain the most rounded and reliable high-impact forwards, locks gain legitimacy and consistency, and the front row evolves into a high-impact position with genuine upside rather than just stability.

• The changes materially increase forward relevance while preserving the overall balance between forwards and backs and maintaining clear positional identity.