-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
GB: Wicket-Keepers
- Thread starter Rich2001
- Start date
Not really Marc, because those teams own them therefore if there was none left GB would have to generate some for those with only one WK.... and we have all seen how most of the random player can turn out.marc71178 said:What if all the keepers have gone by then? Those managers with more than 2 keepers have you all over a barrel!
A top WK avgeraging 60+ in both forms isn't much to ask is it??? :saint:
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
Erm how exactly?
You know you have to have 2 keepers for this by the end of the trading - if you don't then you have broken the rules - I don't see how you can have a random keeper generated, who could turn out to be a world beater.
In the FWC, the rule quite clearly stated a cut-off point, and therefore no rules were broken.
You know you have to have 2 keepers for this by the end of the trading - if you don't then you have broken the rules - I don't see how you can have a random keeper generated, who could turn out to be a world beater.
In the FWC, the rule quite clearly stated a cut-off point, and therefore no rules were broken.
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
"2 WKs by the end of the draft or 2 WKs by the end of the post-draft trading?" was answered by GB with "2 by the end of the trading".
Therefore, those with 3+ WKs will be in a v.strong trading position. If you've knowingly not picked a second wickie (and there's plenty in the draft) in hope of a 50/60 random - IMO that's cheating.
There are enough to go round in the draft, and it someone ends with <2 WKs, a random with averages <10 ought to be allocated.
Therefore, those with 3+ WKs will be in a v.strong trading position. If you've knowingly not picked a second wickie (and there's plenty in the draft) in hope of a 50/60 random - IMO that's cheating.
There are enough to go round in the draft, and it someone ends with <2 WKs, a random with averages <10 ought to be allocated.
Last edited:
Have you counted the total number of keepers...?If every team has to have 2 then there have to be atleast 60 keepers in the whole database.Besides ppl ahead in the draft could delibrately pick more than 2 keepers so that they can take advantage of a team that has failed to get 2 keepers.
I think the way to go would be to generate the keepers with very poor avgs for teams that arent able to get the 2 keepers instead of getting them to trade 4 1.
Sriram
I think the way to go would be to generate the keepers with very poor avgs for teams that arent able to get the 2 keepers instead of getting them to trade 4 1.
Sriram
The Argonaut
State Vice-Captain
Before round 3 and 4 of the draft have been run there was 45 wicket keepers available. I think that should be plenty for everybody. There should be no excuses.
