My idea

[marc71178]

Whatever the points for or against it do u agree Marc tht the amount of trading will decrease by a HUGE amount because of the rule??

No I don't necessarily think that - I think the trades that do go ahead will be better planned though.

Its trading thts the best part abt the game for many ppl....
If u cut it down to very low levels ppl cud easily lose interest.
Ur point abt ethos and all could be debated on and on but the fact remains tht it will decrease interest a great deal....

If trading's the best part, let's just scrap the games and all trade for the rest of time then!

By Ethos I mean the entire point about making so teams are MORE equal, not less. At the moment that is just not happening.

Maintaining the FUN factor in the game is I think much more important than anything else.For many managers this is what this rule undermines.

Yes and where is the FUN for the majority of managers when a handful of teams monopolise the game, as will happen if things aren't addressed.

Finally I wud like it if there was an open poll....From the opinions in this thread heres wht I guage... (snip)

It is an open poll - hence anyone can vote. Funny how you go on about that list of people, yet one of the people on that list hasn't posted anything on the thread yet, and another hasn't posted anything along the lines of "Never". So how can you gauge someone's opinion, when he's not even posted?

 

[marc71178]

It was brought in so tht there wudnt be cases where 1 team had 25 players in the squad and had a retaining problem.Just so tht each team contributes an equal 6 players in the draft.

And what is equal about the 6 players going to other sides in exchange for players that would've been dropped, thus significantly weakening the pool?

Nobody has yet answered the question I posed about why people were happy for finance (which would've restricted a squad's strength) to be introduced, yet not this (which when it boils down to it, does exactly the same as a finance (salary cap) would've done)

 

[Sriram k]

No I don't necessarily think that - I think the trades that do go ahead will be better planned though.

Lets try and implement it we will see the amount of trading done...!! Im not the only 1 who thinks this way!!

If trading's the best part, let's just scrap the games and all trade for the rest of time then!

I mean the best part AFTER winning!!

By Ethos I mean the entire point about making so teams are MORE equal, not less. At the moment that is just not happening.

Yes and where is the FUN for the majority of managers when a handful of teams monopolise the game, as will happen if things aren't addressed.

This part has been answered well by rich nothing more I cud add.

It is an open poll - hence anyone can vote. Funny how you go on about that list of people, yet one of the people on that list hasn't posted anything on the thread yet, and another hasn't posted anything along the lines of "Never". So how can you gauge someone's opinion, when he's not even posted? [/B]

Open poll meaning I get to know who has voted yes and who has voted no....
Hmm was talking to rich on msn when I posted and he said he was thinking NO atm and also asked him whether I cud mention him in the thread.

 

[Rich2001]

No I don't necessarily think that - I think the trades that do go ahead will be better planned though.

Just a minor worry here is the inactive users, they will be punished for not being able to be here as offten as some of us, and if they come here to get a player and he has already been traded away, he/she can't go to the new club and enquire.

(WCC seems to be on a turnaround of 6 months for a season, therefore trade always happenes in the busy holiday months)

 

[Sriram k]

Mumabi - Were also very very strong, they ruled WCC last season yet due to trades and forcing them to drop certain players they (Sorry Sriram) are probley one of the worse sides in D1 in both forms this season, seems hard to say a gulf is there, where a team rules one season and the newxt they are facing demotion.

Thanks for pointing tht out! I agree Mumbai have been 1 of the worst in the whole game let alone division 1 in the one day department.Just shows the draft system must really be working well in getting the teams back even.And yes it does keep the interest alive when the cup isnt taken by a team for a longer period of time.

Sriram

 

[marc71178]

Just a minor worry here is the inactive users, they will be punished for not being able to be here as offten as some of us, and if they come here to get a player and he has already been traded away, he/she can't go to the new club and enquire.

Why not Rich?

There's no rule being used about a player only moving once in a period.

 

[Blewy]

Its funny that 15 votes have been recorded but yet only about 6-7 people have given thier views...

 

[Sriram k]

Why not Rich?

There's no rule being used about a player only moving once in a period.

My understanding is tht if a player has move to another club in a deal then according to the rule the new player HAS to be retained isnt it?
So wouldnt tht make the player move only once...once hes traded he has to be retained he cannot be traded away!

Sriram

 

[Rich2001]

Why not Rich?

There's no rule being used about a player only moving once in a period.

Because at the very start you said a traded in player must be retained, therefore I see that as not being able to trade them on again as iam not retianing them.

 

[aditya]

This means u r contridicting ur own idea which says a player can be traded just once and has to be retained.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

If a player is traded into a side during the trade period, he MUST be retained in the 10 players retained prior to the draft.

Or maybe he means that we can't release the player to the draft but we can actually trade the player again.

 

[Blewy]

Yeah thats what he means Mr M...

 

[Rich2001]

Yeah thats what he means Mr M...

Then why didn't he just say that in the first place :P

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Then why didn't he just say that in the first place :P

Because it's Marc. :P

 

[aditya]

Then also i think its not good as no one will take crap players again.If i get one good and 2 ordinary players then i wont be able to trade them as then r bad.

For good players in the draft there r many good academy players in the draft which all the weak teams will only get.So weak teams r getting good players in the draft as they r ahead in the draft.so this means one the weak team will get good players in the draft and also then will get to retain the best 10 and good teams have to throw away their good players in the draft after retaining 10 better.

Now isnt this baised against the strong team.

If this is implemented then this also should be included that we can drop the draft picks if we want.So good teams will get to retain their players.

 

[marc71178]

Its funny that 15 votes have been recorded but yet only about 6-7 people have given thier views...

People are allowed to vote without posting though aren't they? Perhaps they just don't feel like speaking, but do want to register their opinion.

 

[marc71178]

Then why didn't he just say that in the first place :P

I didn't say otherwise because this one trade thing had already been turned down.

It may have been unclear from the start there.

 

[Blewy]

People are allowed to vote without posting though aren't they? Perhaps they just don't feel like speaking, but do want to register their opinion.

Oh yeah i just found it funny, i mean if people were supporting the idea i would have thought they would have backed it up a little, so far its just you who is 100% behind this and then Myself and Rich who are split down the middle...

 

[marc71178]

Then also i think its not good as no one will take crap players again.If i get one good and 2 ordinary players then i wont be able to trade them as then r bad.

That's the whole point - the manager has to decide just how much he wants the star player - is he prepared to carry one or two weak players through the season?

For good players in the draft there r many good academy players in the draft which all the weak teams will only get.

If there's that many good players, then all teams will get a chance to sign them!

So weak teams r getting good players in the draft as they r ahead in the draft.so this means one the weak team will get good players in the draft and also then will get to retain the best 10 and good teams have to throw away their good players in the draft after retaining 10 better.

Now isnt this baised against the strong team.
[/B]

The strong team already has players that are better than the week team. If we're going to run true to the way it was set-up then we must implement it - otherwise the gulf will appear.

You're talking about how the weaker team can keep all their great players, but they automatically aren't as good as the strong team's players by definition, and the "good" players the strong team get rid of aren't good enough to be in their first 10, so how does the strong team lose out there?

If this is implemented then this also should be included that we can drop the draft picks if we want.So good teams will get to retain their players.

There may be a work-around there, but that would need looking into and strong rules introduced, because otherwise a player who is happy with 14 of his players already may say that he only wants to drop 2 picks, and that is surely against the idea of the draft.

 

[marc71178]

Oh yeah i just found it funny, i mean if people were supporting the idea i would have thought they would have backed it up a little, so far its just you who is 100% behind this and then Myself and Rich who are split down the middle...

Maybe they don't want to be ridiculed and attacked for daring to be different and improve the equality of the game...