*Official* Signup Announcements/Introductions

[Loony BoB]

What happens if we hit 91 players, Liam?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

18 max

We may go past that this season though.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

What happens if we hit 91 players, Liam?

The rookies will be dispersed midseason in the same way as usual. So squads will just grow as need be.

 

[Loony BoB]

I thought ITC can't have more than 18 per squad...?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I thought ITC can't have more than 18 per squad...?

I think it's 20. Besides, the database can accomodate hundreds of players, so we can just shuffle people in and out of squads as needs be.

 

[Loony BoB]

Gotcha.

 

[Hoppy1987]

Can you not?

Just add more squads?

 

[Loony BoB]

I would imagine that would put a major spanner in the works at the moment as we've just spent a lot of time and effort managing contracts - but I can see it happening before next season.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Providing we have 100+ active players before next season, a new squad may be on the way. Definitely not on the agenda before the upcoming season though.

 

[Loony BoB]

I think it shouldn't have to get to 100 players, personally. We don't want too many people to be missing out on cricket. If it gets to 19-20 per side, that's a lot of people not getting a game... not to mention the byes due to there being five teams. You'd end up with more people not playing each game-day than you would have playing. I'd say 15-per-side would do it, which is 90 players. Not that we need to worry about it for the next few months.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I think it shouldn't have to get to 100 players, personally. We don't want too many people to be missing out on cricket. If it gets to 19-20 per side, that's a lot of people not getting a game... not to mention the byes due to there being five teams. You'd end up with more people not playing each game-day than you would have playing. I'd say 15-per-side would do it, which is 90 players. Not that we need to worry about it for the next few months.

But we need at least 17 per side to run things effectively. 17 x 6 = 102.

Look at a team like CW Blue, who could conceivably be missing 5 players to internationals at a given time. A 15-man squad would leave 10. Aside from that, even if 3 players are called up to internationals - Goff, Camps, Crampton, for example - that basically forces a team to play a particular XI, as there's only one option aside.

Squads need a minimum of 17 players, IMO.

 

[Hoppy1987]

SO how do you get to become an international player? Or captain of a team? Or will that never happen?

 

[Loony BoB]

Pretty certain I covered the first bit in the FAQ. As for the latter, you get elected to the position by your squad once the existing captain retires, or else the CWBCC offer you the job when a new club is created.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

SO how do you get to become an international player?

Be one of the best XI players in the country....

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Be one of the best XI players in the country....

Or play for Surrey.

 

[Hoppy1987]

obviously the international bit goes without saying, im not that dense!! as for surrey, pppffff! do they have any current internationals?

 

[Goughy]

With the new contract system how would a new team be formed in the future. As many guys are on 3-5 year contracts they obviously couldnt join the new team.

So I guess any new team would have to be made up of Rookies and players out of contract. Is that right?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Yeah, pretty much like how the Colts were created. We only had two players whom had played Dev League cricket before (Wright and Towns) when we started. I'm pretty sure, anyways.

 

[Loony BoB]

That is correct. We've managed to keep most of the players together, too... of those that signed into Colts in the debut season and are still in the Dev League, I think only Mamesh and McKern have left. We still have Wright, Jack, Nick, Jaso, Burke, Howler, Thomas, Dasa and myself.

 

[vic_orthdox]

And we've had a few inactive too.

Brown, Comley (which may have been slightly provoked by being "released"), Cook, and Tucker.