2016 WXV Awards and 2016 Rules Discussion

[Ringo]

There are a couple of factors here:

Players retired before start of season which is different to getting injured then retiring. As we have left over players have no real objection to drafting them to complete their lists.

Issue to me will be do we allow them to promote a rookie to replace them on Senior list and then the drafted player goes on rookie list or does the drafted player go on senior list. Personally think first option is the fairest.

Happy to support if we go to vote.

[Jukes]

There are a couple of factors here:

Players retired before start of season which is different to getting injured then retiring. As we have left over players have no real objection to drafting them to complete their lists.

Issue to me will be do we allow them to promote a rookie to replace them on Senior list and then the drafted player goes on rookie list or does the drafted player go on senior list. Personally think first option is the fairest.

Happy to support if we go to vote.

I agree with this, it's pretty much how we do it in AXVIII (being just take a player from the pool and replace the guy on your list, seeing as we don't use rookie lists).

[Purple 77]

Out of this vote:

Option A) Be able to draft undrafted players to replace retired ones as explained above

or

Option B) Carry the retirement on your list as an LTI (like you always have been able to), allowing you to promote a rookie at any time.

13 votes are in, and B leads 11-2. So B it is!

Feel free to vote if you haven't already (always interested in what people think), but you don't have to anymore either  :)



In this vote:

Trade Process

A) Keep the current system. If this option wins, we'll then review the "neg" brackets i.e. 0-3 = autopass, 4-5 votes = passes but admin can fail it etc.

B) Give the admin total power over trade rulings.

C) Establish a trade committee. This committee would comprise of about 5 members, which will consist of me and 4 other WXV coaches either chosen by me or the WXV coaches.

D) Establish a trade committee. This committee would comprise of about 5 members, which will consist of me and 4 other people outside of WXVs.

15 votes are in:
A - 11 votes
B - 3 votes
C - 1 vote
D - 0 votes

So option A wins! We'll have a review on the different "neg" levels we could use in due course.

The Leadership Group vote and Former Player Bidding votes are still too close to call, with the following teams still yet to vote:
London Royals
PNL Reindeers
Seoul Magpies

[Purple 77]

Votes are in!

Trade Process (already decided, but this was the final count)

A) Keep the current system. If this option wins, we'll then review the "neg" brackets i.e. 0-3 = autopass, 4-5 votes = passes but admin can fail it etc.

B) Give the admin total power over trade rulings. 

C) Establish a trade committee. This committee would comprise of about 5 members, which will consist of me and 4 other WXV coaches either chosen by me or the WXV coaches.

D) Establish a trade committee. This committee would comprise of about 5 members, which will consist of me and 4 other people outside of WXVs.

A - 14
B - 3
C - 1
D - 0



Former Player Bidding

A) Don't change a thing

B) Once the leading bid is ascertained, the coach whom can match the bid can either decide to match the bid with their next draft pick, or receive the draft pick (the leading bid) and allow the player to go to the team that bid for him. E.g. Cape Town bid Pick 35 for Matt Dea. Tokyo can either match the bid with their Pick 41, or they can choose to receive Pick 35 instead, allowing Matt Dea to go Cape Town. 

A - 7
B - 11

B wins! Gives the former owner of a player something else to think about, instead of taking the predictable option of getting a player cheap. I've noted a couple of coaches opinion of being able to match within 18 spots... something to keep in mind for the next September voting!



Leadership Groups

A) Keep it: with all restrictions and allowances i.e. mid-season re-selection, injury demotions/promotions

B) Scrap it

C) Keep it, but get rid of the mid-season window where you can re-select it without consequence.

A - 9
B - 8
C - 1

It was a close one this, but option A wins! Although less popular this time last year, the Leadership Group adds another element to our game, and there are still plenty of allowances. I wonder if anyone will select an LTI in their Leadership group so that a team can promote another player at will?



Trade Levels - 1 coach left to vote

A) Keep the current levels.

B) Stricter
- 0-2 votes is an auto-pass
- 3-4 votes passes the trade with the admin having the power to reject it
- 5-6 votes fails a trade with the admin having the power to pass it
- 7+ votes is an auto-fail.

C) Lenient-er
- 0-4 votes is an auto-pass
- 5-6 votes passes the trade with the admin having the power to reject it
- 7-8 votes fails a trade with the admin having the power to pass it
- 9+ votes is an auto-fail.

D) Adhere to the masses
- 0-6 votes is an auto-pass
- 7-8 votes passes the trade with the admin having the power to reject it
- 9+ votes is an auto-fail.

E) You're totally wrong Purps, and none of these options are close (note: wording) to what I want. Here is what I think... *propose custom levels*, but in case this option is unpopular, I will vote *choose A, B, C or D*

A - 10
B - 1
C - 3
D - 3
E - 0

This trade period certainly got a lot better feedback than it did after 2015, so option A gets another go!



All votes are done, bring on the season!

[Holz]

Predictable results do find it interesting that its a democracy for everything but voting on trades.

Its a real paradox that the majority dont want the majority to have a say. And its a minority saying they want a majority to have the say.


You could argue those that dont want a democracy are banned from voting and the majority of the minority decide everything. But then thats not even a democracy.