i5s General Discussion

[LF]

Coaches picked on the assumption they were keeping three players, so don't think that should change.

[Pkbaldy]

Coaches picked on the assumption they were keeping three players, so don't think that should change.

[RaisyDaisy]

Yeah that's fair enough. Just keep 3 as originally planned

This comp should be simple and fun, we have XV for more in depth comps

[Nige]

Yeah that's fair enough. Just keep 3 as originally planned

This comp should be simple and fun, we have XV for more in depth comps

Preach. 8)

[JBs-Hawks]

I'd rather 2.

[JBs-Hawks]

Coaches picked on the assumption they were keeping three players, so don't think that should change.

Cant keep using that excuse to cancel out any change in the competition. I also drafted on the assumption we would be able to trade but that hasnt come to fruition has it

[LF]

Coaches picked on the assumption they were keeping three players, so don't think that should change.

Cant keep using that excuse to cancel out any change in the competition. I also drafted on the assumption we would be able to trade but that hasnt come to fruition has it

Keeping 3 players was in the original post,trading never was it was just suggested as something that might possibly happen.
I never drafted for trading because was not ever confirmed as happening was always based on who could be possible keepers as per what Os posted.
So not my problem you assumed that there would be trading when it was never fully confirmed.

[Vinny]

It wasn't confirmed but trading was always a possibility so don't see how you can use it as a reason.

[Nige]

Cant keep using that excuse to cancel out any change in the competition. I also drafted on the assumption we would be able to trade but that hasnt come to fruition has it

Well, that's your fault for assuming then. That was never official or a sure thing unlike the retention of 3 players which was stated in the OP when Oss raised the idea of the comp.

[Mr.Craig]

Think it was a fair assumption.

Can't think of any other draft game off the top of my head that doesn't have trading.

[upthemaidens]

Think it was a fair assumption.

Can't think of any other draft game off the top of my head that doesn't have trading.

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
  They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

[Mr.Craig]

Think it was a fair assumption.

Can't think of any other draft game off the top of my head that doesn't have trading.

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

???

I think you're reading lines in my comment that don't exist.

[upthemaidens]

Think it was a fair assumption.

Can't think of any other draft game off the top of my head that doesn't have trading.

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

???

I think you're reading lines in my comment that don't exist.

Well it was following on from what others are saying about "if there is no trading we should only keep 1-2 players, but keeping 3 is fine if there is trading etc."
    I shouldn't have quoted with my statement, since you didn't say that in yours.

[Ricochet]

This comp has had gradual input and will continue to evolve. So using  you drafted to keep 3 players as an argument isnt fair. Especially considering you'll normally take the best player available  in your top 3 picks anyway. And I don't think the gap between the strong pools and weak pools was fully realised.

Is it really much diff for stronger teams in a drop from 3 keepers to 2? its a massive difference for the poorer teams. As the pool next year will be stronger

[Mr.Craig]

Think it was a fair assumption.

Can't think of any other draft game off the top of my head that doesn't have trading.

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

???

I think you're reading lines in my comment that don't exist.

Well it was following on from what others are saying about "if there is no trading we should only keep 1-2 players, but keeping 3 is fine if there is trading etc."
    I shouldn't have quoted with my statement, since you didn't say that in yours.

My opinions are purely those of the Japan Whalers, their board and members. :P