WXV Trade Talk

[RaisyDaisy]

NY quick to jump all over Taylor Walker.

Should we bring in a rule that says if your trade gets rejected, you're not allowed to trade that player(s) to another club that wasn't involved in the initial failed trade until one trade vote has been sent out. As in Tex would be able to be traded after the upcoming Sunday? Would encourage coaches to work on finding a solution.

We didn't chase Tex at all. Levi approached me yesterday asking if I was interested, and then conversations began

He said he would be informing all other parties of his decision to take up our offer, which he did - and then I posted the trade

FWIW we would always give the team who tried getting a player before it was negged first crack. I assume Levi did that, and then approached us as he was happy with our offer

[Jay]

NY quick to jump all over Taylor Walker.

Should we bring in a rule that says if your trade gets rejected, you're not allowed to trade that player(s) to another club that wasn't involved in the initial failed trade until one trade vote has been sent out. As in Tex would be able to be traded after the upcoming Sunday? Would encourage coaches to work on finding a solution.

Same thing happened with Stephen Hill... A rule like this is a must imo.

[kilbluff1985]

wow that trades crazy

[Holz]

I think what should happen is that the team that is perceived to be losing in the deal should be able to add on top of the deal and if the admin then believes it is worthy then it passes.

Its what i do in the Euro. I had two deals which i rejected but then the team that was winning too much added some good picks and it went through.

considering 13/18 passed the trade and it was Purp who rejected it it seems if Toga could have added something that purp believes makes it a fair deal then it should pass. It would stop snipping and people rejecting trades if they want players (there is some talk of this).

Would also make the process much faster.

[Ricochet]

I think what should happen is that the team that is perceived to be losing in the deal should be able to add on top of the deal and if the admin then believes it is worthy then it passes.

Its why i do in the Euro. I had two deals which i rejected but then the team that was winning too much added some good picks and it went through.

considering 13/18 passed the trade and it was Purp who rejected it it seems if Toga could have added something that purp believes makes it a fair deal then it should pass. It would stop snipping and people rejecting trades if they want players (there is some talk of this).

Would also make the process much faster.

Yeh I reckon something like this should be brought in

[RaisyDaisy]

wow that trades crazy

OK, you got me - I'll bite

After reading my explanation when posting the trade, please tell me how the trade is crazy

[RaisyDaisy]

I think what should happen is that the team that is perceived to be losing in the deal should be able to add on top of the deal and if the admin then believes it is worthy then it passes.

Its why i do in the Euro. I had two deals which i rejected but then the team that was winning too much added some good picks and it went through.

considering 13/18 passed the trade and it was Purp who rejected it it seems if Toga could have added something that purp believes makes it a fair deal then it should pass. It would stop snipping and people rejecting trades if they want players (there is some talk of this).

Would also make the process much faster.

Yeh I reckon something like this should be brought in

I kind of thought there was an unwritten rule that this was already happening? I know last year when we had several trades negged, we just went back to the team and re-negotiated/added something on top and then got them through

I just assumed that this is what everyone does. Again, it was Levi that approached me offering Tex and Houli, so of course I assumed it was fair play and we went from there

[AaronKirk]

Levi approached us.

Anyone saying we jumped in to "snatch" Walker can get flowered because it is factually incorrect.

[Toga]

I like Holz's suggestion, especially since a majority of coaches didn't have a huge problem with the trade in the first place.

[elephants]

Haha wowee boy oh boy

[kilbluff1985]

wow that trades crazy

OK, you got me - I'll bite

After reading my explanation when posting the trade, please tell me how the trade is crazy

kind of may have possible had a kb moment and i'd rather not explain it in detail lol

[RaisyDaisy]

LOL relax AK, I already explained that he approached us - it's all good :)

The trade is lodged, the trade is fair. If we need to use this example to change the rules moving forward than so be it, but this trade is lodged and shouldn't be impacted now.

[Jay]

wow that trades crazy

OK, you got me - I'll bite

After reading my explanation when posting the trade, please tell me how the trade is crazy

Because Lamb, Lowden and NAT 12 doesn't even come close to Tex...

[RaisyDaisy]

wow that trades crazy

OK, you got me - I'll bite

After reading my explanation when posting the trade, please tell me how the trade is crazy

kind of may have possible had a kb moment and i'd rather not explain it in detail lol

Haha, ok  ;D

Classic KB

[elephants]

The trade is fair.

Let the coaches decide that one m8 ;)