British 15's - Discussion thread

[Phasir]

lol, I picked a great night to go out all night & get home at 7am...

[Colliwobblers]

lol, I picked a great night to go out all night & get home at 7am...

I'm too old for that now but my inner young me says " any night is a good night to do that"

[Spinking]

Folks I've PMd each coach with the current actions Im taking with the league, and also asking them to confirm they want to remain in the comp. Can everyone do this, or let me know if they didn't receive the PM.

[Fletch74]

I'm still in. I hope that MTTY is ok, and ok with this though. I understand the logic behind Spinking being appointef, but I abstained from voting as I felt it was not right, as it was MTTy's idea, and it felt a little like a takeover. Just my opinion before anyone questions me. I discussed it with Ringo and he helped me understand the reasoning, but I still felt it not right to vote.

Just one question? How many list changes are we allowed to have, and what are the rules around passing a player on as to whether that counts, and whether a draft pick counts or not? Cheers

[Spinking]

Thanks for the honesty with those comments Fletch. I appreciate your position and think many of the coaches would agree with you. I really don't want this to be seen as a takeover, it is still MTTYs comp until he is able to clarify what is going on.

It obviously just needed action as there was a backlog of trades, and coaches were becoming frustrated at the stagnation that caused. There is also a lack of clarification on the drafts, and some of the trading rules that have been a bit confusing.

In regards to your question about list changes, my interpretation of the existing rules is that you are allowed 5 movements in this trade period, and that draft picks don't count. MTTY said this:

1. A list change will occur for both teams if this happens: Player x for Player y
2. A list change will occur for both teams if this happens: Player x for Draft pick
3. A list change will not count if: Draft pick x for Draft pick y

This is not my preferred method of measuring the movements, but it's what we have to work with now. I think it needs to be reviewed for next season though.

[Fletch74]

Thanks Spinking for your reply.

I'm happy enough for the temporary fix, but just the way some coaches worded their comments made it sound more permanent...

Thanks also for the clarification.  I just feel the trading rules are a little ambiguous.

[Colliwobblers]

Thanks Spinking for your reply.

I'm happy enough for the temporary fix, but just the way some coaches worded their comments made it sound more permanent...

Thanks also for the clarification.  I just feel the trading rules are a little ambiguous.

I respect your view Fletch, but do not agree with you at all.

I have nothing against MTTY and I hope he is well. Seriously.

When people were ripping into him and the competition about trades I stuck up for him and tried to help out, I genuinely don't have a bad feeling in my body for anyone least of all MTTY.

This is not personal, it is administrative and something that just had to happen, probably 4 weeks ago to be fair.

I don't want to get into it but if a coach in this competition is unresponsive for 2 weeks without a good reason provided they are sacked. It's pretty clear and it's not my rule, but it is a rule.

http://www.fanfooty.com.au/forum/index.php/topic,62789.msg808582.html#msg808582

I am more than happy for MTTY to return to run "this" competition, but I would think it a huge injustice to expect Spinking or anyone to put in a huge amount of time and effort just to be pushed aside when MTTY returns if he returns.

I think the co-administration idea is fair to both, especially fair to MTTY given his own rules about going missing...

[Fletch74]

Again I respect your view too CW.

I'd agree with you entirely if MTTY was away for a long period of time, but if he is away for 2 weeks, then he should.be sacked... You don't know what's happened to them in their personal life. I know I once had a situation where I cut myself off from the world for a few weeks and didn't really explain myself to anyone, before forums were even thought of... lol

Who knows what has happened to him, but I think it is unfair that someone should be sacked. I don't mind the co-admin thing, and I'm sure MTTY would be fine as well, but not sacked. I think that is a bit harsh!

Hence, I am fine to continue my affiliation with the comp, as long as it is not a takeover. I just chose to abstain as I felt it was right. I knew that my vote would have little impact, as it stands I would have voted for Spinking, but just felt right to sit it out.

[Colliwobblers]

Never a takeover , I made it sound that way early on - and to be honest being in MTTY's role I have high expectations of him / myself.

But Nails and Ringo got it right in suggesting keeping MTTY in his rightful place but getting him a "partner".

think the best of both worlds and can't say enough hoping MTTY is all ok, just wish for THAT reason (not knowing) more than anything to do with the competition that the clown had let us know!!!! :)

Stand up guy for sticking to your morals and abstaining, we can't all agree but the best we can do is be true to our morals so I take my hat off to you Fletch.

Think MTTY and Spinking will make a fine team, now we just need to find a moderator who can make Spinking a moderator for British so he can get to work...

Can't PM Monty... who else can do it....?

[Spinking]

Folks, seeking some opinions on this one, before I'll potentially put it to a vote.

We currently have a rules / trades committee who adjudicate in these areas. This committee originally consisted of MTTY, RooBoys!, CrowsFan, Boomz, Ziplock and ossie85. Obviously MTTY is not currently active, and today RB and CF have requested that they be released from the committee. Both were apologetic and I suspect would have continued on if I had pressed them. I am also unsure what role Ossie will play when he gets back involved in the site.

I am querying 3 different ways to go forward with this:

1. Just replace those who would like to leave with new committee members.

2. Reduce the size of the committee to 3 members who are all active. This is my preferred option as I think it will streamline the trade approval process

3. Do away with the committee, and implement a different system such as the WXV where all trades are voted on by all coaches, or like the EXV where the admin approves all trades except in a protest / dubious trade where it goes to a vote.

I am again conscious of my role as a caretaker here, and so if you feel that making a change like this is too extreme, please say so.  Offer your opinion and if there is agreement in a particular direction I will put it to a vote.

[Torpedo10]

I think best way is to let the admin or co-admins decide like Asians. Seems the best way & no so called block voting on some trades.

[Colliwobblers]

Happy for you / you & MTTY, to approve or decline trades, or  have a reduced 3 man committee.

However with a small 3 man committee i don't think one of the members should be a BXVs coach like there was in the original comittee.

As long as there is an appeals process hich is clear and laid out up front, i think it will be easier and more accurate to just approve /reject yourself.

with the appeals process only there for people to write an essay and explain why they really need the trade ( if uneven and blocked)

whatever you decide is fine by me, you just have to make it clear up front and then it is easy, most trades should pass anyway unless they are ridiculous so it isn't a hard process to rule on them. Unless you intend to be strict and try to ensure even trades every time, then you might be best with a committee :)

swan for blease = no

swan for sloanne / gaff / D Swallow = ok - it's not ridiculously uneven, but it isn't EVEN either....

swan for watson = yes

it's just hard when you get into that ok territory, some people will see it different ways so you need to be clear in advance what the grounds for trade approval will be, and then stick to the guidelines you lay out and there should be no issues....

I'll go with the crowd but would say..

1. You rule alone (you/mtty - when returns).
2. Small committee.
3. Large committee

in that order :)

[Ringo]

For what is worth my opinion is that you/MTTY rule on all trades.

We have a committee of 3 coaches plus one alternate to be elected by all coaches to form an appeals committee to hear appeals and make decision if required. Reason for alternate is in the case that trade being appealed involves a coach on the committee. Appeals process will have to be documented so that fribilous appeals do not occur.

Can  suggest that the following rules for appeals be used.
Reason for trade rejection are published to both coaches involved.
Any appeal that is made to the committee must address why the reasons for rejection are not correct.
Committee then assesses the trades looking at both arguments and ruling on the trade.

[Colliwobblers]

+1 what Ringo Said. Still tehre has to be an ultimate power/ decision maker, be it the admin or the committee the result is the same.

But I'll go with what Ringo says, there are a few ultra-active AXVs and WXVs coaches I am aware of that are not involved with BXVs I would suggest grabbing 3 for the appeals committee and in the event of an appeal the 3 can vote and there will be a majority and all 3 are not involved in BXVs so no issue can be read into with their decision.

Just make sure the said committee coaches are not assistants in BXVs :)

Just think that will be cleaner, YOU Rule on trades, and in the event of an appeal it goes to an EXTERNAL panel. ?

[Justin Bieber]

I hate committee crap.