British 15's Official Trade period 1 thread

[Colliwobblers]

Can I get some clarification on why Tabs and my trade did not go through? I thought the rule is there to eliminate crazy trades. Tabs and I agreed more than 2 weeks ago on this, have been basing all future trades on this going through. I believe the rule should be in place to prevent Ablett for Relton Roberts type trades rather than slight inequalitys. This eliminates the opportunity for coaches to pull off clever trades or strong negotiations.

LOL I reckon you just answered your own question  :o

[Torpedo10]

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


Note: I will put this in the OP.

Therefore (in my non-official opinion, and an opinion that respects your decision) I think that Ringo/Torp trade should be voided (sorry Ringo)

As that trade would take Torp to 6 list changes, and therefore because their trade does not pass, my trade with Torp should pass as it'll take him to 5 list changes as Ringo/Torp's trade should be voided under the rules.

You are correct Nails. Apologies as i had Torp down as Betts not counting as a list movement for him too. (After Betts was on traded but it should still count for Torp).

I did the trade with Nails because I thought the trade with ringo would go through, neither trade should go through because of changed circumstances.

[Torpedo10]

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


Note: I will put this in the OP.

Therefore (in my non-official opinion, and an opinion that respects your decision) I think that Ringo/Torp trade should be voided (sorry Ringo)

As that trade would take Torp to 6 list changes, and therefore because their trade does not pass, my trade with Torp should pass as it'll take him to 5 list changes as Ringo/Torp's trade should be voided under the rules.

No, I should be given an oppitunity to try and negotiate with ringo because it was confirmed first.

[Nails]

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


Note: I will put this in the OP.

Therefore (in my non-official opinion, and an opinion that respects your decision) I think that Ringo/Torp trade should be voided (sorry Ringo)

As that trade would take Torp to 6 list changes, and therefore because their trade does not pass, my trade with Torp should pass as it'll take him to 5 list changes as Ringo/Torp's trade should be voided under the rules.

No, I should be given an oppitunity to try and negotiate with ringo because it was confirmed first.

It's your own fault for not paying attention to the rules and trying to trade more than you're allowed. You were aware of the rules ::)

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


Note: I will put this in the OP.

Therefore (in my non-official opinion, and an opinion that respects your decision) I think that Ringo/Torp trade should be voided (sorry Ringo)

As that trade would take Torp to 6 list changes, and therefore because their trade does not pass, my trade with Torp should pass as it'll take him to 5 list changes as Ringo/Torp's trade should be voided under the rules.

You are correct Nails. Apologies as i had Torp down as Betts not counting as a list movement for him too. (After Betts was on traded but it should still count for Torp).

I did the trade with Nails because I thought the trade with ringo would go through, neither trade should go through because of changed circumstances.

If you're doing trades because you're banking on another trade to pass, perhaps you should wait for that trade to be confirmed first as opposed to just assuming/hoping ::)

[JBs-Hawks]

Can I get some clarification on why Tabs and my trade did not go through? I thought the rule is there to eliminate crazy trades. Tabs and I agreed more than 2 weeks ago on this, have been basing all future trades on this going through. I believe the rule should be in place to prevent Ablett for Relton Roberts type trades rather than slight inequalitys. This eliminates the opportunity for coaches to pull off clever trades or strong negotiations.

I agree this trade panel is absolute bullshower. The only blocked trades sshould be crazy trades not just because someone slightly wins the trade. People aren't going to trade if they think they are doing an even trade they always want to think they are ahead.

I am not trading until the trade committee is changed

[Colliwobblers]

A bit drastic? There is an appeals process isn't there, if the decision was close you may be able to convince the panel to over rule or they may just need a very minor change to the balance.

I am not commenting on the particular trade because it is none of my business but perhaps a PM to MTTY to appeal the trade would be a good first step?

I agree IN GENERAL that a trade does not have to be equal exactly but there are a lot of things to consider, as the trade that favors one team may favor them too much and MORE IMPORTANT, if it disadvantages a team too much, there is the risk that team will fail to perform, the coach quit and the team be left in a mess for the poor sucker if one can be found  to take it over.

For example the committee needs to be careful to not allow a young list that won't compete early to worsen it's situation by trading out senior players for draft picks, making it even less likely to compete for years.

I am sure he doesn't wasn't a GCS or GWS in British...

On the flip side, a team like Nails in Asians that has drafted old players for an early premiership, must be monitored through trades that is isn't trading itself into a hopeless position in 2-3 seasons time by trading in MORE old players for that early premiership and trading OUT their draft picks.

This would mean the owner could take 2 premierships, by then everyone retires, then his list is shot to pieces, he has traded all early draft picks away, and quits because it will take 5-6 years to fix the team.

Again how to find some poor sucker to take the team over?

AGAIN THIS IS GENERAL COMMENT NOT ON THE SPECIFIC TRADE/S THAT HAVE CAUSED THIS COMMOTION :)

Just saying MTTY is responsible for making sure he has a league with competitive teams, NOW, in a few seasons, and beyond.

[JBs-Hawks]

Well these trades have been fine there's been no teams stocking up on old or young so I'm over it tradings obviously not worth the time in British because you cant have any advantage at all. So whats the point of you can't get an advantage.

[Torpedo10]

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


Note: I will put this in the OP.

Therefore (in my non-official opinion, and an opinion that respects your decision) I think that Ringo/Torp trade should be voided (sorry Ringo)

As that trade would take Torp to 6 list changes, and therefore because their trade does not pass, my trade with Torp should pass as it'll take him to 5 list changes as Ringo/Torp's trade should be voided under the rules.

No, I should be given an oppitunity to try and negotiate with ringo because it was confirmed first.

It's your own fault for not paying attention to the rules and trying to trade more than you're allowed. You were aware of the rules ::)

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


Note: I will put this in the OP.

Therefore (in my non-official opinion, and an opinion that respects your decision) I think that Ringo/Torp trade should be voided (sorry Ringo)

As that trade would take Torp to 6 list changes, and therefore because their trade does not pass, my trade with Torp should pass as it'll take him to 5 list changes as Ringo/Torp's trade should be voided under the rules.

You are correct Nails. Apologies as i had Torp down as Betts not counting as a list movement for him too. (After Betts was on traded but it should still count for Torp).

I did the trade with Nails because I thought the trade with ringo would go through, neither trade should go through because of changed circumstances.

If you're doing trades because you're banking on another trade to pass, perhaps you should wait for that trade to be confirmed first as opposed to just assuming/hoping ::)

I still have 1 out left.
6. Torpedo10 and Monstrum

Torpedo10 Gives: Harry Taylor, Chris Masten
Monstrum Gives: David Swallow, Mzungu

Verdict - Accepted

7. Holzman and Torpedo10

Holz Recives: Lance Franklin, T.Mzungu

Torp Recieves: Andrew Swallow, E.Betts


Verdict - Accepted


Trade 11 - Nails and Torpedo10

Nails gives NAT draft picks: 4, 33 and 40

Torp gives: David Swallow and his 2nd and 3rd round Pre-Season Draft Pick


Assessment - Passed

4 Outs, 1 Out left.

[picker_man]

Trade between Colli and me

Colliwobblers give: Redden + Henderson

Picker_man gives: Fyfe + Gunston

CW to confirm :)

[Colliwobblers]

Trade between Colli and me

Colliwobblers give: Redden + Henderson

Picker_man gives: Fyfe + Gunston

CW to confirm :)

confirmed

[Spinking]

As always a balanced opinion from Colli, which I very much respect. I will contact MTTY as you suggest, but I want to point out some concerns that I have here. I am not overly worried about that specific trade however it has raised some concerns for me about this process.

1. That was a very long way from being a crazy trade. I have an old list and was trading some excess players for some youth I value, plus a reasonable pick. Tabs and I agreed this was beneficial for both our teams. I understand Colli's point about wanting to keep teams balanced, but trading the calibre of players we had involved was hardly team defining. I much prefer Holz system in the Euro where most trades go through unless there is a really crazy trade.

2. The length of time taken to confirm the trade is clearly prohibitive. I understand MTTY is busy, but 2 weeks to confirm a trade means that we effectively are stuck in a holding pattern until it is confirmed. In honesty I though the trade would just be ticked off on, so had started to negotiate my next trades.

3. I feel the rules committee owe a bit more explanation than just 'Rejected'

4. It may be in the interest of the admins to keep the teams fair, but lets not forget that it is a game :) I've really admired when some coaches pull off a skillful trade by playing hardball, talking their players up and playing to their opposition's interests. This is part of the game I enjoy most and the part I'd hate to see lost by the committee rejecting marginal trades.

No disrespect meant at all to MTTY or the committee who I think do a great job, but honestly I am now reluctant to go trying to organise a new trade knowing that it may get rejected in this manner.

[JBs-Hawks]

Trade between Colli and me

Colliwobblers give: Redden + Henderson

Picker_man gives: Fyfe + Gunston

CW to confirm :)

Nope trade can't go through collie has a slight advantage.

Rejected

[Colliwobblers]

I agree with your concerns Spinking maybe MTTY can take the decisions upon himself and do away with the committee.

That is for him to decide however and he may have a process for dealing with trade decisions that are rejected, then challenged, maybe he then does take the final say on the trade and can over rule. or maybe he should / or shouldn't....

I agree trades should not be seen as having to be perfectly equal.

As we cannot predict the future of ANY player even a perfectly even trade may turn out to be a disaster for one side...

For this reason a certain amount of leeway, and speculation should be allowed in a trade, the what "could be" has to also be considered.

Take my trade with pickers just now...

For example gunston could be the next buddy or he could be delisted in a year.

Henderson, he has huge upside but possibly could become nothing, Pickers doesn't care he is just a balance for the trade...

For another example, redden may kick on and become the elite mid we all expect him to, Fyfe might do the same,

BUT if one of them does and the other doesn't then what looks a balanced trade, becomes a VERY UNBALANCED trade.


I don't mean to interfere just think it best to get a hold of MTTY and express your concerns to him, I am confident he will make the right call in the end :)

AND @ JBs-Hawks - I think you'll find BOTH pickers and I agree the advantage is his ! Fyfe under Lyons is a MASSIVE risk, will be the LEAST fantasy friendly team in the competition playing their ugly lock down football.

But if rejected we will build a case and take it to MTTY to try convince him to make the CORRECT decision :)

[Torpedo10]

I have 1 Out left right? according to my above post I do.

[MTTY]

I have 1 Out left right? according to my above post I do.

Torp you have not taken into account D.Swallow for a draft pick. So you have 5.