Re: WXV Trade Confirmation Thread & Final Draft Order

[Maca24]

Moscow trades: Pick 87
Beijing trades: Jurrah
Reason: I don't like him. I really don't think he has a future in the AFL and got whatever I could.

Confirmed. Dunno why.

Hope? :P

[bomberboy0618]

Moscow trades: Pick 22 and 30
Beijing trades: Tuck
Reason: Draft picks. We want them. Moscow gave them.

[meow meow]

Moscow trades: Pick 22 and 30
Beijing trades: Tuck
Reason: Draft picks. We want them. Moscow gave them.

Tuck is a gun and we'll be happy to have him for his final season. Giving up two good quality picks won't destroy the team as it is a young list.

[Maca24]

Meow well done! *Claps

[c4v3m4n]

I feel sorry for ossie tomorrow having to write all of these up! SO many!!! :o :o :o

[Purple 77]

And another!

BERLIN TRADES: Trent West + Pick 58

TOKYO TRADES: Picks 13 and 25

Reasoning:
Trent West was no longer required, and I felt this deal shows his worth at another club. Ruckman like West are quite rare.

[Boomz]

And another!

BERLIN TRADES: Trent West + Pick 58

TOKYO TRADES: Picks 13 and 25

Reasoning:
Trent West was no longer required, and I felt this deal shows his worth at another club. Ruckman like West are quite rare.

Confirmed. Needed a ruckman that is more certain to play. West should only improve too.

[ossie85]

Still waiting for 4 coaches, plenty have been confirmed already, but am going to wait a bit longer

[ossie85]

Rightio, it has happened yet - but if votes go a certain way a couple of trades could be rejected.

But something has happened that I didn't count on, but probably should have

... people's reasons for rejecting the trades are contradictory (i.e. some say one person gets too much advantage, while another says the other gets too much advantage).

So, should we still say that 6 votes cause a trade to be cancelled - regardless of reason?

Or something like this - If 4 people vote one way, and 2 people vote the other way.... it would be (4 - 2 =) 2 votes against?

[c4v3m4n]

Rightio, it has happened yet - but if votes go a certain way a couple of trades could be rejected.

But something has happened that I didn't count on, but probably should have

... people's reasons for rejecting the trades are contradictory (i.e. some say one person gets too much advantage, while another says the other gets too much advantage).

So, should we still say that 6 votes cause a trade to be cancelled - regardless of reason?

Or something like this - If 4 people vote one way, and 2 people vote the other way.... it would be (4 - 2 =) 2 votes against?

Wow, thats an interesting point you raise ossie.

I reckon that it should be 6 regardless of the contradiction as 6 coaches believe the overall trade is unfair in some way.

[bomberboy0618]

Rightio, it has happened yet - but if votes go a certain way a couple of trades could be rejected.

But something has happened that I didn't count on, but probably should have

... people's reasons for rejecting the trades are contradictory (i.e. some say one person gets too much advantage, while another says the other gets too much advantage).

So, should we still say that 6 votes cause a trade to be cancelled - regardless of reason?

Or something like this - If 4 people vote one way, and 2 people vote the other way.... it would be (4 - 2 =) 2 votes against?

Nah votes should still count.
That just gives it even more reason to be voted out as it's a bad trade all round.

[Nails]

How can something be a bad trade all round? Both sides lose? How? ::) will post my thoughts up after uni class... in about an hour

[roo boys!]

I think the contradicting trades idea is an interesting one. I'd say in your example it should only count for 2 votes, because if people think it's unfair one way and others think it is unfair the other, it obviously isn't a clear advantage to a certain party, thus the trade is deemed fair IMO.

[Nails]

Correct me if I'm wrong... but the reason we have a voting system in place and don't allow coaches to trade without acceptance is to block trades that are glaringly obvious that they are one sided...

For example Dane Swan and Scott Pendlebury for Sam Blease... This is clearly a one sided trade and the kind of trade the vote was introduced for.

Therefore if voters are arguing either way on a trade, sure it might not be 100% fair and exactly equal on both sides, one side might have overpaid and one side may have underpaid obviously. But not all trades are 100% fair but are done for the team's purpose in mind. I think we need to block the glaringly obvious ones, because if a coach doesn't rate just youth or something, it might be a little unfair but he sees it as glaringly unfair.

Therefore if voters are going either way on a trade, it is not a glaringly obvious one sided trade which the system is in existence for. Therefore if it can be argued either way or is being argued either way, I'd say that in either way it is only slightly unfair and should not receive a negative vote.

In conclusion, if argued for and against in contradictory fashions it should be 4-2 not 4+2.

[Maca24]

It's worse when you get neg'd for the reason team will be to strong :/