WXV Discussion

[Purple 77]

Just throwing ideas out there, what if we copy the scores of the banned 17 from the 2015 season, but they cannot be selected as captain or be able to be loopholed?

Eh. That doesn't feel right as I type it... but thoughts?

[Holz]

Just throwing ideas out there, what if we copy the scores of the banned 17 from the 2015 season, but they cannot be selected as captain or be able to be loopholed?

Eh. That doesn't feel right as I type it... but thoughts?

Im trying to write something to say how opposed I am to this idea. i will be kind.

good to think outside the box and you have come up with some great ideas doing so, this isn't one of them.

I think people knew this could happen and all these players had a asterix on the trade table and this droped their value. Obvisouly not enough as people all felt it wouldnt happen but it did and getting to pick top up players is lenient as it is. I wasnt even sure about that in the Euro.

[Ricochet]

Just throwing ideas out there, what if we copy the scores of the banned 17 from the 2015 season, but they cannot be selected as captain or be able to be loopholed?

Eh. That doesn't feel right as I type it... but thoughts?

Hate it, sorry mate.

We try and replicate real life in this comp. Essendon won't get Heppell's output for the 2016 season, so neither should a WXV team. Otherwise you start opening cases for players with LTIs like Libba.

[Ringo]

One thing to remember here it is the AFL who are allowing Bombers top players.  As we try to replicate AFL as much as possible should not we try and do something similar for those effected.  Does not worry me at all as i am not effected in the slightest since i traded Stanton and Bellchambers, but just voicing an opinion.

bear in mind also the AFL did not allow Pies to top up for Keeffe and Thomas so it is a different situation here.

[RaisyDaisy]

It's not like any top up players are going to replicate hep, jobe etc. Heck the top ups won't even be best XV in most cases.

Just draft them by order of banned players value and cop it on the chin

[meow meow]

lol meow

Glad someone knew I was just stirring the pot.

Holz wants Jobe and will get him unless someone else wants to take the punt on him playing on, refreshed physically and mentally in 2017. Make an offer!

[Purple 77]

lol meow

Glad someone knew I was just stirring the pot.

Holz wants Jobe and will get him unless someone else wants to take the punt on him playing on, refreshed physically and mentally in 2017. Make an offer!

Ah god dammit :P I gotta admit, I thought you were serious. Well played.

[DazBurg]

lol meow

Glad someone knew I was just stirring the pot.

Holz wants Jobe and will get him unless someone else wants to take the punt on him playing on, refreshed physically and mentally in 2017. Make an offer!

Ah god dammit :P I gotta admit, I thought you were serious. Well played.

agree got me too
well done Meow well done ;)

[Holz]

As predicted and rightly so Martin is clear. maybe might miss a NAB or two and a suspension.

[Purple 77]

Ok, all votes are in for the trade processing vote!

A) Leave the system as it currently is. If you vote for this option, we might have a look at the trade vote levels i.e. 0-2 votes auto pass, 3-5 votes pass with admin able to reject etc... we might have a vote to change those levels.

B) Have a trade committee of 5, me (the Admin) and 4 others, voted by everyone.

C) Have a trade committee of 5, me (the Admin) and 4 others, selected by me.

D) Have admin decide every trade, with the coaches PMing the admin to express any qualms, which will trigger further discussion of trade.

The results were;

A) 11
B) 0
C) 3
D) 4

So it's staying like it is.

Which brings us to our next vote... deciding how many votes constitutes what (i.e. currently 0-2 auto pass, 3-5 pass without admin intervention, 6-8 fail without admin intervention, 9+ auto fail).

The people have spoken, the decision is final. I'll be sending out the next vote shortly.

[Purple 77]

Ok, all votes are in for the trade processing vote!

A) Leave the system as it currently is. If you vote for this option, we might have a look at the trade vote levels i.e. 0-2 votes auto pass, 3-5 votes pass with admin able to reject etc... we might have a vote to change those levels.

B) Have a trade committee of 5, me (the Admin) and 4 others, voted by everyone.

C) Have a trade committee of 5, me (the Admin) and 4 others, selected by me.

D) Have admin decide every trade, with the coaches PMing the admin to express any qualms, which will trigger further discussion of trade.

The results were;

A) 11
B) 0
C) 3
D) 4

So it's staying like it is.

Which brings us to our next vote... deciding how many votes constitutes what (i.e. currently 0-2 auto pass, 3-5 pass without admin intervention, 6-8 fail without admin intervention, 9+ auto fail).

The people have spoken, the decision is final. I'll be sending out the next vote shortly.

thats 7 votes against A. under the system thats 6-8 fail without admin intervention. So is the admin voting against option C or D? :P

Lol :P

I actually voted C fwiw

[RaisyDaisy]

-  7 votes against and the trade fails

- 5-6 votes against and the trade fails, unless the Admin decides to let it pass

- 4 votes against and the trade passes, unless the Admin decides to let it fail

- 0-3 votes against and the trade passes.

[Holz]

Ok, all votes are in for the trade processing vote!

A) Leave the system as it currently is. If you vote for this option, we might have a look at the trade vote levels i.e. 0-2 votes auto pass, 3-5 votes pass with admin able to reject etc... we might have a vote to change those levels.

B) Have a trade committee of 5, me (the Admin) and 4 others, voted by everyone.

C) Have a trade committee of 5, me (the Admin) and 4 others, selected by me.

D) Have admin decide every trade, with the coaches PMing the admin to express any qualms, which will trigger further discussion of trade.

The results were;

A) 11
B) 0
C) 3
D) 4

So it's staying like it is.

Which brings us to our next vote... deciding how many votes constitutes what (i.e. currently 0-2 auto pass, 3-5 pass without admin intervention, 6-8 fail without admin intervention, 9+ auto fail).

The people have spoken, the decision is final. I'll be sending out the next vote shortly.

thats 7 votes against A. under the system thats 6-8 fail without admin intervention. So is the admin voting against option C or D? :P

Lol :P

I actually voted C fwiw

so option C it is :p

would love to see an indifferent option.

I have a feeling it would be far less A votes and still the 7 against.

[RaisyDaisy]

@ Holz, it's not completely accurate as to whether they are "against" Option A

Each team could select one option (which didnt mean they are negging the other 3)

They might like A too, but liked C or D more

Cant please everyone, and the majority has spoken so A it is!

[Holz]

-  7 votes against and the trade fails

- 5-6 votes against and the trade fails, unless the Admin decides to let it pass

- 4 votes against and the trade passes, unless the Admin decides to let it fail

- 0-3 votes against and the trade passes.

if we really are all about a democracy then this should be the rules. we just had 7 people unhappy with the system and that was overruled.

10 votes against and the trade fails

7-9 votes against and the trade fails, unless the Admin decides to let it pass

6-8 votes against and the trade passes, unless the Admin decides to let it fail

0-6 votes against and the trade passes.