Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
AFFL
WELCOME TO AFFL!

AFFL ROUND SEVENTEEN LOCKOUT:

Welcome to AFFL. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Sign-up now and you could be the next AFFL coach!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
The St Kilda/Geelong Trade
Topic Started: Jun 9 2009, 05:08 PM (860 Views)
Snappy
Member Avatar
#TeamLummas
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TrueBlueNavyBlues
Jun 9 2009, 06:26 PM
Snappy
Jun 9 2009, 06:13 PM
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:11 PM
Can't say I agree with this verdict either. It actually gives me a fair few concerns regarding other areas of the game that the rules aren't 100% clear on.

I mean techinically, (I'm trying to be as stupid as possible here btw) nowhere in the rules does it say that your captain has to be named prior to the commencement of the round. All that is said is that your team has to be named. Admin will probably say here that naming a captain is part of the naming of the team. But nowhere does it say this clearly in the rules and by the ruling re GEE and STK, I can only assume I'd be allowed to get away with it as 'they don't have a leg to stand on'.

I'd also like to see a detailed procedure of how a 'realistic 22' is decided now since obviously the idea of common sense has gone out the window with this decision. Nowhere in the rules does it say that decisions made in the 'Player Positional Queries' thread have to be abided to. I won't be taking any notice of that thread, or the rulings given in it until it is an 'official' thread.

It's a dangerous precedent that has been set now and guys you are going to have to re consider all the rules because of it, re write quite a few and probably have to add a hell of a lot.

Having said that JA had plenty of time to take this out of the admins hands and accepted the trade. Pretty poor by him more than anything imo.
Perhaps we should use the positions list like in the AFLPL, with a few minor changes to them?
Fuck no!!!
Well if teams don't stop putting players in ridiculous positions (ie Pattison FB), it'll have to come with it.

It seems alot of arguments these days have come from common sense issues
Quote:
 
Nah got me pictures of your mums clunge. sweet and juicy
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dtm
Member Avatar
Mark Blake
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tarkyn you just reminded me of something that I just looked up. According to the rules, Admin have no right to overturn trades. They have done so in the past and correctly so.

My point is that common sense prevailed and ffs, this is a fantasy afl game. Common sense and decency should be the main rules. Common sense tells me that this trade should have gone through.
New Zealand Consulate. Murray Hewitt speaking.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dtm
Member Avatar
Mark Blake
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TrueBlueNavyBlues
Jun 9 2009, 06:26 PM
Snappy
Jun 9 2009, 06:13 PM
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:11 PM
Can't say I agree with this verdict either. It actually gives me a fair few concerns regarding other areas of the game that the rules aren't 100% clear on.

I mean techinically, (I'm trying to be as stupid as possible here btw) nowhere in the rules does it say that your captain has to be named prior to the commencement of the round. All that is said is that your team has to be named. Admin will probably say here that naming a captain is part of the naming of the team. But nowhere does it say this clearly in the rules and by the ruling re GEE and STK, I can only assume I'd be allowed to get away with it as 'they don't have a leg to stand on'.

I'd also like to see a detailed procedure of how a 'realistic 22' is decided now since obviously the idea of common sense has gone out the window with this decision. Nowhere in the rules does it say that decisions made in the 'Player Positional Queries' thread have to be abided to. I won't be taking any notice of that thread, or the rulings given in it until it is an 'official' thread.

It's a dangerous precedent that has been set now and guys you are going to have to re consider all the rules because of it, re write quite a few and probably have to add a hell of a lot.

Having said that JA had plenty of time to take this out of the admins hands and accepted the trade. Pretty poor by him more than anything imo.
Perhaps we should use the positions list like in the AFLPL, with a few minor changes to them?
Fuck no!!!
As an admin, 2 word posts, particularly 'fuck no!!!' are pretty juvenile and unhelpful. You have been part of a decision making process that has rightly or wrongly come up with a decision involving STK and GEE and as thus, should be giving some proper feedback like the other two admin will and have done.

Snappy's comment was a suggestion in response to my post which was relevant to the wider issue at hand here. As a result of the decision passed down it has to really be considered now as much as it pains me to say it.
New Zealand Consulate. Murray Hewitt speaking.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tarkyn_24
Jarrad Oakleigh-Nichols
[ * ]
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:28 PM
Tarkyn you just reminded me of something that I just looked up. According to the rules, Admin have no right to overturn trades. They have done so in the past and correctly so.

My point is that common sense prevailed and ffs, this is a fantasy afl game. Common sense and decency should be the main rules. Common sense tells me that this trade should have gone through.
Common sense prevailed? Didn't we overrule the trade?

I'm lost now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Colby
Member Avatar
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:32 PM
TrueBlueNavyBlues
Jun 9 2009, 06:26 PM
Snappy
Jun 9 2009, 06:13 PM
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:11 PM
Can't say I agree with this verdict either. It actually gives me a fair few concerns regarding other areas of the game that the rules aren't 100% clear on.

I mean techinically, (I'm trying to be as stupid as possible here btw) nowhere in the rules does it say that your captain has to be named prior to the commencement of the round. All that is said is that your team has to be named. Admin will probably say here that naming a captain is part of the naming of the team. But nowhere does it say this clearly in the rules and by the ruling re GEE and STK, I can only assume I'd be allowed to get away with it as 'they don't have a leg to stand on'.

I'd also like to see a detailed procedure of how a 'realistic 22' is decided now since obviously the idea of common sense has gone out the window with this decision. Nowhere in the rules does it say that decisions made in the 'Player Positional Queries' thread have to be abided to. I won't be taking any notice of that thread, or the rulings given in it until it is an 'official' thread.

It's a dangerous precedent that has been set now and guys you are going to have to re consider all the rules because of it, re write quite a few and probably have to add a hell of a lot.

Having said that JA had plenty of time to take this out of the admins hands and accepted the trade. Pretty poor by him more than anything imo.
Perhaps we should use the positions list like in the AFLPL, with a few minor changes to them?
Fuck no!!!
As an admin, 2 word posts, particularly 'fuck no!!!' are pretty juvenile and unhelpful. You have been part of a decision making process that has rightly or wrongly come up with a decision involving STK and GEE and as thus, should be giving some proper feedback like the other two admin will and have done.

Snappy's comment was a suggestion in response to my post which was relevant to the wider issue at hand here. As a result of the decision passed down it has to really be considered now as much as it pains me to say it.
Yeah sorry mate, poor form on my behalf but the fact remains that i can't stand the player position list on AFLPL, i understand why it's there but personally i hate it.
Quote:
 
Stife
Just got out of a long, long relationship. Single living ftw. Freelance sex object ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dtm
Member Avatar
Mark Blake
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tarkyn_24
Jun 9 2009, 06:32 PM
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:28 PM
Tarkyn you just reminded me of something that I just looked up. According to the rules, Admin have no right to overturn trades. They have done so in the past and correctly so.

My point is that common sense prevailed and ffs, this is a fantasy afl game. Common sense and decency should be the main rules. Common sense tells me that this trade should have gone through.
Common sense prevailed? Didn't we overrule the trade?

I'm lost now.
Lol, NO! imo common sense didn't prevail here.

In the past when other trades have been overturned, common sense has prevailed.
New Zealand Consulate. Murray Hewitt speaking.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Snappy
Member Avatar
#TeamLummas
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TrueBlueNavyBlues
Jun 9 2009, 06:34 PM
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:32 PM
TrueBlueNavyBlues
Jun 9 2009, 06:26 PM
Snappy
Jun 9 2009, 06:13 PM
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:11 PM
Can't say I agree with this verdict either. It actually gives me a fair few concerns regarding other areas of the game that the rules aren't 100% clear on.

I mean techinically, (I'm trying to be as stupid as possible here btw) nowhere in the rules does it say that your captain has to be named prior to the commencement of the round. All that is said is that your team has to be named. Admin will probably say here that naming a captain is part of the naming of the team. But nowhere does it say this clearly in the rules and by the ruling re GEE and STK, I can only assume I'd be allowed to get away with it as 'they don't have a leg to stand on'.

I'd also like to see a detailed procedure of how a 'realistic 22' is decided now since obviously the idea of common sense has gone out the window with this decision. Nowhere in the rules does it say that decisions made in the 'Player Positional Queries' thread have to be abided to. I won't be taking any notice of that thread, or the rulings given in it until it is an 'official' thread.

It's a dangerous precedent that has been set now and guys you are going to have to re consider all the rules because of it, re write quite a few and probably have to add a hell of a lot.

Having said that JA had plenty of time to take this out of the admins hands and accepted the trade. Pretty poor by him more than anything imo.
Perhaps we should use the positions list like in the AFLPL, with a few minor changes to them?
Fuck no!!!
As an admin, 2 word posts, particularly 'fuck no!!!' are pretty juvenile and unhelpful. You have been part of a decision making process that has rightly or wrongly come up with a decision involving STK and GEE and as thus, should be giving some proper feedback like the other two admin will and have done.

Snappy's comment was a suggestion in response to my post which was relevant to the wider issue at hand here. As a result of the decision passed down it has to really be considered now as much as it pains me to say it.
Yeah sorry mate, poor form on my behalf but the fact remains that i can't stand the player position list on AFLPL, i understand why it's there but personally i hate it.
Without set boundaries, coaches are starting to push the limits of common sense
Quote:
 
Nah got me pictures of your mums clunge. sweet and juicy
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tarkyn_24
Jarrad Oakleigh-Nichols
[ * ]
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:34 PM
Tarkyn_24
Jun 9 2009, 06:32 PM
dtm06
Jun 9 2009, 06:28 PM
Tarkyn you just reminded me of something that I just looked up. According to the rules, Admin have no right to overturn trades. They have done so in the past and correctly so.

My point is that common sense prevailed and ffs, this is a fantasy afl game. Common sense and decency should be the main rules. Common sense tells me that this trade should have gone through.
Common sense prevailed? Didn't we overrule the trade?

I'm lost now.
Lol, NO! imo common sense didn't prevail here.

In the past when other trades have been overturned, common sense has prevailed.
Ah right, I read it contextually wrong.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jarman Magic
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I was surprised to see the announcement when I logged in. After a fair bit of consideration I'd found myself 50/50 on how the trade should be handled and would have liked a bit more time to discuss all the ins and outs before making a definite decision.
Having said that, the fact that no (current) rules had actually been broken and the trade was cancelled before it had been confirmed by both coaches is, in itself, sufficient reason for the trade to not go through and I back that decision.


People have been saying this goes against common sense.
I think people may be getting "common sense" mixed up with "ethics".
To post a trade and then cancel it after is without any doubt an unethical thing to do.
But common sense could very easily go in ja's favour here. Common sense told him that it wasn't a good trade for him and it's not an official trade until both team confirm it so common sense told him to cancel the trade before it goes through. He obviously didn't expect it to be an issue although should have considered the ethics involved throughout this whole issue.


A couple of times I've seen that Cleishy is being "punished" in this decision. While Cleishy has every reason to be pissed off with what's happened here he's not being punished at all. He hasn't lost anything that he didn't already have. His team is no weaker than it was before this dispute.


People have also said they are worried that common sense will go out the window on other issues such as player positions. This shouldn't be the case as everyone has the right to request or dispute any player positioning and the thread dedicated to dealing with player positions is regularly used.


I think the majority of us all have a feel for what we think is the right way to go about things here. But ja is new and I would hope that everyone would give him the benefit of the doubt in this and also hope that ja has learned now that the "Official Trades" thread is sacred and what he did is viewed as blasphemy on this site.

Rules will be put in place to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen again and all new coaches will be made aware of their trade responsibilities when they sign up.


Cleishy... Sorry that this didn't go your way mate. I hope you understand and accept this decision and understand how frustrating this must be for you.

JA... Be very careful with your trades. If you accept a trade and that trade is posted you now know that you are expected to honour that trade. Also, be very careful of any immediate trades you may have in mind for Chappy or Dal. If you cancelled the trade because you suddenly received an offer you thought was better you know that will not go down well here. Remember, all eyes are now on you!
Edited by Jarman Magic, Jun 9 2009, 08:17 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cleishy
Member Avatar
Jason Laycock
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Yes I am pissed off that this trade was reversed for my own benefit but mainly because of the spirit this game has always been played.

I don't have any choice but to accept it, I just think its a poor decision made. Every other decision made had been due to common sense but now we are going on technicalities which opens the door for a lot of boundaries to be pushed.

The rules cannot cover every single thing but we all know what was right. Now that has gone out the window there will be other things pushed.


The decision went against what the majority thought was right also, which is another story,.

Home of Dustin Martin.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lliam
Member Avatar
Matthew Richardson
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
This was posted by JM in the Staff Room.

Seeing as it's something that everyone has a clear opinion on, I thought it'd be good to show everyone first.

Quote:
 
Proposed wording for new trading rule:

All agreed trades must be posted in a new thread in the "Official Trades" section with the thread title naming all teams involved in the trade.
The team/coach posting the new thread must name all players involved in the trade and which team they are being traded to. The OP serves as confirmation of the trade for that team.

The team starting the thread may not, under any circumstances, cancel the trade during the next 48 hours.
If the other team(s) involved in the trade have not confirmed the trade within 48 hours of the trade being posted any coach/team who has already confirmed that trade may then cancel the trade if they wish from that point provided that the trade is not confirmed by all parties before the trade is reversed.

Trades should be confirmed by all teams as soon as possible after the trade has been posted.
Any disputes arising from possible errors or differences between the trade posted and the trade agreed to in negotiation must be highlighted before all teams have confirmed the trade.

Once trades have been confirmed by all parties involved that trade can only be reversed by admin if sufficient grounds exist to do so.

Coaches must be aware that while a trade is not complete until all teams involved have confirmed the trade in the "Official Trades" section it is considered highly unethical to agree to a trade and then change your mind after the trade has been posted.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lliam
Member Avatar
Matthew Richardson
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Nobody even has an opinion?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dtm
Member Avatar
Mark Blake
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think that's fair. I would add one thing though, that a trade can be reversed if all involved parties agree to it.

Alternatively they could just do another trade so not a big deal really.

Actually just thinking about it, I'd make it longer than 48 hours. Anything can happen to a computer that would keep you off the site for that time. Personal circumstances may keep people from logging on too. I'd make it 5 days or a week.
New Zealand Consulate. Murray Hewitt speaking.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jarman Magic
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
dtm06
Jun 15 2009, 11:34 AM
I think that's fair. I would add one thing though, that a trade can be reversed if all involved parties agree to it.

Alternatively they could just do another trade so not a big deal really.

Actually just thinking about it, I'd make it longer than 48 hours. Anything can happen to a computer that would keep you off the site for that time. Personal circumstances may keep people from logging on too. I'd make it 5 days or a week.
It's only an option to cancel the trade. I personally don't think it's fair for someone to have to wait more than 24 hours for a trade to be confirmed effectively putting a complete freeze on the players you have involved.

Most people won't want to cancel the trade anyway, but I just think 48 hours is plenty for coaches to confirm. If it isn't confirmed in this time I think the posting coach should have the option of cancelling.

I would HATE to wait 5-7 days for someone to confirm a trade. I wouldn't be happy with that at all. But I don't have to cancel the trade if I really want it to go through. 2 days is more than enough to wait
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dtm
Member Avatar
Mark Blake
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Imo 48 hours is a bit of an odd time. I understand what you're saying but 99% of the time the trade is finalised with an hour or so by the second party. Everyone here seems to get on at least once a day so usually the trade will be confirmed within a day if this is not the case. The only reason it wouldn't be is if the coach literally can't get on a computer and I don't think 2 days is really a long enough period for this to rectify itself.

Having said that, both ideas are dealing with really rare occurences. It doesn't really matter but I think it's better to play it safe.
New Zealand Consulate. Murray Hewitt speaking.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jarman Magic
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I see your point but like I said, I'd hate to have players hanging on a confirmation for more than a few days. Especially if I needed them for team structure in a match for the weekend or was planning on using them in another trade. As you said, it's rare that this will happen and I think it'd be rare that anyone would cancel the trade if they had to wait 2 days or more but they should have that option if they are kept waiting.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pie 4 Life
Member Avatar
Mitch Thorp
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sounds good, will stop people posting trades without thinking.
Shabby
 
And yes, Nick Maxwell is a pretty elite defender in this game.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lliam
Member Avatar
Matthew Richardson
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The 'Trade Rules' have been posted in the 'Official Trades' section and also linked in the official rules.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
« Previous Topic · Official Press Releases · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2