Ultimate Footy - Norm Smith League

[scarlett 247]

He'll be back. He's just upset and being dramatic.

So if you believe that then why did you vote against the trade if you believed it to be in the spirit of the game?

[Range Rover 1,935]

The problem now is people have stated they will veto future trades as 'payback', which casts a pall over the system.

[JACKATTACK 17]

Just so we're all clear, vetoeing is only there to protect against trades that are not 'in the spirit of the game'. It should not be used as a competative advantage to give your team a leg up.

We all seem to have varying degrees of what 'in the spirit of the game' means. So vote according to your understanding, vote honestly and if you have a trade vetoed, accept it and move on.

To answer a couple of questions:

I can't change the trade deadline.

My other league settings are almost the same. Except that we have fewer players, no utility and a league of 16 (not 18). Which I personally think works better. When it comes to it next year I might sound everyone out about what they would prefer.

Our league has 4 backs 5 centres 4 forwards a ruck and utility.

My other one has 3 backs, 4 centres, 3 forwards and a ruck.

[rpfc 27,692]

My other league settings are almost the same. Except that we have fewer players, no utility and a league of 16 (not 18). Which I personally think works better. When it comes to it next year I might sound everyone out about what they would prefer.

Our league has 4 backs 5 centres 4 forwards a ruck and utility.

My other one has 3 backs, 4 centres, 3 forwards and a ruck.

How many keepers do you have?

[scarlett 247]

I voted against it,because it was unfair and unreasonable. Martin And one other would have got my vote. Any other two without Martin ,I would have deemed it unfair.I would have given you either SJ or Stanton for any two on offer.

ablett is worth alot more then sj or Stanton, your point is not valid.

He said he had other offers for ablett, I made the best one, I made one got rejected so made a better one. The deal you all think would of got the deal done didn't.

[scarlett 247]

The problem now is people have stated they will veto future trades as 'payback', which casts a pall over the system.

People have already stated they used the veto tool to increase there chances to win, that is cheating.

I still haven't seen a valid reason why this trade was voted against only corrupt ones.

[rpfc 27,692]

People have already stated they used the veto tool to increase there chances to win, that is cheating.

I still haven't seen a valid reason why this trade was voted against only corrupt ones.

I don't believe it is cheating.

In the same way I don't believe what you and DD were doing was cheating.

But swapping Ablett:

8 pts, 20 kicks, 15 HBs, 3 Ms, 0 HOs and 5 Ts for:

32 pts, 46 kicks, 45.5, HBs, 23 Ms, 42.5 HOs and 18 Ts

Is not in the spirit of the game because...wait for it...it makes it harder for others to compete when a trade is so lopsided.

So please, there are no cheaters here - only people wanting to win a game.

[JACKATTACK 17]

I don't believe it is cheating.

In the same way I don't believe what you and DD were doing was cheating.

But swapping Ablett:

8 pts, 20 kicks, 15 HBs, 3 Ms, 0 HOs and 5 Ts for:

32 pts, 46 kicks, 45.5, HBs, 23 Ms, 42.5 HOs and 18 Ts

Is not in the spirit of the game because...wait for it...it makes it harder for others to compete when a trade is so lopsided.

So please, there are no cheaters here - only people wanting to win a game.

If you believe that it isn't in the spirit of the game then I'll accept that.

Personally I think the trade is okay, (other than the fact he said he did it because he was quitting next year).

[scarlett 247]

I don't believe it is cheating.

In the same way I don't believe what you and DD were doing was cheating.

But swapping Ablett:

8 pts, 20 kicks, 15 HBs, 3 Ms, 0 HOs and 5 Ts for:

32 pts, 46 kicks, 45.5, HBs, 23 Ms, 42.5 HOs and 18 Ts

Is not in the spirit of the game because...wait for it...it makes it harder for others to compete when a trade is so lopsided.

So please, there are no cheaters here - only people wanting to win a game.

You leave out the fact that ablett is probably the best keeper in the game to suit your arguement, jack attack has already said the way you used the veto tool was incorrect and didn't count your vote, so in the spirit of the game you cheated. It was a fair trade in the context of keepers, it just didn't favor you so you cheated, yet people did this earlier in the year I did the right thing and waited til I definatley couldn't make the finals and you cheat. You all realize it wasn't 1 player for 5, he would of had to delist 4 other players and are only aloud a certain number of players for each spot. A real low point for the league, what's probably worse is you admitting it and then trying to defend it.

[rpfc 27,692]

You leave out the fact that ablett is probably the best keeper in the game to suit your arguement, jack attack has already said the way you used the veto tool was incorrect and didn't count your vote, so in the spirit of the game you cheated. It was a fair trade in the context of keepers, it just didn't favor you so you cheated, yet people did this earlier in the year I did the right thing and waited til I definatley couldn't make the finals and you cheat. You all realize it wasn't 1 player for 5, he would of had to delist 4 other players and are only aloud a certain number of players for each spot. A real low point for the league, what's probably worse is you admitting it and then trying to defend it.

The 'spirit of the game' argument is my argument.

It was outside the 'spirit of the game' because it was a lopsided deal that makes it harder for anyone to beat DD - that is why people vetoed the deal - whether they want to admit that or not or realise that or not.

Edited July 23, 2012 by rpfc

[jayceebee31 692]

The 'spirit of the game' argument is my argument.

It was outside the 'spirit of the game' because it was a lopsided deal that makes it harder for anyone to beat DD - that is why people vetoed the deal - whether they want to admit that or not or realise that or not.

The 'spirit of the game' argument is my argument.

It was outside the 'spirit of the game' because it was a lopsided deal that makes it harder for anyone to beat DD - that is why people vetoed the deal - whether they want to admit that or not or realise that or not.

Not just harder- impossible to beat him.AscI already pointed out Dappa was beaten by Scarlett 9 to 6 , therefore to gain 5 top picks To go with his other players , he was totally unbeatable. Scarlett, you know that.

[scarlett 247]

It was in the spirit of you have to pay for a keeper like ablett which is what I did. We voted for these rules then change our minds to suit

[H_T 2,941]

And THAT is why I'm pulling out of his comp.

You guys have fun with it next year.

Wow...much has transpired since my last visit.Group hug ?

[snomed 54]

What a pity we can't extend the trade deadline so we can abuse eachother some more

I didn't veto the trade (not sure if I would have - it had already been vetoed by the time I read the email about the trade going though). I'd suggest that the reason for veto'ing would be to stop people from colluding (e.g. when one person can't win they unload their best players to their mates). Just because one person is going to have a stronger team than you isn't a reason.

But swapping Ablett:

8 pts, 20 kicks, 15 HBs, 3 Ms, 0 HOs and 5 Ts for:

32 pts, 46 kicks, 45.5, HBs, 23 Ms, 42.5 HOs and 18 Ts

I think this is a bit of an unfair comparison - given that of the DD would have had to drop 5 players from his starting lineup unless if he's found a way to play with 20 on the field.

This is the downfall of the "keeper" system though - some people might think of this as colluding (even if they don't know eachother) given one has basically said to the other "I'll give up this year, and in return you give me the best player in the league for next year" however, IMO that's just both guys playing smart and within the rules which have been set in jelly (and modified) throughout the year.

Time for some chill pills all or else I'm taking my bat and going home!

Edited July 23, 2012 by snomed

[Old Man Rivers 326]

Ablett Trade vetoed - Was always a 50/50 that trade would not get through.

I understand the thought process from both sides but you have to run the Veto gauntlet.

You both came up a little short on this occasion. Personally I didn't have a huge drama with the trade.

I am just very happy I managed to land 2 Lock Keepers in Kieren Jack & Jack Darling (U 21) in the final week of trading.

Jack Attack made a huge mistake listing Taylor Walker as a 1991 keeper when in fact he was born in 1990.

Took me until Monday of this week to uncover this error & charge into damage repair mode for 2013 season.

Finally Dappa Dan, I have said this to Range Rover, JCB & DL7, all who have threatend to leave this comp in the past few month's.

Stay, this is a game only, lets not take ourselves too serious here.

I honestly reckon The Dee's disgraceul plight in 2012 is messing with everyones head's.

Stick around Dappa, we can all attack UF 2013 with greater focus after The Demons clean up at the draft, Trade week & score a Free Agency gem. .

[H_T 2,941]

Re: The Ablett trade (which I didn't have a say on), understandably Ablett is a great player, perhaps if the trade was a 5 for 3 player ratio or even 5 for 2 player ratio it might have got through. The 5:1 ratio - as OMR stated - probably came up a bit short in other coaches calculations.

Just a suggestion for next time around....

[scarlett 247]

Re: The Ablett trade (which I didn't have a say on), understandably Ablett is a great player, perhaps if the trade was a 5 for 3 player ratio or even 5 for 2 player ratio it might have got through. The 5:1 ratio - as OMR stated - probably came up a bit short in other coaches calculations.

Just a suggestion for next time around....

How is it a 5 for 1, he would of had to delist 4 players, makes no difference to his team if we had put his 4 players to be delisted in the trade or not, I might of overestimated the intelligence of people in this league if that would of got the trade through.

[H_T 2,941]

Looking at it scarlett the quality of the 5 players outweighed Ablett. That's all I'm saying.

[scarlett 247]

Yes, you have to pay for quality, if you look at it from my side I was getting the better deal with my season shot I was getting the best keeper player without giving up my other 3 keepers, yet people are saying it was lopsided dappa's way, I'd say it was fairer then the trades that went through earlier in the year, just people being in the 8 or close to would of feared losing to dappa.

[DeeVoted 582]

I suggest another rule change for 2013 for you blokes.

A couple of nulla nullas at 20 paces. If that doesnt solve it, cream pies toe to toe.

[robbo24 66]

Anyway back on it. Look at Beams projected score this week . HUGE! Will win you the match and end my season if he pulls it off!

F Dayne Beams

(CW - C,F) 6-1 (37) .857 22 18 5 0 3 1

Edited July 25, 2012 by robbo24

[45HG 1,539]

How'd you get that projection?

Mind telling me how Dawes/Elliot wil go?

[robbo24 66]

How'd you get that projection?

Mind telling me how Dawes/Elliot wil go?

Paid the couple of bucks for premium. Hasn't worked out for me though! You're the wreckers, yeh? It says not to play either of them and to pick Shulz!

[robbo24 66]

Dawes - 3-4(22) .429 8 6 5 4 2 -

Elliot - 0-2 (2) .000 8 5 8 0 6 0

The projection suggests you'll smash me

[45HG 1,539]

If the projection's anything like Supercoach's, I'll pay it no mind.

You'd like me to play Schulz, ey!