I am so confused after reading the last dozen posts. What trade was vetoed? by whom? Did someone withdraw from a trade after it was posted? bad form! But I think a 24h cooling off seems fair. A handshake is a handshake though gents.
Jim, a trade was vetoed twice when the person who had the disadvantage in the trade wished to withrdraw it, then another few people vetoed it. Lenny and I made the trade Lenny traded Goddard pick 11 and pick 65 for my, Mundy, Pick 44 and pick 62 if I recall correctly.
<blockquote>Quote from Lenh191 on September 20, 2012, 14:00 fwiw I think Terry will probably tell you you're in charge of trades, make a ruling (publicly), if parties are aggrieved it can be referred further...</blockquote> As Terry is away this week, he'll be unable to comment. However, as Assistant Commish, I'm inclined to agree Len and say that Bama was appointed Trade Commissioner by Terry to "oversee the trade period to ensure all is hunky dory". All yours Bama! FWIW, the original ORRFL rule re: the Veto System provides no guidance as to what circumstances the Veto can, or should, be used in, merely that coaches have the option to veto. Cheers JC
I'm with you jimbowen very confused. I think there must've been discussions going on somewhere else too that we missed, Fwiw, I think there should be 48h period for the league to veto. Somebody can vote to veto their own trade, but personally I don't think someone should be able to change their mind and retract their trade - not after it's been agreed upon and posted in the official thread.
Ok, I think it is unclear what has happened to I will explain, Lenny and I made a trade, Lenny traded Goddard pick 11 and pick 65 for my, Mundy, Pick 44 and pick 62, we both thought it was a fair trade at the time, then Lenh and ChiefRussel Veto'ed, then Lenny commented asking for his trade to be retracted as he had realised what a bad trade and decision he had made, so he veto'ed his own trade, after that another two people veto'ed it before I felt inclined to veto the trade as well, so that is 6 coaches 'veto' against the trade. Bama a few days before had made a trade that at the time he also felt was fair, he also made the trade with me. That trade was Bama's Luke Parker and Jack Watts were on their way to my side in return for Josh Drummond and pick 8, then the next day he messaged me asking if he could take the trade back because he wasn't a fan of it, saying he has to many backman and not enough forwards at the moment, and he is trading in a backman, and saying that is no use for his team (not exact message, but some-what along the lines of it). I said no as the trade was already on the block, and I was a fan of the trade as it worked well for my team. Also no one had yet veto'ed, I thought it was fair enough that I said no to taking the trade back because we had both agreed on the trade and put it here on the trading block. No one veto'ed before the 48hr period, and no one is yet to officially veto against it, although I think you can't veto after the 48hr period, is this correct? So Bama is complaining (sorry if that isn't the right word mate) that a trade got retracted because they felt it was unfair, but his trade got through even though he thought it was unfair, but the trade that was 'retracted' had been veto'ed a considerable amount of times, and that is the reason it was taken back. Bama's trade was not veto'ed so therefor the trade become offical. Hope I have cleared things up, if I haven't well, it was worth a try!
Fitzy's explanation of the veto process with regard to his trade with Lenny is how I saw it also, in that the retraction was irrelevant the trade was not going to pass as it was felt by enough of us to be too far unbalanced. Obviously the 2nd issue is different, for mine once a trade has passed the 48 hours its locked in, as the traded players or picks need to be able to be on-traded. So we are then talking about a change of mind process only, whilst I can see that happens and have often bought something shiny that 10 seconds later I thought was crap, I never took it back, caveat emptor as the saying goes. My vote would be; Once the trade is posted it can only be killed by veto, as I said earlier though, I see no reason a manager couldn't vote veto on their own trade and try to convince the others to agree, subject to the same 48 hour veto rules as the normal trade process. ie change nothing and apply the same rule regardless.
My thoughts are that the league can veto a trade for the 48hrs after the trade has been posted but people involved can't retract or veto. If you pull the trigger on the trade, I'm going to assume that you have thought about it. If you haven't then that is your own fault, you have to rely on the league to save you. The league is there to preserve the integrity of the competition so no "Lachlan Veale" deals get done. Pretty much what most other people have already said I think...
Haha, I'd forgotten about Laclan Veale What an interesting trade that was, even though I can't remember the particulars of it now. And thanks for the review Fitzy. Makes a lot of sense now. I didn't veto that trade, but I'm not sure why I didn't. I didn't look at it properly tbh. I just remember thinking, I wish I had have enquirer about Goddard haha
<blockquote>Quote from Jolcon on September 20, 2012, 20:33 FWIW, the original ORRFL rule re: the Veto System provides no guidance as to what circumstances the Veto can, or should, be used in, merely that coaches have the option to veto. </blockquote> That's because over at the ORFFL we let our hearts decide what is worthy of a veto. You have it pretty much right, it basically gives the right to everyone to be a policeman, in a kind of fantasy football game theory experiment. FWIW, no trade in the ORFFL has received a single veto vote. There's been plenty of conjecture though.
Hi Lads, As the new kid on the block, I have been trying to get my head around the some of the intracacies relating to trading rules and delistment rules. I appreciate that there has been extensive discussion recently relating to trading and delisting but I was wondering if someone (in the absence of TiB) could clarify a few points for me. I read that in early Sept there was voting on a change to a 4/2 delistment rule, consensus seemed to be in favour of this, has this rule now been adopted? If it is adopted, is 4 a fixed number (i.e. 4 only prior to pre season draft, no more no less)? Is the pre season draft purely a rookie draft (i.e. only can draft newly signed AFL players coming into system late 2012)? Confirming end of season trade rules, I read in TiB's ORFFA post on Sept 5th that trades need to be on a one for one basis (i.e. Player X for Player Y or Player X for a pre season draft pick). Is this how everyone understands it? Also, TiB posted on Sept 13th that if a Player is traded for a draft pick that effectively this equates to delisting a player so only a further 3 would need to be delisted prior to the draft. Correct? Sorry if this sounds like trolling over old ground, hopefully someone is willing to shed some light Thanks
Larrikin Lagoon and Charlie's Opening have agreed a trade involving Shane Savagae moving from the Lagoon to The Pit in exchange for Heath 'Reg' Grundy. Let the 48 hour veto period begin!
Pretty busy today guys, but will check trade offers tonight/weekend. Would like to move on the below players, and can package with draft picks to sweeten deals as they are veterans. Chris Newman Robert Murphy Nick Riewoldt Joel Corey In order my preference in return is back, ruck, forward, midfielder. Aged around or under 25. Thanks guys, happy friday
Just my opinion, but to give you some feedback, in line <blockquote>Quote from gravenger on September 21, 2012, 09:56 Hi Lads, As the new kid on the block, I have been trying to get my head around the some of the intracacies relating to trading rules and delistment rules. I appreciate that there has been extensive discussion recently relating to trading and delisting but I was wondering if someone (in the absence of TiB) could clarify a few points for me.</blockquote> <blockquote> I read that in early Sept there was voting on a change to a 4/2 delistment rule, consensus seemed to be in favour of this, has this rule now been adopted? </blockquote> As far as I know yes <blockquote> If it is adopted, is 4 a fixed number (i.e. 4 only prior to pre season draft, no more no less)?</blockquote> As many as you like, they are minimums <blockquote> Is the pre season draft purely a rookie draft (i.e. only can draft newly signed AFL players coming into system late 2012)?</blockquote> All AFL listed players that can be selected for SC that do not already belong to an ORFFA club are eligible for the draft <blockquote> Confirming end of season trade rules, I read in TiB's ORFFA post on Sept 5th that trades need to be on a one for one basis (i.e. Player X for Player Y or Player X for a pre season draft pick). Is this how everyone understands it?</blockquote> This is how I understood it <blockquote> Also, TiB posted on Sept 13th that if a Player is traded for a draft pick that effectively this equates to delisting a player so only a further 3 would need to be delisted prior to the draft. Correct? </blockquote> correct, again how I understood it, the overriding principle is that all teams must have 22 or less players at the start of the draft. <blockquote> Sorry if this sounds like trolling over old ground, hopefully someone is willing to shed some light Thanks</blockquote> Hopefully I did
How can the participants in a trade veto there own trade??? Not worried about my trade that was my own stupidity through haste (trying to leave work!) Still think the Fitzy/Lenny trade wasn't worth a veto just a stupid trade like my one!
Guys, Below are the rules on the ORFFL board. Trading works on the 50% Veto system. If 50% of the non-involved teams veto said trade, trade does not go through. Teams will have roughly 48 hours to veto a trade proposed (eg. If a trade is proposed at 2.15pm on a Tuesday, ORFFL coaches have until 10pm on a thursday to cast their votes. I'll be checking/ratifying at 10pm, basically). Reading back through the posts there were only 3 veto's, Lenh191, Chels and Jolcon. Chief didn't actually say he vetoed the trade just said he thought it was strange and you can not veto your own trade. That is not 50% as stated in the above rules if these are in fact the rules we are following. As trades can not be retracted once they are posted I feel the trade should stand. If anyone thinks I am wrong or being unfair please let me know.
All non voters are treated as abstaining, and therefore the total votes made are all that is counted, this is somewhere from Terry
The way I see it the Fitzy and Lenny trade was retracted by Lenny and allowed by Fitzy, so move on nothing to see (it seems both parties are happy)