We will be tidying up the rules on auctions, which in truth will mostly consist of confirming what was put in place last year. We would also like no posts deleted, under any circumstances. This is why despite reading your note chels I chose not to delete the posts. We have a history of playing fair and above board, lets not get to a point where have to have play fair rules, that sounds way too Nineteen Eighty-Four for my taste
Let me tidy my post up a bit then; I am auctioing one of Minson or Goldy. I have no real reserve in mind and am not 100% I will trade one of them unless the offer is too good to turn down. So far pick #2 in the PSD is leading over Matt Scharenberg. I like Scharenberg but he has had an awful injury run which has me wary. Has pick #2 met my reserve? TBH I am not even sure! lol I havent started scouting the PSD yet, so let me get onto that and I will get back to everyone! All other offers welcome, happy to take established FWD or D stars or highly rated youngsters.
Chels has a valid reason to speak out, but I would remind that I have not stated anywhere that the other shenanigans are classified as 'open'. Far from it and two wongs never have made a wite. It is unfortunate that I have to state this publicly, but Chris your 'admin' (as opposed to Moderator) is simply to facilitate posting your weekly write-up, which we appreciate. It is not under any circumstances a carte blanche to delete posts - especially those of other people. I suspect Ant also has 'admin' as a result of his involvement in other ts-related activities but am confident he would never even consider deleting someone else's post. While I am at it, I would also point out that the originator of a thread can apparently delete at will anything within that thread. So pause for a little thought before you kick off a new thread. I learnt this the hard way. Unless you have been on the end of it, you don't realise the bad feeling having your post deleted or modified can engender. So, posts in a thread CAN be deleted, either by the originator or by a moderator (which at the moment [I think] is Len and myself). The originator would want to have an extremely good reason to delete or modify someone else's post - there are 17 other coaches watching and you risk their ire. My inclination is that we do not continue with the auction idea (after this one is concluded). We gave it a fly to see how it would go and early signs were promising. This one, however, is a dog's breakfast and if there is a need for me to point the finger, then clearly not 'fun'.
TerryinBangkok wrote: It is unfortunate that I have to state this publicly, but Chris your 'admin' (as opposed to Moderator) is simply to facilitate posting your weekly write-up, which we appreciate. It is not under any circumstances a carte blanche to delete posts - especially those of other people. Firstly, saying I have carte blanche is correct, but saying that I have used it is a pretty strong - and pretty inaccurate - term to use. I have enough trouble deleting my own posts let alone anyone elses. I stated above the reason I reluctantly took this action in this case, and apologised publicly to Ant for doing so if he felt slighted. TerryinBangkok wrote: While I am at it, I would also point out that the originator of a thread can apparently delete at will anything within that thread. Funnily enough, I originated this thread. And have done similarly in the past in the knowledge that apparently that gave me the power to delete lots of things. That I haven't is probably another pointer towards the fact I haven't used my 'carte blanche' to wreak terror through numerous threads. Again, I apologise to Ant and to anyone else who I've done wrong by through deleting his post. I would also move to assure people that this is (by my memory) the first time I've deleted someone's post other than my own. Clearly it will be the last as well.
I just want to know if anyone wants any of my players It's hard to know whether no-one wants them, or whether all of my players then get buried in discussions about other things.
I'd like a few of your players chief, but not the ones that you have offered up. Should we be talking? If so pm me and we can have a yarn.
......not a continuation of the rant, just getting clarification re: AUCTIONS 1. Ok.....the deleting of posts has been discussed, apols accepted etc. I in no way think Chris did it maliciously at all. Just an honest mistake. I think all & sundry now know that posts can never be deleted again. Done deal. 2. The AUCTION process. Whether it continues next year or not. (and no bandit, it wasn't the Joey discussion mate that got me started, it was something else) Perhaps mistakenly, it was my thinking that when a player is put up for auction, that's it. He is put up for auction with an end date & an unknown reserve. That is simple enough. What I don't 'like' I guess is ongoing trade negotiations in private regarding said player up for auction, and if/when a trade is found acceptable, then the player is withdrawn from the auction EARLY. That to me is crap. As pointed out by chels....somebids are held till the last day, much like real auctions......but when withdrawn early, that team had no chance to bid. In the case of Chris putting Hill upfor auction & then taking him down, he & others can gauge interest publicly& PM trade offers behind the scenes. 'deleted the posts so Hill could be discussed in private without reading auctionbids/posts'.That to me is shenanigans, BUT probably has been allowed so I don't thinkChris has tried to be a sneaky bugger at all. Itis a loop hole. Bandit had Joey upfor auction, but talked trade with CR until acceptable & then he was withdrawn. There are a number of examples. I want to make it clear that I don't think anyone has done anything wrong. I think it was a loop hole that is being used; hell, they are all smarter than me by going with the Hoppers useless team To me.....when a player is put up for auction, ALL trade discussion regarding said player has to stop. He is placed up for bid publicly. Behind the scenes talk is forbidden. ONCE the auction is over & he hasn't been dealt, THEN you can discuss again privately trade options. You cannot for any reason close an auction earlier than said end date. Its not complicated. This ensures the auction is fair to everyone. It may cut back on auctionable (nice word) players knowing that trade discussions have to stop whilst its live. That's ok. I apologize if my thinking is incorrectand want to reiterate, I do not think anyone has acted unfairly. This is a loop hole with the auction processthat I justwant to close - am just not a fan of it. If others prefer it this way, that's fine too. Its just my op that auctions should be run this way.
Simonoz wrote: ......not a continuation of the rant, just getting clarification re: AUCTIONS 1. Ok.....the deleting of posts has been discussed, apols accepted etc. I in no way think Chris did it maliciously at all. Just an honest mistake. I think all & sundry now know that posts can never be deleted again. Done deal. 2. The AUCTION process. Whether it continues next year or not. (and no bandit, it wasn't the Joey discussion mate that got me started, it was something else) Perhaps mistakenly, it was my thinking that when a player is put up for auction, that's it. He is put up for auction with an end date & an unknown reserve. That is simple enough. What I don't 'like' I guess is ongoing trade negotiations in private regarding said player up for auction, and if/when a trade is found acceptable, then the player is withdrawn from the auction EARLY. That to me is crap. As pointed out by chels....somebids are held till the last day, much like real auctions......but when withdrawn early, that team had no chance to bid. In the case of Chris putting Hill upfor auction & then taking him down, he & others can gauge interest publicly& PM trade offers behind the scenes. 'deleted the posts so Hill could be discussed in private without reading auctionbids/posts'.That to me is shenanigans, BUT probably has been allowed so I don't thinkChris has tried to be a sneaky bugger at all. Itis a loop hole. Bandit had Joey upfor auction, but talked trade with CR until acceptable & then he was withdrawn. There are a number of examples. I want to make it clear that I don't think anyone has done anything wrong. I think it was a loop hole that is being used; hell, they are all smarter than me by going with the Hoppers useless team To me.....when a player is put up for auction, ALL trade discussion regarding said player has to stop. He is placed up for bid publicly. Behind the scenes talk is forbidden. ONCE the auction is over & he hasn't been dealt, THEN you can discuss again privately trade options. You cannot for any reason close an auction earlier than said end date. Its not complicated. This ensures the auction is fair to everyone. It may cut back on auctionable (nice word) players knowing that trade discussions have to stop whilst its live. That's ok. I apologize if my thinking is incorrectand want to reiterate, I do not think anyone has acted unfairly. This is a loop hole with the auction processthat I justwant to close - am just not a fan of it. If others prefer it this way, that's fine too. Its just my op that auctions should be run this way. Fair enough. I will apologise as I will freely admit that I didn't read when Bandit's auction was running until and only after reading the above quoted post did I check to see if there was an ending time (and realised it was tomorrow). So that's my bad. If people want to veto the trade because of rules being bent unfairly then I will wear that. In my defence, I am not as frequent on the board during the off season, I saw the offer when it was made, didn't think it was for me and didn't think too much of it. Had some time to devote to my team on Sunday night, saw monster trades that I had missed and thought 'shit, I missed a bit in the last week, better do something'. Didn't even remember that Joey was on the auction block because I normally bid straight away if I see something I like (might not be a good strategy, but oh well - respect people that can play the long game). Instead I was reading the completed trades board where people were posting their lists of untouchables. While not wanting to break confidence, actually asked about a different player and then moved down to Montagna. The deal got done pretty quickly and all the while I still hadn't even remembered that he was on the auction block. Only when I jumped on to place a couple of players on myself and saw my name mentioned did I realise. If I'm completely honest, never liked the auction idea as it was so I'll be happy if it's scrapped. Only when I saw people get some favourable deals I have begrudgingly got involved in it this off season. Didn't want to get left behind. Anyway, some one bid on a player of mine already. Everyone else gets bids. I didn't even win the flag this year so you can be nice to me again ;-P
ChiefRussell wrote: Given that I was flooded with offers for Michael Johnson I will take him off the market. Here is a wierd one... I am putting two of the following three players up in a package deal. The players are Greg Broughton (DEF, avg 76), Brock McLean (MID, avg 74) and Leigh Adams (FWD, avg 62). Adams probably the best value of the three due to his FWD status and the fact that his average is largely sub affected (he averaged 79 in 2013). I will even be visible about the reserve. A second round pick will see the deal done. Peripheral stuff and a lower pick will not. The better the draft pick, you win. The auction will last until Monday. Good value I think for someone who is looking for depth in their squad. This is tempting, very tempting, but I can't quite put up 22 for it. If I had a 30ish second rounder I would be locking in Broughton and Patch.
Prap wrote: ChiefRussell wrote: Given that I was flooded with offers for Michael Johnson I will take him off the market. Here is a wierd one... I am putting two of the following three players up in a package deal. The players are Greg Broughton (DEF, avg 76), Brock McLean (MID, avg 74) and Leigh Adams (FWD, avg 62). Adams probably the best value of the three due to his FWD status and the fact that his average is largely sub affected (he averaged 79 in 2013). I will even be visible about the reserve. A second round pick will see the deal done. Peripheral stuff and a lower pick will not. The better the draft pick, you win. The auction will last until Monday. Good value I think for someone who is looking for depth in their squad. This is tempting, very tempting, but I can't quite put up 22 for it. If I had a 30ish second rounder I would be locking in Broughton and Patch. Yeah, my thinking was very similar to this too.
Simonoz wrote: ......not a continuation of the rant, just getting clarification re: AUCTIONS 2. The AUCTION process. Whether it continues next year or not. (and no bandit, it wasn't the Joey discussion mate that got me started, it was something else) Perhaps mistakenly, it was my thinking that when a player is put up for auction, that's it. He is put up for auction with an end date & an unknown reserve. That is simple enough. What I don't 'like' I guess is ongoing trade negotiations in private regarding said player up for auction, and if/when a trade is found acceptable, then the player is withdrawn from the auction EARLY. That to me is crap. As pointed out by chels....some bids are held till the last day, much like real auctions......but when withdrawn early, that team had no chance to bid. In the case of Chris putting Hill up for auction & then taking him down, he & others can gauge interest publicly & PM trade offers behind the scenes. 'deleted the posts so Hill could be discussed in private without reading auction bids/posts'. That to me is shenanigans, BUT probably has been allowed so I don't think Chris has tried to be a sneaky bugger at all. It is a loop hole. Bandit had Joey up for auction, but talked trade with CR until acceptable & then he was withdrawn. There are a number of examples. I want to make it clear that I don't think anyone has done anything wrong. I think it was a loop hole that is being used; hell, they are all smarter than me by going with the Hoppers useless team To me.....when a player is put up for auction, ALL trade discussion regarding said player has to stop. He is placed up for bid publicly. Behind the scenes talk is forbidden. ONCE the auction is over & he hasn't been dealt, THEN you can discuss again privately trade options. You cannot for any reason close an auction earlier than said end date. Its not complicated. This ensures the auction is fair to everyone. It may cut back on auctionable (nice word) players knowing that trade discussions have to stop whilst its live. That's ok. I apologize if my thinking is incorrect and want to reiterate, I do not think anyone has acted unfairly. This is a loop hole with the auction process that I just want to close - am just not a fan of it. If others prefer it this way, that's fine too. Its just my op that auctions should be run this way. Snoz and I have had a chat about this in private (more specifically, the 'Hill situation') and everything's cool. But in having a chat I realised I hadn't clarified what exactly happened in the lead-up to the trade itself. So in the interests of openness or whatever (no names, no pack drill): I'd had a specific chat about Hill to two other coaches before the auction which hadn't gone anywhere and I thought were done (talks with the second coach were in fact done). I'd had chats about another trade with another coach, and a message about Hill from a fourth coach saying that they were 'interested'. The last message I hadn't responded to and thought 'I'll set up the auction and then let them know he is up for auction due to interest from some coaches, feel free to bid'. Auction gets set up, things go pear-shaped. First coach makes a bid but also says he thought private negotiations were still open. Third coach gets back to me and says - 'Hey, maybe we can look at the separate deal we were doing, but put Hill in the mix'. Then there's the fourth coach who specifically stated his interest in Hill and to whom I was going to suggest to put in a bid. Third and fourth coaches had not approached me with specific deals. Just interest. First coach had put forward a bid - a bid which I removed from the thread when the auction got the kybosh because I didn't want a bid out there in the open for people to compare and make plays off of in private. After auction was pulled I had discussions with the three coaches. I put specific proposals to two of them; to the other I said I thought we were too far apart to find a middle ground. One coach declined my trade proposal, the other took it up - I added a late draft deal to get the thing done. I didn't put Hill up for auction to gauge interest in him. I already had interest from at least 3 people. My mistake was to think that private negotiations with everyone were done before I put Hill up when that ended up not quite being the case. Thus the auction was pulled. I can assure everyone that none of the four people who expressed interest in Hill did anything dodgy (though I don't think that's beingput out there ... I'll just assure people of that anyway). I can also assure everyone that Hill was genuinely up for auction when I put him up for auction ... I just made the mistake of not properly closing off discussions with a couple of coaches about him. This probably brings me to the issue I have with auctions - and it is the same as Snoz has stated above. Auctions are great (unless someone like me stuffs them up, though I've run auctions in the past successfully (for McKenzie, most recently)) but they also cause issues when people use them as a marker or comparison point to discussions on other players which might be occurring in private. I'm not 100% sure that a combination of auctions (as they are run at the moment) and private negotiations works. Thing is, I don't know if there's any other way things can be done. But, FWIW, that's my 2c (more like 10c) on the matter. I guess my takeaway from all this is to actually get assurance that any private discussions with coaches on a player are concluded before putting that player up for auction.
All good in my book & I appreciate the response Chris. Was just having a smoko thinking about this. I think the auctions are great......would be a shame to kill them. But yes, running auctions & a trading period at the same time does open the process up to.......inadvertent manipulation I think the answer is simple. Yep, even snoz can be smart (I think) Have a set auction period. Have a set trading period. Just not at the same time. Shit, we've got time......there are 180 days until the season starts !
Simple misunderstanding. Nothing to see here. Goes back to what we were saying about trade vetos and emergency loopholes earlier this year. We are here to have fun and play a game. No one for a second (I dont think) believes anyone else here is in collusion or cheating or whatever so when things like this flare up, call me an optimist but I always just think it must have been a simple misunderstanding and it always has been to date on every occasion. We have a great bunch of blokes here and a lovely lady and there is no reason to ever think something fishy is going on IMO. Lets give each other the benefit of the doubt I think we have all earned it. [span style='color: #333333;]Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
If I get bored enough tonight I plan on splitting this thread into two. One for the auctions and one for everything else, all this debate is disturbing the stallholders, and if that keeps up they wont pay rent
jimbowan wrote: </br> Let me tidy my post up a bit then; I am auctioing one of Minson or Goldy. I have no real reserve in mind and am not 100% I will trade one of them unless the offer is too good to turn down. So far pick #2 in the PSD is leading over Matt Scharenberg. I like Scharenberg but he has had an awful injury run which has me wary. Has pick #2 met my reserve? TBH I am not even sure! lol I havent started scouting the PSD yet, so let me get onto that and I will get back to everyone! All other offers welcome, happy to take established FWD or D stars or highly rated youngsters. Any developments on the reserve here Jimbo? Also, when does this auction end?
grav wrote: jimbowan wrote: Let me tidy my post up a bit then; I am auctioing one of Minson or Goldy. I have no real reserve in mind and am not 100% I will trade one of them unless the offer is too good to turn down. So far pick #2 in the PSD is leading over Matt Scharenberg. I like Scharenberg but he has had an awful injury run which has me wary. Has pick #2 met my reserve? TBH I am not even sure! lol I havent started scouting the PSD yet, so let me get onto that and I will get back to everyone! All other offers welcome, happy to take established FWD or D stars or highly rated youngsters. Any developments on the reserve here Jimbo? Also, when does this auction end? Yeah sorry for being so vague. My reserve is almost met, I am thinking that I will really require a playing warm body to have as a Ruck reserve AND something of high value (i.e. pick #2) So, if you can meet the playing ruck reserve requirement you will have met the reserve and Goldy shall be yours unless someone else can up the stakes and outdo you in the 11th hour. Auction to end Monday 5pm CST.