My dulcet chello. 'I appreciate the honesty in the recent posts in this thread - thank you. Collusion is evil, even reprehensible, and has no place here. If I bored anybody by drawing this out I apologise, but I thought it was a debate worth entering into. The next time we are having a rules review period I will put a formal proposal into a thread.' Here you are. Go for it. To simplify things a little: (a) should trades be irreversible after 48 hours (b) should any conditions attached to trades be publicly disclosed at the time the trade is announced. My reticence on going down this road earlier was the possibility that many coaches would be relaxing on a beach somewhere or applying for the Brisbane job. So any quorum will be based on a 60% majority and any changes can only come into effect at the pre-season trade period. And, since I have you here, I will float something entirely different. What about if at the pre-season trade period we concurrently run a public auction? That is, you stick your Buddy or your Mummy up there and say what am I bid? Same 48 hrs applies for bids and, at the end of this time, the owner can decide whether to take the most attractive bid or turn the lot in. Sound like added fun? Not suggesting a rule change at this point, but rather give it a trial during PST. There was a touch of disgruntlement during our last trading period + a few sighs of 'if only I had known'. This puts it out in the public arena and, if you really want that player, you have to put up or shut up. In such a scenario the cases of NRoo, Boyd and Cross would likely have been a bit more interesting.
TerryinBangkok wrote: My dulcet chello. 'I appreciate the honesty in the recent posts in this thread - thank you. Collusion is evil, even reprehensible, and has no place here. If I bored anybody by drawing this out I apologise, but I thought it was a debate worth entering into. The next time we are having a rules review period I will put a formal proposal into a thread.' Here you are. Go for it. To simplify things a little: (a) should trades be irreversible after 48 hours (b) should any conditions attached to trades be publicly disclosed at the time the trade is announced. My reticence on going down this road earlier was the possibility that many coaches would be relaxing on a beach somewhere or applying for the Brisbane job. So any quorum will be based on a 60% majority and any changes can only come into effect at the pre-season trade period. And, since I have you here, I will float something entirely different. What about if at the pre-season trade period we concurrently run a public auction? That is, you stick your Buddy or your Mummy up there and say what am I bid? Same 48 hrs applies for bids and, at the end of this time, the owner can decide whether to take the most attractive bid or turn the lot in. Sound like added fun? Not suggesting a rule change at this point, but rather give it a trial during PST. There was a touch of disgruntlement during our last trading period + a few sighs of 'if only I had known'. This puts it out in the public arena and, if you really want that player, you have to put up or shut up. In such a scenario the cases of NRoo, Boyd and Cross would likely have been a bit more interesting. Thank you TiB for simplifying the process - I was worried that your current domicile might have blinded you to the charm of a democracy. (a) yes, I an affirming the positive here (as I understand it). No trade should be reversible after the 48 hour period. (b) yes, there should be full disclosure of any and all terms in a trade. However, ideally there should be no conditions attaching to any trade. As to auctions, I like the idea. Do you envisage the bids being made public (e.g., pick 3 for Buddy) or were you thinking of a sealed bid approach? Not sure which I prefer, but am interested in how those not on holiday/studying for exams/loving new partners/wedded to the afl trade site think this would work.
Thanks Terry. a) Yes, all trades should be irreversible past 48 hours, ie once sanctioned. b) No conditions should be attached to a trade, whether they be public or private, a trade should be an exchange without conditions. Re the auction concept, I think it's a great idea, need to ID a timing spot and some protocols, but I am very much in favour of it.
Lenh191 wrote: Thanks Terry. a) Yes, all trades should be irreversible past 48 hours, ie once sanctioned. b) No conditions should be attached to a trade, whether they be public or private, a trade should be an exchange without conditions. Yep, agree with this. Not sure about the auction idea at this stage.
<p style='margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 16px; background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000;](a) should trades be irreversible after 48 hours: Yes!!!!! Edited! Misread the question the first time <p style='margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 16px; background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000;](b) should any conditions attached to trades be publicly disclosed at the time the trade is announced. Yes <p style='margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 16px; background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000;] <p style='margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 16px; background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000;]Also really like the auction idea, probably should of done that but thats discussion for another time!
Should trades be irreversible after 48 hours: No <p style='margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,San-Serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 16px; background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000;]Should any conditions attached to trades be publicly disclosed at the time the trade is announced. Yes <p style='margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,San-Serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 16px; background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000;]Auctions ... I'm a bit meh to be honest. But if it is the will of the majority... <p style='margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,San-Serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; line-height: 16px; background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000;]
1) Agreed 2) Agreed, with none conditions if at all possible. I know I am the instigator of this... but Jen was worried Hill would be delisted. He was going to be thrown on the scrap heap from my side anyway, so if he got delisted by Simpson, it was going to be no impact on me, but a big impact on Jen. The deal was done without this clause but I thought I would be a gentleman and include it... maybe I shouldn't have... I dunno I like the auction idea... I think it should be blind, and I think it should only happen during the pre season trade period. Run them for 48 hours and it could be 'give me your best offer for xxx, opening reserve is a 85 point avg/15 game+ per season defender or a 1st round draft pick'... or the like
!) Yes - irreversible 2) Yes - as long as the full conditions are attached to the trade during the 48h veto process. No adding conditions after the trade has been accepted or 'oh yeah we had a condition' later on down the track. Also I am totally against deals to trade players back after half a season or whatever, to me thats collusion. Auction might be a good idea, better value for the seller, but not the buyer, bit meh on it, if the majority likes it I will give it a try.
a. trades should be irreversible, but the two teams should still be allowed to make a trade involving the exact same players in reverse of the original. there is a difference. this option allows the veto process to take place and creates a bit of risk. b. no, conditions should not have to be disclosed to everyone else. whats the big deal. c. im open to the auction idea, as long as the bids were not made public at the time of bidding. Im not sure if it is different to how we do it now anyway. I know that I got Taylor Walker under this method, and I know others, such as P'Rap with Buddy, have announced available players and opened up for bids from all. not sure if its necessary to formalise it. even if it was formal, people could still decide not to do it and similar situations could occur as what has happened recently, such as 'NicNat, if only I had have known sooner '
Agree with irreversible and no conditions. Having been an auctioneer in a former life I'm all for it. Bids cannot be withdrawn once made public and the buyer has no cooling off period. You can sweeten the deal if a better offer is made than your initial bid. Your latest bid makes all your previous bids redundant.
Pretty keen on trialing the auction idea, it has to be public, otherwise what's the point, it's just a trade negotiation after publicly stating you have a player available, ie, what half of you do now... Andy's points were pertinent enough that he is clearly a good candidate for auctioneer too
(a) should trades be irreversible after 48 hours ~ YES (b) should any conditions attached to trades be publiclydisclosed at the time the trade is announced. ~ YES c) Auctions........why not try it, I'm in
A) Yes trades should be irreversible after 48 hours B)No conditions to a trade, correct me if I am wrong but I thoughtwith trades in the ORFFA it was a case of buyer beware.
Elia Kazan once said 'Whatever hysteria exists is inflamed by mystery, suspicion and secrecy. Hard and exact facts will cool it.' Despite that he seemed in favour of the Gentleman's Agreement.
anthak wrote:EDIT: deleted post, cause I realised it was mostly inaccurate  I had not remembered the initial question properly, so misinterpreted many of the answers. Sorry.