• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

CW Random Player Auction Draft Thread

M

Michaelf7777777

International Debutant
The amounts will be but not which player went for that amount.

btw received no bids from Daemon despite his earlier posting in this thread
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
We are gonna be judged on the basis of best playing eleven right? I mean we are allowed a junk player right?

I have done my bidding on that assumption..
 
watson

watson

Banned
Since everyone bar daemon has responded fairly promptly it may be worthwhile considering reducing the time between rounds to 24 hours. I think that 24 hours is managable.
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Let's keep it as 48 hours, but let's finish a round as soon as everyone (except Smali, he's a lazy bitch as per experience from an earlier draft :p ) sends in their bids IMO.

I'd particularly like 48 hours mainly because of weekends. I'm generally busy with my life on Saturdays and Sundays, and don't often come online.

And Daemon is a 'Him' btw.
 
Last edited:
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
watson said:
Since everyone bar daemon has responded fairly promptly it may be worthwhile considering reducing the time between rounds to 24 hours. I think that 24 hours is managable.
Click to expand...
From my experience of running this sort of thing, there needs to be a reasonable time between rounds to a) allow everyone to have time to submit as non-submission can ruin someone's team and b) allow the person running it time to actually keep on top of things, it's not a simple thing to run.
 
watson

watson

Banned
marc71178 said:
From my experience of running this sort of thing, there needs to be a reasonable time between rounds to a) allow everyone to have time to submit as non-submission can ruin someone's team and b) allow the person running it time to actually keep on top of things, it's not a simple thing to run.
Click to expand...
Fair enough
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
From my experience of running this sort of thing, there needs to be a reasonable time between rounds to a) allow everyone to have time to submit as non-submission can ruin someone's team and b) allow the person running it time to actually keep on top of things, it's not a simple thing to run.
Click to expand...
Yes exactly my point (I've run it too :) )..

It should be kept as 48 hours but if all submit before that time, and Michaelf7777777 is ready with all his calculations etc then he can post the results for a round before that time.
 
watson

watson

Banned
None of the players in the list is a wicket-keeper.

So will there be a special round with a list of just wicket-keepers as it is very unlikely that 13 keepers will appear randomly in 12 rounds?

Otherwise it's inevitable that some teams will end up without a wicket-keeper which doesn't seem fair/right? Or, we'll all have to make bids of several million for that one-armed keeper from Swasiland who dropped 14 catches during the only Test that he played in the 1880s because he had gout and couldn't bend his knees properly - just because he's the only one on show. That doesn't seem fair/right either.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top