ash chaulk
International Captain
i told jason about what was going on here and stuff and he believes that yes it is unfair that he doesnt post and makes every team.... therefore he said he wishes to retire until he can become active again.
liam and me had brought that up in discussion the other day.. but all this will be due once the season is completed.. for sure..For inactive players who wish to becoma active again... surely we shouldn't stop them, maybe -5 on their batting average and +5 on their bowling....
A most honourable attitude - I applaud him.ash chaulk said:i told jason about what was going on here and stuff and he believes that yes it is unfair that he doesnt post and makes every team.... therefore he said he wishes to retire until he can become active again.
a) what's it to do with you?NikhilN said:I think he should stay active...he might not have time to post but atleast he checks the scores...and I think that is enough for someone to play
What if they retire, then un-retire, then retire again, then un-retire...Loony BoB said:Fair enough - I was more meaning should the server stop sending forum emails as this has happened at a large vB I admin at. The problem was serverside, and when people changed emails they would need to verify the new email address before posting - however without a confirmation email, they were stuck. Like I said, the chances of it ever happening are beyond minimal. Also, they could fix the problem by talking to an admin and getting their account activated manually anyway, so you're right, it shouldn't stop them in any way. So I'll change my stance and say that the rule shouldn't be changed.
There's something very wrong with that sentence, I think.We're inactive unless we leave or are banned. That would mean we're either inactive, gone or banned.
I agree with this depending on the reason they left. If they said they were leaving forever, they should leave forever. If they said that they want a break and will not be participating for a while, then they should be allowed to come back. If they gave no reason at all, I think they should be allowed to return. However, if they did give no reason, they should have to wait until the start of the next season, in other words not to turn up half way through. And yeah, any players who have been deemed inactive should have their averages changed a bit.
haha yeah haha....David said:Ha, who would go inactive then active then inactive then active again?
No-one I know...... :P
thats roughPY said:Guess I'm screwed then.
Don't even have the internet, looks like people are asking for a bit more than some people can give.![]()
Really, I don't know, I mean, really, its the truth, it wasn't me, stop asking me..... :PKennyD said:haha yeah haha....
no really, who?![]()
dont make me get a partner in here to do `good cop bad cop`!David said:Really, I don't know, I mean, really, its the truth, it wasn't me, stop asking me..... :P
We're talking complete lack of posts, period, not just rare ones!PY said:Guess I'm screwed then.
Don't even have the internet, looks like people are asking for a bit more than some people can give.![]()
Following this...Neil Pickup said:What if they retire, then un-retire, then retire again, then un-retire...
Either...Loony BoB said:I agree with this depending on the reason they left. If they said they were leaving forever, they should leave forever. If they said that they want a break and will not be participating for a while, then they should be allowed to come back. If they gave no reason at all, I think they should be allowed to return. However, if they did give no reason, they should have to wait until the start of the next season, in other words not to turn up half way through. And yeah, any players who have been deemed inactive should have their averages changed a bit.
That's more or less what the CWBCC was hoping to implement. Good suggestions.Loony BoB said:Following this...
Either...
a) Retirement, unless stated otherwise, should be considered as a permanent thing, and therefore be listed under 'leaving forever'.
or
b) Retirement should last for at least [x] amount of complete seasons, ie from the beginning to the end, not from midway through one to midway through the next. I guess [x] would be one or two or three.
It would be best if people explained their retirement, though. In other words, they should say "I'm going to have a break from cricket so I can concentrate on other things." or "I'm finished with cricket, it was a good run, but I feel my time has passed."
As for repeated retirements, considering that their average would be going down (or up for bowling) considerably each time they come out of retirement, it would hopefully discourage them from doing such a thing as they wouldn't get selected in the end anyway.
Retirement should not disallow people from having the opportunity to play in unofficial matches such as charity matches, though.
I hope it's an overall decent proposal.
Marc I would like to let you know no matter what you say I am still a part of Cricket Web XI and I am doing my part as a member so mind your own business for once? and dont expect everyone to have the same thoughts as yours...marc71178 said:a) what's it to do with you?
b) have you read the rules regarding inactivity?
But I am still a member of the CW XImarc71178 said:Erm, you're not a part of the CW XI, or even the Dev set-up, at the moment.
You've retired twice, lied consistently, and are now subject to a trial.