• 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.

A compromise

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
No poll here, but have closed the other one which is clearly going nowhere:

Having combined the suggestions of 2 or 3 people, I have the following amended proposal.

Basically we reintroduce the trading of draft picks into the equation. Instead of swapping 2 good players for 1 super and 1 right donkey - you swap them for 1 super and 1 poor draft selection. Still have to retain all the players that have been traded in (and not traded on to another side), and the number of draft picks is the number of players you HAVE to drop.

The benefit of this that I can see is that although you will still end up with a poor player to balance the squad strength slightly, you can actually decide on what type of player you want to complete your squad.

Could people post on this amended idea, and try to be constructive.
 

deckard

U19 Captain
The thing is its still essentially the same as a 6th draft pick is usually a donkey, so there will be a reluctance to trade.

But what i want to know marc is why u want to make WCC so much fairer?
 

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
As a new manager I am not too sure on how the whole trading/draft system operates.

What would be good...you pick your 10 players and get your two rookies (that gives you a squad size of 12. The six players you drop go into a pool with all other players from other clubs that have been dropped. From the pool, the managers, get a pick in the order they have finished (last in division 5, first pick, first in division 1 gets last pick) for four picks. This way managers still drop 6 players each and it gives the weaker sides a chance to strengthen.

So there would be:
1. A trading period for however long.
2. Then the drafting period for however long.
3. Then the relegations before the new season.

For all I know this could already be the process, or I could be completely off the mark. But it sounds like an interesting & fair way to me.
 

aditya

U19 Vice-Captain
I just dont know y u want to change the rules.The rules last season were fine and many weak teams benefitted.Just leave the trading as it is.All r enjoying this and i dont understand y u want to be a spoil sport.

Is it necessary whatever u have thought shl be included.I know u r thinking fine but no one likes it then just forget abt it.

This thread will also go the same way as the other.
 

Sriram k

Total Cricket Moderator
If I understand your rule right then heres how the senario would be :

Mumbai want say stratton....So they go up to SA and offer a host of players say Graham+Muzumdar+Tendulkar.SA in return give them Stratton + their 5th+6th DPs....

Now mumbai have 2 extra Dps so they will retain only 8 and pick up 4 REAL CRAP players (Maybe even worse than wht they wud have got from sa along with stratton) into their team.
This means ur earlier rule and this 1 are EXCATLY the same!
This doesnt seem like a compromise to me it seems like the same old wine in the same old bottle ..may be with a new label!


Sriram
 

Blewy

Cricketer Of The Year
aditya said:
I just dont know y u want to change the rules.The rules last season were fine and many weak teams benefitted.Just leave the trading as it is.All r enjoying this and i dont understand y u want to be a spoil sport.
This is a bit hipocritical Aditya....

You were one pushing for the Finance system very hard, now from what i can see that would be called change....

Now Marc has made a suggestion and whether you agree with it or not it is fair for him to do so and fair for you to also give your opinion, but when you start making it personal and also begin to try and influence decisions(as u were in the previous thread) its not on...

I personally told Marc that i liked his idea, and i would like to maybe see it introduced, but my role is to give people what they want, but in the same process make sure that the game can continue with the changes that are made....

Now let this conversation go on and allow people to give THIER opinions without any influence from others...
Marc has put his case forward so let the rest take care of itself...
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
deckard said:
The thing is its still essentially the same as a 6th draft pick is usually a donkey, so there will be a reluctance to trade.
The 6th draft pick will not be anywhere near as bad as the donkey since the donkey will be the worst player in the weak team, and the draft will include all the rookies and Academy players.


deckard said:
But what i want to know marc is why u want to make WCC so much fairer?
The whole idea of the game in the first place was to try to even the sides up.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
aditya said:
I just dont know y u want to change the rules.The rules last season were fine and many weak teams benefitted.
For a start, someone else suggested part of this rule, and you yourself have contributed to it in a way as well!

The rules last season were fine in the sense that some teams managed to get rid of players they were going to dump anyway, and pick up a superstar in the process - that is clearly unequal and benefits that side a great deal.

"Weak teams benefited" confuses me since they lost a star player but the weak player would've been dumped and had the trade not been completed they would've had a chance to get one of the good players through the draft.

Thus they've in effect lost a star and picked up a good player - and that's fair?

aditya said:

This thread will also go the same way as the other.
And is that a threat?
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Sriram k said:
Now mumbai have 2 extra Dps so they will retain only 8 and pick up 4 REAL CRAP players (Maybe even worse than wht they wud have got from sa along with stratton) into their team.

This means ur earlier rule and this 1 are EXCATLY the same!
No it doesn't. The 4 "REAL CRAP" will not be as bad as the 2 they would've picked up, since the draft includes more than just the dumped players.

These players will not only be better, but the manager will be able to select his own back-ups, rather than being left with someone he has no choice over.

ie he may be able to pick up a batsman with 30 to back them up, when under the old suggestion he was given a bowler with SR 80 when he had enough bowling back-up.
 

Sriram k

Total Cricket Moderator
marc71178 said:
No it doesn't. The 4 "REAL CRAP" will not be as bad as the 2 they would've picked up, since the draft includes more than just the dumped players.

These players will not only be better, but the manager will be able to select his own back-ups, rather than being left with someone he has no choice over.

ie he may be able to pick up a batsman with 30 to back them up, when under the old suggestion he was given a bowler with SR 80 when he had enough bowling back-up.
Hmm just overlooked tht part of it...thts a good point.A slight improvement over the other method no doubt.
But I still feel trade will be affected much by it in the sense tht there wil be much less of trading.Im still biased against it but I would also like to see wht the other ppl think of it ....


Sriram
 

Cloete

International Captain
Mister Wright said:
As a new manager I am not too sure on how the whole trading/draft system operates.

What would be good...you pick your 10 players and get your two rookies (that gives you a squad size of 12. The six players you drop go into a pool with all other players from other clubs that have been dropped. From the pool, the managers, get a pick in the order they have finished (last in division 5, first pick, first in division 1 gets last pick) for four picks. This way managers still drop 6 players each and it gives the weaker sides a chance to strengthen.

So there would be:
1. A trading period for however long.
2. Then the drafting period for however long.
3. Then the relegations before the new season.

For all I know this could already be the process, or I could be completely off the mark. But it sounds like an interesting & fair way to me.
:lol: you don't know just how righ u r!!! only we also add generated players into teh draft as well as the dropped ones. but the rest is almost exactly right.
 

The Argonaut

State Vice-Captain
The players in the draft this time are going to be much stronger. The academy series was played with rookies, new players from teams not in the comp and the best of the rest. Add to that the players that sides will have to drop and some of them will be strong. There will still be some quality for the 6th pick I think.

That said, the idea is an improvement but am worried about the trading of draft picks. The first trade period had these and it allowed some of the sides to get a huge advantage. I guess I am with a couple of the others in that I see no reason to change. The draft is the major thing that allow sides to even up.
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
The Argonaut said:
The players in the draft this time are going to be much stronger. The academy series was played with rookies, new players from teams not in the comp and the best of the rest. Add to that the players that sides will have to drop and some of them will be strong. There will still be some quality for the 6th pick I think.

That said, the idea is an improvement but am worried about the trading of draft picks. The first trade period had these and it allowed some of the sides to get a huge advantage. I guess I am with a couple of the others in that I see no reason to change. The draft is the major thing that allow sides to even up.
noone is forcing teams to trade players or draft picks, its just an option availiable to the teams.

i like this idea more, im still not sure what effect having to keep traded players, but there is only one way to find out :)
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
having said that i still doubt that i will want to keep everyone that i have traded and i will only want 4 draft picks (keeping 2 rookies)
 

Rich2001

International Captain
age_master said:
i like this idea more, im still not sure what effect having to keep traded players, but there is only one way to find out :)
Well ok lets go drastic!

Blewy can take Div 1/2/3 and I'll take Div 4/5 we run seprate comps along side each other, Blewy takes one set of suggestions on such as Marc's and I'll take the others... at the end of the season the two comps re-merge and the most productive ideas are kept and those that were rubbish are binned :cool2:

Rich was only being sacrastic here :D - No need to get worried yet :lol:
 

nibbs

International Captain
Someone told me the reason this should be implemented is to stop people from using brainwashing tactics when trading. If people happen to lie when proposing trades, maybe their could room for concern, but currently I see no need for action.

Being forced to keep players is just stupid and lame. The current way works really well. I see no need for change.

Although slowly teams in WCC are getting more and more even, they will never be even. There will always be crap teams and there will always be awesome teams, even teams is just not achieveable. If thats what you want Marc we may as well asign everyone with identical squads.

I don't see how small teams can close the gap if such a rule is passed. Managers of the big teams aren't stupid, and the odds of them trading deminish. There will be few trades. The rate at which team can close the gap on other teams suddenly slows right down.

If you want to make teams more even, I say get rid of rookies. Because every season some teams have done better than others. This will continue with rookies and unless something is done teams will never be even...

IMO, trading in WCC is realistic. However people keep on saying that this idea is would make WCC more realistic. So by this your all this saying, lets be boring and conform, not original.

This idea will detract from the fun value of WCC. WCC is simple and fun. These kind of rules add restrictions, and take away the fun value. You need big teams, they are a part of the game. They give smaller teams something asspire to. With teams all the same thing could get boring...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

nibbs

International Captain
What happens if a team is into trading, and they trade all 16 squad members? What happens then? Do they have to keep all 16 players still???
 

deckard

U19 Captain
marc71178 said:
The 6th draft pick will not be anywhere near as bad as the donkey since the donkey will be the worst player in the weak team, and the draft will include all the rookies and Academy players.
Yeah but the worse players that are actually in teams at the moment are the 6th draft picks. This is the 3rd season of WCC and all teams have been through at least 1 draft where they have dropped their worse players into the draft. Now these 'donkeys' that are being traded are the ones that are being picked up as 5th and 6th round picks. So dont you see the point that the donkeys are the 6th round picks.

Now you could argue that the overall quality of players in the draft are improving but i disagree. Yes we are getting more players through rookies, replacements and real players but we are also losing players through retirement. Given the new sim and how experience and age play a factor i believe the quality of retiring players outweights the quality of the rookies and replacements. I do agree that some of the new real players (not rookies or replacements but actual players) are good, but how many more good real players can be added to WCC in the future?


marc71178 said:
The whole idea of the game in the first place was to try to even the sides up.
Yes i agree that WCC should be even to a certain degree, but not any more then it currently is. We have the draft to even up the sides. I dont think we should make it any fairer because shouldnt there be a point where teams are stopped being given assistance and the managers ability takes over. You talked about the possibility of their being a large gap between teams in the future, but taking the opposite approach we could end up with a situation where all teams are too even and results rely purely on luck and not skill.
 
Last edited:

thierry henry

International Coach
No way can I be bothered reading all this crap:lol: . I just hope that it stays as it is because otherwise I'm gonna have to get my head around a whole new system.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
thierry henry said:
No way can I be bothered reading all this crap:lol: . I just hope that it stays as it is because otherwise I'm gonna have to get my head around a whole new system.
In what way does this comment help the situation?
 

Top