Selling players to the pool

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	I	J
1	yes	yes	no		alternative 1	alternative 6	alternative 4
2		to	to		if yes to resale to the pool
3		pool resale	pool resale		which option would you prefer
4	kiev	yes	no		no	yes	no
5	cnn	yes				yes
6	tantric
7	illegibles	yes			yes
8	phallus	no	yes		yes	no	no
9	bse	no	yes		no		no
10	realale	yes	no		no	yes	no
11	fungus	no	yes		no	no	yes
12	celery	yes	no		no	yes	no
13	stanley	yes				yes
14	the suspects	yes			yes	yes
15	spartak	yes	no		no	yes	no
16
17		66.67%	25.00%		25.00%	58.33%	8.33%
18
19	kiev has removed alternatives 2 & 3 as there are no takers and people are not interested in the 'sell on' - released players are no more (consigned to the dustbin)
20	brian ?should? also remove no. 4 ... but thats up to him
21	Fungus	Options 1 & 3 are restraints of trade. I can get outbid by the 'Pool' when a manager releases a player - the Pool may offer far more than any sane manager. I thought we wanted our FFL to be better than the faceless newspaper ones? I thought that the idea was we dealt with each other rather than take fixed, guaranteed sums from the Pool. (kiev: thats your idea bri - some want the simplicity of old)
22		2 is too complicated. (kiev: its not too complicated - forget my waffle - you get 50% of future purchase price)
23	Phallus	Fungus - 4 is also very clearly a restraint of trade as there will be a restraint on the previous owner buying his old player back - it will cost him the purchase price plus all his compo (kiev say: you cant have it both ways pahllus ;-) I say the previous owner should be able to incorporate but you don't like that either?)
24	Fungus	Can't agree about the 'restraint of trade'. Everyone's free to bid - winning bid wins. 11 managers get no compo. 1 manager, who released him, gets compo.
25	Phallus	Phallus say no compo unless sale is forced by leaving the prem. If your player is worth something then find a buyer, loan him out or keep him. this is just charity for crap players.
26
27		How about we just keep it simple and stick with our radical new rule which is - if you can't sell you player it's because he's shit and worth nowt!
28	Fungus	I'm gonna vote for your 'no compo' cos I'm mortified by the chance of the Pool returning and bailing out managers who bought shite for too much money. Worse than that, the Pool can outbid me for a player - and it's not even playing the FFL! Of course, I prefer the 'released player compo' idea - cos as the Rule stands now, I release a player, a mangaer waits a day, starts an auction, and I get fuck all. Surely that player wouldn't come under the catergory 'worth f#*k all'.
29	Realale	Players do actually have a very specific value in Fantacy terms, which we (rightly or wrongly) currently use to compensate sales outside the prem. How about if alternative 1 was based on 50% of their value? Because the truth is that the supply of players within the FFL far outstrips the demand so the vast majority of released players end up going for nothing as thing currently stand with no compo. See it as selling them on to some club that isn't in the FFL. I think we sometimes get too hung up on trying to make this like reality, when it can't be entirely like reality, and ruining the game in the process.
30	Realale	Actually, using 50% of value may not be a good idea but the rest of what I said above still stands
31	Fungus	re supply & demand - why should you get money for players there no demand for, even if you bought him for untold millions? If a player has been steadily losing value over time, why didn't you sell him when there was some demand for him? Why are you trying to get charity from the Pool instead?
32	illegibles	Just vote for 1 toavoid the same confusion we've had ever since we messed around with all these rules	at least the faceless newspaper ones are easy to understand (apart from the new guardian one)	biggest restraint of trade is not being able to afford a new signing if you get nowt for a crap/injured/3 in a team sale.	Forget arguments vote for simplicity (kiev say: here here)
33	bse	It is truly regrettable that there is a momentum to the return of the nanny state of the pool. If your player has a value then sell him. If he doesn't then dump him and at least stop paying him a salary.
34	Realale	The reason he has no value within the FFL is because there are so many other unattached players floating around who probably offer similar value but come cheaper. You are never going to replicate a true market because the supply and demand is so out of balance
35	bse	Simon. The "true market" is full of mediocre players of minimal value. Just because a manager has paid tens of millions for a player who turns out to be rubbish doesn't mean that his value is more than an unattached player. That's the risk and risk is a good thing. Attempts to approcimate our game to
36
37	Fungus	What are KiEV and Spartak playing at? : - ).First you caused the death of the 'released player' concept with your dodgy dealings. Now your changing the Symposium's 'death to the Pool' decision, by voting it back! Is there anything left from the Symposium we're allowed to keep? : - )
38
39	spartak	so bri read proposal 6 and tell me what you think - its a charity free version of proposal 1
40	Fungus	You're right - it's less charity inclined. But it still has the following problem. It goes against the desire of the Symposium and 'Death to the Pool. What's worse, is that allows the Pool to outbid me on a player - not very fair at all
41	kiev:	bri - you're missing the point - there are 3 managers in the league that believe that you should get nowt when you release one of your players. (I made a horrible mistake voting with you guys at the last meeting to remove the last vestige of compensation) I have been listening to managers who are not quite so vociferous and simply expanded on chris's proposal - as there are many managers that want to return to the good old days.
42	kiev:	spartak is offering a charity free version of alternative 1
43	Fungus	I bélieve the following points to be an accurate assessment of what has happened over the last year and a bit						kiev say:
44		1. The Symposium agrees to the concept of 'Death to the Pool'						but didn't consider all alternatives in stopping inflated prices
45		2. During the first few months of the season various managers bleat that they will go bankrupt with no Pool. They demand it back so they won't go bankrupt.						I can remember alot of bleating - esp. large contract bleating.
46		3. The rest of the managers tell them to be patient
47		4. Everyone is patient, no one goes bankrupt and not one single voice is raised at season end about 'Death to the Pool' being a failure.						I can remember many voices calling for a return to simpler dealing - Illegibles mainly...
48		5 2 managers piss every other manager off with their underhand player swap						100% compensation allows for player incorporation - well known - and everyone knew my views regarding incorporating released players - nothing underhand! - also reincorporation of released players was voted in at the opening meeting this season ;-)
49		6.As a result the league votes to scrap 'released player compo'
50		7. War breaks out in the FFL.							I believe war broke out for other reasons - mainly hoyte - and senderos et al
51		8. War is over. It is generally agreed that we need to a) be less 'agressive' b) stop constantly making news rules and c) go back to the spirit of the symposium						I believe we are being less aggressive. This vote is not aggressive against any single manager - noone is at the brunt of this rule change
52		9.In the spirit of detente it now seems that we will a) change the rules again and b) move completly away from the spirit of the Symposium						the whole idea of the symposium was to stop managers inflating their players prices for resale to the pool - the symposium went about it one way giving compensation when a player is rebought - but that way failed due to managers thinking it overcomplicated - this latest proposal also stops inflation of price before resale to the pool .. within the spirit of the symposium
53		So, no, I don't believe I'm missing the point. : - )
54	kiev	oo -errr	I believe you are missing the point - and not listening to the majority of managers in the league
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100