Press conference
1.1
Trade/Lending players:
Team made a trade offer
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
90 S
27 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
90 S
27 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
90 S
27 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
1.1
Trade has been reverted by the "Fair play" committee
--
90 S
29 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
The Fair play committee decided that the trade is unfair and teams are given a warning.
--
90 S
29 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
How the Fair Play Committee members voted:<br />
- volunteers voted "Revert and punish": 0<br />
- volunteers voted "Revert": 9<br />
- volunteers voted "Fair": 3<br />
<br />
These reasons were chosen by the volunteers during voting:<br />
6 - Salary drop (one or more useful players are exchanged for useless player(s) with the only goal to reduce salaries)<br />
3 - Suspicion that trade’s goal is to help one of the teams<br />
<br />
-- 90 S 29 d.
- volunteers voted "Revert and punish": 0<br />
- volunteers voted "Revert": 9<br />
- volunteers voted "Fair": 3<br />
<br />
These reasons were chosen by the volunteers during voting:<br />
6 - Salary drop (one or more useful players are exchanged for useless player(s) with the only goal to reduce salaries)<br />
3 - Suspicion that trade’s goal is to help one of the teams<br />
<br />
-- 90 S 29 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
What a nonsence, i am sorry - which is a useless player? Obelenis is high rt but only defensive type, for which i get a decent future prospect. Could fpc explain?
--
90 S
29 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+4
1.1
At least your trade got three fair votes, mine got all voted reverted and one of them even think I should get punished for trading a player who can only play one more season for a decent 7-pot. If the FPC think we should not trade ready-now player for school talents straight up, why give an option for users to spend credits to update the trade level that allows them to ignore the salary difference? If we add some useless player to match the salary, I think then the trade would’ve been voted fair, but what is the point of that? These useless players will be fired anyways and it only costs one of the team to spend more money on the compensation. Saving salary is one of the main goals in many trades. 7 and 8 pot players are useful players, especially in the NE that encourage teams to have a 12-men lineup, not useless at it is described in the “salary drop”
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+5
But then reasons are contradicting one another - salary drop vs suspicion to help other team
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+3
These reasons are confusing. Trade are supposed to help both teams, in this kind of trade, one team gets stronger in strength while the other team gets a future prospect to develop with and save money. It is a win-win trade, help not only one of the team but both teams, and saving is not the only goal here. I have stated this as my explanation for more than one time.
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
Again: when the referee goes off to play the game, there is no fairness. 
https://www.basketpulse.com/cn/Trade/information/1131224 before the deal, such deals are no problem, because the deal led to threaten a player (members at the same time he still FPC) upgrade, So he reported it.
--
90 S
30 d.
https://www.basketpulse.com/cn/Trade/information/1131224 before the deal, such deals are no problem, because the deal led to threaten a player (members at the same time he still FPC) upgrade, So he reported it.
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
https://www.basketpulse.com/cn/Trade/information/1131551
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Members of this FPC made a similar deal. He can do it, but we can't.
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
https://www.basketpulse.com/cn/Trade/information/1131551This trade is much much worse than the original trade. Half a season player has not too much trade value. Getting so many high POT youths is a robbery.
If FPC does not know how to determine trade values, just let them go. Do not damage the game. -- 90 S 30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Trade/information/1131226
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
I think these transactions are similar. One player can do it, so everyone can do it. The rules must be the same.
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
Agree that those should be allowed. If it is not one-sided, that two managers acquire different types of positive trade values, we should allow a trade, no matter they are friends or not.
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
What is pitty, that for full day no response from FPC...
--
90 S
30 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
As FPC members may not comment the decisions made, I would like to share the FPC reasoning behind the decision made.
Fung911 gets:
- A defender draft in standard salary with above average WL2 RT
- A 280 peak youth which is considered to be undervalued in WL2
Virtuozai gets:
- 336 peak youth which is considered to be future WL2 level
- 28543EU salary drop
Unless the 8 potential players has significantly worse inner potentials than the 7 potential players, the trade is unfair by the vote of FPC.
We would like to encourage the teams making the trades that may look suspicious to describe the reasoning of the trade when making it. By providing more information about the trade to FPC will help the committee to make a better informed decision. In addition, we are encouraging FPC to have a discussion prior making the vote so the decision made is well-discussed. -- 90 S 31 d.
Fung911 gets:
- A defender draft in standard salary with above average WL2 RT
- A 280 peak youth which is considered to be undervalued in WL2
Virtuozai gets:
- 336 peak youth which is considered to be future WL2 level
- 28543EU salary drop
Unless the 8 potential players has significantly worse inner potentials than the 7 potential players, the trade is unfair by the vote of FPC.
We would like to encourage the teams making the trades that may look suspicious to describe the reasoning of the trade when making it. By providing more information about the trade to FPC will help the committee to make a better informed decision. In addition, we are encouraging FPC to have a discussion prior making the vote so the decision made is well-discussed. -- 90 S 31 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
Well, i consider that 8pot is ok for wl1 + you can train as u want, so this is additional advantage. And center is quite specific
--
90 S
31 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Unless the 8 potential players has significantly worse inner potentials than the 7 potential players, the trade is unfair by the vote of FPC. Then why did you change 8 to 10 to pass?
--
90 S
31 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
https://www.basketpulse.com/cn/Trade/information/1131580
--
90 S
31 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
also, dear FPC, i have two players, with peak RT you consider to be too bad for wl1 - are they playing too bad? https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Player/2174811/description https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Player/2129166/description
I agree general FPC rule book would be needed. Potential 8 is very much fine for wl1 -- 90 S 31 d.
https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Player/2174811/description https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Player/2129166/descriptionI agree general FPC rule book would be needed. Potential 8 is very much fine for wl1 -- 90 S 31 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+4
And they can be much cheaper than 9 and 10 pot players, which is an advantage in the NE. I don’t know why FPC member often try to talk down 8 pots, even 7-pot can be useful in WL1.
--
90 S
31 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+3