L'échange a été signalé comme inéquitable et a été examiné par le Comité d'Éthique et du Fair-play. Le Comité d'Éthique et du Fair-play a jugé que cet échange est équitable.
--
76 S
5 j.
How the Fair Play Committee members voted:<br />
- volunteers voted "Revert and punish": 0<br />
- volunteers voted "Revert": 5<br />
- volunteers voted "Fair": 6<br />
<br />
These reasons were chosen by the volunteers during voting:<br />
2 - Overuse of disbalanced trades. Players' trade somehow has to benefit both teams (financially, in respect of team composition, etc). Good but expensive player can be traded to a bit worse but cheaper player. This type of trade can not be overused.<br />
2 - Suspicion that trade’s goal is to help one of the teams<br />
<br />
1 - Other reasons. Volunteers wrote explanations: <br />
--- Young school talent (10pot) traded for good (8pot) player and random 6pot is not very high return. Should be at least similar level talent added in return for such school player.<br />
--
76 S
5 j.
An 8-potential+6-potential can be exchanged for a 10-potential Miao. This is the privilege of one's own officials in North Korea. Where is fairness?
--
76 S
6 j.
Nesikisu as i mainus, bet cia jau net man gaila CO. tureciau tyleti nes Benio zaideja turiu pasiskolines, mainai neliecia manes, bet procentaliai ar cia nedidesnis salary dropas? ir gaunamas 10 pot zaidejas. Negrazu net man tokie mainai.
--
76 S
6 j.
--
(Traduire) (Traduire EN)
+3
Nesikisu as i mainus, bet cia jau net man gaila CO.
--
76 S
6 j.
I think FPC has a problem of double standarts. If somebody asks me, I would say that this trade is fair. Why should we care about 10pot midget? But on other hand: a lot of similiar looking trades have been reverted.
--
76 S
6 j.
Échange/Prêt de joueurs: 
6.15
https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Trade/information/986363
2.2
