交易資訊

退回

資訊
協商開始	2023-07-26- 00:32
協商結束	2023-07-26- 10:03
限制等級	9

LZS OSOLIN

Ambrozy Rozenek
薪資:	3341 Eu
合約:	5 賽季	年齡:	20 歲
RT:	131	身高:	206 cm.
潛力:	7

Buraczani Toruń

Leopold Kwiecien
薪資:	5564 Eu
合約:	4 賽季	年齡:	19 歲
RT:	161	身高:	198 cm.
潛力:	7

1.1 1.1 LZS OSOLIN

交易/出借球員: LZS OSOLIN & Buraczani

-- 94 賽季 17 天

球隊提出交易請求

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

球員: Ambrozy Rozenek

交易後開始在新球隊比賽 -- 94 賽季 17 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

球員:

交易後開始在新球隊比賽 -- 94 賽季 17 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Buraczani

交易已接受 -- 94 賽季 17 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Artemix

What Buraczani got:
Nice low post polish young player pot 7 with 5 years cheaper and contract. He need to balance finances to protect yourself from bankruptcy in future and he want to trade only polish players with long and cheap contract (before this trade i propose him even better foreign young players and he refused trade).
What I got:
Nice 7 pot. polish point guard player.
Conclusion:
Both teams got benefits from the trade. -- 94 賽季 17 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Cosmos

Just a strange thing. Artemix already traded that PG to Buraczani this season, now getting back. More over, he is sitting in 6wl for a couple of seasons.
Seems his strategy is to help other with trade, not for himself. Need to look closer for Buraczani trades... -- 94 賽季 17 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Artemix

Yes, this PG was my former player. In the first exchange, Buraczany also wanted to save money. Then he propably decided he needed to look for more savings, and the put Kwiecien (this PG) for to the list of exchanges. Me and few more polish users sended offert for Kwiecien and others his players with no effect for several days. Yesterday i luckly scouted my low post player i send offert to Buraczany with no message - and he accepted it. So how could i set it up (without this luckly scouts). Propably he want to have cheap low post players - and they have the same pot. -- 94 賽季 17 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Cosmos

Strange, but it hapenned this season twice.
Miracle? -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Artemix

Show me the rule in the manual ( help) of the game that forbids it? This was fair trade . I dont know what intentions you have . I understand that you want to intentionally introduce new rules of trade and limit others' ability to exchange. I've played this game for many years, but I really don't like the tendency to limit everything without any basis in the rules available to everyone. I hope the committee will make the right decisions based only on the fairness of the exchange. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 dragiux

As i know you can't trade same player in same season

2 - Other reasons. Volunteers wrote explanations:
--- Not allowed to trade back same players in the same season -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Artemix

But dragiux all rules should be explicitly stated. I won't copy the Trade rules, but there's no mention of that. Then how many undescribed rules in the game know only few people ? Good rules of law must be clear, and a possible revert will discriminate against me in a situation where the exchange was fair. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 dragiux

Not FPC problem. They can't update help section. Go complain to game administration -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Artemix

That's the easiest way to reply. that is, the FPC is de facto outside the law of the game and can decide what it wants. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 dragiux

Pointless discussion again... Stop thinking only about yourself there is many other trades where this rule has to be on the list let's say to stop helping lower division teams one way. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Y 1 Artemix

As I thought, your statement only shows ignorance and zero interest in the problem.
You said: "Not FPC problem. They can't update help section. Go complain to game administration"
What a strange logic. So i should appeal to the administrators to introduce a trade ban, which is not in the game manual, but is used by FPC, which adopted it without any basis.
The exchange we're talking about doesn't really strengthen me in any significant way, so I don't really care how it ends.
But I learned a lot about your attitude. I wonder if the whole community of the game fully accepts it (that, FPC is outside the law of the game and can decide what it wants - even against the rules in maual).
In one of the previous exchanges, Lipinski said:
"I have the impression that the FPC often causes more trouble than it helps the community.Or is it just me?" I fully support. And the turn of this discussion leaves me no longer confused. I'm sure the last sentence will be yours anyway that you don't care about everything I wrote... -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.1 4.7 Kogzik

Patty Mills was traded 3 times in just 1 month. Why a player in this game cant be traded twice in one season, if the game engine allow to make a trade?
For example drafted player cant be traded, and he is blocked whole season.
If the game engine allowed it, then such an exchange is the most appropriate. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 dragiux

Please stop mixing up different topics go read again in what question i just answered. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 dragiux

6) The punishments cannot be changed and will not be discussed. The club that is punished cannot say that the punishment is too harsh or unnecessary, they cannot try and prove their innocence in press conferences, etc.
Suggestions, what should be considered as OK and what should be considered as wrong, are very welcome in discussions with FPC in the second half of the season (after trades are closed). -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 dragiux

And now you gonna say this trade is not punished so you can complain? -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 4.3 Lipinski

Surely the issue here is not the recall or the punishment per se, but rather that nowhere is it written that a player may not be traded twice between two teams in one season.

How can it be considered a rule and used as a reason if not everyone knows? -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 4.3 Lipinski

Let's see how you put the words back together now -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Mirza

All reported hidden lending cases are reverting. No exceptions. This is FPC practise. If someone dont like it, ask your federation presidents to change FPC members ;) -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Artemix

So we have certain rules in the game about which only several representatives know and freely decide for the rest of society, who dont need to know anything about the rules. In political terminology we would call it an oligarchy :) -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 4.3 Lipinski

I am not saying that it is wrong to reverse these trades. I am absolutely on your side.
It should just be clear to everyone that this regulation exists.

There is a similar case here:

https://www.basketpulse.com/de/Trade/information/1167656
I doubt that they knew that it was not allowed to structure their trades in the way they did.

If the FPC has clear guidelines in their evaluation, then let it be reflected in the rules.
Please don't shift the responsibility for this.
We all want to play this game fairly and amicably with each other. So let everyone have the same conditions. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Artemix

"The Fair play committee is a group of devoted volunteers from different countries. The main goal of this group is to make this game fair for everyone".
What means fair? In game manual (help section) this is indicated in point 2 (Rules - Trades):
"2) Players' trade somehow has to benefit both teams (financially, in respect of team composition, etc).
You can trade a good but expensive player to a bit worse but cheaper player. You should not overuse this type of trade."
So there are no prerequisitesto reverse these trades, if they are fair in definition of fair trade above.
What you are doing is your interpretation has no basis in the rules of the game. Such interpretations are unfair and discriminatory. -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

顯示已隱藏回覆: 24

公平遊戲委員會

交易已被公平遊戲委員會撤銷 -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

公平遊戲委員會

公平競賽委員會決定這筆交易不公平，並向球隊提出警告。 -- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

公平遊戲委員會

How the Fair Play Committee members voted: 
- volunteers voted "Revert and punish": 0 
- volunteers voted "Revert": 12 
- volunteers voted "Fair": 0 
 
These reasons were chosen by the volunteers during voting: 
10 - Trade constitutes a "hidden lending" (player(s) that changed team went back to the original team) 
 
2 - Other reasons. Volunteers wrote explanations: 
--- Not allowed to trade back same players in the same season 
--- Hide lending. Not allowed this type of tfades. 
-- 94 賽季 18 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

交易資訊

退回

LZS OSOLIN

Buraczani Toruń

限制等級

計算方式

此限制等級的交易規則

快速指南

檢舉這則貼文