記者會

Icon 交易/租借球員: 007 & United
-- 75 賽季 1 天
球隊提出交易請求
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
球員:
交易後開始在新球隊比賽 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
球員:
交易後開始在新球隊比賽 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
球員:
交易後開始在新球隊比賽 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
球員:
交易後開始在新球隊比賽 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
交易已接受 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
交易已被公平競賽委員會退回 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
the trade had been reverted,but why the players are not reverted? -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+5
此筆交易無法退回，因為已超出期限。 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
公平競賽委員會決定這筆交易不公平，並向球隊提出警告。 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
How the Fair Play Committee members voted:<br />
- volunteers voted &quot;Revert and punish&quot;: 1<br />
- volunteers voted &quot;Revert&quot;: 9<br />
- volunteers voted &quot;Fair&quot;: 0<br />
<br />
These reasons were chosen by the volunteers during voting:<br />
2 - Significantly unfair to other users (for example, when strong and cheap player is moved to lower division).<br />
3 - Suspicion that trade&rsquo;s goal is to help one of the teams<br />
2 - Overuse of disbalanced trades. Players&#39; 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 />
1 - Salary drop (one or more useful players are exchanged for useless player(s) with the only goal to reduce salaries)<br />
<br />
1 - Other reasons. Volunteers wrote explanations: <br />
--- One-sided trade when a 15y/o 10pot school talent is traded for lower ceiling and potential players.<br />
 -- 75 賽季 1 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
unacceptable reason, "to late" is simply FCP incapability -- 75 賽季 4 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0
Shouldn't you be already gone? -- 75 賽季 4 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+8
Kai ziaurumo vagyste... :o -- 75 賽季 4 天
-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)
+0