|
|
Post by wee2dee on Jun 3, 2018 4:38:24 GMT
FWIW I interpreted this the same way ward did @odin please clarify |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 12:46:37 GMT
on one hand sim 2 was yesterday and today is after yesterday
on the other i was considering changing the rule to include day 2 signings
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:04:02 GMT
on one hand sim 2 was yesterday and today is after yesterday on the other i was considering changing the rule to include day 2 signings I understood the rule and so did others, it was explained in shout multiple times. Changing it seems fine but changing rules and applying the changes retroactively seems lame especially when the changes will hurt the team that followed the rules |
|
|
|
Post by wee2dee on Jun 3, 2018 13:12:32 GMT
we can't all be in shout 24/7 & there was clearly some misunderstanding about the rule by more than just myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by wee2dee on Jun 3, 2018 13:13:35 GMT
on one hand sim 2 was yesterday and today is after yesterday on the other i was considering changing the rule to include day 2 signings ahh, but i posted yesterday  |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:16:02 GMT
"3. After day 1 of free agency, if one of your players was signed to a contract that is smaller than what he offered to resign for you may match the contract and steal him."
The way the rule is currently written includes all days of FA imo because Day 2 is after day 1. It wasn't intentional, but it's obvious that's what it says. There's no mention of not being able to steal back at a later point in fa.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:19:02 GMT
someone with a law degree tell me i'm wrong @heebs
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:20:05 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:25:41 GMT
someone with a law degree tell me i'm wrong @heebs I know a lawyer and he’d probably say something like: if a a rule has been interpreted and defined by the ruling body to mean one thing it can’t be interpreted another way without a public ruling explaining it first |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:31:55 GMT
i just explained why
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:33:02 GMT
if it's not in a thread it doesn't mean anything
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:50:08 GMT
so youre saying you write a rule
we ask it to be explained
you explain it
turns out it can ALSO be interpreted in a different way
not even clear which way it is
the ruling goes toward whoever bitched in the thread and not who asked it to be explained in shout?
if i had bitched in the thread in the opposite direction you could say something like "oh it can clearly be interpreted youre way bk" and then ward would be fucked
if it can be interpreted both ways, why does the person who didnt even receive the official explanation of how it works the one whose interpretation is correct
this is not cut and dry where the text of the thread only reads in wards direction. the words work for both our viewpoints, and mine is the one who was
A) explained by you
B) intention of the rule
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:52:48 GMT
it wasn't explained. nothing posted in shout is ever official. if there was clarification in the thread this would be different. but there isn't. so i just read the rule and see which side it leans towards.
and it says "after day 1 of fa". there's no limitations mentioned whatsoever. the rule implies you can do it at any point after day 1.
stop bitching about god damn borat's shitty fucking ass dude
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:54:13 GMT
it wasn't explained. nothing posted in shout is ever official. if there was clarification in the thread this would be different. but there isn't. so i just read the rule and see which side it leans towards. and it says "after day 1 of fa". there's no limitations mentioned whatsoever. the rule implies you can do it at any point after day 1. stop bitching about god damn borat's shitty fucking ass dude can i keep my avatar ... plz |
|
|
|
Post by 👨🏼⚕️delapandemic🚑 on Jun 3, 2018 13:55:43 GMT
Not to defend BK... but Rule #3 seems to be clarified by Rule #4
"3. After day 1 of free agency, if one of your players was signed to a contract that is smaller than what he offered to resign for you may match the contract and steal him.
4. Free Agency sims will then move to a 1-1-2 format. (FA Sim 2 is Day 2, Sim 3 is Day 3, Sim 4 is Days 4/5) Resignings can still be accepted through Sim 3 (but they can't be stolen back after Sim 2!)"
Where #3 seems to indicate that immediately following Day 1, they can be stolen back. Rule #4 explicitly states that they can't be stolen back after Sim (Day 2)
I don't see it as ambiguous at all. After Sim 2 (which is Day 2), guys can't be stolen back. I think the rule should change through Days 1 and 2... but as written now, they can only be stolen back after Day 1, not Days 2-5.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 13:57:41 GMT
further reading of the rule has changed my mind
"4. Free Agency sims will then move to a 1-1-2 format. (FA Sim 2 is Day 2, Sim 3 is Day 3, Sim 4 is Days 4/5) Resignings can still be accepted through Sim 3 (but they can't be stolen back after Sim 2!)"
sim 2 is defined as "the exact moment i press the button in the software to make it sim".
|
|
|
|
Post by wee2dee on Jun 3, 2018 14:05:40 GMT
got it, i took "after sim 2" to mean, beginning with sim 3.
|
|
dump
New Member
Posts: 671
Likes: 171
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by dump on Jun 3, 2018 14:36:23 GMT
team ward because fuck Billy
|
|
dump
New Member
Posts: 671
Likes: 171
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by dump on Jun 3, 2018 14:36:45 GMT
got it, i took "after sim 2" to mean, beginning with sim 3. that should be how its read |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jun 3, 2018 16:14:41 GMT
How about we all quickly mention that we’re glad this happened over Borat and not someone really good?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 16:25:33 GMT
and glad it was ward and not someone more prone to blossoming
|
|
ahebrewtoo
New Member
Posts: 796
Likes: 225
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by ahebrewtoo on Jun 5, 2018 14:08:10 GMT
someone with a law degree tell me i'm wrong @heebs You're not wrong at all. Day 2 is after day 1. |
|
ahebrewtoo
New Member
Posts: 796
Likes: 225
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by ahebrewtoo on Jun 5, 2018 14:10:38 GMT
Not to defend BK... but Rule #3 seems to be clarified by Rule #4 "3. After day 1 of free agency, if one of your players was signed to a contract that is smaller than what he offered to resign for you may match the contract and steal him. 4. Free Agency sims will then move to a 1-1-2 format. (FA Sim 2 is Day 2, Sim 3 is Day 3, Sim 4 is Days 4/5) Resignings can still be accepted through Sim 3 (but they can't be stolen back after Sim 2!)" Where #3 seems to indicate that immediately following Day 1, they can be stolen back. Rule #4 explicitly states that they can't be stolen back after Sim (Day 2) I don't see it as ambiguous at all. After Sim 2 (which is Day 2), guys can't be stolen back. I think the rule should change through Days 1 and 2... but as written now, they can only be stolen back after Day 1, not Days 2-5. Agree with this post. The parenthetical in 4 modifies what "after day 1 of free agency" in 3 means. |
|
IanBoyd
New Member
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 315
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by IanBoyd on Jun 5, 2018 14:28:29 GMT
your face is 3 means
|
|
IanBoyd
New Member
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 315
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by IanBoyd on Jun 5, 2018 14:28:45 GMT
i'm sorry that was mean.
|
|
|
|
Post by jhb on Jun 5, 2018 17:59:28 GMT
He's not sorry.
|
|
