Proposed rule to govern future on the clock trades

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Proposed rule: If an On The Clock trade gets vetoed, both GMs lose an hour off their clocks on top of any other penalty. This extra hour is a hard penalty, which can drop the GMs in question under the otherwise guaranteed 4 hour minimum clock.

This will apply to all future trades (in other words, not the one in question now).

Click to read more...

 

[vecens24]

Good rule. I agree with this.

 

[BenchBrawl]

2 hours deduction to the GM on the clock and 1 hour to the GM off the clock for any trade veto or not if the trade took more than half of the clock.If the trade was made quickly on the clock it doesn't matter.I can't believe I actually have a 1 hour penalty while Bugg will only have 2 LOL.

Just an idea.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

What happens if the initial trade was made off the clock, vetoed, then that team went on the clock before a new trade could be reworked?

 

[vecens24]

2 hours deduction to the GM on the clock and 1 hour to the GM off the clock.

This is too harsh.

 

[Elvis P]

Good rule. I agree with this.

Agreed.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

2 hours deduction to the GM on the clock and 1 hour to the GM off the clock.

That's how it would work out. This is on top of the 1 hour deduction that already exists for trading on the clock.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

What happens if the initial trade was made off the clock, vetoed, then that team went on the clock before a new trade could be reworked?

Then it's not a vetoed on the clock trade.

But the second trade would be OTC and the OTC GM would lose an hour the normal way.

 

[vecens24]

That's how it would work out. This is on top of the 1 hour deduction that already exists for trading on the clock.

Oh, wow I misread that then.

I mean I'm not going to stop it from going through, but I think it's too harsh.

 

[DoMakc]

Proposed rule: If an On The Clock trade gets vetoed, both GMs lose an hour off their clocks on top of any other penalty. This extra hour is a hard penalty, which can drop the GMs in question under the otherwise guaranteed 4 hour minimum clock.

This will apply to all future trades (in other words, not the one in question now).

I don't think time penalty is a proper penalty, it's just something most of GMs can live with.

 

[BenchBrawl]

This is too harsh.

that's what you get for being insensitive.

Of course trade on the clock that goes quickly shouldn't be punished at all in fact.

The problem is trades shouldn't be there to annoy the group , just to help people getting a certain player here and there , but now it's getting shady , they are basically deciding on the clock what way they want to go with their complete roster , it's ridiculous.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't think time penalty is a proper penalty, it's just something most of GMs can live with.

Well yeah, but what other penalty can we give?

Force the GM who was on the clock to keep the player? It's evil and hilarious to think about. But no.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Oh, wow I misread that then.

I mean I'm not going to stop it from going through, but I think it's too harsh.

You don't like it, don't make a veto-worthy trade while on the clock. That's my reasoning. Feel free to vote no.

 

[vecens24]

You don't like it, don't make a veto-worthy trade while on the clock. That's my reasoning. Feel free to vote no.

Yeah I mean I'm not someone who is going to do that (and I don't think anyone does it on purpose), but we'll see the way this goes. As of right now I'll vote no to this, but I'm not exactly going with this one way or the other with absolute certainty.

 

[tony d]

I agree with this. 1 hour penalty for both GM's who trade while on the clock is a good rule and 1 I support.

 

[DaveG]

Then it's not a vetoed on the clock trade.

But the second trade would be OTC and the OTC GM would lose an hour the normal way.

Good, that makes sense and is more then fair.

 

[Leafs Forever]

It's only fair I vote 'yes' for a rule I helped create

 

[vecens24]

If it goes through, can it be called the LF/Bugg Corollary?

 

[DoMakc]

Well yeah, but what other penalty can we give?

Force the GM who was on the clock to keep the player? It's evil and hilarious to think about. But no.

It's actually easy, a person who trades on the clock trolls other GMs - just give him HFB infraction points.

 

[BenchBrawl]

We should also considered making a 1 trade OTC rule for the next ATD.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It's actually easy, a person who trades on the clock trolls other GMs - just give him HFB infraction points.

Haha, you trade on the clock twice, you lose your avatar. I like it.

(pretty sure we're not allowed to do this though)

 

[vecens24]

We should also considered making a 1 trade OTC rule for the next ATD.

I am vehemently opposed to limiting trades in any way. This would be very similar to the 3 trade rule last draft that is pointless.

 

[Leafs Forever]

We should also considered making a 1 trade OTC rule for the next ATD.

That brings about the issue of the old "pick a player than trade him" thing.

To counteract that, we could try a "no trading players rule"; seems harsh because then we can't correct mistakes, but usually only 1-2 of those deals are done per draft anyway.

 

[BenchBrawl]

The 3trades rule was pointless , the 1 trade max OTC rule wouldn't be , it would have been useful today.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

It's actually easy, a person who trades on the clock trolls other GMs - just give him HFB infraction points.

How do you propose defining trading solely to troll? I mean Bugg has been involved in a few OTC trades but it's hard to fault him for trying to shop the pick after he was scooped. How can you differentiate where someone is trolling as opposed to just annoying people by taking their sweet time while OTC?

I think this rule is pretty solid. If you have to trade on the clock for whatever reason, make it reasonable so it doesn't hold things up even more. If these deals didn't have to be reviewed this wouldn't be a problem.