Open Forum (Ask GMs)

[MrMoose]

We did consider paying out last week as a whole but I like the way we do it now
As for a match fee or lower wage plus match fee, ity is something being tossed around but I will say it will be a couple of season away being seriously discussed and/or implemented.

That's disappointing to hear. It basically puts me in the bin until gate tickets roll in on a Friday.

[vietd]

The game manual really only mentions that a good keeper can limit byes and wides

How does a good keeper limit wides? Are the umpires less likely to call a wide-ish delivery "wide" if the keeper catches it more cleanly?

I don't understand it either since a wide is like a no-ball -- it adds one run to the score and that's all. If a wide goes for multiple runs, well then those are called byes. Or at least that's my understanding. But below is what it says in the game manual.

Keeping This is the primary skill required for wicket keepers. A wicketkeeper with a high keeping skill will convert more stumping and caught behind opportunities. Keeping skill also affects the number of byes conceded and has a minor effect on the number of leg byes and wides that are conceded (a good keeper might be able to stop a wide ball from going for 5 wides, for example).

If a wide goes for multiple runs, it's not byes. Officially, it's still wides. One of the reasons why this is the case is to not penalise keepers, who generally get marked on the number of byes conceded, if it's the bowler's fault for bowling so wide.

[berksowl]

If a wide goes for multiple runs, it's not byes. Officially, it's still wides. One of the reasons why this is the case is to not penalise keepers, who generally get marked on the number of byes conceded, if it's the bowler's fault for bowling so wide.

I see. Thanks for explaining this.

[radar]

If a wide goes for multiple runs, it's not byes. Officially, it's still wides. One of the reasons why this is the case is to not penalise keepers, who generally get marked on the number of byes conceded, if it's the bowler's fault for bowling so wide.

I see. Thanks for explaining this.

Thanks both!

[berksowl]

I understand lately there has been at least one instance of a transfer-listed player receiving a bid that was later reversed or cancelled by admin, because it was deemed to be too high for the player's perceived value. I've not paid too close attention to this, so don't really know if this happens a lot, or if it's a rare occurrence that admin steps in to cancel a bid.

By what set of a criteria is a bid deemed to be too high for a player's value? How is that value objectively measured? Is there some guide to player skills, ratings, wages, talents, etc. that we can all access so we can know a player's value?

Has admin considered subsidizing bids when highly valuable players fail to sell at an objectively appropriate price relative to their skills, etc.?

Or am I mis-reading the situation altogether? Was the bid cancelled because it was suspected to be of a nefarious nature?

[GM-crowfan65]

We use past sales as a guide to what the price should be but we are fairly lenient on variations as time of the week and season can change price dramatically.

We will only adjust prices or cancel bids if there is a link between the teams, the price is very high based on the past sales and there appears to be something smelly going on.

[berksowl]

We use past sales as a guide to what the price should be but we are fairly lenient on variations as time of the week and season can change price dramatically.

We will only adjust prices or cancel bids if there is a link between the teams, the price is very high based on the past sales and there appears to be something smelly going on.

Thanks for clarifying. Sounds like there are three (or two maybe, since #1 ad #2 are what might make something "smelly") conditions that need to be met before a bid will be cancelled, not just one. That makes sense.

[MD-Summit]

I can second this.

It is rare for us to intervene however there has been a couple of obvious transfers that had to be altered or removed.

There is generally back end information we can use to see why the bid has occurred or why the bid is smelly.

The most recent one had 3 admin members raise it and a behind the scenes discussion occurred to come to a group decision rather than it being solely on 1 person to make the decision.

[Bustergut]

Which provides more bowling variety:

RF, RFM, RFM, RM & LFS (4 R/H bowlers but more different types) or

LF, LF, RM, RM, RFS (3 R/H bowers but there are 2 pairs of bowlers)

[GM-crowfan65]

Variety is decided by arm and type so LF and RF are different
and of course the 5 types if bowlers are different therefore giving us 10 different types of bowlers

Does that make sense?

[Bustergut]

So RF, RFM, RFM, RM & LFS has 4 types

and LF, LF, RM, RM, RFS has 3 types. So the former has more variety?

[GM-crowfan65]

correct

[MrMoose]

Is the bowling type variety at all related to the oppositions bowling type variety?

For example I have 5 unique bowling types is the bonus that gains different if my opponent also has 5 unique bowling types or has 1?

[MrMoose]

Any hint on how large the bonus for that variety is?

Like is playing a part time bowler two junk overs worth it for the bonus?

[GM-crowfan65]

Good question

but no the bonus isn't worth that much