pillowprocter
Panel of Selectors
Great, looking forward to it.
World of Cricket
- Thread starter Na Maloom Afraad
- Start date
- Status
Pinch hitter
Smash… Smash… Smash!
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
Umair7
El Presidente
We have a secret technology in Israel, now better shut up or else we will not be diplomatic!
Sherlock Holmes
PlanetCricket's Sherlock Holmes
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2014
pillowprocter
Panel of Selectors
Is there a limit to the amount of years a player can play before he retires? Otherwise if a team like Denmark manages to get 11 Ruby players and never retires them they'll just dominate forever.
NaviN GandhI
Panel of Selectors
This is actually a very valid point. We need to bring in a age system.
Till Valhalla
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2011
- Profile Flag
- Papua New Guinea
It's a no from me.
A.P Haux
The Meowest Avenger
If I'm right, So far NMA has laid out plans for 1999-2003. So I don't think this issue will arise for now. It'll probably be dealt with when NMA extends the timeframe
pillowprocter
Panel of Selectors
@Na Maloom Afraad for you
Till Valhalla
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2011
- Profile Flag
- Papua New Guinea
I again say my answer would be no.
Na Maloom Afraad
Man of Tomorrow
Player retirements were originally meant as a tool for countries without domestic cricket to get replacement players, should they really need them. That does not mean that making them a bigger part of the league by introducing a player age system isn't going to work, but like A.P Haux said above, I did not think it'd be necessary for at least the first four seasons (1999-2003).
I did talk about it with Neptune and my biggest issue with having a system for player ages is that it would be completely arbitrary. Which is kind of serviceable if we're starting out, but not when we already have players established in the game. Assigning ages to current cricketers is going to be far too arbitrary and that's why I've sort've just pushed the issue aside until I (or someone else) come up with a system that works well enough where managers and teams don't feel cheated.
As for a particular team (like Denmark) managing to get 11
ruby-tier players, I think it would mean they'd dominate for a while, but probably only until the next team manages to get their 11 players to ruby-tier. Which I don't think would happen until at least the 2003 CWC. After which, we'll look into a system for player ages.
Sherlock Holmes
PlanetCricket's Sherlock Holmes
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2014
To be fair I don't mind one team dominating for a phase. That brings the authenticity because there are always one or two heavyweight and couple of dark horses in a sport at any given point of time. Other always play catch up. It's only after couple of decades when another superpower emerges and tips the existing one.Player retirements were originally meant as a tool for countries without domestic cricket to get replacement players, should they really need them. That does not mean that making them a bigger part of the league by introducing a player age system isn't going to work, but like A.P Haux said above, I did not think it'd be necessary for at least the first four seasons (1999-2003).
I did talk about it with Neptune and my biggest issue with having a system for player ages is that it would be completely arbitrary. Which is kind of serviceable if we're starting out, but not when we already have players established in the game. Assigning ages to current cricketers is going to be far too arbitrary and that's why I've sort've just pushed the issue aside until I (or someone else) come up with a system that works well enough where managers and teams don't feel cheated.
As for a particular team (like Denmark) managing to get 11
Na Maloom Afraad
Man of Tomorrow
LEAGUE UPDATE
April 3, 2023
April 3, 2023
RANKINGS
Monthly Updates
Moving forward, rankings for players will be updated on the first of every month. While I initially thought it would be best to not have additional work aside from simming and posting FTP matches, it's actually proven to be the complete opposite. Having statistics from the entire year to convert into WCC rankings is turning out to be more work than having to update a few players from each series at the end of the month.
Team rankings will work the same way they do now, where they get updated at the end of each series/tournament. However, they'll be 'officially' considered from the first of each month. Just for logic's sake.
New Penalties
As established during last season, teams that are inactive throughout the entire year will drop down three spots in rankings for both formats. You can avoid getting penalized for your inactivity by playing a single official match in either format.
Another very important penalty, prompted by New Zealand withdrawing from the Knockout Trophy because they were unavailable, is that should a team fail to submit their squad within the given deadline (which is typically 72-96 hours) for a WCC event, they'll be replaced by the next best-ranked team. If someone is inactive, then they should definitely be making way for someone who is active.
More to do with WCC events than rankings, but to make sense of it in storyline as to why a team that's ranked high and not competing, and saving me from having to write articles declaring bankruptcies on nations with hosting rights for the World Cup, I'll simply swap the rankings for teams that fail to submit their squad and teams that get asked to compete despite being outside of the top-12/top-16.
Monthly Updates
Moving forward, rankings for players will be updated on the first of every month. While I initially thought it would be best to not have additional work aside from simming and posting FTP matches, it's actually proven to be the complete opposite. Having statistics from the entire year to convert into WCC rankings is turning out to be more work than having to update a few players from each series at the end of the month.
Team rankings will work the same way they do now, where they get updated at the end of each series/tournament. However, they'll be 'officially' considered from the first of each month. Just for logic's sake.
New Penalties
As established during last season, teams that are inactive throughout the entire year will drop down three spots in rankings for both formats. You can avoid getting penalized for your inactivity by playing a single official match in either format.
Another very important penalty, prompted by New Zealand withdrawing from the Knockout Trophy because they were unavailable, is that should a team fail to submit their squad within the given deadline (which is typically 72-96 hours) for a WCC event, they'll be replaced by the next best-ranked team. If someone is inactive, then they should definitely be making way for someone who is active.
More to do with WCC events than rankings, but to make sense of it in storyline as to why a team that's ranked high and not competing, and saving me from having to write articles declaring bankruptcies on nations with hosting rights for the World Cup, I'll simply swap the rankings for teams that fail to submit their squad and teams that get asked to compete despite being outside of the top-12/top-16.
DOMESTIC CRICKET
Regulations
This is probably going to be the least popular of the newly made changes, but one I feel imperative to make. All countries are now being restricted to having ONE domestic tournament per year (for each format of course). Dutch need not panic, since they've already run and posted their entire domestic season for 2001, I'll allow a single exception because it would be too harsh to let all that effort go to waste. The upgrades the Dutch have received from their tertiary tournaments will be accepted, but any tournaments they may run outside of their primary First-Class and List A will not be given official status moving forward.
Another really 'fun' rule, teams that are not a part of your proper domestic system will no longer be recognized either. This means domestic matches including India Red, India Blue, All Stars [Guernsey] won't be considered part of your domestic season. You have all the jurisdiction over the format of your leagues, so if you wish to get to a certain number of matches, please do so using your actual domestic teams. If you've got a makeshift team like that in your domestic fixtures, their matches will be removed from the overall tally.
I know how lame and annoying this is, and how restrictive and un-fun this is going to be for a lot of ya'll's tournaments, but this is something I feel I need to enforce because it has properly broken the framework of how domestic cricket is supposed to work. India currently have more than the 8 domestic teams a country is allowed to have, because they have the RGB teams alongside their zonal teams.
And because teams were running more than one official tournaments, it also made the distribution of domestic upgrades seem really stupid. Why would anyone want to run a 46 to 60-game league for 6 upgrades, when they can run six separate 3-game mini-tournaments and get just as many upgrades, which would even be spread out amongst more teams and not be restricted to just one and only require you to post a total of 18 matches?
Again, not something I feel too thrilled to be doing, but I do think regulating this and putting a tighter framework helps keep things balanced for everyone.
Regulations
This is probably going to be the least popular of the newly made changes, but one I feel imperative to make. All countries are now being restricted to having ONE domestic tournament per year (for each format of course). Dutch need not panic, since they've already run and posted their entire domestic season for 2001, I'll allow a single exception because it would be too harsh to let all that effort go to waste. The upgrades the Dutch have received from their tertiary tournaments will be accepted, but any tournaments they may run outside of their primary First-Class and List A will not be given official status moving forward.
Another really 'fun' rule, teams that are not a part of your proper domestic system will no longer be recognized either. This means domestic matches including India Red, India Blue, All Stars [Guernsey] won't be considered part of your domestic season. You have all the jurisdiction over the format of your leagues, so if you wish to get to a certain number of matches, please do so using your actual domestic teams. If you've got a makeshift team like that in your domestic fixtures, their matches will be removed from the overall tally.
I know how lame and annoying this is, and how restrictive and un-fun this is going to be for a lot of ya'll's tournaments, but this is something I feel I need to enforce because it has properly broken the framework of how domestic cricket is supposed to work. India currently have more than the 8 domestic teams a country is allowed to have, because they have the RGB teams alongside their zonal teams.
And because teams were running more than one official tournaments, it also made the distribution of domestic upgrades seem really stupid. Why would anyone want to run a 46 to 60-game league for 6 upgrades, when they can run six separate 3-game mini-tournaments and get just as many upgrades, which would even be spread out amongst more teams and not be restricted to just one and only require you to post a total of 18 matches?
Again, not something I feel too thrilled to be doing, but I do think regulating this and putting a tighter framework helps keep things balanced for everyone.
FUTURE TOURS PROGRAMME
In the 2000 season, I simmed and posted 161 matches in a calendar that was supposed to have only 104 slots. I do quite enjoy the league so simming those many matches was not tiresome to me at all. The only issue I had was that it took me nearly six months to complete the season.
Another issue was having new signups in France, Zimbabwe, Netherlands, Vanuatu, Japan come along mid-season and not having vacant slots in the FTP to fit them into the calendar.
Their unexpected arrival prompted the regional championships that weren't initially on the agenda, adding to the originally planned FTP. So, to make it so that the FTP moving forward is inclusive of all regional championships and has enough room in it to allow new signups to add their fixtures should they signup mid-season, the FTP window is being expanded to 156 slots from the previous 104.
Regional championships will however be included in the new FTP slots so it doesn't expand any further. And given the rapid growth of the league and how many teams there are currently as opposed to how many there were at the start of the 2000 season, the number of matches a team can play has also been halved to 8 (from the previous 15).
BUT teams from confederations with their own simmers can play up to 12 matches since their regional championship won't be run by me, and won't fall into the 156-slot FTP.
Old Format
104 slots in the calendar - two for each week of the year [ ended up being 161 due to the regional competitions anyway ] + WCC event
15 internationals allowed per team [ outside of the regional championships and WCC event, should they qualify ]
New Format
156 slots in the calendar - three for each week of the year [ inclusive of regional championship matches ] + WCC event
8 internationals allowed per team [ outside of the regional championships and WCC event, should they qualify ]
* * * Teams from confederations run by users can play up to 12 internationals since their regional championships won't be simmed by me.
In the 2000 season, I simmed and posted 161 matches in a calendar that was supposed to have only 104 slots. I do quite enjoy the league so simming those many matches was not tiresome to me at all. The only issue I had was that it took me nearly six months to complete the season.
Another issue was having new signups in France, Zimbabwe, Netherlands, Vanuatu, Japan come along mid-season and not having vacant slots in the FTP to fit them into the calendar.
Their unexpected arrival prompted the regional championships that weren't initially on the agenda, adding to the originally planned FTP. So, to make it so that the FTP moving forward is inclusive of all regional championships and has enough room in it to allow new signups to add their fixtures should they signup mid-season, the FTP window is being expanded to 156 slots from the previous 104.
Regional championships will however be included in the new FTP slots so it doesn't expand any further. And given the rapid growth of the league and how many teams there are currently as opposed to how many there were at the start of the 2000 season, the number of matches a team can play has also been halved to 8 (from the previous 15).
BUT teams from confederations with their own simmers can play up to 12 matches since their regional championship won't be run by me, and won't fall into the 156-slot FTP.
Old Format
104 slots in the calendar - two for each week of the year [ ended up being 161 due to the regional competitions anyway ] + WCC event
15 internationals allowed per team [ outside of the regional championships and WCC event, should they qualify ]
New Format
156 slots in the calendar - three for each week of the year [ inclusive of regional championship matches ] + WCC event
8 internationals allowed per team [ outside of the regional championships and WCC event, should they qualify ]
* * * Teams from confederations run by users can play up to 12 internationals since their regional championships won't be simmed by me.
CONFEDERATIONS
User-run confederations was originally a thing I added to the league so I could delegate some of my work, but it hasn't really worked out quite the way I had hoped. Continental tournaments have been run by me regardless, and while they were great fun, they did add up to the workload.
I absolutely do not intend to take away them, nor do I wish to force managerial duties to someone who doesn't want it. But I will make it so that there's an actual upside to having user-run confederations. From now on, confederations run by users will be given complete accreditation. Their managers will be given the official databases to simulate the matches, and all matches posted in their tournaments will be considered official.
Teams from user-run confederations will be allowed FOUR extra matches in the official FTP calendar. Since I won't be running their regional championship, it will free me to sim extra matches which can be used for bilateral cricket by the teams from said confederation. It will not push the FTP to expand any further than 156 slots. More or less, if a confederation is run by me, it will fall into the 156-slot FTP calendar. If it is run by someone other than me, it will fall outside of the 156-slot FTP calendar. Slots freed up from me not having to run a regional championship can be used by teams from that region.
User-run confederations was originally a thing I added to the league so I could delegate some of my work, but it hasn't really worked out quite the way I had hoped. Continental tournaments have been run by me regardless, and while they were great fun, they did add up to the workload.
I absolutely do not intend to take away them, nor do I wish to force managerial duties to someone who doesn't want it. But I will make it so that there's an actual upside to having user-run confederations. From now on, confederations run by users will be given complete accreditation. Their managers will be given the official databases to simulate the matches, and all matches posted in their tournaments will be considered official.
Teams from user-run confederations will be allowed FOUR extra matches in the official FTP calendar. Since I won't be running their regional championship, it will free me to sim extra matches which can be used for bilateral cricket by the teams from said confederation. It will not push the FTP to expand any further than 156 slots. More or less, if a confederation is run by me, it will fall into the 156-slot FTP calendar. If it is run by someone other than me, it will fall outside of the 156-slot FTP calendar. Slots freed up from me not having to run a regional championship can be used by teams from that region.
MOROCCO
Full transparency, I quit from managing England because after a few games, I got a bit self-conscious about people possibly thinking that I was rigging the games in my own team's favour. Now, I know no one's gonna stoop so low to think that, nor that I would EVER do that, but the thought of it was something I could not get out of my head.
Also, managing a team in your own league is so stupid. You post the lineup while posting all the admin stuff, you know the result of the game before it's even posted, you have to comment on a match which's description you just wrote yourself. It feels awkward as all hell.
So, to combat all that and make sure that 100% neutrality is maintained, I've asked multiple people to simulate Morocco's matches as neutral simmers, and they've all been very kind to agree to it. Really grateful for that, and also really glad to be playing the league I really want to play in. Hopefully my participation isn't something that ruins other people's fun.
All of Morocco's matches will be simmed and posted by neutral simmers, depending on who's available at the time.
Full transparency, I quit from managing England because after a few games, I got a bit self-conscious about people possibly thinking that I was rigging the games in my own team's favour. Now, I know no one's gonna stoop so low to think that, nor that I would EVER do that, but the thought of it was something I could not get out of my head.
Also, managing a team in your own league is so stupid. You post the lineup while posting all the admin stuff, you know the result of the game before it's even posted, you have to comment on a match which's description you just wrote yourself. It feels awkward as all hell.
So, to combat all that and make sure that 100% neutrality is maintained, I've asked multiple people to simulate Morocco's matches as neutral simmers, and they've all been very kind to agree to it. Really grateful for that, and also really glad to be playing the league I really want to play in. Hopefully my participation isn't something that ruins other people's fun.
All of Morocco's matches will be simmed and posted by neutral simmers, depending on who's available at the time.
2001 SEASON - START DATE
And lastly, just wanted everyone to know the start date for the 2001 season. Will be needing some time to setup the season threads and tournament threads, and will also push new potential signups by bringing the confederations' threads to the sticky section.
The 2001 season will begin 4-5 days after @Pinch hitter finishes the Super League. I'll be putting up threads and pushing for new signups in the meanwhile.
Should also point out, if anyone wants to get their 2000 domestic tournament in, they can try to do so. I know you've got a List A tournament left that you want to do @ahmedleo414. Also, if a domestic tournament from 2000 is currently ongoing (like @RUDI's SuperSport Series), you won't be allowed to start your 2001 domestic season until it is completed.
Alright, that's all. Please do let me know of any feedback, critique, suggestion, idea,backlash you might have. Helps in improving the league a great deal.
And lastly, just wanted everyone to know the start date for the 2001 season. Will be needing some time to setup the season threads and tournament threads, and will also push new potential signups by bringing the confederations' threads to the sticky section.
The 2001 season will begin 4-5 days after @Pinch hitter finishes the Super League. I'll be putting up threads and pushing for new signups in the meanwhile.
Should also point out, if anyone wants to get their 2000 domestic tournament in, they can try to do so. I know you've got a List A tournament left that you want to do @ahmedleo414. Also, if a domestic tournament from 2000 is currently ongoing (like @RUDI's SuperSport Series), you won't be allowed to start your 2001 domestic season until it is completed.
Alright, that's all. Please do let me know of any feedback, critique, suggestion, idea,
Neptune
Panel of Selectors
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2020
Na Maloom Afraad said:
You could just repeat this one for all of them too
Na Maloom Afraad
Man of Tomorrow
- Status
Similar threads
