Let Retired Players Play In The World Cup

[FacePuncher 1,343]

I was supposed to bring this up after the S50 World Cup, but I forgot, and once again the rule was unchanged, so here I am.

 

This rule that retired players cat play in the World Cup is a terrible one. We should remove it IMMEDIATELY. Why, do you ask? well, 2 reasons, my friends.

 

#1. Do it simply for the good of the VHL. Let me ask you all something, what makes the World Cup(and in turn, the VHL) more active? Max @Molholt playing out his final games on Team Scandinavia, or watching inactive Jory Rose do shit all? Would we enjoy the Clegane brothers making a final stand together for Team Europe, or whoever the hell Alex Wolf is at backup? The same thing happened to @jRuutu last year. Adding these guys adds activity and involves more members.

 

#2. This one is the logical reason. Very simply, when players retire, are they immediately forced to stop playing? No!! They are allowed to finish the season they are in! so, lets take a quick look. Max Molholt, Greg Clegane, Biggu Kyanon, Ariel Weinstein, and Joel Jarvi have in common? they retired during the S52 season. What else for they have in common? they finished out the S52 season as per rules. What was this World Cup called? The S52 World Cup!!! When does it take place? the S52 offseason!!! So if these players are allowed to finish the season, why oh why are they disqualified from the World Cup in favor of inactives?????

 

I rest my case

Edited February 2, 2017 by The Bread Man

[Ahma 1,443]

yes let Valmount play in the World Cup.!

[FacePuncher 1,343]

1 minute ago, Ahma said:

yes let Valmount play in the World Cup.!

I didn't mean THAT much retired

[Kendrick 4,741]

No because the would mess with old players abilities to never get more medals. Plus the young guys are supposed to get the nod.

[Ahma 1,443]

7 minutes ago, The Bread Man said:

I didn't mean THAT much retired

what are you a racist against old retired players???

i gotchu now ADwyer.

[FacePuncher 1,343]

7 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

No because the would mess with old players abilities to never get more medals. Plus the young guys are supposed to get the nod.

I don't see the problem with that first part. And if it WAS younger guys getting the nod that would make sense. But it's not, it's inactives

[FacePuncher 1,343]

4 minutes ago, Ahma said:

what are you a racist against old retired players???

i gotchu now ADwyer.

You know it

[Kendrick 4,741]

Just now, The Bread Man said:

I don't see the problem with that first part. And if it WAS younger guys getting the nod that would make sense. But it's not, it's inactives

Well thats not on the World Cup team, thats on the GM's then. For every Jory Rose there is an Alexander Wolf who deserves a chance to be on a roster as someone this league is trying to retain. You want engagement, a player on the outs of his career is less likely to care.

[FacePuncher 1,343]

9 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

Well thats not on the World Cup team, thats on the GM's then. For every Jory Rose there is an Alexander Wolf who deserves a chance to be on a roster as someone this league is trying to retain. You want engagement, a player on the outs of his career is less likely to care.

But that's simply not true. There are many more mid level inactives than new members like Wolf. In fact, I believe wolf is the only one. Rose is definitely not. And as for the last statement, I don't think that's true at all. The past 2 cups now have had retired guys upset that they couldn't finish out their career. That seems pretty engaged to me....Not to mention Alex Wolf hasn't made a post since Jan. 27th, at least in the forums

 

If you wanted to give more players like Wolf a chance to play, we should up the number of teams in the World Cup, because the low TPE new guys that keep going inactive aren't getting in this way

[Kendrick 4,741]

2 minutes ago, The Bread Man said:

But that's simply not true. There are many more mid level inactives than new members like Wolf. In fact, I believe wolf is the only one. Rose is definitely not. And as for the last statement, I don't think that's true at all. The past 2 cups now have had retired guys upset that they couldn't finish out their career. That seems pretty engaged to me....Not to mention Alex Wolf hasn't made a post since Jan. 27th, at least in the forums

 

If you wanted to give more players like Wolf a chance to play, we should up the number of teams in the World Cup, because the low TPE new guys that keep going inactive aren't getting in this way

January 27th isn't even a week ago. Like I said the onus is on the gM's to include them, you can't really blame the system for that. I repeat: GM's, not the system. Nothing more, nothing less. Seems you'd rather the engagement of players on their way out than the ones on their way in. I for one don't care if I get in one last crack at some International event (seeing as I don't have interest in them anyways) and would rather see it go to someone who is just starting out.

[jRuutu 2,474]

If you need to choose between clearly a inactive player or a retiring active player, the choice should always be the retiring active player. GM´s can of course make that decision, even if retiring players are allowed to take part in the tournament, does not mean every GM needs to pick them. Can and should pick younger active players whenever that is possible.

 

I have not done any research, but I doubt every nation has that luxury to roll with fully active team to every tournament, then a retiring active player could come in and take the inactive players spot. The whole tournament would be that much more competitive, maybe we could see few more comments in the game threads, even media spots/fan590 etc stuff from the retiring active players.

 

What stops retiring players from doing those things now? Nothing, but inactive player is not going to bring anything to the table. 

 

[Kendrick 4,741]

5 minutes ago, jRuutu said:

If you need to choose between clearly a inactive player or a retiring active player, the choice should always be the retiring active player. GM´s can of course make that decision, even if retiring players are allowed to take part in the tournament, does not mean every GM needs to pick them. Can and should pick younger active players whenever that is possible.

 

I have not done any research, but I doubt every nation has that luxury to roll with fully active team to every tournament, then a retiring active player could come in and take the inactive players spot. The whole tournament would be that much more competitive, maybe we could see few more comments in the game threads, even media spots/fan590 etc stuff from the retiring active players.

 

What stops retiring players from doing those things now? Nothing, but inactive player is not going to bring anything to the table. 

 

But for every instance of that happening there will be an instance of retiring active player taking the place of a newly created active player. You guys are only really pointing to the smaller nations. Canada is a huge nation and if a retiring active player took the place of a newer player who was active, that would suck as well. There always is a negative and positive to a pitch.

[jRuutu 2,474]

Just now, Kendrick said:

But for every instance of that happening there will be an instance of retiring active player taking the place of a newly created active player. You guys are only really pointing to the smaller nations. Canada is a huge nation and if a retiring active player took the place of a newer player who was active, that would suck as well. There always is a negative and positive to a pitch.

Canada like you said is a big nation, they more than likely can roll with active team to every tournament? (I don´t know if they can) The smaller nations are the ones who have to keep on going with inactive player(s) when they could add a retiring active player to the team. 

 

In my opinion allowing the retiring active players to play one more time if needed, brings more good than bad. 

[Kendrick 4,741]

3 minutes ago, jRuutu said:

Canada like you said is a big nation, they more than likely can roll with active team to every tournament? (I don´t know if they can) The smaller nations are the ones who have to keep on going with inactive player(s) when they could add a retiring active player to the team. 

 

In my opinion allowing the retiring active players to play one more time if needed, brings more good than bad. 

So basically re-alignment might be what you guys want instead. Like it was several years ago when some of the smaller nations couldn't field a team. I think the World Cup Commish's look at that every year though.

[FacePuncher 1,343]

1 minute ago, Kendrick said:

So basically re-alignment might be what you guys want instead. Like it was several years ago when some of the smaller nations couldn't field a team. I think the World Cup Commish's look at that every year though.

Why would they.....

[Kendrick 4,741]

Just now, The Bread Man said:

Why would they.....

Because it's natural that through time some creations aren't from a specific nation. An example would be if no one created with a player from Sweden or Finland in 4 consecutive years. That would mean less players for Scandinavia to use.

[Will 4,662]

It made more sense before two players existed because everyone Dwyer mentioned in OP would have retired and recreated new players at the S52 trade deadline. Their old players would be sitting idle from the deadline on so it just made sense not to include them. Nowadays, none of those people were actually eligible to create another player because they already have second ones. In the future they probably should be allowed if the person didn't already create a player to replace that specific retiring player. 

[FacePuncher 1,343]

23 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

But for every instance of that happening there will be an instance of retiring active player taking the place of a newly created active player. You guys are only really pointing to the smaller nations. Canada is a huge nation and if a retiring active player took the place of a newer player who was active, that would suck as well. There always is a negative and positive to a pitch.

But that's NOT what's happening. Canada has only Xander Finn that I guess would be classified as 'newer'. Other than that, the only guys that were on that team that were 'newer' were second players. And then semi-inactive Jim Lahey because the only 'actve' defensemen left was 30 TPE Ryan Beadle. I really don't see any examples of these newer guys who have put in some sort of effort getting pushed out of lineups, besides maybe Lablanc, who was left off anyway, and Girard, who idk if they had and retired guys who could take his place, and also he had 56 TPE.

4 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

Because it's natural that through time some creations aren't from a specific nation. An example would be if no one created with a player from Sweden or Finland in 4 consecutive years. That would mean less players for Scandinavia to use.

Yes, but us World Cup Commissioners don't have the power to make those kind of calls. I mean, I could TELL you that Europe is in pretty bad shape moving forward. But I can't do anything about it

[Kendrick 4,741]

9 minutes ago, The Bread Man said:

But that's NOT what's happening. Canada has only Xander Finn that I guess would be classified as 'newer'. Other than that, the only guys that were on that team that were 'newer' were second players. And then semi-inactive Jim Lahey because the only 'actve' defensemen left was 30 TPE Ryan Beadle. I really don't see any examples of these newer guys who have put in some sort of effort getting pushed out of lineups, besides maybe Lablanc, who was left off anyway, and Girard, who idk if they had and retired guys who could take his place, and also he had 56 TPE.

Yes, but us World Cup Commissioners don't have the power to make those kind of calls. I mean, I could TELL you that Europe is in pretty bad shape moving forward. But I can't do anything about it

Uhhh but you do. In fact even if you don't think you do you can pitch the idea to those in charge. See you can make the call to switch things up because...you are 1. A BOG Member and 2. Looking out for the best interest of the World Cup.

[Tagger 2,722]

To be fair, quite a few of the examples you listed aren't going to help your case. 

 

- Joel Jarvi played in the S52 World Cup. He unretired shortly after retiring

- Ariel Weinstein deliberately retired his player because he wanted another player to take his spot.

- Greg Clegane could have played in the tournament if he wanted to (The rule is if you're about to be forced retired immediately after the World Cup, you can play in the tournament so long as you aren't forced retired), but cared so little about participating in the World Cup that he chose to retire before it.

- Max Molholt, like Clegane, could have participated in the tournament also, but declared his retirement early for some reason. Since he didn't gain any benefit from his retirement, if he wanted to take part in the World Cup, he shouldn't have declared his retirement early. 

[JardyB10 4,868]

YEAH has the right of it here. There's nothing stopping older retiring players from not retiring before WC. If they value the TD head start on their new players more than an additional WC appearance so be it. Or if they're like Victor and I and want both, and also a brief vacation (this was pre-Player 2), they could just get auto-retired and wait until the NEXT trade deadline.

[Molholt 2,185]

I'm fine with being sticklers of the rules I guess, but I think in this scenario its a weird place to put your foot down. In this very specific instance, the league decided that abiding 100% with this weird rule for an event that holds no bearing on anything in the league was a better option than the fun of a single member. And, in this instance, I am in fact a single member and this is a unique situation, and I'll live and I don't really care that much - but neither does Jory Rose lol.

 

Max was a big part of Scandinavia in the previous WCs and it would've been cool to see him go one more time. I posted a retirement thread because I wanted to talk about Max, and he was already done. His last games for Toronto were played and he was set to be auto-retired, so the fact that waiting to make a post later has some bearing over the ruling is silly to me. He was never going to play another VHL game whether I posted or not. He was not going to come back next season whether I posted or not. Sure, I could've waited - but for one, I didn't know that was a thing until someone pointed it out in the retirement thread and two, it shouldn't be. 

 

If the concern is getting new members in - then players who have played their last VHL game shouldn't be allowed in at all, across the board. That's a great argument that Max shouldn't be taking someone else's place, if every other S45 player wasn't doing the exact same thing simply because their post was later. Want a straight forward rule? Either include or don't include them every time, don't make it based on when a post was made. Then I'll believe that you care about the newer members getting in. (and lets not pretend we're just overflowing with new members clamoring to get into the WC)

 

Like I said, it's just a weird situation where the VHL said this weird rule was more important to enforce than me having fun one last time with the only player I cared about in this league. When given the opportunity, I prioritize member enjoyment over enforcing a rule that doesn't have longstanding negative effects. 

Edited February 2, 2017 by Molholt

[JardyB10 4,868]

6 minutes ago, Molholt said:

I'm fine with being sticklers of the rules I guess, but I think in this scenario its a weird place to put your foot down. In this very specific instance, the league decided that abiding 100% with this weird rule for an event that holds no bearing on anything in the league was a better option than the fun of a single member. And, in this instance, I am in fact a single member and this is a unique situation, and I'll live and I don't really care that much - but neither does Jory Rose lol.

 

Max was a big part of Scandinavia in the previous WCs and it would've been cool to see him go one more time. I posted a retirement thread because I wanted to talk about Max, and he was already done. His last games for Toronto were played and he was set to be auto-retired, so the fact that waiting to make a post later has some bearing over the ruling is silly to me. He was never going to play another VHL game whether I posted or not. He was not going to come back next season whether I posted or not. Sure, I could've waited - but for one, I didn't know that was a thing until someone pointed it out in the retirement thread and two, it shouldn't be. 

 

If the concern is getting new members in - then players who have played their last VHL game shouldn't be allowed in at all, across the board. That's a great argument that Max shouldn't be taking someone else's place, if every other S45 player wasn't doing the exact same thing simply because their post was later. Want a straight forward rule? Either include or don't include them every time, don't make it based on when a post was made. Then I'll believe that you care about the newer members getting in. (and lets not pretend we're just overflowing with new members clamoring to get into the WC)

 

Like I said, it's just a weird situation where the VHL said this weird rule was more important to enforce than me having fun one last time with the only player I cared about in this league. When given the opportunity, I prioritize member enjoyment over enforcing a rule that doesn't have longstanding negative effects. 

I didn't realize this was the case. I was kind of absent during the off-season/busy with other shit, but I think if you would have just said you wanted to play in WC you could have. If nothing else you could have unretired, haha. I was personally thinking as well that Victor was expecting Clegane to be in one last WC, but he kind of peaced and possibly didn't notice, and it did give Wolf a small taste of the action which was good I suppose. But maybe he wouldn't have shat the bed in the last stretch of the tournament and Europe would have medaled.

[Will 4,662]

31 minutes ago, Molholt said:

I'm fine with being sticklers of the rules I guess, but I think in this scenario its a weird place to put your foot down. In this very specific instance, the league decided that abiding 100% with this weird rule for an event that holds no bearing on anything in the league was a better option than the fun of a single member. And, in this instance, I am in fact a single member and this is a unique situation, and I'll live and I don't really care that much - but neither does Jory Rose lol.

 

Max was a big part of Scandinavia in the previous WCs and it would've been cool to see him go one more time. I posted a retirement thread because I wanted to talk about Max, and he was already done. His last games for Toronto were played and he was set to be auto-retired, so the fact that waiting to make a post later has some bearing over the ruling is silly to me. He was never going to play another VHL game whether I posted or not. He was not going to come back next season whether I posted or not. Sure, I could've waited - but for one, I didn't know that was a thing until someone pointed it out in the retirement thread and two, it shouldn't be. 

 

If the concern is getting new members in - then players who have played their last VHL game shouldn't be allowed in at all, across the board. That's a great argument that Max shouldn't be taking someone else's place, if every other S45 player wasn't doing the exact same thing simply because their post was later. Want a straight forward rule? Either include or don't include them every time, don't make it based on when a post was made. Then I'll believe that you care about the newer members getting in. (and lets not pretend we're just overflowing with new members clamoring to get into the WC)

 

Like I said, it's just a weird situation where the VHL said this weird rule was more important to enforce than me having fun one last time with the only player I cared about in this league. When given the opportunity, I prioritize member enjoyment over enforcing a rule that doesn't have longstanding negative effects. 

 

Nobody's putting their foot down, I said like 4 posts up it should be changed   (though i understand that doesn't do much for you)

 

I didn't think about it to be honest, I just got YEAH to make the player tracker based on the standard WC rules that have been in use forever. 

 

Again, I think it made more sense when people were retiring and recreating at the deadline. I don't think the rule was intended to care about when you retire, but rather when you re-create. For Molholt and Koponen, there shouldn't have been a difference just because I didn't officially retire. I think in the future if you replace that specific player before WC comes around, he doesn't play. If you don't, he plays. 

[Baozi 1,662]

#makeworldcupstrongagain