So as far as I understand it, we essentially now have a time limit to sign up our remaining signatures to avoid them being shit. Not much of a reward for sticking by your own, really. It's a bit of a kick in the teeth to know that what we should have done was replace them back when we had the chance.
Good move IMO. Teams who already have 25 signings can breathe a bit, if more than 2 injuries are unlikely in the same week for the same club.
When did you have the chance though? Teams had to leave space for all their old players with 1000+ posts in their 25 who signed last season or get them another club AFAIK.
I'm not going to start the season if I still think there are players who'll sign but haven't yet. Some clubs were just never going to get 25 though, and that was obvious (to me anyway) from the moment I said they had to.
Weldone, you've definitely been here long enough to start researching things for yourself. There's no reason you need to ask questions like that anymore.
Thought it won't take more than 5 seconds to post if someone has the number handy. And the question wasn't specifically directed at you, so no need to get annoyed.
Going on this post: http://www.cricsim.com/showpost.php?p=1880891&postcount=1 SWXI: 20 Cyclones: 22 Crusaders: 23 Pumas: 21 Ravens: 20 Allstars: 20 Vipers: 20 Stingrays: 21 Gamblers: 20
Thanks. I agree that some clubs could do it, but not all. To increase that number from 189 to 225 isn't as easy as it looks in calculation, since all the remaining people are disinterested inactives that we're talking about (assuming most of the new registrations have been signed). In fact, none of the clubs reached 25, which according to you would suggest that none of the HoRs are active
Ah yeah, you're right - I saw Hauritz on the list above saying he was going from the Rays to the Pumas, so I assumed he was there. Cheers Chewie