Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Stats & History S32 Rules & Tribunal Thread

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

NaturalDisaster said:
The Coney Island Warriors have been charged with violation of Section 4B after failing to name a delisted player in the 'outs' section of their squad submission.

On Thursday of last week, The Warriors delisted Spanna_ to make room for a rookie signing. Although they correctly posted the change and removed him from the squad, they neglected to add him to the list of outs just below the squad list.
This has been graded as a low impact violation and thus Warriors captain TheInjuryFactory will serve a suspended one game ban, which will be active if another rule is violated. This suspended sentence will remain in player for the remainder of S32.

As per usual, the Warriors have a right to appeal this sentence and have until 11.59on 04/08 to do so.
Click to expand...

NaturalDisaster said:
Mount Buller Demons rookie Pickitt has been charged with violation of Rule 4B after attempting to sign up to the SFA with an Alias Account.



The matter was discussed in committee and it was decided that:
1. The alias technically is not a listed player and the rule does not specifically state that attempted sign ups are violations.
2. He is just a rookie who was likely not aware of the rule.

Therefore, it has been decided that Pickett will not face suspension for his actions, however, he will be slapped with a suspended sentence which, if he is caught attempting to sign up with an alias again, he will be given an instant 8 week suspension from the SFA.

Rule 4B's section on alt accounts will also be tightened to what I will refer to as the "Pickitt Rule". From now on, listed posters may not use alt accounts and post in the sign up thread, even as a joke. This is to eliminate any "grey area" and confusion when such a thing occurs.
Click to expand...

NaturalDisaster why does MBD not get offered a right to appeal like the Warriors ?
 
Pickitt said:
What is ND gonna do to me dad....
Click to expand...
Nothing mate, although showing that a few teams made the wrong decision.
Edit - And I'm not referring to the decision, which I have already stated was wrong.
 
Ned_Flanders said:
It's a bullshit interpretation you have cobbled together to allow a punishment.

Under this interpretation the joke NOT TJASTA alt should see TJ get a suspended sentence. There is no qualifier, it says "no Alts allowed". But you know this is crap because the qualifier is the first sentence.

The rule worked because the club identified it and didn't recruit him. It wasn't listed. The intent is to stop lists being stacked with Alts, and guess what, no list was stacked with an alt.

This interpretation is a sign you guys are back on the vibe bandwagon again, and it's not a good thing. If the rule is a bad one, change it. Don't become some arbitrary body that does whatever the fu** it wants.

This should never have gotten this far, everyone who voted for it should be embarrassed
Click to expand...
We have to fight for our freedom ned
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Pickitt said:
We have to fight for our freedom ned
Click to expand...

Dude I don't even like your mob, and the idea of a Buller bunny copping eight weeks actually makes me smile.

BUT no rule was broken, so sadly no sanction (suspended or not) should have been applied
 
Pickitt said:
I'm just reading over this all, what have I caused
Click to expand...
Nothing really. You have, however, pointed out inadequacies in the administration and the committee.
Again, the people would like to know who came to this poor decision.

We already know that the Wonders and Warriors made some poor decisions about putting the admin in. Unfortunately people vote for how it could suit them, nothing about how it would affect the league as a whole.
 
DemonJim said:
Nothing really. You have, however, pointed out inadequacies in the administration and the committee.
Again, the people would like to know who came to this poor decision.

We already know that the Wonders and Warriors made some poor decisions about putting the admin in. Unfortunately people vote for how it could suit them, nothing about how it would affect the league as a whole.
Click to expand...
So I'm getting a slap on the wrist basically?
 
Pickitt said:
So I'm getting a slap on the wrist basically?
Click to expand...
For almost breaking the rules. Yes.

Whereas you should only be receiving a warning for almost breaking the rules.
 
DemonJim said:
For almost breaking the rules. Yes.

Whereas you should only be receiving a warning for almost breaking the rules.
Click to expand...

Not even that, a general comment as to what the rule is would have sufficed.
 
pantskyle said:
Not even that, a general comment as to what the rule is would have sufficed.
Click to expand...
You mean what their interpretation of the rule is.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

By the way, Ned_Flanders and DemonJim, this is my opinion on the ruling:

GremioPower said:
I know. I have suggested the Rats to abstain. It seemed an odd accusation. It still does.

Either Pickitt is being punished for a rule that SHOULD exist or aliases are not allowed. That’s the issue.

Ultimately, Pickitt wasn’t suspended. The whole point of the decision is to merely justify the accusation.
Click to expand...

I can be either right or wrong, I don’t know; but now you can comment on what I actually think on the matter.
 
Pickitt said:
What would we even appeal?
Click to expand...
You have been found guilty. An appeal would give you a chance for getting an acquittal.

You haven’t been suspended, but another punishment would trigger an 8-match suspension.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom