Rules S33 Rules & Tribunal Thread

[Mobbs]

If it makes you feel any better the committee has effectively tripped arse over head into the right outcome helped along the way by the admin

That's still a process!

 

[Tonga Bob]

I keep mine off centred because it triggers Tonga Bob

I WILL F*CKEN CUT YOU.

 

[Tonga Bob]

Verdict of RE-Vote

All committee members have voted to either dismiss or uphold the High Impact Charge on the Bombers. If upheld, the HI charge would remain, if dismissed, the charge would be downgraded to a Medium Impact.

The Bombers challenge has been successful with 6 committee members voting to dismiss the High Impact charge. Thus, their charge for incorrect Squad Submission will be downgraded to Medium Impact. Captains BLUEALLTHRU and Metalcrusher will still miss a week, but the Bombers will no longer receive a -2 point penalty.

This just in: Cancel Culture has been cancelled.

Here's Tom with the weather...

 

[Wosh]

I would have liked to see a third option rather than just ’uphold’ or dismiss’

‘Dismiss with all penalties suspended and the rule to be immediately reviewed for amendment to a lower impact’

 

[Tonga Bob]

I would have liked to see a third option rather than just ’uphold’ or dismiss’

‘Dismiss with all penalties suspended and the rule to be immediately reviewed for amendment to a lower impact’

Please don't make us vote again.

 

[Metalcrusher]

I would have liked to see a third option rather than just ’uphold’ or dismiss’

‘Dismiss with all penalties suspended and the rule to be immediately reviewed for amendment to a lower impact’

Definitely, that rule needs to be looked at WOSH.

 

[Headless]

Definitely, that rule needs to be looked at WOSH.

Are you shouting, mate?

 

[Metalcrusher]

Are you shouting, mate?

WHAT I CANT HEAR YOU FROM UP HERE ON MY HIGH HORSE MATE!

 

[Tonga Bob]

Are you shouting, mate?

Maybe he can channel some of that enthusiasm into centering his dumb avatar for jerks.

 

[Barrybran]

I would have liked to see a third option rather than just ’uphold’ or dismiss’

‘Dismiss with all penalties suspended and the rule to be immediately reviewed for amendment to a lower impact’

Definitely, that rule needs to be looked at WOSH.

You don't give people more options. Stick to the process and apply it properly - has the rule been applied properly, yes or no? If yes, is the penalty fair, yes or no? Keep it simple. Don't combine into one action.

 

[Barrybran]

And before anyone gets on their high horse, as I said above, the right outcome was achieved but the process was misapplied.

 

[Tonga Bob]

And before anyone gets on their high horse, as I said above, the right outcome was achieved but the process was misapplied.

Too late for Shouty McShoutface up there.

 

[Barrybran]

Too late for Shouty McShoutface up there.

Yeah my timing there was impeccable

 

[Wosh]

Please don't make us vote again.

As I said this thread wasn’t even bothered to be stickied so at least there was a bit of discussion and interest in it out in the open for everyone, the whole point of these things. It’s not about agreeing with eachother, it’s the vibe.
Mobbs and I enjoyed terrific robust discussion about it lol.

 

[Wosh]

And before anyone gets on their high horse, as I said above, the right outcome was achieved but the process was misapplied.

No high horse here Baz, I purely don’t think a week off is warranted and would have liked to see it suspended and and reviewed, as an option

 

[NaturalDisaster]

No high horse here Baz, I purely don’t think a week off is warranted and would have liked to see it suspended and and reviewed, as an option

It will be reviewed in future, definitely before the next off season.

 

[Wosh]

It will be reviewed in future, definitely before the next off season.

Yes.

 

[Mobbs]

As I said this thread wasn’t even bothered to be stickied so at least there was a bit of discussion and interest in it out in the open for everyone, the whole point of these things. It’s not about agreeing with eachother, it’s the vibe.
Mobbs and I enjoyed terrific robust discussion about it lol.

We have had highs and lows between high-fiving each other and chucking rocks at each other over this and it spilled into other league management topics as well!

But Wosh made me blush by saying I said something good (this is rare lol) so I'm gonna repeat it here. No bias or jokes intended with this, its pretty much how I think we got into a situation where this mess happened :

I can tell you why its high impact. Its because its a rule written for incorrect squad submission. If a squad was submitted with all the wrong names or with names bleeding together, or half the listed players missing, then its absolutely shithouse and worthy of high impact. But the rules was written to cover all possibilities of this, thereby accidentally included such nominal things as just leaving off the Outs, which of course is no big deal.

The only way to correctly have avoided this was to have that rule be approximately a dozen rules : 1 for this kind of squad list fu**up, 1 for that kind of squad list fu**up, etc. (which is dumb) or much better : have the rule say that if the squad list is f’ed up, it goes to an admin review of how bad the fu**up is (potential damage) and the severity is applied by the admin, then discussed by the committee.

Unfortunately that would require a committee, and not one guy behind a counter and plastic screen attending to club reps queueing up among velvet ropes outside his booth with submissions to give him/her.

I think that;s pretty much the sum of it. And maybe it offers up some ideas for a rewrite? The last sentence was kind of changing subject a bit but the rest is all relevant imo. Any thoughts?

 

[Toump Ass]

Hi, I would like to exercise my rights under section 6E and dispute the penalty to the Bombers on the basis that it is too soft.
It makes a mockery of the written law, and invites anarchy, chaos and injustice into this otherwise well-run league.

If that doesn't work I will like to call admin/committee's attention to Section 7 of the so-called rules, specifically this bit which I am copying and pasting and highlighting in italics below:

"If a player's or teams actions are having a profoundly negative effect on the experience and functioning of the league, or against the spirit of the Sweet F.A and attempting to and/or succeeding in undermining the integrity of the competition, then the committee and the admin will convene in the tribunal to decide on a suitable punishment".

Successfully overturning a penalty on the basis that you don't like the agreed upon rules, and further to this, having a re-count of a committee vote because someone apparently changed their mind is absolutely detrimental to the integrity of the competition. What are the point of rules if they do not need to be enforced? Where in the rules does it say you can have multiple votes? It doesn't.

I eagerly await feedback on one or both of my objections and in the meantime, I'll find more things to object about.

Thanks.

 

[Wosh]

We have had highs and lows between high-fiving each other and chucking rocks at each other over this and it spilled into other league management topics as well!

But Wosh made me blush by saying I said something good (this is rare lol) so I'm gonna repeat it here. No bias or jokes intended with this, its pretty much how I think we got into a situation where this mess happened :



I think that;s pretty much the sum of it. And maybe it offers up some ideas for a rewrite? The last sentence was kind of changing subject a bit but the rest is all relevant imo. Any thoughts?

Our LG pm is pretty awesome

 

[Mobbs]

Our LG pm is pretty awesome

And these people think they have drama.

 

[ClarkeM]

It will be reviewed in future, definitely before the next off season.

Will it?

 

[Tonga Bob]

As I said this thread wasn’t even bothered to be stickied so at least there was a bit of discussion and interest in it out in the open for everyone, the whole point of these things. It’s not about agreeing with eachother, it’s the vibe.
Mobbs and I enjoyed terrific robust discussion about it lol.

Absolutely. Discussion on the rules with a view to reviewing them is a healthy thing. You don't want rules just because "they've always been that way". But there's a difference between reviewing the rules with a view to improving them and applying the rules as they currently stand.

I've said the word 'rules' too many times for one morning, imma get another coffee.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Hi, I would like to exercise my rights under section 6E and dispute the penalty to the Bombers on the basis that it is too soft.
It makes a mockery of the written law, and invites anarchy, chaos and injustice into this otherwise well-run league.

If that doesn't work I will like to call admin/committee's attention to Section 7 of the so-called rules, specifically this bit which I am copying and pasting and highlighting in italics below:

"If a player's or teams actions are having a profoundly negative effect on the experience and functioning of the league, or against the spirit of the Sweet F.A and attempting to and/or succeeding in undermining the integrity of the competition, then the committee and the admin will convene in the tribunal to decide on a suitable punishment".

Successfully overturning a penalty on the basis that you don't like the agreed upon rules, and further to this, having a re-count of a committee vote because someone apparently changed their mind is absolutely detrimental to the integrity of the competition. What are the point of rules if they do not need to be enforced? Where in the rules does it say you can have multiple votes? It doesn't.

I eagerly await feedback on one or both of my objections and in the meantime, I'll find more things to object about.

Thanks.

we are back to rules by the vibe - fun days ahead!

 

[NaturalDisaster]

Will it?

If you stop pestering me, yes