Rules S33 Rules & Tribunal Thread

[Headless]

Can you run them for me?

I'm happy to put my hand up if I can decide all the results, mate.

 

[TRUMAN#1]

So I need to know NaturalDisaster , is TheCoach16 clear to play for the Bombers this week or not?

 

[Barrybran]

Nah, throw them to Barrybran. Hopefully we'll get them by S35.

If it wasn't for me, they wouldn't have been on time the past two seasons.

 

[sante]

This place has too many rules

 

[The Filth Wizard]

This place has too many rules

Actually fielding a team might be one of the more required ones.

 

[sante]

Actually fielding a team might be one of the more required ones.

Not being able to sign certain players doesn’t help

 

[Mobbs]

I would like to raise a BTGID charge against this thread.

 

[TedDougChris]

I would like to raise a BTGID charge against this thread.

 

[Dingster]

I would like to raise a BTGID charge against this thread.

 

[HaroLad]

People always get excited when we’re in trouble

The last time a bunch of senior bombers missed a game through suspension we won the flag a few weeks later

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Not being able to sign certain players doesn’t help

I can’t say I have too much sympathy for the club that got half a list nuked for breaking site rules.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

I can’t say I have too much sympathy for the club that got half a list nuked for breaking site rules.

Hmmn. For the first time ever I have the barest scintilla of sympathy for the Royals. Your team copped a 2 point penalty for failing to lodge your team sheet on time. At present that is the difference between the Royals being 7th and outside the 8.

The current ladder afaik has the Bombers on top and without a penalty. Last round they fielded an ineligible team v East Side. Somewhere NaturalDisaster flagged a 2 point penalty. That does not seem to have been applied. Why?

In the current round they have selected three ineligible players (one suspended player and two who have never posted in the Sweet FA according to serial_thrilla ). Arguably they should forfeit but they certainly be penalised 4 points (2nd offence). Looks like ND cannot be bothered.

If the 'out to lunch' Admin fails to exercise their responsibilities on the Bombers, I reckon the Royals have a case for the restitution of the two points they lost because Banger's teddy bear alarm clock let him down.

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Hmmn. For the first time ever I have the barest scintilla of sympathy for the Royals. Your team copped a 2 point penalty for failing to lodge your team sheet on time. At present that is the difference between the Royals being 7th and outside the 8.

The current ladder afaik has the Bombers on top and without a penalty. Last round they fielded an ineligible team v East Side. Somewhere NaturalDisaster flagged a 2 point penalty. That does not seem to have been applied. Why?

In the current round they have selected three ineligible players (one suspended player and two who have never posted in the Sweet FA according to serial_thrilla ). Arguably they should forfeit but they certainly be penalised 4 points (2nd offence). Looks like ND cannot be bothered.

If the 'out to lunch' Admin fails to exercise their responsibilities on the Bombers, I reckon the Royals have a case for the restitution of the two points they lost because Banger's teddy bear alarm clock let him down.

Look, I don't think any of the Royals are going to kick up much of a stink in that regard, we're probably a bit more saddened we were in the minor premiership race at that time and ever since we've gone on a weird run of close losses. If the two points are the difference between us and finals it will just bring to a close what will one day be revealed as a bit of a season from hell for the team. End of the day, it was a **** up, they happen but we didn't have the sim love either.

I'm not anti-Bombers in any way either on this, their leadership knows I've always been happy to help when they've tried to ensure team sheets are correct etc and I know it would be hard and very stressful to not only have to pick up the pieces of so many players missing weeks but also of (love them or hate them) stalwart players being removed from the game altogether. The basic rules still need to be applied though. No doubt ND is waiting for the wash cycle to end to see the full effect because there's also suspensions to come for the captain/s. If they'd been applied last week then that's one more head they need to cover.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Look, I don't think any of the Royals are going to kick up much of a stink in that regard, we're probably a bit more saddened we were in the minor premiership race at that time and ever since we've gone on a weird run of close losses. If the two points are the difference between us and finals it will just bring to a close what will one day be revealed as a bit of a season from hell for the team. End of the day, it was a **** up, they happen but we didn't have the sim love either.

I'm not anti-Bombers in any way either on this, their leadership knows I've always been happy to help when they've tried to ensure team sheets are correct etc and I know it would be hard and very stressful to not only have to pick up the pieces of so many players missing weeks but also of (love them or hate them) stalwart players being removed from the game altogether. The basic rules still need to be applied though. No doubt ND is waiting for the wash cycle to end to see the full effect because there's also suspensions to come for the captain/s. If they'd been applied last week then that's one more head they need to cover.

Do not disagree. Hopefully there is a tidy up that makes sense and is fair.

 

[Ljp86]

Hmmn. For the first time ever I have the barest scintilla of sympathy for the Royals. Your team copped a 2 point penalty for failing to lodge your team sheet on time. At present that is the difference between the Royals being 7th and outside the 8.

The current ladder afaik has the Bombers on top and without a penalty. Last round they fielded an ineligible team v East Side. Somewhere NaturalDisaster flagged a 2 point penalty. That does not seem to have been applied. Why?

In the current round they have selected three ineligible players (one suspended player and two who have never posted in the Sweet FA according to serial_thrilla ). Arguably they should forfeit but they certainly be penalised 4 points (2nd offence). Looks like ND cannot be bothered.

If the 'out to lunch' Admin fails to exercise their responsibilities on the Bombers, I reckon the Royals have a case for the restitution of the two points they lost because Banger's teddy bear alarm clock let him down.

Penalties are applied at the posting of the ladder in the following round so the penalty from Round 14 will be applied when the ladder is posted for the ladder after Round 15. This was as a result of the administrator deciding on the penalty after the completion of Round 14. Such penalties can be applied to the previous round when appropriate or at the request of the SFA administrator.

As for what has happened recently, it is unacceptable that any side is allowed to field a team with ineligible players and are able to claim premiership points from that game. The match between the Bombers and Phoenix should have been declared a forfeit with the Phoenix to be awarded the game with a score line of 100-0 or whatever is deemed appropriate. The fact that any club can win a game with ineligible players and still claim a net haul of two premiership points is unacceptable in my opinion and is grossly unfair on the club that has abided by the guidelines of the competition and general rules which govern this site. The same should apply for the current Round 15 fixture which I believe has included another ineligible player for selection.

Frankly, the last two weeks for the SFA have been a complete shitshow and highlights the need for a thorough review of the rules for Season 34. I'm all for the competition to have less reliance on rules but basic stuff such as submitting an eligible team for selection is a very simple requirement for the SFA and zero tolerance should be shown.

 

[Cadsky]

Penalties are applied at the posting of the ladder in the following round so the penalty from Round 14 will be applied when the ladder is posted for the ladder after Round 15. This was as a result of the administrator deciding on the penalty after the completion of Round 14. Such penalties can be applied to the previous round when appropriate or at the request of the SFA administrator.

As for what has happened recently, it is unacceptable that any side is allowed to field a team with ineligible players and are able to claim premiership points from that game. The match between the Bombers and Phoenix should have been declared a forfeit with the Phoenix to be awarded the game with a score line of 100-0 or whatever is deemed appropriate. The fact that any club can win a game with ineligible players and still claim a net haul of two premiership points is unacceptable in my opinion and is grossly unfair on the club that has abided by the guidelines of the competition and general rules which govern this site. The same should apply for the current Round 15 fixture which I believe has included another ineligible player for selection.

Frankly, the last two weeks for the SFA have been a complete shitshow and highlights the need for a thorough review of the rules for Season 34. I'm all for the competition to have less reliance on rules but basic stuff such as submitting an eligible team for selection is a very simple requirement for the SFA and zero tolerance should be shown.

It's not so much the rules that need a review. But the administrator needs to follow the rules. Unfortunately the current admin has shown himself to give in to pressure and rule by sympathy rather than the governing rules of the board.

 

[Hate]

Every time I see Ljp get involved in league matters

https://c.tenor.com/rsM6ZF73rjQAAAAS/pr0n-masturbation.gif

 

[Ljp86]

It's not so much the rules that need a review. But the administrator needs to follow the rules. Unfortunately the current admin has shown himself to give in to pressure and rule by sympathy rather than the governing rules of the board.

I agree, Moz. There has been a couple of incidents this season where a side has made a clear breach of the rules for which a penalty has or should have been applied only for the decision to be reversed even though the guidelines say otherwise. It doesn't sit right with me where the competition has a set of guidelines in place only for the clubs who agree to those guidelines before the commencement of the season to then vote against their own rules they agreed to in the first place. The rules need to be enforced as they are written for that season, if there are issues that can then be addressed at the end of the season. In my opinion, this only further highlights the potential need for an independent appeals/disputes/tribunal sub-committee.

I also feel the current set of guidelines has gaps in it, such as the situation we've had in the past couple of weeks. No club should be able to win a game after fielding an ineligible side and should be punished as such with a forfeit. This is something that needs to be addressed at the end of the season.

 

[The Filth Wizard]

I agree, Moz. There has been a couple of incidents this season where a side has made a clear breach of the rules for which a penalty has or should have been applied only for the decision to be reversed even though the guidelines say otherwise. It doesn't sit right with me where the competition has a set of guidelines in place only for the clubs who agree to those guidelines before the commencement of the season to then vote against their own rules they agreed to in the first place. The rules need to be enforced as they are written for that season, if there are issues that can then be addressed at the end of the season. In my opinion, this only further highlights the potential need for an independent appeals/disputes/tribunal sub-committee.

I also feel the current set of guidelines has gaps in it, such as the situation we've had in the past couple of weeks. No club should be able to win a game after fielding an ineligible side and should be punished as such with a forfeit. This is something that needs to be addressed at the end of the season.

It should probably be harsher if you get to the stage where you can't field a side. Theoretically if you start the season this way, and if that stayed the same to first submission of a team sheet, the penalties add up to 8 penalty points. It should be at least that if you can't field a side in season, I'd even say closer to 12. I don't agree necessarily with a free win for the team "lucky" enough to play that side that week but certainly the Bombers this week should not have access to any premiership points for something this severe.

 

[NinjaSwan]

It’s actually absurd that we penalise clubs and players for things like typos in team sheets yet the Bombers have named a suspended player in their team this week and have received absolutely no punishment.

 

[TRUMAN#1]

All this just proves that having FULL lists of very active players doesn't always help a team out.

They all went into bat for each other, and paid the price.

Not sure they would have had so many suspended if they only had 10 - 12 Ultra active posters. They wouldn't be in this position I reckon.



A team list that can fill all the Prime Positions with really active players, and then the rest with those less able to post regularly is the Sweet spot.

IMO another reason we are ready for even more expansion, if the right bid comes along.

 

[damicky]

All this just proves that having FULL lists of very active players doesn't always help a team out.

They all went into bat for each other, and paid the price.

Not sure they would have had so many suspended if they only had 10 - 12 Ultra active posters. They wouldn't be in this position I reckon.



A team list that can fill all the Prime Positions with really active players, and then the rest with those less able to post regularly is the Sweet spot.

IMO another reason we are ready for even more expansion, if the right bid comes along.

 

[Headless]

All this just proves that having FULL lists of very active players doesn't always help a team out.

They all went into bat for each other, and paid the price.

Not sure they would have had so many suspended if they only had 10 - 12 Ultra active posters. They wouldn't be in this position I reckon.



A team list that can fill all the Prime Positions with really active players, and then the rest with those less able to post regularly is the Sweet spot.

IMO another reason we are ready for even more expansion, if the right bid comes along.

You think we should add another team because lots of Bombers got banned, and you think that suggests having fewer active players is better?

 

[Hate]

 

[The Filth Wizard]

All this just proves that having FULL lists of very active players doesn't always help a team out.

They all went into bat for each other, and paid the price.

Not sure they would have had so many suspended if they only had 10 - 12 Ultra active posters. They wouldn't be in this position I reckon.



A team list that can fill all the Prime Positions with really active players, and then the rest with those less able to post regularly is the Sweet spot.

IMO another reason we are ready for even more expansion, if the right bid comes along.

I'm pro-expansion now but I can't make the correlation between a once-in-forever incident like a bunch of one team breaking rules together giving themselves not enough players to make a team, and making a new team.