Season 14 Review

[Ljp86]

Absolutely not. Team submissions and the penalty is part of the game. Enter on time or be penalized. I don't believe that sides got away with it last year.

They did although some got away with it more than others, which is a little unfair on those teams who do the right thing. There's little point having submission rules if teams are able to appeal and then win their appeal on a rule which was introduced halfway through the season.

 

[Papa Juggs]

The fact that penalties are so petty to begin with created boncer's rule.

C'mon it's time to own up to who supports these joke rules?

I think we're active enough that we don't need to screw the ladder with punishment systems.

 

[ClarkeM]

21 games.
Including a 3 or 4 match day round robin mid-season.
Thoughts?? I don't care.

 

[boncer34]

Boncer's law is garbage and should be scrapped. The rule sets a precedent that teams can overturn any penalty they receive for team submission and other such rules that have been breached. The other rules are worth nothing if teams can overcome breaches on an introduced technicality.

Clubs should only be let off penalties in special circumstances, not because they forgot to submit a team or they submitted it incorrectly by accident. To combat this, match threads should be posted as early as possible to give teams more time to submit their line-ups.

Interesting you abuse the law allowing penalties over turned then in the next paragraph admit they should be over turned in special circumstances.

I admitted the law should be applied tighter then it was. Thus it stays as under the rules there is nothing other then that rule that allows penalties to be overturned.

 

[Easty]

The fact that penalties are so petty to begin with created boncer's rule.

C'mon it's time to own up to who supports these joke rules?

I think we're active enough that we don't need to screw the ladder with punishment systems.

I do, and it's been proven time and time again that we need them.

Once we go a season without a penalty then we can consider scrapping them.

 

[Ljp86]

Interesting you abuse the law allowing penalties over turned then in the next paragraph admit they should be over turned in special circumstances.

Special cirumstances in my description constitutes family emergency type stuff or a situation that occurs where it would have been impossible to get on in a period of time to post a side (unforseeable power outage/internet goes down etc). Or where the deadline given to post a team is unreasonable.

I admitted the law should be applied tighter then it was. Thus it stays as under the rules there is nothing other then that rule that allows penalties to be overturned.

You could easily write an "appeals" rule stating how an appeal must be made and the timeframe it must be lodged in. Not too hard at all.

I do, and it's been proven time and time again that we need them.

Once we go a season without a penalty then we can consider scrapping them.

Once you scrap them teams will take advantage of that. A scenario could arise where a team fails to submit their side by the day of the match which would then cause delays.

 

[Mr Zero]

The fact that penalties are so petty to begin with created boncer's rule.

C'mon it's time to own up to who supports these joke rules?

I think we're active enough that we don't need to screw the ladder with punishment systems.

No matter how active we are, people are always going to do things that make life hard for the simmer, and taking away penalty points just screws it up for the simmer even more because people will worry less about it, if they get to Friday night then they'll think eh, won't post a side, nothingll happen. And it'd keep happening.

Penalty points are the only way of keeping order in this league.

 

[Rhodesy_Blues]

Could it make it easier for teams to just straight up be allocated something like a 4 goal deduction from their score?

That's how it's done in finals, right?

 

[Itsmyshow]

The fact that penalties are so petty to begin with created boncer's rule.

C'mon it's time to own up to who supports these joke rules?

I think we're active enough that we don't need to screw the ladder with punishment systems.

Are you really that stupid? Everyone supports them bar you.. Clearly. The only rule being debated is Boncers law. There are 3 to 4 days to submit a side in a match thread. There are absolutely no circumstances where not having them in on time should apply.

 

[boncer34]

Special cirumstances in my description constitutes family emergency type stuff or a situation that occurs where it would have been impossible to get on in a period of time to post a side (unforseeable power outage/internet goes down etc). Or where the deadline given to post a team is unreasonable.



You could easily write an "appeals" rule stating how an appeal must be made and the timeframe it must be lodged in. Not too hard at all.



Once you scrap them teams will take advantage of that. A scenario could arise where a team fails to submit their side by the day of the match which would then cause delays.

Um.... Boncers law is an appeals rule? Its already there. Why remove it to then add another one?

 

[Papa Juggs]

I do, and it's been proven time and time again that we need them.

Once we go a season without a penalty then we can consider scrapping them.

It has been proven?

If anything it was more the fact that Mobbs was inactive and the deadline was unknown to most that caused the problems we had last season. That shortened deadline combined with the lack of announcement/ sticky rules thread created a problem where there shouldn't have been one.

More open leadership reviews earlier in the loop would prevent the problems we had. We could've sorted out which Roys posters were most active and had them responsible for it.

Once you scrap them teams will take advantage of that. A scenario could arise where a team fails to submit their side by the day of the match which would then cause delays.

They would? If and when that occurs those responsible for the discretion will get a public roasting anyway. Working with leadership groups to ensure teams are posted by the stated deadlines. Why should we have a rule that any player from a team can post the team if nobody does it? There should be enough posters to pick up the slack.

I would rather strip licenses off at the end of the season if that sort of "taking advantage" happens.

No matter how active we are, people are always going to do things that make life hard for the simmer, and taking away penalty points just screws it up for the simmer even more because people will worry less about it, if they get to Friday night then they'll think eh, won't post a side, nothingll happen. And it'd keep happening.

Penalty points are the only way of keeping order in this league.

Protect the simmer? Yes by allowing the simmer to just play an unchanged side. Isn't that less work?

Are you really that stupid? Everyone supports them bar you.. Clearly. The only rule being debated is Boncers law. There are 3 to 4 days to submit a side in a match thread. There are absolutely no circumstances where not having them in on time should apply.

Everybody? lol you got the stats from a public poll?

boncer's rule is being debated here you fool. I'm saying that the appeals wouldn't be needed if we didn't have this petty system of penalties when we could be doing things like having real discussions about leadership and putting the right people in to name the teams in week and allowing the simmer to just give them an unchanged line up.

At the end of the season those teams that posted late / not at all will be reviewed by all and licenses may be rescinded.

I know I can organise at least 3 players to post the team if I'm going to be absent. I don't see a problem.

Like I've already said last season we just had communication difficulties in communicating that the deadline had been moved forward to 9pm (Vic time, when I should remind you all we're not all living in Victoria).

So that's it. Why the league is now active, sensible and mature enough to deal with this stuff without needing to hand out penalties.

 

[StFly]

Are you really that stupid? Everyone supports them bar you.. Clearly. The only rule being debated is Boncers law. There are 3 to 4 days to submit a side in a match thread. There are absolutely no circumstances where not having them in on time should apply.

Which is sad TBF, out of all the rules that are in the SFA, the question is against an appeal of a penalty and not the reliance upon inferred expectation to provide results to end arguments.

Have you actually read 2.1c lately?

2.1(c) Team selection/submission performed by a player: A club player shall be permitted to select and submit a side on behalf of his or her captain if the captain or vice-captain are not present or will be unavailable to perform their selection duties. However, if the captain or vice-captain submits a side after the player but before the deadline than the captain or vice-captain’s team shall be used as the official team for the match.

Captain: Unavailable: "Everyone, make a team like this [details] just in case"
vice captain: "Everyone, make a team like this [details] just in case"
Everyone: "We're all making teams let's make them different for the lols"

Explain to me, using the rules as they stand without expectation;

If multiple players create a team, which one is given precedence by the simmer?

The first?
The last?
The active?
The one with pretty formatting that stands out?
The one with less work attached since there was no change?
The one with more changes since it piques interest?

 

[Papa Juggs]

1. Captain
2. Vice Captain
3. First posted by another player on the team

If the deadline is hit your team is unchanged and your leadership group has a black mark against it which may or may not result in action by the administrator.

If I was in charge I'd care more about keeping the ladder clean than punishment for not submitting a team. Is it more work to worry about the punishment or to have a civil discussion with the leadership group at fault and work through any issues they're having?

I'm sure once posters know their captain isn't posting they'll be keen to post heaps of wacky changes. I'm sure if I went inactive Rhodesy would name himself at FF just for the lols.

 

[Eth]

I'm sure once posters know their captain isn't posting they'll be keen to post heaps of wacky changes. I'm sure if I went inactive Rhodesy would name himself at FF just for the lols.

Hey, I'm still here.

 

[Papa Juggs]

Yes exactly. Your vice captain would have to be an inactive flog too.

I hate seeing ladder positions decided on penalties.

I'll push to get rid of them but it doesn't seem like I've got much support.

 

[Easty]

1. Captain
2. Vice Captain(s)

If noone on the leadership group can save the captains arse if he ever forgets to post it, the vice captains should be changed.

 

[Easty]

Um.... Boncers law is an appeals rule? Its already there. Why remove it to then add another one?

Because it has a s**t name.

 

[Eth]

Yes exactly. Your vice captain would have to be an inactive flog too.

I hate seeing ladder positions decided on penalties.

I'll push to get rid of them but it doesn't seem like I've got much support.

Probably because no team has a completely inactive leadership group.

It only takes ten seconds to copy and paste last week's team and go in unchanged, though, so barring the unfortunate (the EBIAC debacle springs to mind) I think the penalty is deserved.

 

[Easty]

the EBIAC debacle springs to mind

Penalty was deserved there too I feel. Vice captains were aware that they should post a side because they stated that in the match thread the night before it was due.

The review might see that differently but I don't.

 

[Mr Zero]

Yes exactly. Your vice captain would have to be an inactive flog too.

I hate seeing ladder positions decided on penalties.

I'll push to get rid of them but it doesn't seem like I've got much support.

You did disprove me theory Juggs, but people still need to be punished, I mean, how hard is it to copy and paste?

The other way is goal penalties but that would ruin games.

 

[Ljp86]

Um.... Boncers law is an appeals rule? Its already there. Why remove it to then add another one?

Makes it more official, boncer's law was a rule introduced part way through a season to solve a few problems. This way it's more clear cut.

They would? If and when that occurs those responsible for the discretion will get a public roasting anyway. Working with leadership groups to ensure teams are posted by the stated deadlines. Why should we have a rule that any player from a team can post the team if nobody does it? There should be enough posters to pick up the slack.

I would rather strip licenses off at the end of the season if that sort of "taking advantage" happens.

Your solution to everything is to strip a club's license.

 

[Papa Juggs]

That was more of a last resort if you read everything I wrote.

I'm more about sitting down and having a chat than jumping straight to the beating with a stick.

 

[Mobbs]

I'm just here 'cause I thought someone said "strip club".

 

[The Half Back]

I'm just here 'cause I thought someone said "strip club".

Turn your hearing aid up Mobbs !

 

[Papa Juggs]

If this league is not mature enough to do the right thing without penalites are we really growing?

The requirement of punishment denotes that players are looking to do the wrong/lazy thing if given a chance to do so.

If any of the 8 teams has a leadership group so inactive they can't organise it they should fold before the next season even starts.