Rules Sweet F.A - Season 25 Rules

[NaturalDisaster]

Thanks thats all I asked for.

View attachment 470733

Please stop

 

[ShaunDuggan]

Damn you guys. I was already planning my delisting in the final round of the season to play for whoever is top of the ladder. I miss playing in finals

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Following a committee room discussion the moves made by the Swamprats and Roys during this week have been vetoed, the edits to squad submission reverted and changes deleted. The respective matches will be simmed with last week's teams.

For this to be reversed just before midnight on a friday night is insane. Im genuinely baffled 11th hour stuff like this is happening. This whole situation is a complete joke.

 

[Noobz0r]

Sanity prevails. One shudders to think of the outrage this would have caused if a BC affiliated side did this last season.

 

[Ant Bear]

Sanity prevails. One shudders to think of the outrage this would have caused if a BC affiliated side did this last season.

...or next week

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Sanity prevails. One shudders to think of the outrage this would have caused if a BC affiliated side did this last season.

Woe is me.
Are you just upset you can’t somehow pin this on the Dragons or Hatchy1992

 

[Noobz0r]

Woe is me.
Are you just upset you can’t somehow pin this on the Dragons or Hatchy1992

How is that at all relevant?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

How is that at all relevant?

As relevant as making a comparison about BC 3 times in 12 hours. How is that relevant is the question.
Highly doubt either captain involved or admin pushed for this to be reversed so who did? Should have been done far sooner, to change it near midnight on Friday is too late.

 

[Noobz0r]

As relevant as making a comparison about BC 3 times in 12 hours. How is that relevant is the question.

Mate, the last 2 seasons were an absolute drain, with a lot of serious, untrue, and unfair aspersions cast about a group I happen to be socially involved with. I can't be blamed for still holding a bit of a grudge when actual toying with the rules takes place and there is nowhere near the public outcry that we copped.

Highly doubt either captain involved or admin pushed for this to be reversed so who did? Should have been done far sooner, to change it near midnight on Friday is too late.

Judging by the admins post, practically every other captain in the league? And I'm assuming that it took time to organise discussion and vote in the committee, hence the late timing.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Mate, the last 2 seasons were an absolute drain, with a lot of serious, untrue, and unfair aspersions cast about a group I happen to be socially involved with. I can't be blamed for still holding a bit of a grudge when actual toying with the rules takes place and there is nowhere near the public outcry that we copped.

No rule was actually broken as far as I can tell.

Judging by the admins post, practically every other captain in the league? And I'm assuming that it took time to organise discussion and vote in the committee, hence the late timing.

How long though. It’s was done in the sign up thread where any respectable committee member (captain) should have that thread on watch. Change was enacted midday Wednesday. Filf made small exception to it on that day (no action taken) and it was only seriously raised yesterday afternoon.

So in a thread that all captains should be following it took the other 10 captains over two days to take serious exception to it, by which making the subsequent committee discussion and reversal (with no rule broken) occur after admin had divvied up sim duties and after some members had begun simming games.

So a non rule break has been overturned at the 11th hour essentially on the back of slack captains.

 

[Loonerty]

How long though. It’s was done in the sign up thread where any respectable committee member (captain) should have that thread on watch. Change was enacted midday Wednesday. Filf made small exception to it on that day (no action taken) and it was only seriously raised yesterday afternoon.

So in a thread that all captains should be following it took the other 10 captains over two days to take serious exception to it, by which making the subsequent committee discussion and reversal (with no rule broken) occur after admin had divvied up sim duties and after some members had begun simming games.

So a non rule break has been overturned at the 11th hour essentially on the back of slack captains.

My first assumption was that xenxen had decided she wanted to leave the Roys completely. That's why I initially was okay with it. Not necessarily thrilled because she is an active Roys poster but whatever. It was only when it was clear that this was a one week deal that I was concerned. That was yesterday afternoon. Seems that was the case for other captains as well.

 

[Ant Bear]

Can confirm that neither fitzroybowiedog or myself asked for the decision to be reversed, and that no committee vote was asked for or undertaken.

Unfortunately, the committee has descended into an unedifying slanging match between myself and the TWO Hawks representatives in there...

 

[Art Vandelay_]

My first assumption was that xenxen had decided she wanted to leave the Roys completely. That's why I initially was okay with it. Not necessarily thrilled because she is an active Roys poster but whatever. It was only when it was clear that this was a one week deal that I was concerned. That was yesterday afternoon. Seems that was the case for other captains as well.

Look I can see both sides of the argument. Yes it could set a precedent that allows someone to exploit rules for finals or what not, on the flip side no rule was broken and both captains and player agreed to it. So you could argue that this case should have stood and the rules amended to prevent such a thing.

The only thin AB is guilty of imo is misusing the jocular intentions of the favour punishment system. It’s designed to be fun and embarrass captains.

 

[Loonerty]

Look I can see both sides of the argument. Yes it could set a precedent that allows someone to exploit rules for finals or what not, on the flip side no rule was broken and both captains and player agreed to it. So you could argue that this case should have stood and the rules amended to prevent such a thing.

The only thin AB is guilty of imo is misusing the jocular intentions of the favour punishment system. It’s designed to be fun and embarrass captains.

I don't agree that a post-event rules amendment is the way to go. Then you've allowed this one club an opportunity to do it then said "that's it, nobody else can do it now".

I agree on your second point. I think the favour was too much however it came out that if FBD had disagreed to do it, it wouldn't have been approved. My concern then became the precedent it would have set.

 

[Loonerty]

Unfortunately, the committee has descended into an unedifying slanging match between myself and the TWO Hawks representatives in there...

Good deflection attempt however completely irrelevant to this thread.
You want that media piece yet?

 

[Noobz0r]

No rule was actually broken as far as I can tell.

Correct, and we didn't break any either. And whilst no rule was broken, Surely you can admit this went against the spirit in which the law was intended?

How long though. It’s was done in the sign up thread where any respectable committee member (captain) should have that thread on watch. Change was enacted midday Wednesday. Filf made small exception to it on that day (no action taken) and it was only seriously raised yesterday afternoon.

So in a thread that all captains should be following it took the other 10 captains over two days to take serious exception to it, by which making the subsequent committee discussion and reversal (with no rule broken) occur after admin had divvied up sim duties and after some members had begun simming games.

So a non rule break has been overturned at the 11th hour essentially on the back of slack captains.

I'm not arguing with you here, I'm not even sure how we reached this point

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I don't agree that a post-event rules amendment is the way to go. Then you've allowed this one club an opportunity to do it then said "that's it, nobody else can do it now".

I agree on your second point. I think the favour was too much however it came out that if FBD had disagreed to do it, it wouldn't have been approved. My concern then became the precedent it would have set.

So you’d prefer to not close a loophole but just make decisions without any basis to do so? Allowing one club to do something and closing that loophole is better imo than punishing clubs for not breaking rules. Talk about setting precedents, that sets a more dangerous precedent imo

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Unfortunately, the committee has descended into an unedifying slanging match between myself and the TWO Hawks representatives in there...

I offered to take my discussion with you into the public domain. You chose to ignore that request so you can roll your eyes all you like, you made the choice to have it out in the committee.

It's pointless still whinging about it, it's clear that practically every single person not involved thought it was a terrible move. Also the whole debate ended last night, the only discussion going on in there now is you jumping the gun on an error related to a big name poster that has retired because of the shitshow that took place yesterday.

 

[Loonerty]

So you’d prefer to not close a loophole but just make decisions without any basis to do so? Allowing one club to do something and closing that loophole is better imo than punishing clubs for not breaking rules. Talk about setting precedents, that sets a more dangerous precedent imo

How is anyone being punished here?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

How is anyone being punished here?

Okay wrong wording. How about ‘dictating’ what clubs can do without a rule breach?

Correct, and we didn't break any either. And whilst no rule was broken, Surely you can admit this went against the spirit in which the law was intended?

I'm not arguing with you here, I'm not even sure how we reached this point

oh I agreed yesterday it went against the spirit of the rule. I can’t see how that can be acted on though is the issue

 

[Noobz0r]

I'm not going, and never was going, to the Royals FWIW.

 

[Ant Bear]

a big name poster that has retired because of the shitshow that took place yesterday

pantskyle retired from the Royals because a Roys player switched to the Swamprats?

Spare me.

 

[Loonerty]

Okay wrong wording. How about ‘dictating’ what clubs can do without a rule breach?

Disrepute charges are a thing. Like the case of okey.
The xenxen move would just blur the lines. What's the point of committing to a club if you can just hop around as you please?

 

[Noobz0r]

Okay wrong wording. How about ‘dictating’ what clubs can do without a rule breach?

oh I agreed yesterday it went against the spirit of the rule. I can’t see how that can be acted on though is the issue

Disrepute, as has been brought up several times.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Disrepute charges are a thing. Like the case of okey.
The xenxen move would just blur the lines. What's the point of committing to a club if you can just hop around as you please?

imo ‘disrepute charges’ is probably the most wishy washy catch all safety net.