Rules S33 Rules & Tribunal Thread

[manangatang]

What would you like to cure the boredom?

Just having you here seems to have done the trick.

 

[Headless]

sante saves the league yet again!

 

[manangatang]

sante saves the league yet again!

 

[manangatang]

Yep - league saved.

 

[Mobbs]

Shouldn’t this thread be one of the more important ones to be stickied for easy reference and discussion? Tribunals and decisions affect the League and should be open to everyone.

Why would ins and outs be high impact on anyone? They helped me do the badges and I think they are used by the stats people but thats all they are needed for. The simmers just reset and put the new squads in every season yeah?

I dont actually remember the ins and outs being a thing before, except changes of course during the season…adding and delisting, if you fu** those up its high.

Two good points.

I'm glad this thread is stickied again. Actually even the squad list thread was unstickied earlier ... just a bit of common sense here folks.

And this rule was based on not giving the simmers difficulties, and the non-listing of Outs doesn't fuss them. Not listing someone coming in would be a different story. Serve the intent with which the rule was penned, and allow a lighter penalty for what it is, nothing more than some sloppy documentation with zero impact on the comp.

 

[Kennedy Parker]

If the logic of these penalties is to prevent trouble being caused for simmers then we should not penalise team sheet CHANGES at all.

The simmers are on record saying they don't read the changes under team sheets and don't need them to sim a game.

 

[Headless]

The simmers are on record saying they don't read the changes under team sheets and don't need them to sim a game.

Where was this, CC?

 

[Kennedy Parker]

Where was this, CC?

See below:

Hate NaturalDisaster Barrybran

Something I've been wondering. When you sim games each week, do you go through all 12 team sheets and input the changes or would you only update the team sheets for the teams that are involved in the two games you're simming that particular round?

I only do the ones for my games.

I sense this is a rhetorical question given your experience but I only update the teams for the games I'm simming

Yes, I suspected it was the case but wanted to reaffirm.

To illustrate my point what relevance would the CHANGES section of a team sheet submission have in a situation where you are simming games for different teams to the previous round?

Kind of redundant if the changes refer to last week's positions that haven't been inputted into your SIM, no?

Can't say that I refer to it all really. I compare my sim input to the teamsheets page that I prepared the input from.

And so the logical question to now ask is:

If simmers dont refer to the changes, then why should captains be required to post them?

In truth the current system was designed back when all games were simmed by a single simmer and once we transitioned over to a multi simmer system the efficacy of the changes section was completely undermined. Its stayed that way for 10+ seasons mostly due to inertia.

Ant Bear if you're following this discussion you should really put some mass deregulation of team sheet rules on the cards.

 

[Headless]

Ant Bear if you're following this discussion you should really put some mass deregulation of team sheet rules on the cards.

 

[ClarkeM]

Ant Bear if you're following this discussion you should really put some mass deregulation of team sheet rules on the cards.

He might even be able to include it as a highlight in his end of season "notable threads" commentary.

 

[Headless]

He might even be able to include it as a highlight in his end of season "notable threads" commentary.

Would be up there with "All-Sweet FA squad of 40 announced".

 

[sante]

View attachment 1320543
GOLD CITY ROYALS OFFICIAL TEAM SHEET
ROUND 1 V BAGHDAD BOMBERS
#Smiles150



B: Smartys Power - Blacky - Paddles_
HB: MrPremiership - BRAB - omgfridge
C: krakouers - PMBangers - nahnah
HF: weltschmerz - CakeEater - Ulahoopski
FF: SarahSmiles - spookism - Ligma
FOLL: GreyCrow - Marlowe - The Filth Wizard
INT: grumbleguts - Fitzey​

Oh dear Bangers. It’s meant to be F, not FF

 

[Supersuns]

Oh dear Bangers. It’s meant to be F, not FF

High impact!!
PMBangers banned

 

[damicky]

Oh dear Bangers. It’s meant to be F, not FF

Has he Fed it up?

 

[sante]

 

[sante]

Has he Fed it up?

He f****ed it

 

[Greenery]

High impact!!
PMBangers banned

He deserves it. krakouers your time is now!

 

[krakouers]

He deserves it. krakouers your time is now!

Introducing the New Royals... where every player gets a vote!.

 

[sante]

sante saves the league yet again!

And again

manangatang must be so proud

 

[Ned_Flanders]

But you are admin now, how easy

- ins and outs don’t really affect simming and arn’t high impact, it would be a great courtesy if captains could list them as it helps with stats and badges etc.
“We will change that section to just a warning so people know it’s desirable. The rest of the squad submission rules remain the same“ Done.


Next minute match threads are up, people move on, committee discusses the important stuff.

thats not how things work.

its the rule, and its a long established rule. They cannot claim ignorance, its in black and white and has survived numerous reviews of the rules.

multiple committees have endorsed this multiple times.

if its a bad rule, speak to your committee member and get it changed.

Until then, the bombers are ****ed, because this is as black and white as it gets

 

[Muddiemoose]

Introducing the New Royals... where every player gets a vote!.
View attachment 1320559

I actually own that t shirt

 

[Supersuns]

Ha ha PMBanned

 

[Mobbs]

thats not how things work.

its the rule, and its a long established rule. They cannot claim ignorance, its in black and white and has survived numerous reviews of the rules.

multiple committees have endorsed this multiple times.

if its a bad rule, speak to your committee member and get it changed.

Until then, the bombers are f’ed, because this is as black and white as it gets

Nice use of the Appeal To Tradition logical fallacy in no less than 5 times. Pointless except perhaps for purposes of malice.

It's not a high-impact breach as it doesn't represent a high-impact problem. Needs fixing immediately.

And claiming it's black and white is straight-up deception and lying. The entire question here revolves around how it's not as black and white as the rule itself naively thought it was gonna be when it was penned. We are discussing the grey area in something that is black and white? Nonsensical.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Nice use of the Appeal To Tradition logical fallacy in no less than 5 times. Pointless except perhaps for purposes of malice.

It's not a high-impact breach as it doesn't represent a high-impact problem. Needs fixing immediately.

And claiming it's black and white is straight-up deception and lying. The entire question here revolves around how it's not as black and white as the rule itself naively thought it was gonna be when it was penned. We are discussing the grey area in something that is black and white? Nonsensical.

All of that says it's a stupid rule. No issue with that.

The issue is the committee has endorsed said stupid rule multiple times. Its not an error that snuck through and we are doing clean up on it shortly after revision.

 

[Mobbs]

All of that says it's a stupid rule. No issue with that.

The issue is the committee has endorsed said stupid rule multiple times. Its not an error that snuck through and we are doing clean up on it shortly after revision.

I did notice that you at no time said it was a good rule, just that it has been a rule