In my opinion the only good reason for not completing a match in one go is computer problems. Unfortunately if someone claims computer problems it's very hard to prove them wrong.

That can be a genuine reason, if they return and the fixture gets completed fine but if the fixture then goes to default because of it the league runners know whos at fault and all remaining games should go to the opponent due to them not getting the chance to finish.

shouldnt messages count for anything though?

once its started you cant sub and if you both are in a different timezone then its hard to punish.

Messages should count for more than activity logs in my opinion. Same with Browsing time.

Why should message count more than activity.....so a player who is very active but has a game arranged through a message but for a unknown reason he gets punished through default although he has been on alot more than his opponent

Just because a player is online more doesn't mean he's trying to arrange or get his clan match played does it? The majority of people play this site to play pool, not to play in clans. There are levels at which people care about their clan matches and i know a fair few are on the level where they wouldn't mind playing here and there, but dont care that much. Messaging is clear evidence that a player in a fixture is trying to arrange a clan match.

I don't think incomplete games should go straight to whoever didn't leave, at all. Granted, it should hold some sway in defaults, as should the reason for it, but I still think that it should go down to effort to play afterwards. Not everyone has control over things like when they eat or when they have to leave (games can take longer than expected).

Also-people will say if you get disconnected/phone goes off or whatever, then that player should just log back on/come back to the computer straight off, but there's been cases where one player gets disconnected, comes back after a minute and their opponent has logged off assuming they left. Who would get punished for things like that? If it's the logged out, you'll get players logging off as soon as anyone leaves a lot of the time, if it's the opponent, people will claim it's unfair as they don't know what's happened.

Also, a lot of games I tend to arrange isn't done through messages but through pm's in-game, if I see someone's sent me a message but are in game, I tend to ignore it and go find them in game to talk about it instead. If that were to cost me even if I were online more after we had spoken, especially if it were between times we had both said we're likely to be online, I would certainly find it unfair...

I suppose it all depends on how much sway you put on each factor though, as long as you balance the two properly then i'd agree, otherwise it just wouldn't work fairly...

EDIT: Second paragraph.

Edited at 16:29 Fri 09/09/11 (BST)

I only partially agree.
I'm talking only about situations where a player either concedes mid-match (meaning the frames don't get finished) or he fails to show up after the game has started.

I think both clans are victims in this case. It is hardly the fault of the captain or the clan if a rogue player decides that he wants to quit mid-game. I think there is already enough punishment for that clan: they lose the remaining frames by default and lose out on the bonus. Any further punishment would serve any purpose at all.

Remember, the default bonus is there to encourage more games getting played. If it doesn't serve that purpose anymore, get rid of that bonus completely.

I would suggest punishing players who quit mid-game, resulting in a default. Perhaps a warning for the first offense with the threat of suspension/ban?

Edited at 17:10 Fri 09/09/11 (BST)

i try get it done soon as possible but it all depends on y people have left granted some times it happens but should be scored on gettin games done if noo effort from 1 side the i say other person should get the points but i like the idea of deducting points as we do have 7 subs and if my players havnt played by the sat before deadline there in risk of gettin subed soo think every team has that opton soo there realli shouldnt be any defaults at all

What I said above applies only to cases where the game has been partially completed and the captain has no choice to sub anymore (in case you were answering my post).

naa just my imput lol not very good but imput it is ish

or tries to concede all frames

we have a code of conduct also which is...

General Rules to Follow for Clan League!

1. Please attempt to follow the principles of fair play to the best of your ability (while playing and on the forums).

These include...

a) When playing please respect each other. Do not shout the abuse the opponent or treat them unfairly in any way.
b) Do not attempt to put your opponent off (pm'ing during shot, or speaking when opponent has asked for silence).
c) Do not say things like "gg wp" before the frame is decided, unless you are absolutely sure the opponent doesn't mind this. Many people are put off by this. In case of doubt, saying 'gg wp' should occur when the game has finished.
d) If your stats are reset for cheating, your case will be referred to the default team.

2. Any second accounts will be automatically banned from the clan league. The case will be referred to the default team.

3. Do not concede an entire fixture. All frames should be played. If you attempt to concede frames without playing them, you will be issued a warning. Subsequent violations may be punished as the league runner sees fit.

continued...

4. If players have a problem with their opponent then contact the league runner(s) If the league receive continuous complaints about the same player for repeated problems then the league will have to intervene.

5. Please treat the league runners respectfully. They we are here to help.

6. You MUST follow the funkysnooker rules.
Funkysnooker Rules can be found here:
http://www.funkysnooker.com/viewPostingRules.do

Every breach will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis by the defaults team.

If previous accounts are taken into consideration for a player captaining a clan and not having a seasons experience, why are previous accounts not taken into consideration when a player wants to play in a clan and not have to wait the month...

I think the difference is the month before you can play is to deter people from deactivating, and re-joining and all that stuff

In the 1 season rule for captaincy, its to ensure that the person has enough experience to competently captain a clan and maintain it

So the rule for a month acts like a punishment, whereas the captain thingy isn't

Correct

Fair enough

yeah its to try and stop people deactivating and the month rule does that

got about a week left, no point removing kirk yet in case he gets unbanned.

Nobody gets unbanned lets face it