I think it's a tough decision between the 2 ideas
*option 1-let the team with the deactivating player sub
The games actually get played but the team get the opportunity to turn the fixture around with their sub
*option 2-let the game go to default but still give match completion bonus to the innocent team
Maybe too much advantage to the innocent team a 14-1 score in a game and match completion bonus having only played 4 games(using damee's as an example)

Still not 100% sure but I think if you are getting the 10 pts for completing the match that balances out a better player maybe being subbed in.
Definitely a season ban for people doing it whichever way and if the season is in week 6 it should be a ban till week 6 of the next season.

i'll go with option 2, which i think is what they do on snooker.

The penalty needs to be high to discourage players from leaving and deactivating.

In all honesty i think doing the sub and playing is the best way maybe! i'll have to re-read all the posts again though too see whats been said haha

The ban from league could be done but he has deactivated and it would be impossible to actually know it is him on a new account unless he told someone about it and they approached us and told us.

Another consideration is do you want the clan of the deactivated player to suffer or just the player because allowing them to sub a player in gives them their no default bonus too.
Something seems wrong with that to me, maybe harsh but captains pick the players if they make a bad choice and it messes an opponent around they shouldn't be getting a bonus for no defaults from that set.

I agree, they are getting a 2nd chance to gain the bonus, which is unfair.

we mean if they reactivate jay, they get banned from the league, if they create a new account or try using an old one we just have to hope it comes out eventually,

Yeah i see what you all mean, i think this one is down to other league runners though as i am apart of MVP, i dont really want people that i am agreeing to either one because of that.

So i don't really want to be involved in a decision like this for that reason, doing the defaults and stuff is fair game but something like this no chance haha

I get accused of being biased and unfair far too much all ready.

Option 2 is the best idea i feel, yep it sucks going to defaults but due to new system you would get the bonus anyway.

i agree with almost everything but mostly a warning usually works, it has done on snooker as people wasn't aware they couldn't concede fixtures and when we told them they never did it again.

deactivation i think a warning is fair as it carrys on to future usernames so if they did something else after that then banned for the season as people can rash/mistake deactivate like tinie did but came back and played.

for bannings, unless its a second account they have to wait 1-3 plus the 1 month to compete in the league so thats like a punishment in itself.

ill pass a message to dex and techno to take a look too.

so on snooker is it ok to reactivate and finish the games ?

this could affect all clans, players leave games throughout every season, its probably happened to most clans.

yes long as its within the deadline, tinie is a prime example, he deactivated (albeit a mistake) came back and finished his games.

its only conceders (those who say "have the rest"), deactivators (who stay deactivated during the ongoing fixture) second accounts or banned users who get banned during a fixture.

sounds good mate, I was just thinking its best if you keep the rule the same as snooker.

I would also expect the opponent to be awarded the remaining frames as the deactivating player has taken away the chance to win them.

Edited at 23:42 Thu 17/11/11 (GMT)

yeah too many loopholes in the system, hopefully this will solve most of them

anymore opinions? seems mostly positive so far which is good so will look into getting it changed before the deadline unless majority have an objection.

So it is OK for any player to leave in the middle of a fixture in a strop and come back later to finish the games? At best it's not very sporting to do that and at worst is arguably even cheating.

That's like Man Utd losing at half time to Burnley in August/September and saying "we are playing badly and they are on a high at the moment, therefore we don't want to play the second half now but we will complete it some time in April or May when we are on a good run of form and they haven't won a match in four months!!"

yes its perfectly fine, sometimes its unsporting but sometimes you can't distinguish if its a genuine reason like lag or emergency or in a strop.

only once i had to stop otherwise on that night i would have been booted as i was in a rage, not because i was losing but because of the bad luck i got.

usually i ask the opponent if we can play another time, mostly due to lag reasons.

Maybe if a player does it they get a warning first time and if they do it again they get banned from the league, so if your opponent just leaves you report it to the league staff, unless you have both agreed to continue at a later date.

and if it's agreed by both players then fantastic - no problem at all.

but to say its an automatically acceptable tactic no matter what would seem a dangerous path to go down?

could do, its your discretion if to report it to league staff and if we do get a complaint about someone then usually we look how serious the complaint is then decide on the best COA (if its do nothing/talking to/warning/suspension/ban).

The majority i agree with but as chris has pointed out going in a strop and logging out because game is not going your way should be looked into..lets say players decided to play in this order..8us, 9us, 8uk

player a is 3-0 up in 8us player b strops off maybe they should automatically forfeit the other 2 frames of that discipline aswell for unsporting conduct...and works the same if they had progressed to the next discipline.

Yes it still gives the option to carry on the games but player b has put themselves at a worse disadvantage maybe than having carried on playing therfore a punishment.

If they then refuse to play a maximum default should be applied and a warning issued.

And true what james said i can be hard to clarify why they left but a player thats on your friend list as they should be for the games they have to physically respond to a yes i want to close the game window and log out so that would be deliberate.

yeah its a dangerous path, not saying its right but if people only did it once then normally i would see no reason for a warning, twice then i would give the warning and on third time a suspension.

only thing is there are easier ways to avoid it.

@ dex

disagree with part about the 2 frames thing as its same as giving frames away basically which is like the same as conceding which isn't allowed. the rest seem ok though.

Edited at 00:03 Fri 18/11/11 (GMT)

Maybe if a player does it they get a warning first time and if they do it again they get banned from the league, so if your opponent just leaves you report it to the league staff, they then warn the player what will happen if they do it again, fine
if you have both agreed to continue at a later date.

edited slightly from my above post.

As I've mentioned already, who wants to play a player that is known for leaving during fixtures, knowing if you get a few frames ahead they are gone, I don't.