Or stick to what you have and apply them as they are written? They cover and deal with every scenario thats been mentioned so far.

No effort no points rising to maximum effort maximum points. Obviously common sense states that two maximum efforts results in a game played within 2 weeks.

Every idea will lead to arguments or people minipulating it for easy wins.

not really...

my idea...

no defaults panel, 1 league runner to check evidence exists - no ifs and buts, just the below...

played game - points as per result
non played game - evidence from both game was attempted = 0 points
non played game - no attempt at getting game played = - 5 per fixture for the team making no effort

Forget punishment or rewarding, that causes arguments when deciding whos to blame, just the same as we have at the moment, lets look at ways to make clans more reliable, rules that force captains to sub out inactive players, like my suggestion above, I'm sure theres more we could do to get games played.

clans should NOT be getting points for games that are unplayed !

If they make no effort to play it absolutely. But if they do make effort then they are being denied points they could otherwise earn due to events outside of their control.

A vs B

Player A is active for 2 weeks of the fixture.

Player B hasn't been on at all, and all the subs have been used.


Whats going to happen?

Agreed!

i do defaults, i see people being awarded a "result" that they would never achieve through normal play, it annoys me to be honest. a clan shouldnt get points for a game that has not been played whether it be their fault or not.

Couldn't agree more all we need are people to apply the rules.

no points awarded for player A - never played, shouldnt get a result like 15-0 they would get in current defaults system, would be a joke to be honest

-5 for player B - punished for failure to complete the match

Chris you will have 8 subs for each fixture and a subbed out player can sub back in, 16 players to play 8 fixtures shouldn't really be a problem.

How is that fair?

It's not player A's fault for not playing the fixture..... Why isn't s/he given full points?

So a player who is active all fixture and messages his opponent doesn't deserve anything if his opponent has not replied to his messages and been inactive.

Introduce a rule like this we can forgot about the FCL as no one will bother playing.

And how would anyone bother playing the last game in a fixture if the game was close but their clan was winning by a point.

Options are don't play and win fixture

Or play and possibly lose fixture

Sorry but this is a non starter

why should they get full points for not playing?

A token 5 points for doing everything right and all the opponents fault that you could have had 10 more if game was played.

Errrrrrrrrrrr unfair i think is the words.

No reason why Player A should necessarily get 15 points - depends what they have done throughout the 2 weeks in highlighting the issue amongst other things. If they have done everything possible then 15 points - failing that then anywhere in between. Trouble is the way its done at the moment I believe 15 points would always have been given, which is wrong.

Work on other options to get games played during a period - such as what ab has suggested - or anything else. But if it all fails and a game doesnt get played then it has to come down to a genuine default score. Avoiding that just does not work full stop.

horse10000 - Introduce a rule like this we can forgot about the FCL as no one will bother playing

Exactly

I can't believe we are even discussing this.

*It would've been funny to see SS's results last fixture with this in the rule book. -25 vs -26 Well done SS, you win! *


But really, this would never work, thats why there is a default team, and if the team does it properly, then no one would complain!