Since when did the fbl rules change so much from the fcl ones ?

I remember playing an opponent on fcl and the sub was posted on no thread. I argued it should have been and was told that subs need to be posted nowhere so result stood...

I can't believe you're making correct grammar a necessary qualification to get a game done on this site.
Certain people would never be allowed to make any subs then!

its not me makin correct grammar a necessary qualification LOL

its clear no permission was givin, no1 is a mind reader, so unless its put CLEARLY "u have permission to sub in....", its not clear, therefore is void

so ryan agreed to play? he said yes to u wen u asked him?

The degree of clarity is for the runners to judge. There is no specific magic phrase.
They clearly wanted him to sub in and he did.

Let's face it we haven't had any problems all season with people just posting permission on their own threads.
Now if we are going to start forcing everyone to post permission on their own thread, subs thread and opponents otherwise the game will be void...I dont think it is the right road to go down.

thats the point, he subbed himself in when no permission was given...even sarah yano the league runner, says no permission was given

I haven't seen her say that. The only runner who has produced a judgement so far is ipotalot who has said permission was given.

no problems all season as simple rules to give permission were bein followed...until now

its the right road to go down as some players wouldnt know if games have been arranged, so by subbin themselves in with no permission and no idea whats actually goin on would be a huge problem...i had the problem a few seasons back, which is y i voted for permission needed

u need the screenshot i have of sarah sayin no permission was given?

He was asked to sub himself in...lee yano the league runner says permission was given
Going around in circles here, sarah has said as long as fastboysam agrees then the game will stand.

Just in case this matters, the player himself interpreted the previous posts as allowing him to sub in:
http://www.funkypool.com/thread/18572/latin-legends-numero-four/84#1368655

lmaoooo lee, he was asked if he wanted to sub in, not to sub himself in

sarah also said no rules will be changed, and said its void due to no permission (its in the rules)...so game is void....

if the player misinterpreted what was said, its his own fault...but its still void lol

antione you can say it is void till you are blue in the face, doesn't make the blindest bit of difference as you have no say in the matter.
Nor does your interpretation of therev's post (or the first few words you appear to be stuck on)
Myself and Sarah have discussed this and short of fastboysam having a radically different view (which neither of us see as a likely event) the game stands.

lmaooo so why did sarah say to me no permission was given and on forums it says no rules will be changed so surely game is void...

ooo i know exactly whats goin on

and ill leave it there haha, hope ur enjoyin it

Why would you ask someone if they can play and not give them permission to play anyway? Doesn't matter how you interpret the post, it's clear the intent from the person who can give permission was for the player to play that game if neccessary.


Just to clarify this...
http://www.funkypool.com/thread/18572/latin-legends-numero-four/84#1368571



Now explain how this means red4ever does not have a captains permission to sub in?

im sorry i didnt see where it clearly says "i give permission for rev4ever to sub in"...must be blind LOL...

not my game...wont be replyin

Can we please drop this one now

I'm sorry, I didn't see where the rules tell us the exact wording that MUST be used, I must be blind also

Don't see why shortstop would need permission to sub in either, he was already in the fixture :S

Seeing as we had quite a few other players who could play, any reasonable person can see that Ryan had permission