simply cant follow what people say...

also didnt mention shortstop...another player who cant read....

I have read through the thread numerous times, regarding permission actually being given , permission was not stated on the thread allowing red to sub himself in,however it does ask if red would be willing to sub in and get the game played on the weekend.
The final decision will be made regarding this game, once i hear back from sam.
For now though, to hopefully help solve the 'subs' problems , i have posted on all threads the rules for posting subs, hopefully everyone will follow them, and we will not have any more problems,
If anyone does have any further questions, please offline message me.

Thanks
Sarah

Just thought I would quote this again, Dan has clearly said "Ryan would ya be willing to sub in and play straight", no matter how you try to twist it Seb it is still clearly not giving permission to post subs, that is no different to me asking someone if they are available to sub in, total farce if this one is allowed and the shooters one not., I think either both fixtures go to default or both sides accept the games were played and move on. ASAP for the good of the league.

The two cases are completely different obviously.

Shooters- A player that had no connection with the FBL Shooters team and with no permission posted subs. It could've been anyone from the chat room.

Latin Legends- A player that was told to sub in (and as was proven by his later post also interpreted that to be permission to sub) did exactly what his captain asked him to do- sub in.

Have you actually read the pages?

Captain and Co-Captain's post regarding the game...




This is not giving permission? how did you manage to draw that conclusion? o.o

Saying a player will play the game if the one in the fixture doesn't is a clear indication that they have permission to sub in, no matter how you twist it

(And before there is any interpretation of bias from our point of view, we're saying a game that was a 6-0 loss shouldn't go to default)

*whispers* he wasnt asked to sub in, he was asked if he wanted to sub in...bein asked if someone fancies a game and someone sayin "u can sub in" is different...

The player wasn't told to sub in, the player was clearly asked if he was willing to sub in and posting permission is nowhere to be seen, so does it make it right that he interpreted it that way, I don't think so.

i retract my point of view...game should clearly stand, red4ever got wrong interpretation, nevermind, 6-0 to snooker squad vs latin legend...wd pirate_steve

shh ab, 6-0 shouldnt stand due to no permission, but latin legends lost 6-0 so should clearly stand.....

I would just like to point out, this is nothing to do with the shooters game , that is going to default, that has been decided.

It is not red4evers fault, he posted saying he had permission.
The problem is no where on the thread is it posted by capt/co capt that red4ever had permission to sub himself into the game, he was only asked if he could play it. This is the issue and this is what is being questionned.

But both captains posted being under the impression that Ryan had the permission to play. Why would you not give permission to someone who you've already asked to play and they've said yes to?

let LL lose 6-0 sarah...they obviously want a void game to stand at a 6-0 loss

That clearly states red4ever will play, just like saying we have him to step in, its still not giving permission to post subs.

Least we dont cry when a default dont go our way

Take the game to default for all i care

and give snooker squad the 6-0 win

either way the scoreline aint changed at all

saying red4ever will play, and doubting shortstop will be on over the weekend. So all's you actually want to see is "red4ever has permission to sub himself in when shortstop doesn't log in, and when his opponent actually logs in at the weekend". Pedantic really, I thought we want defaults lowered when permission is clear? If it wasn't wouldn't we argue about the game being void?

awww rev that hurt....hmmmmm no!...lost default cuz printscreens was took in my room, didnt cheat my way to a league title, be proud of ur lack of playin ability as a team as obviously cant win without pokin ur nose in lmaoooo

How did we cheat a title win?

Your threw ya dummy out of ya pram and called the league a joke plus if ya played king he would have smashed ya and we would have won league and ya would have folded

Still trying to cause arguements? Really need to grow up and move on Dan!

king wouldnt have smashed me just for the record...was 2-0 up and a player from your clan decided to join the room and put me off my game, obvious cheatin...then your player refused to play me and still won lmaoooooo obviously cheating...now move on

The above has nothing to do with FBL discussion , please take it to offline message or team threads

thankyou

Do you agree both fixtures were played by eligible players, the only problem in both cases is who posted the subs, I still think this is all petty bickering, I say either both sides accept both fixtures were played in good faith which they were or put both to default.