I'm glad you made sense of it Craig cause i couldn't and i wrote it

suggestions are fine feel free to post away, but hopefully the topic may be about the FBL im sure youd agree

if its non FBL related isnt that what offline messages are for, or maybe even find the relevant thread,

i hope that helps

no jay it made good sense, the trials and responses have been very constructive

will post more tomorrow and hopefully we can get an agreement all round and move it on

yes that is, thanks.

no problem feel free to ask questions,, if i can be of help i will do my upmost to answer them,, if not im sure sarah will

I have a point regarding subs and the use of them.

We have a situation in FBL final where a player has not been on for 2/3 of the fixture at all, yet the other clan as per their choice do not want to sub.

If my player now had something came up and they did not come on line for the remainder of the fixture, why would i sub him out if he has messaged and posted etc for the first 2/3 of the fixture and could be back any of the last few days.

As it stands if we deny a sub in last day or two it would go against us yet the same rule does not seem to apply to refusal earlier in the fixture, how can this be right?

May i add that i did the best i could when FBL was thrust upon me. I could have let it fold as nobody was willing to really help out when i asked for assistance..... What i got was 2 applications after 2 weeks of it being advertised and they got the job but in the end did nothing to assist really in the running. I also only took the helm after the fiasco of the league sites going AWOL and the main runner leaving...I was only ever asked to be a helper never mind a runner and did what i could even introducing the FBL cup which your clan is in the final so please don't mock me Craig.

Thank you for being your old self again.

<edit>

I am slightly wrong in what i said above...

I had 2 other players who joined prior to the 2 unnamed... both who were willing volunteers to make the league website but the first left saying had no time and the other said they were busy and unwilling to transfer "their baby" (league website) over to me...so more disruption.

So the only difference i see is the warnings and bannings going on for posting...Where did you find these rules to add...the english FA code of conduct (for referees) ?

Please reply

Edited at 05:39 Tue 29/05/12 (BST)

I do agree that you shouldn't be forced to sub your player if he is inactive no for let's say 3 days of the fixture if he has been active for 11 days of a fixture yet te opponents player has been inactive for all 11 days I do think this is something that needs to be looked at closely by Sarah and the other league runners as this is where the arguments are actually coming from its those sort of games that end up going to default we nee to try and come up with some sort of compromise personally of someone has been off 3/4 of the fixture then they should get a quarter of the points as long as when they are on they make an active attempt to get the game played.

answering horses post

if a player has been informed and agreed to a sub being made on a particular day and is happy with the situation, and a captain was informed,, so were is this problem

its was dealt with, i dont see a problem

is this how a sub should be made, and agreed







and is this why a sub should be made




differant ways of doing things,

example 1) i believe so
example 2) but is this the constructive way

is asking for a sub acting like a girl ???
horse your players words not mine could you clarify please????

i think this topic needs to be addressed sarah, but maybe at the end of the season

craig
shooters captain

Edited at 10:45 Tue 29/05/12 (BST)

Typical a league runner with no answer pick and choose your responses laugh a minute this is ...stick ure league and ure responses fair and squarely where sun don't shine sideways...Your post to horse puts it all in perspective...guts without garters.

Fail.

Edited at 10:32 Tue 29/05/12 (BST)

Craig I seem to remember earlier on this season tratter having to play seb, and tratter refusing to play seb UNTIL he was ready isn't this the same thing? We can't have double standards so if nick was in the wrong which I don't think he is does that mean tratter is also?

well id have to agree with you matty, but dont ppl learn from their mistakes,
however, reagrdless of tratters posts in the past is the above away to conduct yourself

im sorry matty either ways 2 wrongs dont make a right..

Thanks Craig I jut think if we are goig to question one persons then we also hve to question another's and seems like u agree :-)

what does this mean matty ?
just for claification does this mean you agree with all of his comments ??

I don't agree with his comments I just agree with he doesn't have to play it on someone else's terms I.e it take two people to arrange a time not for one person to say ill play at 7 tonight and expect it, hope this clarifies what I meant.

thankyou for that ,, but at no point anywhere including MVP thread does he say he has messaged or anything,

but thanks for clearing that up cheers

i was going to make a post on that the other week but i thought better of it, ive noticed that vs Seb tratter avoided seb as much as possible but the next set he was back to normal, i wonder why the thing with seb happened?

regarding killer 3 v 3 is fine and it works, if you can't get 3 people online at a time then somethings wrong there.

Back to the killer I would personally like it to be introduced firstly as 2x2 the if it is successful this season "as we think it will be" then make it 3x3 next season.

Probably the sensible approach. However, 3 vs 3 is miles more fun and more tactically challenging than 2 vs 2.