Win bonus won't be increased hense why i never even bothered to mention it in the essay

Surprised noone has mentioned the rule changes that i mentioned will be done.

i don't mind it in all honesty, i would almost play any opponent but if i got someone like kirk who i really dislike then i would ask to be subbed out.

Yes i thought about people doing that before the first week was actually up. I then decided that i would need a captain to message me if one of their players requested that, i would then stop that player in this case you from subbing back in on the second week (If it was done for no reason at all, i think not liking someone is a bit of a stupid reason but would depend on the time if it happened)

Again I think the point is being missed. The default score allocated would still be subject to all the same rules that exist now regarding effort, and evidence of effort, at getting a game completed - not linked to ability.

The only difference would be limiting the maximum score that could be awarded to something more in keeping with reality and the rest of the games played.

Going back to the examples being used in the game between Eagles and Pros the average of all the other 6 games completed was 10-5, in addition I am not sure Eagles players lost many games at all greater than 12-3 and similarly the Pros average win it that game was 10-5 and 9-6 across the season. However from nowhere you then get 2 x 15's scored which are completely not in keeping with game play but because they count to the overall tables have a negative effect on other teams not involved in the default.

I go back to the fourfold aim of a default in my original post

Assuming the same facts existed for the two defaults in question ie totally one side at fault then the scores would have been 10-0. Had it been decided that there was not maximum effort then the score could have been anything between 1-0 and 10-0.

1) to punish the offending team in the direct fixture - achieved by them not scoring a point having made no effort
2) not to punish the opposing team in the direct fixture - achieved for the same reason as 1) in that your opponents dont score whilst you score at a rate commensurate both to your effort and the efforts of your team (if you earn the maximum)
3) not to unduly reward (ie overscore) the opposing team in the direct fixture - achieved as the maximum awardable score - in this case 10 - is in keeping with the rest of the fixture.
4) not to punish any third party teams not involved in the default at all - partly achieved, since it can never be fully achieved when the score has not been earned from the table. However 10 is a lot fairer and more palettable than 15.

Edited at 10:18 Tue 01/01/13 (GMT)

Your still forgetting the fact that all effort was made by two Professional players and the management of that clan (which was all sent in as information) Eagles sent in nothing which could have cost then a few more points and Professionals less.

Default panel has no limit on what they offer as points but they are always told full points don't need to be rewarded. All the panel have the experience to do defaults and do them right. Was a unanimous decision by the panel

Speaking of default (which i hate doing) the Sinners one with Team Angry is being added to the default panel today and a result should be shown in the next few days.

I have skimmed through both teams evidence (which is a truck load) and it looks to be a close call as both teams do make some valid points through out.

And in the guidelines would have been the right decision. I am not, and never have said, revisit those scores. The season was completed uder the rules as they are.

I am trying to look forward and find ways to improve things for all leagues as to some extent the same problem affects all.

But I dont think it is right that default score(s) should be able to be the difference between winning and losing a league.

It happens, and as an online pool site and league there is only certain ways you can limit all of this.

Hence the suggested ways forward

Anyway I have found it useful and come up with what I think is a better solution to take away. Always the purpose of a discussion like this.

I have noted your suggestion, will have to look into it in detail as it has only been a quick skim right now as i have other league things to do but i will look at it in full soon as i can.

Jay can you offline message me the rule changes mate? Think I missed them in my fragile state

They are on previous page on my essay mate, second post at the bottom and start of the third post.

I agree with all rule changes tbh mate. Match fixing can be a problem because its so easy to do. As for the deadline day subbing, think that's a good idea too. Will cut down a large chance of defaults tbh.

Yeah that is the plan anyway.

Same with Pre Season this season, teams will not know who they have until the games are released as there is no need to know as the games are only to qualify for the league and for clans to find out who is active in there team and what not.

i know i mentioned this before but in pre seasons in my opinion i think it would be better if everyone plays 1 established clan and 1 new (or struggling) clan. I know it wouldn't be completely random but the old vs old game should complete without a problem so its old vs new which we should be looking at here

For example...

If 12 teams do enter the league next season are we having 2 leagues?

nah Jay is sticking to one division

I'm easy either way. Just thought 2 divisions everyone plays twice would be cool.

One division would make for a longer season (which mostly everyone wants). The way it is going now from a league few is that there may only be 11 teams as right now Legend Killers are struggling (going by my last post on their thread)