I have no problem removing swaps all together, there is no limit on the subs so a swap is pointless.

Maybe they should be then. Also, if a player gets subbed out, how about only letting him sub back into the same fixture??

They are only allowed to sub back into the same fixture.

Do you mean allowed to be subbed back into the game they were subbed out of or subbed back in to any of the games?

If you mean get subbed back into the game you had been subbed out of then i would need all clans to keep the positioning of games that where released in the same order as some clans decide they will mix it up (would just make it easier)

Yeah what I meant for example was:

Say it was:

Mich vs Liam
Foxy vs Lee
Jay vs Dave

and Foxy got subbed out. He could only get subbed in to play Lee in that match.

Maybe try numbering the fixtures 1-8? Or is that pointless?

Because if 'you' want to maintain a restriction that acts as a potential inhibitor/obstacle to getting games played then 'you' should have to work for it.

It is a fact of life that captains (and/or vices), like any other member on here, can go missing unexpectedly. Why does one (or two) members' unexpected, or unanticipated absence, have to mean that a game must go to default?

Totally with the HLR on this one.

Yeah that is what i thought you meant mate. I had thought about that before as it was once like that and it made it easier and if you look at it the way i am that would also remove the chance of a match fix in a way. Let me think about it tonight and i will probably add that in to the rules to.

It would be pointless numbering them to be honest mate, its not hard to keep the order the games are in on the website though.

Note to self

Possibly remove the swap rule to restrict the match fixing that could take place (because of the new rule about only subbing in second week i may not remove it just depends)

Possibly only allow a player who has been subbed out of a game to be allowed to be subbed back in to that same game instead of any game in the one fixture.

its a fair idea is that, it wouls stop people avoiding hard mathes,as this does happen, could u not moderate which players should be able to play 4 clans, as most people know the reliable and unreliable ones, i know this would create problems with newbies, but not if you limited them to only playing for a clan if they have been active enough for the first 2 months for example, this would also stop another major problem of the fake newbies which have completley messed the ranking system up

All players are monitored in a way mate anyway from myself as i have all past league history (well the past three seasons i have been in charge, new season will make it four).

This is why i find it easier to say which clan should make it and what one may not, on occasion i have messaged captains stating the record of the player they have from clan history so the captain is not wasting his/her time.

yes i understand that pal, ive seen u do it on forum pages, do u not think that its a good idea that u could only sub in to the game u have come out of though

i dont agree, i hate the fbl sub rules as it is because it is too confusing. the only time you need that subs rule is in the cup games. I would leave it to wait 7 days for league as the suggestion Jim said may increase defaults.

as for ridding of swaps pointless since its 2 subs? if you want rid of swaps you can only sub once per fixture but i doubt the league would do that.

Lol if you can't get on to post a one sentence comment on a thread then chances are you wouldn't be able to get on to send 15 stupid un-necessary messages.
You totally ignore the efforts that people make to get these games done, if they make these efforts and get nothing back from their opponents, then ask for subs and get nothing back then why on earth should they be subbed out deadline day because their opponents suddenly decide to make an effort.
Were there even any problem of this nature this season or last to warrant this or wasn't the system working perfectly well?



Excuse me, sir. Seeing as how the H.L.R is such a V.I.P., shouldn't we keep the P.C. on the Q.T.? 'Cause if it leaks to the V.C. he could end up M.I.A., and then we'd all be put out in K.P.

i agree and disagree mate, i understand your points, but theres got to be a way of stopping match avoiding, say if they were subbed and then cannot play at all in that game

Lmfao

already is, the 7 day rule. The more you take away the more chance of defaults. don't forget they might be a logical reason for subbing (e.g. timezone problems).

7 Day rule means nothing though mate. As I said before, I could simply wait 7 days then swap a fixture, just to fix it in my favour. I can't deny it but next season it's gonna happen. If it's in the rules then I'll do it just to prove a point lol

why should the logical people suffer though? either add the 7 day rule or do Jims suggestion NOT both otherwise your risking more defaults. If you see someone match fixing ban them.

How can you tell though?

that 7 day rule is a load of scallops

Fried or grilled?

hi i confused but just like to say i agree with whatever is decided and try it.

dont see point in arguments