If Jay picks a default team then the result that comes from them should be final, what is the point in the panel giving up their free time to do a default for Jay to come and overrule the decision.

The fact that _ego had said he was handing scooby the game and did not want to finish showed the default panel he was giving up his right to any further points beyond the 5 he had already earned. The only thing after that was to determine how many points scooby should have got, which like I said before was averaged on scores ranging from 0 points to the full 9 remaining points.

No all he should do is apply the league rules and if they are not applied as league runner he should then get involved to make sure they are.

Also an unbiased panel? 2 clans with 2 members on it and some clans with no one that means it is already unbiased and i have no interest on who the people are that are on it but there should be one member from each clan as there was previously

_egotistical wanted us to take ALL the points from the game. He asked us to take the points, and wasn't interested in completing the games. He then left his clan. So yes, we think the default decision is ridiculous, we think we should've had far more points from it!

Also, regarding that clan leaving the league, After their captain posted an image on this thread that showed ALL of Uprising's real names and in some cases pictures, I would expect severe sanctions anyway. Even if you (or another moderator) did remove the picture, the breach of privacy is severe, and illegal.

Edited at 00:08 Fri 01/03/13 (GMT)

The result should be final and would be if the rules had been applied, but if they then choose not to apply the rules. Jay should get involved to ensure that they are applied as he is the league runner.

Even going on the little you say above, the correct default score would be egotistical would get no more points and scooby would get no more points either as he had not been online to show any effort to finish the game. So there is still no explanation as to how a player who does not log in can get 5 points when he has to show effort on any partially played game to earn points under the league rules.

Rules have always been clear that no player can give away frames.

Rule is it goes to default and that in partially played games the players involved must show effort to get the game finished, this is not possible if a player is offline and does not log in, thus why under the league rules he would not get any more points.

Scooby waited for 3 hours for him to finish, whilst ego was still online. That is effort. _ego also said he had no interest in finishing the clan games. After this, there was no incentive for scooby to come back on to finish games against someone that didn't want to play them! Even if the rule is that you can't give away frames, it's a pretty fair indicator of who's putting the most effort in to get them played!

The rules that was thrown about were;

7.4 Aborted games
In the case where a player has to abort the game (for whatever reason), both players are equally expected to maintain efforts to get the remaining part of the game played by the deadline.

and

8.5 Most important factor
Defaults are largely based on how much each player has contributed towards getting their game played.

----------------------------------------------------------

7.4 - neither player made any effort to complete the game after both had logged off for the night once the game ceased. No points for either.

8.5 - The fact that scooby had stuck around for about 4 hours after _ego left to try and get the game played was a positive for him. scooby had also messaged _ego during that time with no reply despite _ego browsing for about 2 hours. This reason and the fact _ego wanted scooby to take the remainder of the points is probably why the default outcome was what it was.

Nice start to a response. Question the reliability of the person instead of starting by addressing the content. I won't bother stooping to such a level (at first I thought the default was with sinners and C&G because I didn't realise scooby was in my clan so there's your argument for that invalidated. Plus the fact it actually disadvantages us as we have a good fixture score removed against an opponent that would've taken more from other clans we're competing against)

The rules clearly state an aborted game, when both players are wanting to continue playing not when one player refuses to play and the other player wants to play. Even by that logic the fact he refuses to actually play the game and the other player has to make the effort of trying to make him change his mind and he doesn't shows that you shouldn't award him points because he was refusing to play. There's a difference between logging in and trying to get the game played. Ego never tried to get it played which is why he got zero, Craig wanted it to be but ego didn't. And it was beyond the point Craig could make a sub.

The rules don't give exact guidelines for defaults and they're at the discretion of the panel, that's why the defaults alway vary slightly between people. 2 points to scooby for activity over the whole fixture doesn't seem unreasonable, plus 2 for starting the game and actually wanting to continue when his opponent says take the remaining frames. That's 4-0 and would've given us the win.

i find it hard to understand all these. if a team decides to enter in a league than that team should accept all the rules that are made from the runners and the way they chose results for defaults, if not thand dont take part from the beggining . in a football league there are referees mistakes but no team quits the league for that reason. they try and still win the league or try to reach their own goals.

As per the timing of posts and last log in the maximum he could have hung around for would be approx 1 hour 30 minutes.

Also if he has not logged in since how did he manage to provide a message for the default?

Even with one message and minimal hanging around.

They played on the 13th February so 11 days left of fixture.

He has been inactive for 78% of the fixture since they played yet was awarded 33% of the points that were available for the whole fixture on one message and hanging around for a short period of time.

Sorry but the default was wrong and sinners were right to ask for clarification and for the rules to be applied.

You seem to take scooby being offline after the fixture as him making no effort throughout the whole fixture. You also keep reitering the fact rules should be kept to. In the rules it states that by playing in the league you accept all decisions runners make. So you can't just ignore that rule. The decision has been made. The duty of care is for the entire league not just one player or clan, if by completing a duty of care for a small group you are neglecting the rest of the league then you have made a poor decision indeed.

The panel made a decision which is the same sort of decision they have always give in situations like this. They have made the correct decision by sticking to it even if we get disadvantaged by it. I know my own allegiances are making know impact on my thoughts and decisions, and they don't for the league panel. How you think a panel should be picked is not fact it's opinion. It's not gonna make it an unbiased panel I. The slightest because they're making the same decisions as they always have been when under your logic they were unbiased

btw if _ego tried so much to play games with sinners than our game in TCL wouldnt have gone in default. the reason was that they didnt have players on. on deadline day _ego was browsing and i asked their captain why he doesnt sub in and the answer was that he has personal problems and cant play, so i think that he shouldnt have played the game against scooby anyway but think that was a trick to get the result in default to show that he has been on everyday

I play for professionals so it has nothing to do with me yet i can see that the rules have not been applied. Yes you got enough points and you won the fixture which is actually better for professionals as if last season is anything to go by the sinners would be one of our main rivals so them losing has major pluses. But i would not like them to lose a game on the basis that the rules of the league are not applied.

This for me has nothing to do with it being sinners, uprising, CnG or SS, the clans involved are irrelevant, it is purely about the rules being applied.

Fair play to jema as she has at least tried to explain from her point of view

Seeing as it was over 15 days ago you can't tell when a game was played because you don't have access to the results page. I presume you base that on the time he posted the game not when he actually played. So there's no point in further discussion of that. It is possible for communication other than on funky. Remember there was a Facebook page.

The rules have been quoted above and clearly followed from the panels opinion. Just because it doesn't follow suit to what you believe doesn't mean that rules aren't followed as you have a different interpretation (and you have received what the panel received so there's bound to be difference)

No point in arguing the toss. Everyone arguing has their own opinion, and some people clearly have their own agenda._ego didn't want to play the games. He didn't want to play clans anymore. I see nothing else that could be relevant, but other people see other factors being more important. I imagine the people on the default panel had many different opinions too, and I respect their collective decision, as I did on our last negative decision in the FCL.

Sorry but inactive for 78% of the fixture and getting a third of the points, something has not been done right.

Yet rules state that both players have to show effort to get game done when a game is partially played, so if hanging around and sending a message equates to that.
I should hang around for 3 nights and send 3 messages, then disappear for the other 11 days and i will get a 15-0 default

^The effort is not entirely what goes into default decisions surely. If one person quits several times for no reason and then makes an effort to get them played another time, that would surely count against him.
In this case, the guy seems to have quit and made some (?) effort after that. Why should he get points for that?
I'm glad that people who quit or attempt to throw games are getting punished like here. I have no idea about the other guy's effort, so don't know how many he deserved. But he clearly made an effort by showing up to the game in the first place.

But anyway, the argument about 1 default member from each team was thrown out a while ago I seem to remember. There were members that had no idea what they were doing because they had never done it before. There were huge arguments over outrageous default decisions at the time, because these people were newbies at defaults.

If you read my posts further up, the player who quit i agree should get nothing if he has left and said take the rest of the games. The point is the rules state that in partially played games that both players have to make effort to try and get game completed. The other player in the game has not logged in since so how can get 33% off the points for the game when there was 11 days to get the rest of the games completed from where the game stopped. If the player does not log in he cannot show effort and he should not receive points if the rules are applied, there is no way you can get to 5 points for not being here at all. At least the player who left originally has logged in since the game stopped. He may have calmed down and finished the game in the remaining 11 days if he had an opponent to play which he didn't.

I don't know why the guy didn't log in anymore. But would you make further effort after you've talked to the guy and he says he doesn't want to play? I would accept that, record it, and not htink about it again.

How about this then- you tell me you can only play today and are leaving on vacation after. I, being a tricky little dirtbag, decide to play 3 frames and then leave. You can't show effort the rest of the way, because you'll be gone. I then send you loads of messages. Do you not get points for making the effort to play?

If it wasn't for egotistical, the game would've been played as normal. That's probably why the score came out the way it did. It's easy to argue for both sides here.