It has been like this for two sets now. Obviously we have just come out of a transfer window which would of allowed them to sign more players, but I think me,Chris and pirate need to have a chat, not much can be done as we certainly do not want teams folding. It would have a huge Impact on the league and it wouldn't be fair on anybody.

Shame there's no kind of loan system?
cke1982's doing all he can with such reduced resources, unfortunately his players have decided to dessert him or vanish. If there were a loan system id happily help out with players say for 1 set give more time to reinforce the team, then if not by then, then some consequences could be dished out.

Just an idea.

Edited at 13:27 Tue 26/11/13 (GMT)

weve signed 3 players unfortunately was after fixture was out players i out in games as ash said left me in lurch and other subs have disappeared a loan system is a great idea was thinking about that for ages as players not gettting a game can get game some where else whaen not needed

Maybe as a last resort, or in a multi division set up. But it would be all too easy to abuse. Loaning out players to the teams playing your rivals to lower the score they get, players missing out on games for their own clan because a loaned player took their spot, etc.

If there was certain criteria, e.g. Only clans with less than 14 players can loan in, clans can only loan out 2 players at a time and must have at least 14 players left after loaned out players have been removed, etc. then it is one possibility. I would say it would probably remain unpopular, if I can't get a get for my clan why would I want to remain part of it and play for another team. Seems like I would just leave them anyway, only way it makes a difference is with a transfer window a player can move earlier.

I totally agree it were only a temporary method maybe just for one fixture set or two, too late to implement this season i feel but next and with set criteria could benefit all. Should anyone abuse it then they are not only cheating their teams but themselves, more fool them.

Maybe ask myself,Chris and pirate if we can give special permission for you to use the three players you signed??

I'm pretty sure he signed those 3 players before the new FCL fixtures were out (the last being chris, about an hour before fixtures release), so they should already be eligible for FCL. They need special permission to play in FBL as that set was released last week.

Looking at it I'm sure you are right, even if it was after the fixture giving the current situation I'm sure we would be lenient towards this predicament.

The players signed are 100% eligible to play in the fixtures (Chris included) as they were registered before the deadline - Via offline message exchange, the forum post on the team changes thread is late.

So hopefully the issue should be resolved

Isn't it strange that Underdogs don't remember registering these players via offline message, I'm not suggesting they didn't, just surprised they can't remember doing so..

I'm confused, where does it say that he doesn't remember sending an offline message.

Ckes post just states he thought his players weren't eligible (which they aren't for FBL, but are for FCL). Since he's been asked for subs and knows he doesn't have any for the games he's been asked (other than himself) it would be easy for him to get confused. Especially since Seb made the same post on FBL and FCL threads and said it concerns both leagues in the post. Simply looks like a confusion of the leagues. He posted the changes before fixtures were released. If I did that I would assume my players were eligible, I'll have to read over the rules about that area though.

im talking about fbl as who cares posted on both threads as zante said fcl players where signed before deadline

You're always confused zante, as I said I wasn't suggesting anything...

Lets hope you can get the games played now cke that ya got valid subs..

You blatantly suggested Underdogs didn't remember sending an offline message despite no such post from Underdogs. It was pretty clear what Cke meant...

Since you didn't actually answer the question, I guess there was no meaning in what you said. Sorted

Here's an idea: Instead of Pheonix Storm constantly signing players, that they don't really need, why don't they push them towards the Underdogs to help them out?

And no, Ash, this is not a dig at you or PS, just a suggestion?

So wait...without me going back to read..Underdogs are short player!?

How many..gonna go do research, and GET THEM BACK ON THEIR FEET!

Care to explain those default decisions, guys?
Message will do if you don't want it on threads.

7-0 you got,

pros 2 x 10-0's

TG's - ZILCH

WOW, consistent.

Yep absolutely!! Completely consistent.

without the info you can't make an accurate inference Ash. If you look, TG had 4 defaults and got 0-0 in all of them. I would guess that no info was sent in. Underdogs got 0 in everything so consistent? yes.

You don't get points for having an inactive opponent, I don't know what info was sent in but they clearly think no one has done everything they can for the full 14/15 days