Loved it thanks for asking.

And I would love to know who this group that you speak of is as I am not aware of one. The people I use change on a game to game basis so I doubt anyone knows who they are, a few may say I was asked once, but most I have used have chose to stay anonymous as I know that they are happy to assist and remain anonymous as they don't want the aggro or grief or accusations of being corrupt / biased etc that certain individuals are happy to post when things go against them, I have big shoulders and am happy to take all the flack going though

Yeah i asked the staff so keith would have the opinions if he wanted to use them, if not them fine, but the info is the ready to be judged be whomever, I think the staff are able and relieable enough to do it.

its like this player championship i had , a flip of an invisible coin by niall who was the opponent (crazy) and Veyron got me out of a QF place .

Even tho i had an excellent default info regarding my opponent being offline for most of the tie , had me asking him to play . ect .

You wouldve been out anyway, equal effort, double dq, niall won anyway so draw hasn't changed.

I dont get all this.

A default is the non-playing of a match between two players isnt it? They are both part of a team and are managed by the captain. At the end of the day it is the captains responsibility to ensure the games get played within the 3 week period.
If the games dont get done then its the captains fault if they lose points within the default process. Not the guy who has to trawl through the messages and other crap posted to come to a decision and hope everybody likes it.

FPD have had a few defaults. Not lots but a few i guess without checking. I dont argue any of them and will just give the points away if i know we dont deserve them. If i didnt like the decision i still wouldnt argue as i dont have a leg to stand on, as i have had 3 weeks to get the games done.

90% of the time this season the problem has been captains not helping each other find mutual times for their players to play and actually stating on thread that they are expecting it to go to default. They are then shifting the responsibility onto Keith for the decision to go thier way. Wrong! The responsibility is still yours to act like proper people in the first place!

equal effort ? you clearly didn't read much off my default info to say that james . i don't trust you as one of keiths little helpers .

Santas little helper

hes a fake one tho lol

well your a night player, he is a day player and once you refused to play and chose to argue. most guys think equal effort so double dq, however coin was used but niall beat matt anyway so the right guy is through.

whatever you say you would be out.

Awwww ya can't help but get a giggle reading thro this sometimes. Seems that it will be less corrupt now

what you mean whatever i say ? the info was facts .

and defaults are based on facts correct ?

I wouldnt say so. Just because he doesnt agree with you doesnt meqn bes fake.

Your narrow-mindedness is actually embarrassing. The only thing "crazy" about it is your inability to comprehend how a) the actual 50/50 process was carried out and b) it made zero difference who it was carried out by. Neither of you should have been afforded the opportunity anyway so it's high time you built a bridge and got over it.

On a more relevant note, I'm of the opinion that 3 weeks is, if anything, a crazy amount of time to get a couple of games done. Given the amount of times I've seen subs made, swaps, further swaps etc. to get games done, it's rather ludicrous and pretty hard to fathom that games do go to default. Or maybe I (and indeed Uprising) just find it easier to arrange games than others.

i vote for one week

Two weeks per fixture was plenty, longer fixtures enable players to disappear or encourage a laxadacical attitude towards completing them.

21 days or 28 days have been too long I agree with _niall_

Agreed, also Captains tend to wait 50-75% before subbing a player so one week would be like 3-5 days and then double for two weeks then of course double again for four weeks.

Players are also too laid back wanting to do second week.

I do think Pool and Snooker default times should be different as if Pool set for default time and a Snooker one goes to default then Snooker players will miss out playing Pool and vice versa. It does mean though that Snooker players has an extra incentive to play before the deadline but doesn't feel right

And i totally disagree. It worked extremely well as far as i was concerned At no point did you have you fcl,fbl. and sl on all at the same time except the last fcl set. It worked very well and every week there was a new set of games for the players. It gave plenty of time to get games organized for people not on all the time and it was only the obstinate and obtuse people that had a problem.As normal!

There's absolutely no reason why two reasonably active players can't organise the playing of a fixture within the first couple of days of its release. The only people who benefit from 3 week fixture sets are those who are lazy/inactive and shouldn't be in the fixture anyway, and those who will try to manipulate so many fixtures to their advantage (and there's more than one of this type of person). In some ways it puts those off who like to get their games played as soon as possible to avoid drama later in the set. It sometimes doesn't feel like you're really contributing much either when you play your game(s) early and then have to wait at least another 3 weeks for a game in the same competition. Granted there aren't a whole lot of regular players around to have fixtures in the more meaningful competition coming at us regularly, but I think it would help maintain high levels of interest. Or maybe that's just me.

May I add:

My point I were trying to get across were if some Captains are asked then WHY NOT ALL - there is meant to be no favouritism, preferential treatment or confidential information passed on to a secretive/selective group. IMO