Team Radical disqualification

Oh where do I start? May as well use the rules you guys used to somehow support this absolute [insert word here to fit your emotion] decision.

"13.4
Team captains are not allowed to be transferred during a league/tournament. Team assistant captains are allowed to transfer in case the team captain agrees to a transfer. In case the team captain disagrees, an assistant captain is not allowed to be transferred to another team. This paragraph also applies if a team is not able to finish the tournament for whatever reason.”

“13.8
If a team is disqualified, its managers are banned from the league/tournament. The other roster players are free to transfer to another team, unless they were proven involved in the disqualification of their team, in which case they are also banned.”

So 13.4 is pretty key in that it EXPLICITLY states "This paragraph also applies if a team is not able to finish the tournament for whatever reason.", In non-bloated speak that means "team assistant captains" are allowed to change teams if the captain consents to it, Ape did so why the actual shit was this not applied? This is where you say "it wasn't used because 13.8 (which is contradictory in nature) states otherwise". But wait, 13.8 is not only completely contradictory but it is also GENERAL. What kind of backwards ass rule system applies a general rule over one that is much more specific in nature? In fact, why not top off this pile of excrement with the fact that 13.4 was written AFTER 13.8 was already a rule, meaning that 13.4 was conceived to REPLACE 13.8, jesus christ wtf.

May as well throw this in here since it's shady as shit in my honest opinion, all previous rule threads are hidden, meaning unless you have special privileges you can't see this 'rulebook' (if you can even call it that at this point, since you obviously don't treat it as such) unfold in all of its idiocy. Also, I would like to point out that a member of your admin crew has seemingly deleted posts which show them in a not so good light, great transparency 10/10.

 I would also like to draw attention to another rule that shows how absolutely pants on backwards [expletive] anyone involved in this decision has been.

"6.2
League Administration must stick to all of the written rules at any time. League Administration is allowed to add further clarification to existing rules if deemed necessary. If League Administration is required to process a case that is not covered by any of the existing rules, it is allowed to add new rules throughout a league/tournament to cover these scenarios.”

But wait, you see the problem here? 6.2 states they (LA) must stick to the written rules at any time. No where in that 'rulebook' is there specific mention as to what the intention behind the rule is. But shit, I guess that explains why you selectively chose to follow an older more general rule as opposed to a newer one that DIRECTLY pertains to the situation at hand. That’s fine though, after all, what are rules if they’re not meant to be broken right? 

 

2 minuuttia sitten, MartindalexC kirjoitti:

Oh where do I start? May as well use the rules you guys used to somehow support this absolute [insert word here to fit your emotion] decision.

"13.4
Team captains are not allowed to be transferred during a league/tournament. Team assistant captains are allowed to transfer in case the team captain agrees to a transfer. In case the team captain disagrees, an assistant captain is not allowed to be transferred to another team. This paragraph also applies if a team is not able to finish the tournament for whatever reason.”

“13.8
If a team is disqualified, its managers are banned from the league/tournament. The other roster players are free to transfer to another team, unless they were proven involved in the disqualification of their team, in which case they are also banned.”

So 13.4 is pretty key in that it EXPLICITLY states "This paragraph also applies if a team is not able to finish the tournament for whatever reason.", In non-bloated speak that means "team assistant captains" are allowed to change teams if the captain consents to it, Ape did so why the actual shit was this not applied? This is where you say "it wasn't used because 13.8 (which is contradictory in nature) states otherwise". But wait, 13.8 is not only completely contradictory but it is also GENERAL. What kind of backwards ass rule system applies a general rule over one that is much more specific in nature? In fact, why not top off this pile of excrement with the fact that 13.4 was written AFTER 13.8 was already a rule, meaning that 13.4 was conceived to REPLACE 13.8, jesus christ wtf.

May as well throw this in here since it's shady as shit in my honest opinion, all previous rule threads are hidden, meaning unless you have special privileges you can't see this 'rulebook' (if you can even call it that at this point, since you obviously don't treat it as such) unfold in all of its idiocy. Also, I would like to point out that a member of your admin crew has seemingly deleted posts which show them in a not so good light, great transparency 10/10.

 I would also like to draw attention to another rule that shows how absolutely pants on backwards [expletive] anyone involved in this decision has been.

"6.2
League Administration must stick to all of the written rules at any time. League Administration is allowed to add further clarification to existing rules if deemed necessary. If League Administration is required to process a case that is not covered by any of the existing rules, it is allowed to add new rules throughout a league/tournament to cover these scenarios.”

But wait, you see the problem here? 6.2 states they (LA) must stick to the written rules at any time. No where in that 'rulebook' is there specific mention as to what the intention behind the rule is. But shit, I guess that explains why you selectively chose to follow an older more general rule as opposed to a newer one that DIRECTLY pertains to the situation at hand. That’s fine though, after all, what are rules if they’re not meant to be broken right? 

 

Someone isnt happy because didnt get pena and joukki to his team

Just now, vatalisti said:

Someone isnt happy because didnt get pena and joukki to his team

Yea? I'm annoyed because I followed the rules to the letter unlike the actual admins 😂

I wonder why no ”good” defender want skill hockey

22 minutes ago, MartindalexC said:

Oh where do I start? May as well use the rules you guys used to somehow support this absolute [insert word here to fit your emotion] decision.

"13.4
Team captains are not allowed to be transferred during a league/tournament. Team assistant captains are allowed to transfer in case the team captain agrees to a transfer. In case the team captain disagrees, an assistant captain is not allowed to be transferred to another team. This paragraph also applies if a team is not able to finish the tournament for whatever reason.”

“13.8
If a team is disqualified, its managers are banned from the league/tournament. The other roster players are free to transfer to another team, unless they were proven involved in the disqualification of their team, in which case they are also banned.”

So 13.4 is pretty key in that it EXPLICITLY states "This paragraph also applies if a team is not able to finish the tournament for whatever reason.", In non-bloated speak that means "team assistant captains" are allowed to change teams if the captain consents to it, Ape did so why the actual shit was this not applied? This is where you say "it wasn't used because 13.8 (which is contradictory in nature) states otherwise". But wait, 13.8 is not only completely contradictory but it is also GENERAL. What kind of backwards ass rule system applies a general rule over one that is much more specific in nature? In fact, why not top off this pile of excrement with the fact that 13.4 was written AFTER 13.8 was already a rule, meaning that 13.4 was conceived to REPLACE 13.8, jesus christ wtf.

May as well throw this in here since it's shady as shit in my honest opinion, all previous rule threads are hidden, meaning unless you have special privileges you can't see this 'rulebook' (if you can even call it that at this point, since you obviously don't treat it as such) unfold in all of its idiocy. Also, I would like to point out that a member of your admin crew has seemingly deleted posts which show them in a not so good light, great transparency 10/10.

 I would also like to draw attention to another rule that shows how absolutely pants on backwards [expletive] anyone involved in this decision has been.

"6.2
League Administration must stick to all of the written rules at any time. League Administration is allowed to add further clarification to existing rules if deemed necessary. If League Administration is required to process a case that is not covered by any of the existing rules, it is allowed to add new rules throughout a league/tournament to cover these scenarios.”

But wait, you see the problem here? 6.2 states they (LA) must stick to the written rules at any time. No where in that 'rulebook' is there specific mention as to what the intention behind the rule is. But shit, I guess that explains why you selectively chose to follow an older more general rule as opposed to a newer one that DIRECTLY pertains to the situation at hand. That’s fine though, after all, what are rules if they’re not meant to be broken right? 

 

I'm not involved in the situation in any shape or form, but I think you're misinterpreting the rules in this instance. Assistant captains don't get a "free pass" to leave a folding team just because 13.4 says so. 13.8 says even other roster players are banned if they're involved in the disqualification. Judging by the LA decision (again, I don't necessarily have all the information needed), there was some monkey business as well. So I don't think it's black and white.

5 minutes ago, tbnantti said:

I'm not involved in the situation in any shape or form, but I think you're misinterpreting the rules in this instance. Assistant captains don't get a "free pass" to leave a folding team just because 13.4 says so. 13.8 says even other roster players are banned if they're involved in the disqualification. Judging by the LA decision (again, I don't necessarily have all the information needed), there was some monkey business as well. So I don't think it's black and white.

I acknowledged that the two rules contradict themselves. The problem arises when you realise that 13.4 was added (27th Feb 2017) to the rule book after 13.8 was already there and as a direct replacement for it, therefore the LA applying a clearly obselete rule is just completely asinine.  It's their fault they didn't rectify this discrepancy in the 3 editions of the rule book since, not mine for applying the rule as indicated. 

Edited November 6, 2018 by MartindalexC

Only this season? Kinda low ban, we paid lisence with real money on elite and rest season ban?  welp 

vor 5 Minuten schrieb MartindalexC:

I acknowledged that the two rules contradict themselves. The problem arises when you realise that 13.4 was added (27th Feb 2017) to the rule book after 13.8 was already there and as a direct replacement for it, therefore the LA applying a clearly obselete rule is just completely asinine.  It's their fault they didn't rectify this discrepancy in the 3 editions of the rule book since, not mine for applying the rule as indicated. 

Well, for what do have assistant captains then? That they have absolutely no responsibility in every case and are only named because the rulebook says so?
I agree that this paragraph (13.4) is written a little bit sloppy but as 13.8 referes to this kind of situation it sticks for me.
What did those two guys do? The captain left the sinking ship, that's crap for sure, but what kind of attitude you should have as an assistant captain? Step up for your team, take this role and try to do best out of it. For me it would be something like "pride" to finish the season as good as I can. For sure it could be very frustrating, but it is what it is. This should be a kind of codex to all of those guys who are in a leading role inside of a team. I know you earn nothing out of it as it's only a video game and I'm fully aware that it's nowhere written in the rule book and probably never will, but still, those captains and assistants have to take responsibility for all of the teams actions!
When did they got transferred to Northern Ascendancy? Before or after it was clear they will brake up? Without having knowledge I would assume that it was after it and if it is so, due to this time of event they are responsible for the teams actions and for me it is that exactly after this event they got banned. So they can be transferred to Northern Ascendany but are banned for playing in ECL 7. You could also read the rule book this way. Sure, you can blame LA for writing this paragraph with some loop hole, but as a captain yourself, would you like to see that other captains will sneak through loop holes as well? I doubt it.
For me it's the right call in case that everybody should take responsibility for their actions and don't snitch threw every written latter and try to make the best for themselves and give a damn to the integrity of this community. God damn, we don't do this for a living, there are and will be some mistakes. Please don't put every word or sentence under the microscope.

11 minutes ago, MartindalexC said:

I acknowledged that the two rules contradict themselves. The problem arises when you realise that 13.4 was added (27th Feb 2017) to the rule book after 13.8 was already there and as a direct replacement for it, therefore the LA applying a clearly obselete rule is just completely asinine.  It's their fault they didn't rectify this discrepancy in the 3 editions of the rule book since, not mine for applying the rule as indicated. 

What I meant was 13.8 states that regardless of captaincy, members that were involved in the disqualification of their team will be banned. Judging by what's written here, they were. So I don't think it contradicts 13.4 at all.

Edited November 6, 2018 by tbnantti

Just now, Mannheimer1938 said:

Well, for what do have assistant captains then? That they have absolutely no responsibility in every case and are only named because the rulebook says so?
I agree that this paragraph (13.4) is written a little bit sloppy but as 13.8 referes to this kind of situation it sticks for me.
What did those two guys do? The captain left the sinking ship, that's crap for sure, but what kind of attitude you should have as an assistant captain? Step up for your team, take this role and try to do best out of it. For me it would be something like "pride" to finish the season as good as I can. For sure it could be very frustrating, but it is what it is. This should be a kind of codex to all of those guys who are in a leading role inside of a team. I know you earn nothing out of it as it's only a video game and I'm fully aware that it's nowhere written in the rule book and probably never will, but still, those captains and assistants have to take responsibility for all of the teams actions!
When did they got transferred to Northern Ascendancy? Before or after it was clear they will brake up? Without having knowledge I would assume that it was after it and if it is so, due to this time of event they are responsible for the teams actions and for me it is that exactly after this event they got banned. So they can be transferred to Northern Ascendany but are banned for playing in ECL 7. You could also read the rule book this way. Sure, you can blame LA for writing this paragraph with some loop hole, but as a captain yourself, would you like to see that other captains will sneak through loop holes as well? I doubt it.
For me it's the right call in case that everybody should take responsibility for their actions and don't snitch threw every written latter and try to make the best for themselves and give a damn to the integrity of this community. God damn, we don't do this for a living, there are and will be some mistakes. Please don't put every word or sentence under the microscope.

We're not here to talk about the morality of the situation so anything bold is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Regarding the question after the paragraph I'd ask how can anyone make that call? Besides I forgot to mention that "There didn't seem to be any big efforts to fix this situation and instead of the captains asking the League Administration for help, players seemed to be wanting to transfer to other teams." (from the original post) is a complete bs technicality. The captains did contact LA through Juizki since he has the best english amongst them and thus would be able to lead the conversation between them and LA  better, so really this point is the biggest stretch out of this entire affair, kind of fitting it's by the LA. 

Anyway, moving on to your point. What constitutes someone "being responsible"? Nowhere in the rule book does it even allude to such a concept. Now as you say "God damn, we don't do this for a living, there are and will be some mistakes. Please don't put every word or sentence under the microscope." I can respect this view, however this could all have been avoided by not putting in such a stupid rule as 6.2 that literally states you have to follow the written rules. If you wanted leeway then say something like 'while we would always like to apply the written rules, we cannot possibly account for every scenario and as such we reserve the right to over-rule anything written beforehand' but whoever wrote this had the hubris to think that such a problem would never arise, so really this is just reaping what you sow and nothing else 🤷‍♂️.

27 minutes ago, tbnantti said:

What I meant was 13.8 states members that regardless of captaincy, members that were involved in the disqualification of their team will be banned. Judging by what's written here, they were. So I don't think it contradicts 13.4 at all.

The issue with that last part of 13.8 is that it's never outlined what that exactly entails. Seen as people are looking to inject 'feelings over fact' (not directed at you I'd like to add) in this discussion of rules I would like to ask people to follow me on a hypothetical (in the truest sense of the word, this is an extreme example on purpose). 

What happens if a captain sets up the team in a way where the assistants are given no ability to add players, change how decisions are made or anything along those lines? Essentially an autocratic system. Well, now say that this captain sets up a horrible team that doesn't gel in any way, so much so that it completely tanks the morale of everyone in the team and consequently people lose motivation to play because of this absolute ass of a GM / captain. At this stage do you seriously blame the assistants for the team shutting down, especially since they hold about as much power as a regular player? What if there was no discussion about how the assistant spots were assigned and they were just selected at random? Etc. 

These are all questions / issues that SHOULD be outlined in the rules but for whatever reason, either through sheer hubris, or something else, they just simply aren't. 

Edited November 6, 2018 by MartindalexC

My point of view is that if there happens an action on day x which has to be looked up by the LA, this day x is fact for the ruling of the LA. They were assistant captains at this time so the disqualification settle at day x and not on day x+5 when the final decision is published.

Yeah, we all know that there are only English speaking people in the LA so there is no way of sending a message to them in English and their mother language.. anyways, if they asked for permission, they have to wait for the decision of the LA and not already switching captaincies and changing teams. This kind of behaviour insult that they didn't seem to try a big effort of keeping the team alive.

17 minutes ago, Mannheimer1938 said:

My point of view is that if there happens an action on day x which has to be looked up by the LA, this day x is fact for the ruling of the LA. They were assistant captains at this time so the disqualification settle at day x and not on day x+5 when the final decision is published.

Yeah, we all know that there are only English speaking people in the LA so there is no way of sending a message to them in English and their mother language.. anyways, if they asked for permission, they have to wait for the decision of the LA and not already switching captaincies and changing teams. This kind of behaviour insult that they didn't seem to try a big effort of keeping the team alive.

Look, even Ape talked about Juizki basically being their spokesman before this shit even started to bubble over. Sure he wasn't technically an assistant or captain but if something walks like a dog and barks like one too, then it's a dog. The fact the LA is grasping at this as some sort of smoking gun is completely laughable. 

In addition to this, how can you possibly sit there and say they didn't make "a big effort of keeping the team alive", are you privy to their discussions with LA? Besides, seen as people like to argue semantics, what even constitutes a "big effort"? Does it mean they have to pick up anybody with a pulse? Perhaps you would like to consider the fact that by the time this decision had finally been made 'official' the pro transfer deadline had passed, so if there were to pick up anybody they would almost certainly be completely out of their depth. 

Edited November 6, 2018 by MartindalexC

"WE HAVE RULES!!!“

I have no fucking Idea how we survived in EC14 🤔

21 minutes ago, iSvamp said:

I have no fucking Idea how we survived in EC14 🤔

Not enough loopholes anymore?;)

Just now, Bjono said:

Not enough loopholes anymore?;)

I think there is more of them in this rulebook (Connor has already mentioned them above).
I was just smarter when I used them back in the days.. or was the reason that an "IKEA-lawyer" wrote that rulebook? I dunno.  🙃 

Cant blame my ban length really, but as I was C this mess was completely my fault, why do you have to punish A's as they didnt got anything to do with managing my team. Could you please give me bigger ban that my A's could play on this ECL ? Feels bad for them.

C'mon. 😀
" they didnt got anything to do with managing my team "

They had no Idea what they signed up for when they took the "A's"?
You're actually saying it was a dictatorship in your team?
do you not have history lessons in school?
MAN! 🙃

Would be nice if players that actually forced our team to quit would get some kind of punishment as its almost impossible to get Elite level players during the season but no... players should show some respect and dedication to their teams and not leave the team if you lose a game or two smh

49 minuuttia sitten, iSvamp kirjoitti:

C'mon. 😀
" they didnt got anything to do with managing my team "

They had no Idea what they signed up for when they took the "A's"?
You're actually saying it was a dictatorship in your team?
do you not have history lessons in school?
MAN! 🙃

Yes 😂

Confirmed: FCM won't finish 16th in ECL Elite this season 🧐

58 minuuttia sitten, Penatski kirjoitti:

Would be nice if players that actually forced our team to quit would get some kind of punishment as its almost impossible to get Elite level players during the season but no... players should show some respect and dedication to their teams and not leave the team if you lose a game or two smh

Well i was planned to leave weeks ago during esm games. But i changed my mind after Totalii joined team i thought he would give some more positive mindset for team. Things didnt change and during playing games atmosphere was still toxic in party chat and blaming whoever made mistake in game. I’d rather playing be fun with same time as taking it serious.(you get the point) Losing first elite regular season games didnt affect to my decision to leave the team))

4 hours ago, MartindalexC said:

Look, even Ape talked about Juizki basically being their spokesman before this shit even started to bubble over. Sure he wasn't technically an assistant or captain but if something walks like a dog and barks like one too, then it's a dog. The fact the LA is grasping at this as some sort of smoking gun is completely laughable. 

 

 

18 minuuttia sitten, xDoumi kirjoitti:

Well i was planned to leave weeks ago during esm games. But i changed my mind after Totalii joined team i thought he would give some more positive mindset for team. Things didnt change and during playing games atmosphere was still toxic in party chat and blaming whoever made mistake in game. I’d rather playing be fun with same time as taking it serious.(you get the point) Losing first elite regular season games didnt affect to my decision to leave the team))

Well your behaviour didnt make the party chat any better, especially rage quitting during ecl games

Edited November 6, 2018 by Penatski

9 minuuttia sitten, Penatski kirjoitti:

Well your behaviour didnt make the party chat any better, especially rage quitting during ecl games

What do you mean by my behaviour? First of all them wasnt rage quits. After ape got disconnected joukki told atleast 3 times that we should give them WO’s, after 5 minutes ape hasnt said anything and there was akward silence in party chat and it thought we are not going to play anymore

Edited November 6, 2018 by xDoumi

Sad shit, true story but it is what it is and it cant supprice anyone? Rules are there, lets play by them. 

 

But; bla bla  bla 

Meh: bla bla bla 

Ok

11 minuuttia sitten, xDoumi kirjoitti:

What do you mean by my behaviour? First of all them wasnt rage quits. After ape got disconnected joukki told atleast 3 times that we should give them WO’s, after 5 minutes ape hasnt said anything and there was akward silence in party chat and it thought we are not going to play anymore

You played in other teams when we were playing and in party chat you were also complaining about how we play and when someone disagreed with you you got mad, and against gotham when ape disconnected u left the party instantly and then joukki said lets give wo's but then ape came back and we spammed messages to u on wa but you didnt answer so we had to give wo's

Edited November 6, 2018 by Penatski

12 minuuttia sitten, Penatski kirjoitti:

You played in other teams when we were playing and in party chat you were also complaining about how we play and when someone disagreed with you you got mad, and against gotham when ape disconnected u left the party instantly and then joukki said lets give wo's but then ape came back and we spammed messages to u on wa but you didnt answer so we had to give wo's

I got mad lol? I really didnt care if we did win or lose i just tried give advice how we could improve our game like everyone did. I didnt leave instantly i waited like 5mins and waited whats going to happen, nothing. I thought were going to give wo like joukki said. something like 10minutes have been gone and i suddenly start to get wa messages that we are going to play 😊

Yes i was playing 1 time with another team while we had normal club games (OMG) sorry about that

Edited November 6, 2018 by xDoumi

I have been watching this situation quite closely from the “sideline” over the last few days. One thing really blowing my mind and the reason why I´m writing this lines, is the fact how arbitrary this decision is. If you make the effort to write and introduce rules you got to follow them and respect the wording – even and especially the ones who are carry them out. That is not the case here.

 

Let´s dive into the wording of the relevant paragraphs:

 

„13.3
Teams are allowed to release a player from their roster, provided this doesn’t violate the roster size rule. If a player is released or transferred to another team and thus the roster size is temporarily below the limit mentioned in 2.2, the team has 24 hours to invite a new player to the team to meet the rule again, otherwise it will be disqualified. Released players cannot go back to the team that released them and their next move is considered a transfer from the team that released them.

13.4
Team captains are not allowed to be transferred during a league/tournament. Team assistant captains are allowed to transfer in case the team captain agrees to a transfer. In case the team captain disagrees, an assistant captain is not allowed to be transferred to another team. This paragraph also applies if a team is not able to finish the tournament for whatever reason.

 

13.8
If a team is disqualified, its managers are banned from the league/tournament. The other roster players are free to transfer to another team, unless they were proven involved in the disqualification of their team, in which case they are also banned.“

 

As there is no rule embodying something like a “right to reject trades/transfers” for the LA, the following situation played out:

Team RAD was falling apart. After the C of RAD decided to shut the team down, the A´s didn’t have a chance to really solve this situation. So, they did what, I think, everyone in this situation would do: searching for an out. The seemingly got one by joining NOR.

Now we come to transfer rules. Yes, in general A´s aren’t allowed to change teams midseason unless they have the ok of the team´s C (13.4) – both A´s reached that agreement with their C. So they played by the rules.

Next step is 13.3 and 13.8. The captains of a team are disqualified from participation in the on-going season when their team is disqualified. Now the timeline of this situation becomes leading. As the wording of 13.8 says: a decision of the LA is needed to disqualify a team. But at the time the A´s got transferred to NOR there wasn’t any decision about a disqualification of RAD. If the LA wanted to prevent a situation like this from happening, they should have taken this into account when writing the rules. The other option for LA would have been to make a temporary decision on RAD and putting all transfers out of RAD on hold until the final decision is made. They didn’t obviously. What they did is handling the situation pretty sloppy and let time lapse away. Time the two players used to join NOR. Something A´s are allowed to do (13.4). So RAD was still part of ECL Elite by the time the transfer happened. In fact, the two players were already part of NOR when disqualification was vocalised. In my understanding of the rules there is no basis in the rules for disqualifying them after that point.

 

Now one might say: “The rules intended to keep Captains responsibly for their teams.” That argument is not valid here. If you want intentions to be taken into account in legal interpretation, you have to make these intentions publicly and more important by the time the said rule is established. You can´t just say, this was the intention when we wrote the rule back in the days. That´s not how rules work, because if you do so decision can (and almost certainly will) become discretionary. But it is exactly what happened here. The rules got bend in line with the feelings of how this situation “morally” should be handled.

 

Since NHLgamer wants to take the next step into a more professional league and tender cash prizes, situations like this can´t happen – that´s really hacky. Everyone should think twice about handing over money to a league that´s run the way it is at the moment.

I strongly recommend that you should re-evaluate those transfer rules and perhaps install something like a “rules committee” that is completely independent from the LA in order to separate  jurisdiction from legislation. 

Edited November 7, 2018 by ScottieN27