Regarding the pandora vs sage replay of a replay.

[sarger]

I'm just going to go ahead and say what I think about this. First in your post you claim that the score was close in each game. That is not true. Score was 50-31 in game two. That means only one game was close, the first one, which had already been made INVALID by staff mid match. Now, both teams were wronged by that staff decision to announce that it was being replayed, when obviously nothing was wrong. But it wasnt an unfair decision to anyone, both teams knew about it before the match ended, therefore the result should not have any importance. However there was nothing wrong with the replay, except the fact that Sage had just decided to complete disregard that staff announcement that was made PRIOR to the result, and at a point where Pandora was actually winning the match. The second match was a blowout victory for Pandora. Sage may have been demoralized by that decision, but they knew it beforehand and therefore if that was the case, then it is their own fault for not taking heed to the zone message.


As for this decision to replay a replay, the difference between these two replays is that in the first one, both teams were cheated out of a game that had no problems. In the second replay, only Pandora is being cheated because the second game was fair to both teams.


I don't see any logic in this decision, all I see is sympathy for Sage who knowingly demoralized themselves due to something they already knew mid match in the first game. Now the only team that is being screwed is Pandora.

But apperently I will not be able to appeal this, so I guess this cycle of bad decisions must continue.

[H.M.S. Stargazer]

This Decision was made by all TWL ops. We feel that due to the fact of the controversial nature of the games that both teams DID win a match.(regardless of the circumstances that lead to them) the FAIREST way to determine a winner, would be to play a 3rd and deciding game. That way 1) it is a best of 3 games. winner take all. 2) all the circumstances that lead to any inconsistancies are dealt with.

[Deductable]

I'm just going to go ahead and say what I think about this. First in your post you claim that the score was close in each game. That is not true. Score was 50-31 in game two. That means only one game was close, the first one, which had already been made INVALID by staff mid match. Now, both teams were wronged by that staff decision to announce that it was being replayed, when obviously nothing was wrong. But it wasnt an unfair decision to anyone, both teams knew about it before the match ended, therefore the result should not have any importance. However there was nothing wrong with the replay, except the fact that Sage had just decided to complete disregard that staff announcement that was made PRIOR to the result, and at a point where Pandora was actually winning the match. The second match was a blowout victory for Pandora. Sage may have been demoralized by that decision, but they knew it beforehand and therefore if that was the case, then it is their own fault for not taking heed to the zone message.


As for this decision to replay a replay, the difference between these two replays is that in the first one, both teams were cheated out of a game that had no problems. In the second replay, only Pandora is being cheated because the second game was fair to both teams.


I don't see any logic in this decision, all I see is sympathy for Sage who knowingly demoralized themselves due to something they already knew mid match in the first game. Now the only team that is being screwed is Pandora.

But apperently I will not be able to appeal this, so I guess this cycle of bad decisions must continue.

To be very mature about your post: piss off

[sarger]

This Decision was made by all TWL ops. We feel that due to the fact of the controversial nature of the games that both teams DID win a match.(regardless of the circumstances that lead to them) the FAIREST way to determine a winner, would be to play a 3rd and deciding game. That way 1) it is a best of 3 games. winner take all. 2) all the circumstances that lead to any inconsistancies are dealt with.

"Fairest" you say, well that's argueable.

To 1) I'd just like to point out that the first game was made invalid mid match, so by saying it's a best out of 3 games youre validating a game that staff had had already cancelled mid match. And also would like to point out that a best out of 3 has never been used in a regular season, let alone making an invalid game count.

To 2) Except for the "inconsistancies" you created within Pandora when you made this piss poor decision. And is there any proof that there was such inconsistancy? I'm assuming this "inconsistency" youre referring to is Sage's behavior prior and after the match. But lets face it, the decision was made mid match and they should have realized it.

Also would like to point out one of the inaccurate things about this decision which shows itself in Mirrs post, when she says that both games were close, which is wrong, only the first one was close.

[eelam <tw>]

re

ummm... Sage didnt appeal this match, so why was staff talking about the match? Oh Wait.. let me guess because staff wants to fuck pandora over ONCE AGAIN!.. good decision, i dont give a fuck facing them again i will just fucking run over them again, but its just a really bad decision.

[Jeenyuss]

really? they didn't? i thought spikey said he was going to appeal in another thread.

[eelam <tw>]

re

talked to pascone 2 days ago, said no appeal was made at all so match stands. What i dont get is how the 2nd game was unfair to both teams, the first game was unfair cause of the announcement ( which at the time WE WERE UP ), but afterwards we just waiting for GALLE to end it / kaming, cmon do u think b.rabbit can beat marge/GA 2v1 like cmon lol this is twlj here. The 2nd game we decided to give Sage a lil more credit and play hard all way through and the result was 50-31. So let me sum everything up here.

1) staff made announcemtn while game was going on saying ALL MATCHES WILL BE REPLAYED.

2) GALLE like the newb he is didn't kill our game therefore letting us finish for some odd reason.

3) we did the replay that STAFF WANTED and raped Sage.

K, now tell me why this was unfair? oh is it because we let Sage win and just told our players to have fun and kami or is it because GAlle was too stupid to kill match?

[apt]

Only reason this would be done was because one of the squads in contention appealed the match. Otherwise staff would have never looked twice at it. And if it was done without an appeal, then.. I don't understand :turned:

Pandora, if you were in the same boat, you would request an appeal. You would not be so heavy hearted about the idea, if you believed you could swing Sage 50-31 again.

A third match, fair is fair. This isn't a twl playoff game, pretty sure you guys will make playoffs anyways win or lose. So stop obsessing over the 2d Internet Asteroids drama, and move out of your parents house. :wub:

[sarger]

Only reason this would be done was because one of the squads in contention appealed the match. Otherwise staff would have never looked twice at it. And if it was done without an appeal, then.. I don't understand :turned:

Pandora, if you were in the same boat, you would request an appeal. You would not be so heavy hearted about the idea, if you believed you could swing Sage 50-31 again.

A third match, fair is fair. This isn't a twl playoff game, pretty sure you guys will make playoffs anyways win or lose. So stop obsessing over the 2d Internet Asteroids drama, and move out of your parents house. :wub:

It isnt the fact that we have to play it again that bugs me, its the fact that staff seemed to show serious lack in judgement, I mean we have to replay a game we already won and all we get is:

"After a thorough discussion about last weekend's events, we have decided to have a rematch between Sage vs Pandora (LJ) during replay week. After talking it over, we believe that no lag affected this match and with the scores being so close to each other in each game, there should be a final one to resolve this controversial issue."

I mean this statement is just simply wrong. And that was the basis of their decision? All I see is a sympathy decision.

[flibb]

What was the controversial issue?

[Spikester]

You don't want to play us because you think you might lose?

If you can easily beat us, then you shouldn't have a problem playing us again on replay week right?

You say you told your players to stop trying and suicide etc, however, Marge (who dueled b.rabbit in the end) never did. Neither did any others. To state something like that is just retarded.

"OH WE LOST, BUT LOL WE DIDNT TRY"

[RednaZ]

Pandora sucks and "cmon do u think b.rabbit can beat marge/GA 2v1", yes he can cuz those 2 suck ass aswell.
But trying to fix a mistake with another mistake is as sarger eloquantly put it a "piss poor decision". It's pretty obvious staff made a bad decision at the time and that it was unfavourable to sage, but this decision isn't any better and neither is the reasoning. Seeing as the first game was officially cancelled, you can't even speak of best of 3 however.

Summary, I like sage better, sage deserved the win in the beginning. Staff messed up by zoning a stupid decision too early, fucked over sage. Accept it rather than fucking over another squad.

[Lame]

This is the best decision since Sage won the first LJ match legitimate. The replay call was a mistake, so that means that the second game shouldn't have taken place. Pandora won the game that wasn't supposed to be played. Looking at it that way, you (pandora) should be happy you get a second chance to win a game you actually lost.

[Doc Flabby]

Sage won game 1
Pandora won game 2

Replay will find the real winner imo

[Dutch_]

Ok what if sage would have won the seccond game? Would there still be a replay? I think not! For that reason alone there should not be a replay.

Game 1 was made invalid mid match. <-- INVALID!
Game 2 Pandora won.

Pretty easy if you look at the rules. And no, its not fair for sage but thats just too bad. The ref fkd up, it happens. But rules are rules, and they are pretty clear about this situation.