Appeal for Spastic vs Sweet

[Summa]

Appeal Accepted

The TWL op consensus is that Eelam was added as an ineligible player to the match, and that the match between Sweet and Spastic will be replayed. Both teams' TWL rosters as of round 2 have been recorded, and only those players will be eligible to be added into the replay. Captains, please come to a consensus on when you want the replay over the next 2 weeks, otherwise I will assign a time.

[Crescent Seal]

[gran guerrero]

I don't think LF went to different Ops to try and get a yes out of one of them, lol. MM told LF Eelam was in a "unique" situation, and decided that he could play. Sweet can't be penalized for miscommunication within staff, besides, like I said before, the game was won 15-6, not 15-14:45 or some shit, Eelam didn't even MVP, didn't even break 80 kills, I'm sure he wasn't the HUGE impact of this match.

you are still arguing as if spastic is upset with just eelam being allowed to play

we are, but because he was allowed to play when he was told he couldn't

when we were told we were allowed to have 3 players able to play, then an hour before the game were told we weren't

we honestly didn't even think we would have enough to play that game but luckily we did, but that didn't take away our frustration that came from dealing with bullshit.

[megaman89]

This is great.

[fLaReD]

wa gwan my yutes

[Crescent Seal]

staff has terrible communication with the player base so its not surprising they lack it among themselves too....pathetic

[Efhat]

Decision coming within the next 24 hours.

Some important information that hasn't been mentioned in the thread:
1) I told Eelam on the day that he left his previous squad this exact set of quotes from my log:" 6:humid> wow eelam actually left mid-jd 6:humid> enjoy not playing next round" (there is more to that log that i edited out, but he did see it and did respond as he was typing during the time.)

2) I don't specifically recall talking to PL about his players being able to play this week. I do, however, recall talking to JAMAL and telling him the following: Rucci is allowed to play on the grounds that he has never been rostered for any TWL squad this season, but poxy and max b must wait a round as that is not the case for them.

I don't know if this is the case here, so this is not specifically targeted at Sweet's situation; but it has been the case in other circumstances that when people are told no by one TWL op they seek out another and go down the line trying to get one to say yes and then come back saying "this guy told me yes!!!!". That practice needs to stop. Just know, that the rules are the rules and they are the basis of what we have to draw upon when making decisions on appeals.

I don't think LF went to different Ops to try and get a yes out of one of them, lol. MM told LF Eelam was in a "unique" situation, and decided that he could play. Sweet can't be penalized for miscommunication within staff, besides, like I said before, the game was won 15-6, not 15-14:45 or some shit, Eelam didn't even MVP, didn't even break 80 kills, I'm sure he wasn't the HUGE impact of this match.

[Jamal]

Decision coming within the next 24 hours.

Some important information that hasn't been mentioned in the thread:
1) I told Eelam on the day that he left his previous squad this exact set of quotes from my log:" 6:humid> wow eelam actually left mid-jd 6:humid> enjoy not playing next round" (there is more to that log that i edited out, but he did see it and did respond as he was typing during the time.)

2) I don't specifically recall talking to PL about his players being able to play this week. I do, however, recall talking to JAMAL and telling him the following: Rucci is allowed to play on the grounds that he has never been rostered for any TWL squad this season, but poxy and max b must wait a round as that is not the case for them.

I don't know if this is the case here, so this is not specifically targeted at Sweet's situation; but it has been the case in other circumstances that when people are told no by one TWL op they seek out another and go down the line trying to get one to say yes and then come back saying "this guy told me yes!!!!". That practice needs to stop. Just know, that the rules are the rules and they are the basis of what we have to draw upon when making decisions on appeals.

Honestly don't care about the appeal but you added poxy/max b for me and told me they could play, because I fucking asked about that more than once so I could let them know if they should show. Bottom line, all three of you retards have different rules and have no clue what's going on.

[Hulk]

the replay outcome will be the same.. can you guys give it a rest already jesus

[Summa]

Decision coming within the next 24 hours.

Some important information that hasn't been mentioned in the thread:
1) I told Eelam on the day that he left his previous squad this exact set of quotes from my log:" 6:humid> wow eelam actually left mid-jd 6:humid> enjoy not playing next round" (there is more to that log that i edited out, but he did see it and did respond as he was typing during the time.)

2) I don't specifically recall talking to PL about his players being able to play this week. I do, however, recall talking to JAMAL and telling him the following: Rucci is allowed to play on the grounds that he has never been rostered for any TWL squad this season, but poxy and max b must wait a round as that is not the case for them.

I don't know if this is the case here, so this is not specifically targeted at Sweet's situation; but it has been the case in other circumstances that when people are told no by one TWL op they seek out another and go down the line trying to get one to say yes and then come back saying "this guy told me yes!!!!". That practice needs to stop. Just know, that the rules are the rules and they are the basis of what we have to draw upon when making decisions on appeals.

[Demonic]

What i find hilarious is the fact that I was the only one allowed to play because of my unique situation. Megaman/poxy/rucci/max b all would still be unable to play. MM God's decision to allow me play was not one that had any effect on the other players. So Demonic, your rationale for allowing the appeal is flawed, as those individuals would still not be able to play regardless if they showed or not.

PS -Thanks for throwing me under the bus LF

Not really Eelam, as i said earlier if this situation was just you, then it wouldnt be an issue. TWL op said you could play, thats that, no appeal based on that part so to be honest your situation is irrelevent to this.

As i said, providing the information given is correct, the only appealable bit is where spastic were told THEY could field players, then just before the game told they couldnt. You Eelam dont fit anywhere into that.

[Zeebu]

Wow, what a surprise. Drama over poorly written and implemented rules.
I love it when the ‘this is the rule so we must follow it’ is rolled out whenever someone loses a match. Where is the complaining about the rules before the season starts? Where is the motivation or willingness to drive changes without the context of a losing game? Grow some balls and/or some brains; the rules have sucked, and have not been followed, for over a decade. If you don’t like it, find some motivation to make productive changes when it doesn’t benefit your squad.

They are the same as the ‘rules’ that you might find if invited to go swimming at a neighbor’s house; don’t run around the pool, don’t piss in the pool; you should wear a bathing suit, etc. You know that as soon as things get going the rules will be bent/broken in some way. So another solution if you don’t like it; stop going over to swim.
eph

i pee in all pools and i try to flash my dong as much as possible

[Jones]

if sweet would have lost this we would've made an appeal because we played eelam who was ineligible to play

[Riverside]

3.05c, as a matter of plain language, clearly states that a player in Eelam's situation must wait a round before playing. The "Preamble" as it were, also states that TWL Ops can revise the rules (presumably under their discretion) "but notice will be given on the official TWL site (twl.trenchwars.org) beforehand."

Even if we assume the quoted "Preamble" allows the TWL Ops to deviate from the rules in situations they deem necessary in order to be equitable, it seems to me there was a clear lack of notice to all parties involved. The easiest thing to do would be to deny the appeal and "Let bygones be bygones and you gon' get the hell on..." (quoting Ms. Jackson by Outkast). However this would inevitably frustrate the purpose of 3.05c.

In order to be truly equitable, whatever decision the Ops arrive at in this appeal, it must be applied to Sweet's LJ as well. There was a clear lack of notice involving the same player in both games and to ignore one because it was not raised on appeal would make the existence of the TWL rules seem arbitrary as already noted in this thread. Eelam was deemed eligible to play for this past round because of his early departure during Round 1. Therefore, equity would dictate that if that rationale underlies the TWL Ops' decision, Eelam and Sweet should have been given notice of his eligibility prior to any matches being played.

prob the only post that makes sense here.

[Money]

whats rly new tho eph