I don't know if Dice has decided to appeal or not, but I will make the case for them regardless of if they care or not.
It is quite simple:
6.01
If an unpredictable server crash, router failure, server lag, TWBot failure, or other event has a massive impact on a game in progress, the match will be cancelled and all current scores discarded. The game will then be replayed at a later time.
The decision to award the 2nd (but actually 3rd) game to Pandora is directly opposed to this rule. A team with an 18-11 lead has still not won the game. It is a referee's decision to deny the players the opportunity to determine the outcome of the game, which is directly opposed to all competition.
Now you might say "hey humid, isn't there also a rule in the TWL rules that reserves the right for a TWL op to make decisions in extenuating circumstances"; and I would say to you, why yes there is! And usually in these extenuating circumstances, we look at historical precedence for a guideline. If we are looking for historical precedence, we need look no further than an hour and a half earlier, when a similar bot failure occurred in a game that was 15-14. What was the decision? Replay the game. So what possibly changed over the course of an hour and a half in the TWLB finals to change a bot failure decision from a replay to "well, this team is leading....soooo they win".
The only thing I can come up with is that a judgment was made on expected outcomes. This team was leading by a decent margin, so they will probably win. But again, that makes it so that the players are no longer determining the outcome. And if you really want to go down that road, you would just not play half of TWL since the chance that random crap squad A beats TWL finalist squad B is so negligible that it is not an expected outcome. In the spirit of March Madness, underdogs can happen, surprises can happen, comebacks can happen; teams can find a way to win. That's why you play the game instead of just look at it on paper.
However if that doesn't satisfy your desires, just go back through these archives in the TWL forums. I am sure that you will find above a 95% appeal approval rate in regards to rule 6.01 and bot failure. Hell you already approved one today. You're already replaying one TWL final match, what's the big deal about making the right call and doing the other one.
here is a video for reference material:
TY 4 this.
PS: As a former long time TWL op and head of 2 TWLs, to me the moment this happened the question wouldn't have been whether pandora wins or not. It would have been if we start from 0-0 or if we play with one team needing 2 mins to win and other needing 9. Awarding the win would have never been an option on the table.
It is quite simple:
6.01
If an unpredictable server crash, router failure, server lag, TWBot failure, or other event has a massive impact on a game in progress, the match will be cancelled and all current scores discarded. The game will then be replayed at a later time.
The decision to award the 2nd (but actually 3rd) game to Pandora is directly opposed to this rule. A team with an 18-11 lead has still not won the game. It is a referee's decision to deny the players the opportunity to determine the outcome of the game, which is directly opposed to all competition.
Now you might say "hey humid, isn't there also a rule in the TWL rules that reserves the right for a TWL op to make decisions in extenuating circumstances"; and I would say to you, why yes there is! And usually in these extenuating circumstances, we look at historical precedence for a guideline. If we are looking for historical precedence, we need look no further than an hour and a half earlier, when a similar bot failure occurred in a game that was 15-14. What was the decision? Replay the game. So what possibly changed over the course of an hour and a half in the TWLB finals to change a bot failure decision from a replay to "well, this team is leading....soooo they win".
The only thing I can come up with is that a judgment was made on expected outcomes. This team was leading by a decent margin, so they will probably win. But again, that makes it so that the players are no longer determining the outcome. And if you really want to go down that road, you would just not play half of TWL since the chance that random crap squad A beats TWL finalist squad B is so negligible that it is not an expected outcome. In the spirit of March Madness, underdogs can happen, surprises can happen, comebacks can happen; teams can find a way to win. That's why you play the game instead of just look at it on paper.
However if that doesn't satisfy your desires, just go back through these archives in the TWL forums. I am sure that you will find above a 95% appeal approval rate in regards to rule 6.01 and bot failure. Hell you already approved one today. You're already replaying one TWL final match, what's the big deal about making the right call and doing the other one.
here is a video for reference material:
TY 4 this.
PS: As a former long time TWL op and head of 2 TWLs, to me the moment this happened the question wouldn't have been whether pandora wins or not. It would have been if we start from 0-0 or if we play with one team needing 2 mins to win and other needing 9. Awarding the win would have never been an option on the table.
Comment