no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Discussions / LEATHERHEAD-LEAGUE SERIES 2 Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 13 14 15 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2019-07-26 21:53:25 (ID: 100141637) Report Abuse | |
|
jack6 wrote:
jack6 wrote:
Oh boy, that will be a tough one. Cheese did win in OT by a 60+ yard TD pass, so this will be taken away, leads to a tie. If my team wins, it will jump them. If they lose, Cheese are likely in anyway. I just checked series 1. There an OT win by a pass TD was ruled a win for the losing team. Opinions? I would rate that as a tie. In my game against Magpies I had thrown a TD in regular time. This was rightfully canceled. And so the game has been scored a draw. This is almost the same situation. The difference is here only when the TD was thrown. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-07-27 15:11:49 (ID: 100141656) Report Abuse | |
|
Kottan wrote:
jack6 wrote:
jack6 wrote:
Oh boy, that will be a tough one. Cheese did win in OT by a 60+ yard TD pass, so this will be taken away, leads to a tie. If my team wins, it will jump them. If they lose, Cheese are likely in anyway. I just checked series 1. There an OT win by a pass TD was ruled a win for the losing team. Opinions? I would rate that as a tie. In my game against Magpies I had thrown a TD in regular time. This was rightfully canceled. And so the game has been scored a draw. This is almost the same situation. The difference is here only when the TD was thrown. I'm on the same page. But I did look at the old series and found the ruling, but no explaination why I did that. But at that time we had no tie (why ever that was). |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-07-27 15:14:48 (ID: 100141657) Report Abuse | |
|
I did u p d a t e the standings and the scores of last gameday, the reports will follow from Monday on.
A bit strange was the Athletics/OrangeCrush game, since BOTH did pass a lot and I ruled that a tie 0-0. But eventually this should have been a loss for both teams, since a tie could have playoff impacts. In this case it had not. Opinions? The Campionship games are scheduled, please challenge your opponents. Basterds will host Leopards Wadenbeisser will host Roma |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-07-27 19:13:00 (ID: 100141661) Report Abuse | |
|
in my opinion both teams violated the rules given, therefore should not receive any outcome from the games. So yes, two losses.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
notsch
|
posted: 2019-07-27 19:18:03 (ID: 100141662) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
I did u p d a t e the standings and the scores of last gameday, the reports will follow from Monday on. A bit strange was the Athletics/OrangeCrush game, since BOTH did pass a lot and I ruled that a tie 0-0. But eventually this should have been a loss for both teams, since a tie could have playoff impacts. In this case it had not. Opinions? The Campionship games are scheduled, please challenge your opponents. Basterds will host Leopards Wadenbeisser will host Roma I think a tie is an appropriate outcome...it would be weird to rule a game as a 2-L-game IMHO... And sorry for be so unreliable this whole competition  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-07-28 05:52:02 (ID: 100141671) Report Abuse | |
|
That 2 loss game would be a real punishment beyond regular rulings.
But things like that happening, kind that way. Basically we would vacate any positive outcome. The special situation is that both teams did mess up. Usually that does not happen.  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-07-28 08:12:45 (ID: 100141672) Report Abuse | |
|
jack6 wrote:
That 2 loss game would be a real punishment beyond regular rulings. But things like that happening, kind that way. Basically we would vacate any positive outcome. The special situation is that both teams did mess up. Usually that does not happen. Comment on the Athletics / Crush Game: Both teams did not follow the rules and passed the ball. Had these played against others, then it would have to be scored 0-20 each. Now they have played against each other. Then I think it can not be that then the correct penalty is halved. Therefore, I think it is fair for all teams that both teams lost the game with 0-20. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
OrangeCrush
|
posted: 2019-07-28 12:54:35 (ID: 100141679) Report Abuse |
|
Kottan wrote:
jack6 wrote:
That 2 loss game would be a real punishment beyond regular rulings. But things like that happening, kind that way. Basically we would vacate any positive outcome. The special situation is that both teams did mess up. Usually that does not happen. Comment on the Athletics / Crush Game: Both teams did not follow the rules and passed the ball. Had these played against others, then it would have to be scored 0-20 each. Now they have played against each other. Then I think it can not be that then the correct penalty is halved. Therefore, I think it is fair for all teams that both teams lost the game with 0-20. Sorry for not not putting in correct orders in the last gameday. I expected a loose due to that and can live with amy ruling by Jack. However, i am a little bit confused, that a team like the Bretzfeld Bandits, who did not manage a single game of playing according to the rules in this Tournament point fingers on other teams. Why not use this time to make a correct playbook for your team |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-07-28 14:06:24 (ID: 100141680) Report Abuse | |
|
Pointing fingers does not help here and in case of the Bandits they used as far as I can see a game setting approach which was and is accepted.
This approach has the risk that you get scores substracted if a pass TD does happen, but it also can help to extend the drive. I never wanted and never want to do too many restriction on the game settings and the playbook, because then it gets down to controling and ruling very closely, which spoils the fun. I can understand that it happens not setting the game up the right way (it happend almost to me too, this season) and it is only a matter of possibilities that both parties do it. Still I have to deal with this and it should be fair and easy to understand for every party involved. I first thought and that's why I did rule it 0-0, that a tie would be OK, but when I did calculate the standings and the playoff seatings, I did see that in some cases a tie could have benefit the violator. I think this is an sitituation which should not happen and will likely not happen too often, if there will be ever a 3rd series, but in any case the ruling should be clear. I can understand the approach with 0-20 ruling for both teams. But I would like to hear more opinions. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Captain Jack
|
posted: 2019-07-28 20:01:12 (ID: 100141685) Report Abuse |
|
As one of those who has violated the rules frequently this season (due to my hectic schedule and not even realising we had started and then totally forgetting to change the playbook and then when I did messing up - aka Total Incompetence) I think anyone violating the rules has to have a loss recorded. If it so happens to be both teams then both should suffer a loss otherwise an unfair advantage might accrue.
Just because the other bloke is incompetent doesn't make it ok for you to be incompetent too  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 13 14 15 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / LEATHERHEAD-LEAGUE SERIES 2 | |
