| Forum » General » League 4 / 4 on fire! | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Username
4820 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Most of the things are already summarised in a perfect fashion by my fellow managers. And @Rand about the points that you wrote I have the following opinion. @Rand said: I havent read all the topics about this issue. But i would like someone to give me a quick recap about this. I'll tell you what i know so far, and what i think about it, and let's see if we agree. Please read Solio post. Some of the most active managers have worked hard and actually found loopholes just to prove that whats going on is against the game. 1.- The fact that they are @. I am terribly angry at them right now. I havent been able to talk to them, but i will most probably take out their @, as they have lost all my confidence. They've proven me that they can act as kids if the situation requires it, and that is something a good @ can never do. They represent us as a company, and we cannot allow this type of behaviour from them. Do that right away. No queastion about that. 2.- The only point that acts as their defense, is the fact that noone got penalized for it. i mean, noone from the outside. Jeys68 didnt want the promotion, so he gave it to their colleagues ( they're all friends from spanish striker ). This is the only fact that can help them, but for me is not enough. Do you actually believe that a person wouldn't want a promotion. After working hard for almost a whole season and after this close to going to next stage a person would just leave the hard earned victory. I'm more doubtful about this that Jeys68 has been forced into this by lure of a prize or just by force as a few members of International 55 were told to keep shut if they don't want anything wrong happen to them. Moreover whole group was called cheaters by none other than same person without any reason or proof whatsoever. As for the punishment, we have never punished these types of behaviour before, not even in striker spanish. It is not enough to apply article 9 of the game rules. It's only 2 games in the end. If someone else would have got affected by this, then we would talk about this again, but that is not the case, so i would vote for not punishing them. Somebody getting hurt or not is not the case. If a law is made you have to follow it. Even if a person wants to die, you won't kill him. Because that's against the law. Just like here even if Jeys68 didn't want promotion that doesn't mean that they will fix a match. In the end I would like to say that put all the concerned teams should be penalised in following manner:- 1. Both the @'s must be removed from their duty. 2. All 3 teams must not advance to next stage and teams which are worthy of promotion (even if in other groups) must be given the golden opportuinity. 3. Reset of the teams both the @ Edited by bluegene 12-09-2011 12:52 |
12/09/2011 12:51 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
280 msgs.
First-team player
|
slipi said: My view is that it sets a very dangerous precedent. If managers are allowed to break the rules as long as they have "good intentions", then there is no way of effectively making this game fair. @s should set an example of good, moral behaviour to others, they cannot choose when they are and are not allowed to break the rules. No, that's not what happened. We do not consider this action ( losing a game on purpose ) a fact strong enough to apply rule 9 on it. Intentions have nothing to do here. it's like if you buy a player for 10M, even though the standard price is 13M, you won't be punished for that, although it's a bit off-market. We have been applying this rule in spanish striker for 10 seasons now, and i think it's the way to go. One match, two matches are okay, more... we would have to think about it. And i know, this does not makes the game fair. But what else can we do? We cannot re-check everygame in every division to see if a player has lost on purpose. Check my calendar, i lost a match last week, because i didnt check the lineup, and i played with 10-man only, because one of them was injured. This breaks rule 9? How i can prove that i didnt want to benefit the other guy? It was really my fault, and no-one else's! Things will be very complicated if we have to be aware of this, and come to think about it. did you see yesterday's basketball match between france and spain? France lost on purpose, and everyone knew it. Did it get punished? No. unfair for the guys that will face spain? Yes, of course, but it's something we have to live with, i'm afraid. |
12/09/2011 12:55 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
4820 msgs.
Best scorer
|
@Rand said: We have been applying this rule in spanish striker for 10 seasons now, and i think it's the way to go. One match, two matches are okay, more... we would have to think about it. And i know, this does not makes the game fair. But what else can we do? We cannot re-check everygame in every division to see if a player has lost on purpose. Check my calendar, i lost a match last week, because i didnt check the lineup, and i played with 10-man only, because one of them was injured. This breaks rule 9? How i can prove that i didnt want to benefit the other guy? It was really my fault, and no-one else's! This seems to be the end of disscusion then. If we were called to express our concern and actually speak our minds than this is clearly a big "FULLSTOP" for that. |
12/09/2011 12:59 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
2108 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Also, to add to the above: Cheltenham Town FC and Bolton Wanderers FC MUST be separated. They have been together since season 1, that's just flat out asking for trouble. |
12/09/2011 13:00 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
921 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
@Rand said: We have been applying this rule in spanish striker for 10 seasons now, and i think it's the way to go. One match, two matches are okay, more... we would have to think about it. And i know, this does not makes the game fair. But what else can we do? We cannot re-check everygame in every division to see if a player has lost on purpose. Check my calendar, i lost a match last week, because i didnt check the lineup, and i played with 10-man only, because one of them was injured. This breaks rule 9? How i can prove that i didnt want to benefit the other guy? It was really my fault, and no-one else's! Things will be very complicated if we have to be aware of this, and come to think about it. did you see yesterday's basketball match between france and spain? France lost on purpose, and everyone knew it. Did it get punished? No. unfair for the guys that will face spain? Yes, of course, but it's something we have to live with, i'm afraid. I respond with this one very famous football match in 1982 football world cup. One game was fixed. The rules of the football world cup were changed as a result. The match in 1982 was for deciding qualification to the second round, this Striker Manager game is for deciding promotion to division 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Germany_v_Austria_(1982) |
12/09/2011 13:01 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
921 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
In addition, I must say that France also weren't setting the rules, applying the rules and then breaking the rules and then judging if the rules were broken. This is what happens when @s play this game and then have fixed games. | 12/09/2011 13:05 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
3756 msgs.
Best scorer
|
@Rand Im sorry to point out one of the @ involved in this matter had retained my team and after repeated attempts to ask him for how long my team will be retained and what are the sanctions against me; the only answer I got was "you will see". Today after 67 Hrs after my team was retained I finally ended up messaging @ranru about it and finally my team was released. There seriously has been a lack of communication between the @s and other managers. @s are there to lock/delete threads and of course retain teams of managers who speak against them; but dont reply back to messages. And nowhere have I ever seen @s playing games amongst other players; and when they do this is the mess that is created at the end. Some abuse their powers and try to clarify their actions but if other managers were to do the same then they are labeled as cheats and are sanctioned first and then asked to justify their actions. This is really very absurd. |
12/09/2011 13:07 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
6256 msgs.
Golden Ball
|
@Rand said: And i know, this does not makes the game fair. But what else can we do? We cannot re-check everygame in every division to see if a player has lost on purpose. Check my calendar, i lost a match last week, because i didnt check the lineup, and i played with 10-man only, because one of them was injured. This breaks rule 9? How i can prove that i didnt want to benefit the other guy? It was really my fault, and no-one else's! However the cheating was clear in this case. There is no doubt, it's been admitted by the parties involved and they tried to use their @ powers to cover it up. That must increase the severity of the punishment. Did you see the fine that Wolves got in the Premier League last season for fielding a deliberately weakened line up. |
12/09/2011 13:07 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
921 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
@Rand said: slipi said: My view is that it sets a very dangerous precedent. If managers are allowed to break the rules as long as they have "good intentions", then there is no way of effectively making this game fair. @s should set an example of good, moral behaviour to others, they cannot choose when they are and are not allowed to break the rules. No, that's not what happened. We do not consider this action ( losing a game on purpose ) a fact strong enough to apply rule 9 on it. Intentions have nothing to do here. it's like if you buy a player for 10M, even though the standard price is 13M, you won't be punished for that, although it's a bit off-market. We have been applying this rule in spanish striker for 10 seasons now, and i think it's the way to go. One match, two matches are okay, more... we would have to think about it. Please consider then applying Rule 1, shared IP. Managers with shared IP (the two @s are "brothers" and share IP and login times) are not allowed to participate in the same private leagues were prizes are available. I contend that the prize of promotion to Division 3 is far greater. Managers with shared IP are also not allowed to collude with third parties - this has clearly occurred here. |
12/09/2011 13:09 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
4820 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Choose the punishment so other @ know what we want then above all they have to decide. http://uk.strikermanager.com/foros/hilo.php?id=261280 Edited by bluegene 12-09-2011 13:29 |
12/09/2011 13:26 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
6
