[Frogmite]

Originally Posted by nRvBard

I'm pretty confident I can.


This part of the rule feels like it has been bent?



This isnt the part of the rule that was questioned, basically the opposing team ons wanted to reschedule while Nerve wanted either a substitution to take place or have the game walkovered. I feel that a reschedule has to be agreed upon by both teams as there is no real rule and limitations to it. Essentially the team rescheduling has the advantage as they are not having to use a substitute for the game.


It's quite bad mannered to suggest both teams are "pretending" to be tier 1. I'm quite confident our team can compete at a tier 1 level. I think we showed that in SEACC (well havoc did ^^).

In terms of admins, you guys cant claim you dont have any faults or always make correct decisions. Your human, we all know that. But in this case you are clearly siding with clan ons. Not only are they getting a substitute for this game incase their player cant make it but they are getting a reschedule for a game that they needed to use a substitute on. I dont feel this is fair on future teams playing clan ons, as substitutes are really key in this competition, something that Nerve has keenly felt.

We're not siding anyone.

If you can show me that no onslaught players were not connected 15 minutes after the start of the game we'll give the walkover.

What i mean for the tier 1 thing, i wanted to mean that your teams can both be in tier 1 next season and that i don't want to see such a mess hapening because you guys can't agree on something (whoever the fault belongs to) and blaming the admins for their decisions.

[x5_Bard]

I dont see how the 15minute rule only applies to the entire clan and not individual players? Considering its listing after the substitution rule and how it is designed to prevent single players from getting walkovered you can probably see how some of us feel it is regarding single players as well.

Can you please elaborate on the exact rules for individual players not showing up and then the clan leader asking for a reschedule in this regard then? Should a substitute be used in this case? Which team decides if a reschedule can happen?

Also please dont feel that I am arguing with you simply for the "fun" of it. As this is the first season problems are bound to crop up and talking them out can sometimes result in a workable solution/rule for future games/seasons.

EDIT: I may have misread your post ^^ I can actually prove on my vod i beleive that both Xetech and Fai were absent at both the start and after 15 mins from game time

EDIT: http://www.twitch.tv/bard123/b/310791383 at 26:15 onwards you can clearly see the time at the bottom right 8:51 (Adelaide time) so 9:21 server. And you will see the 2 of their players not online. I even scroll through the chat!

Quick Comments

Snx.FigJig:

evidence!

[Frogmite]

Originally Posted by nRvBard

I dont see how the 15minute rule only applies to the entire clan and not individual players? Considering its listing after the substitution rule and how it is designed to prevent single players from getting walkovered you can probably see how some of us feel it is regarding single players as well.

Can you please elaborate on the exact rules for individual players not showing up and then the clan leader asking for a reschedule in this regard then? Should a substitute be used in this case? Which team decides if a reschedule can happen?

Also please dont feel that I am arguing with you simply for the "fun" of it. As this is the first season problems are bound to crop up and talking them out can sometimes result in a workable solution/rule for future games/seasons.

The rule also applies for individual players.
The players shall all be present at the time of match kick-off, especially when not streamed.
You are in your rights to ask for a walkover in that case, it happened many times since the start of the league in the 5 divisions. My only point is that if you can't get the agreement of the other team leader then you need to speak to an admin, majority of us were connected and you can ask us. Every week players of the 5 divisions ask me questions in-game when they want admin to take decisions.

Admins took the decision to replay those games on sunday 9PM AEDT. If you have any comments regarding this PM me. I am always free to discuss on disagreements.

Good luck to both teams for the sunday games.

[Reere]

Just gonna sum this up, and give my opinions:

All those claiming that nRv is not flexible, and follows the rule too strictly, I must disagree with you. Putting this incident aside, for all those managers/admins/players that have dealt personally with myself or Pickle, have we been such asses about rescheduling or subs? We've pretty much agree'd or negotiated with anyone that's come up to us that wanted a change.

Today's incident was different because we were given no prior notice. It wasn't that 15min on the dot, no player shows up so we take the WO. It was about 2 hours, before one of the missing players show'd up, and another one of the players didn't show up at all. If a team has a player 30min-1hr late, so far it's happened before and we've let the games go on anyway. Today's incident was extreme. Due to the fatigue of our players, we decided to take a WO for a 2hr lateness or no-show. Honestly if this was flipped around, and my players were late for 2hrs or never show'd, I'd give our opponents a WO on the spot.

The rule of needing an admin to permit the walkover, is our mistake that we overlooked. As we thought it would be consensus to all that 2hrs/noshow means WO.

As events were very heated today, I apologize on behalf of the whole nRv if any harsh words or attitudes were exchanged. We train hard, and compete hard to become the best that we can be. The frustration that games could not be played as planned erupted as we train very hard each week for SEACL, and we are sorry for that.

To all Admins/Managers, we nRv mean no disrespect. We appreciate and acknowledge what all of you have done to make SEACL#2 possible. What happened today, will be considered a minor road bump. Please keep doing what all of you are doing, the SEA scene would be nowhere without you guys. We are sorry if our emotions get the best of us.

Quick Comments

	crAzerk:
	Frogmite:	nice post
	x5_Bard:	<3
	phoney:
	LordByrnsy:	great post
	nirvAnA:	thats how you state your case! <3
	Stallion:	an excellent post sir *takes hat off*
	AxSGRiM:
	ToRDolo:	<3 Reere
	xGKingdelete:
	[TA]LoSt:

[crAzerk]

Just to clarify Frog's point in case you don't get it, the main idea is that many admins such as Frog himself were online, but noone messaged them regarding the walkover. You are entitled to the walkover but you need to inform an admin about it, rather than just 'automatically claim it'.

EDIT: Thanks Reere for your post

Quick Comments

Frogmite:

my engrish is terribad. thanks

[TAEdgE]

.. and Stallion - to think, you thought the other issue was gonna cause drama haha. YOU CAN'T ESCAPE IT!

Quick Comments

Stallion:

haha can't escape you either it seems :P

[BAD.BiGbiRd]

This argument hurt my brain almost as much as watching Elfi play PvP

Quick Comments

	neKo:	was that really necessary
	Aiya:	wow
	Stallion:	LOL it made my head hurt too :P
	AxSGRiM:	agreed brohan.
	syfChadMann:
	ToRSpartaz:	^^

[xetech]

I didn't want to post at all since I thought Brynsy had come to a decision on the matter, but since people keep adding to the discussion, I'll input my 2 cents as well.

First and foremost I do not disagree that we were at fault for being late. However putting that aside for a minute I would like to give our side of the story since Calcifer's English is so bad, he has trouble communicating his point across alone.

So taking whats been said in this thread, if there is a dispute of any sort, we need to take it to an admin. Unfortunately, neither party did manage to do so at the time of the disagreements today so it falls to an admin to make a decision in retrospect.

I believe Brynsy's subsequent judgement was a fair one. It's not a matter of whether ONS were late or not, I think everybody knows that we did have 2 late people, but a matter of misunderstanding and "communication breakdown" as Brynsy so greatly put it. Why? Let me explain.

The games in question are mainly game 1, game 2 but also a side point on game 3.

Game 3 first. This match happened no problems, results were a 2-1 win for Arden. But calcifer wanted to raise the point that Arden was a roster change this week and was just wondering where he popped out from and whether this change was legit in the first place.

Game 2 was my game. Admittedly I was late and I accept all responsibility for that, and understand their reasons for wanting a w/o. However I was not 3 hrs late as hinted, I was 45 minutes late, and was actually watching the stream waiting for my game because I thought we were running on a game by game basis (which has been the norm with streamed games). I know you argued that Calcifer said he wanted all games to be played simultaneously but given what happened afterwards (games were played consecutively - kozo, zero then yoong, we reasoned this meant that we would be instead be playing one by one). I could have actually started playing at about 6:50 SGT, I even went in the nerve gaming channel and talked to havoc there but Kez was in the midst of ladder games (no fault of his). However as yoong's game ended I was told my game wasn't happening... Nonetheless after a bit of discussion Kez was nice enough to play me anyway, so this issue was resolved. Thus this game doesn't really warrant further discussion. Thank you Kez for your sportsmanship!

Now to game 1. ONS was waiting for Fai to show up but unfortunately he didn't turn up on time. Calcifer communicated this to NRV. From my understanding of what calcifer said, nrv agreed to wait (for 15 minutes I assume since this is the w/o time limit). However during this time calcifer was negotiating with nrv (pickle and savior) to possibly reschedule the match since he couldn't contact Fai and was worried he wouldn't show up anytime soon. The problem lies here. Somewhere along the lines calcifer was led to believe that savior agreed to a reschedule. (As a side note when I logged on calcifer said to me: ur playing after yoong; to which i replied what about the other games?; and calcifer said, (amongst other things) Fai's game was rescheduled). Note this was BEFORE the drama started where we found out that Fai's game was walkovered so theres little reason for Calcifer to lie to me at this stage which makes me believe, and I hope you all join me in believing, that he honestly thought nrv had agreed to a rescheduling of game 1.

Now from our perspective, if we thought a game was to be rescheduled, why would we need to do anything else? Everything is dandy right? It was not until yoongs game ended, which I think was about 8:00pm SGT or something like that, that we were suddenly told, nrv have won the whole set, walkovers for game 1 and 2, so 5-1 victory. This was communicated to us in all honestly out of the blue. It was the first time we had heard of them claiming walkovers over us, in all this time we had thought they had agreed to wait for my game and reschedule Fai's game.

Calcifer was ready to put a sub in for Fai's game at a seconds notice since there were others online for ONS that weren't already in the match schedule (calcifer himself being the best example). This was our last match of the season (we have byes for the remaining weeks) and with subs still available we had absolutely no reason not to use it and willingly take a walkover instead... However because Calcifer genuinely thought the game was rescheduled he reasoned he didn't need to arrange a sub. If he had known NRV wanted the decision to walkover Fai's game I am in no doubt that he would have organised a sub to prevent this from happening. You have a screenshot that shows savior communicating a requested walkover but unfortunately in the same screenshot it shows Calcifer disconnecting before replying (his last message was "so we"... which means nothing and looks to me like he intended to write something else after it but unfortunately was DC'ed)(Calcifer already mentioned DCing a few times tonight). The best thing to do in this case, as we have learned, would have been to have taken it to an admin. Furthermore, from Calcifer's subsequent actions and communication I think its pretty safe to say he never received this last message and was thus still under the impression game 1 was okay to be rescheduled (which can be inferred from the first part of the conversation in the screenshot).

In relation to savior's message, Calcifer has bad English... from what he said it looks more like he simply wanted to clarify what time the reschedule would be for, and NOT "those times dont work and that (u) need to do it when (Fai) also can," as Bard seems to suggest. Fault Calcifer for his English sure, but please don't fault his intent.

To add to our confusion, we deduced that if savior really couldn't or didn't want to reschedule, he would have made sure to have gotten an agreement out of Calcifer on the walkover especially given the whisper between the two that originally proposed a time for a rescheduling and then the subsequent no-reply-and-DC. Instead he went and observed the other 2 matches as they were played, giving us the impression that he had actually agreed to the reschedule and wasn't in a rush to play his own game. So one can see how going from a situation where we thought everything was sorted out: 4 games today and 1 later, to suddenly after yoong's match: the games are over now, the other two are w/o's!, could cause Calcifer to think ons were being treated unfairly.

Obviously this is only our side of the story and there's always two sides to a coin so please bear that in mind. And since I wasn't there from the beginning this is all I managed to deduce from speaking to calcifer, so please bear with me if I've missed something.

But in all honesty, whilst we are in the wrong for not having our players turn up on time and nrv having all 5 ready at the get go... we would definitely appreciate a little forgiveness from nrv and hope that they can see the misunderstanding from our perspective and respect the decision from Brynsy. After all Starcraft 2 is a game where people fight it out on the battle field and not in a war of words! I don't think it will be that unfair on savior if he plays his game with Fai at a time both are comfortable with. No-ones going to be worse off and then all this drama could be avoided. That's why I think Byrnsy's decision is the right one and hope we stick by it. Rules are rules I know, but there is a Chinese saying: 法律不外乎人情, roughly translating to "the law is nothing more than being humane". So how about we all realize that we are all humans and try to accommodate each other's shortcomings. Let us be friends!

Hope we managed to clear some confusion from our side.

Thanks!

Quick Comments

	Flamga:	Was going to post, but I appreciate this :)
	wTlzq:	rep for 法律不外乎人情!!
	Stallion:	this is pretty much what i managed to get too a very well written post
	Snx.FigJig:	uninformed post.
	x5_Bard:	I'll bear with you for missing a large chunk of what happened :)
	xGKingdelete:
	ToRSpartaz:	PICKLE SHUT UP AND STOP NEGATIVE REPPING PEOPLE

[Arden]

Game 3 first. This match happened no problems, results were a 2-1 win for Arden. But calcifer wanted to raise the point that Arden was a roster change this week and was just wondering where he popped out from and whether this change was legit in the first place.

I am indeed new to the clan as well as the sea community so I honestly don't have a good idea what exactly is going on. I firstly would like to thank all the admins for preparing this amazing tournament and dare to step into the argument as a relatively newcomer. To start with, I have joined the nerve gaming clan recently so I could join this tournament. You'll see that I became part of the roster officially before the tournament in this thread: http://www.sc2sea.com/showthread.php?t=3471. Like I've said, I'm new to the community, so I do not understand the tournament rules thoroughly. If admins agree that such immediate roster change isn't allowed, I will step aside from the tournament.

Regarding the rest of the problem that happened today, I would like to voice out my opinion as a relatively third person's point of view. Game 1,2,3 went smoothly as players of both teams were available for the games. Game 4 was solved after lengthy dispute as Kez decided to take ons' offer to play a subbed game. Game 5, however, is still not solved yet (at least to my understanding) and I believe that not even a sub was ready to play against savior. As a newcomer, I can understand that there can be circumstances where a player cannot make his match. However, if a reschedule is forced without an earlier notice, I strongly believe such leniency would dilute a lot of players' effort and responsibility to make to their matches on time. I come from broodwar background and I believe a walkover instead of a postponement is the right penalty that would make players more serious about their matches no matter how small they are.

Thanks

Quick Comments

	Flamga:
	Stallion:	I accepted you on the roster so you could play dw

[ROCCAT_Savior]

Originally Posted by xetech

I didn't want to post at all since I thought Brynsy had come to a decision on the matter, but since people keep adding to the discussion, I'll input my 2 cents as well.

First and foremost I do not disagree that we were at fault for being late. However putting that aside for a minute I would like to give our side of the story since Calcifer's English is so bad, he has trouble communicating his point across alone.

So taking whats been said in this thread, if there is a dispute of any sort, we need to take it to an admin. Unfortunately, neither party did manage to do so at the time of the disagreements today so it falls to an admin to make a decision in retrospect.

I believe Brynsy's subsequent judgement was a fair one. It's not a matter of whether ONS were late or not, I think everybody knows that we did have 2 late people, but a matter of misunderstanding and "communication breakdown" as Brynsy so greatly put it. Why? Let me explain.

The games in question are mainly game 1, game 2 but also a side point on game 3.

Game 3 first. This match happened no problems, results were a 2-1 win for Arden. But calcifer wanted to raise the point that Arden was a roster change this week and was just wondering where he popped out from and whether this change was legit in the first place.

Game 2 was my game. Admittedly I was late and I accept all responsibility for that, and understand their reasons for wanting a w/o. However I was not 3 hrs late as hinted, I was 45 minutes late, and was actually watching the stream waiting for my game because I thought we were running on a game by game basis (which has been the norm with streamed games). I know you argued that Calcifer said he wanted all games to be played simultaneously but given what happened afterwards (games were played consecutively - kozo, zero then yoong, we reasoned this meant that we would be instead be playing one by one). I could have actually started playing at about 6:50 SGT, I even went in the nerve gaming channel and talked to havoc there but Kez was in the midst of ladder games (no fault of his). However as yoong's game ended I was told my game wasn't happening... Nonetheless after a bit of discussion Kez was nice enough to play me anyway, so this issue was resolved. Thus this game doesn't really warrant further discussion. Thank you Kez for your sportsmanship!

Now to game 1. ONS was waiting for Fai to show up but unfortunately he didn't turn up on time. Calcifer communicated this to NRV. From my understanding of what calcifer said, nrv agreed to wait (for 15 minutes I assume since this is the w/o time limit). However during this time calcifer was negotiating with nrv (pickle and savior) to possibly reschedule the match since he couldn't contact Fai and was worried he wouldn't show up anytime soon. The problem lies here. Somewhere along the lines calcifer was led to believe that savior agreed to a reschedule. (As a side note when I logged on calcifer said to me: ur playing after yoong; to which i replied what about the other games?; and calcifer said, (amongst other things) Fai's game was rescheduled). Note this was BEFORE the drama started where we found out that Fai's game was walkovered so theres little reason for Calcifer to lie to me at this stage which makes me believe, and I hope you all join me in believing, that he honestly thought nrv had agreed to a rescheduling of game 1.

Now from our perspective, if we thought a game was to be rescheduled, why would we need to do anything else? Everything is dandy right? It was not until yoongs game ended, which I think was about 8:00pm SGT or something like that, that we were suddenly told, nrv have won the whole set, walkovers for game 1 and 2, so 5-1 victory. This was communicated to us in all honestly out of the blue. It was the first time we had heard of them claiming walkovers over us, in all this time we had thought they had agreed to wait for my game and reschedule Fai's game.

Calcifer was ready to put a sub in for Fai's game at a seconds notice since there were others online for ONS that weren't already in the match schedule (calcifer himself being the best example). This was our last match of the season (we have byes for the remaining weeks) and with subs still available we had absolutely no reason not to use it and willingly take a walkover instead... However because Calcifer genuinely thought the game was rescheduled he reasoned he didn't need to arrange a sub. If he had known NRV wanted the decision to walkover Fai's game I am in no doubt that he would have organised a sub to prevent this from happening. You have a screenshot that shows savior communicating a requested walkover but unfortunately in the same screenshot it shows Calcifer disconnecting before replying (his last message was "so we"... which means nothing and looks to me like he intended to write something else after it but unfortunately was DC'ed)(Calcifer already mentioned DCing a few times tonight). The best thing to do in this case, as we have learned, would have been to have taken it to an admin. Furthermore, from Calcifer's subsequent actions and communication I think its pretty safe to say he never received this last message and was thus still under the impression game 1 was okay to be rescheduled (which can be inferred from the first part of the conversation in the screenshot).

In relation to savior's message, Calcifer has bad English... from what he said it looks more like he simply wanted to clarify what time the reschedule would be for, and NOT "those times dont work and that (u) need to do it when (Fai) also can," as Bard seems to suggest. Fault Calcifer for his English sure, but please don't fault his intent.

To add to our confusion, we deduced that if savior really couldn't or didn't want to reschedule, he would have made sure to have gotten an agreement out of Calcifer on the walkover especially given the whisper between the two that originally proposed a time for a rescheduling and then the subsequent no-reply-and-DC. Instead he went and observed the other 2 matches as they were played, giving us the impression that he had actually agreed to the reschedule and wasn't in a rush to play his own game. So one can see how going from a situation where we thought everything was sorted out: 4 games today and 1 later, to suddenly after yoong's match: the games are over now, the other two are w/o's!, could cause Calcifer to think ons were being treated unfairly.

Obviously this is only our side of the story and there's always two sides to a coin so please bear that in mind. And since I wasn't there from the beginning this is all I managed to deduce from speaking to calcifer, so please bear with me if I've missed something.

But in all honesty, whilst we are in the wrong for not having our players turn up on time and nrv having all 5 ready at the get go... we would definitely appreciate a little forgiveness from nrv and hope that they can see the misunderstanding from our perspective and respect the decision from Brynsy. After all Starcraft 2 is a game where people fight it out on the battle field and not in a war of words! I don't think it will be that unfair on savior if he plays his game with Fai at a time both are comfortable with. No-ones going to be worse off and then all this drama could be avoided. That's why I think Byrnsy's decision is the right one and hope we stick by it. Rules are rules I know, but there is a Chinese saying: 法律不外乎人情, roughly translating to "the law is nothing more than being humane". So how about we all realize that we are all humans and try to accommodate each other's shortcomings. Let us be friends!

Hope we managed to clear some confusion from our side.

Thanks!

The reason I claimed the w/o was because at no point did calsifer actually say the words 'Yes' 'Ok' or anything implying the go ahead for a reschedule. By the time this was happening it was 1 in the morning on a day when I had a 9 start for an important lecture. It was incredibly frustrating because this would have been my first time participating and every things gone pear shaped.

I've got a bit more to say about this, but I'll update when I get back...
Edit: I was never told about a sub 'ready and waiting'....and I don't think you had one until past the time I'd headed offline...

Quick Comments

Snx.FigJig:

Exactly this. We also followed up several times after asking about reschedules and he never replied. Said this many times, admins being stubborn.

[xetech]

Quick post before I go to work...

Calcifer himself at the very least (if you don't believe any other ons members were online) could have been the sub had he truly believed game 1 was being walkovered instead of being rescheduled... (so it's not like we had deliberate intentions to not want to waste our subs seeing as its our last game of the season).

I feel as though it really was a breakdown in communications. If you couldn't get through to calcifer, as in no response or agreement, then the correct course of action would have been to seek official support... we have seen and learnt from this example. I hope we can respect and listen to the admins decision and move on now. Thank you for everyone's understanding.

[Snx.FigJig]

Originally Posted by xetech

Quick post before I go to work...

Calcifer himself at the very least (if you don't believe any other ons members were online) could have been the sub had he truly believed game 1 was being walkovered instead of being rescheduled... (so it's not like we had deliberate intentions to not want to waste our subs seeing as its our last game of the season).

I feel as though it really was a breakdown in communications. If you couldn't get through to calcifer, as in no response or agreement, then the correct course of action would have been to seek official support... we have seen and learnt from this example. I hope we can respect and listen to the admins decision and move on now. Thank you for everyone's understanding.

We told him may times about reschedules and that we cant make that time, no reply, and after 2hrs he brings up subs. Not our problem, we did everything we could to get the match done. We should not be penalized because cal cannot understand simple english. Get someone se to manage the team, other teams shouldnt be forced to work around ons because the manager is incompentent.

Quick Comments

	deL:	unnecessary personal insults
	ToRSpartaz:	Make sure this is the last time this happens...

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by nRvPickleWeasel

We told him may times about reschedules and that we cant make that time, no reply, and after 2hrs he brings up subs. Not our problem, we did everything we could to get the match done. We should not be penalized because cal cannot understand simple english. Get someone se to manage the team, other teams shouldnt be forced to work around ons because the manager is incompentent.

Take the admin decision and move on. Ever watched Soccer matches (or played)? ever seen the ref change his mind after a decision?..No.

Complaining only makes it worse for you.

[Snx.FigJig]

Originally Posted by TAChadMann

Take the admin decision and move on. Ever watched Soccer matches (or played)? ever seen the ref change his mind after a decision?..No.

Complaining only makes it worse for you.

yea, and when the umpire makes a decision that goes against the rules it's reviewed and they're usually given the sack depending how serious their breach of the rules is. Same situation here. If you don't question and argue blatant wrong decisions, nothing is going to improve.

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by nRvPickleWeasel

yea, and when the umpire makes a decision that goes against the rules it's reviewed and they're usually given the sack depending how serious their breach of the rules is. Same situation here. If you don't question and argue blatant wrong decisions, nothing is going to improve.

I've never seen a decision reviewed or an umpire given the sack over one decision, even the allowed goal by Henry against Republic of Ireland (thnx Phoney ) for qualification into the world cup was clearly a hand ball - yet the decision wasn't over turned - France went to the finals.

Regardless, the judging board of the umpires in this situation is all the SEAL Admins, we've all spoken about it, the decision stands and we agree with it. Taking walk overs is not in the spirit of the competition and in this case your whining is only strengthening the case to not allow your team to take the walk overs. Managers should always be trying to play the games.. not take free wins - your team is here to play.

Take the decision like grown up and move on.

Quick Comments

	ROOTPetraeus:	inb4negrep
	Snx.FigJig:	^ inb4 ban own clan mate from tourney because they beat you
	deL:	shame pickle's actions are reflecting badly on the team
	phoney:	Henry handballed against Rep. of Ireland :p
	Frogmite:
	Nemo:	Don't remind me this shame plz :(

[x5_Bard]

So what is the final decision? As I feel I have proved

"If you can show me that no onslaught players were not connected 15 minutes after the start of the game we'll give the walkover."

[Snx.FigJig]

Originally Posted by TAChadMann

I've never seen a decision reviewed or an umpire given the sack over one decision, even the allowed goal by Henry against Scottland (I think it was) for qualification into the world cup was clearly a hand ball - yet the decision wasn't over turned - France went to the finals.

Regardless, the judging board of the umpires in this situation is all the SEAL Admins, we've all spoken about it, the decision stands and we agree with it. Taking walk overs is not in the spirit of the competition and in this case your whining is only strengthening the case to not allow your team to take the walk overs. Managers should always be trying to play the games.. not take free wins - your team is here to play.

Take the decision like grown up and move on.

If this is the case nRv should not be singled out. xGking vs infi has to be rescheduled and played, as well as all other walkovers that have happened in SEACL. Do this for everyone, or don't do it at all.

Regards to the umpire decisions being reviewed, it has happened many times before. Either way, sports analogies are irrelevant. Soccer format is nothing like this.

Quick Comments

	ROOTPetraeus:	go away
	syfChadMann:	great clan leader.. -_-

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by nRvPickleWeasel

If this is the case nRv should not be singled out. xGking vs infi has to be rescheduled and played, as well as all other walkovers that have happened in SEACL. Do this for everyone, or don't do it at all.

They went about seeking their walk overs in the correct manner. I believe in this situation your attitude towards several admins of the league and the continued complaining on the forum is resulting in you being punished by not receiving the walk over. Act respectfully and follow protocol, you'll get walk overs when it is the fair decision. Pickle, you've brought this onto your team, now live with your actions and move on.

Originally Posted by nRvPickleWeasel

Regards to the umpire decisions being reviewed, it has happened many times before. Either way, sports analogies are irrelevant. Soccer format is nothing like this.

SEAL - Format based on the English Premier League. Nothing like Soccer at all.. -_-

[Frogmite]

Originally Posted by nRvPickleWeasel

If this is the case nRv should not be singled out. xGking vs infi has to be rescheduled and played, as well as all other walkovers that have happened in SEACL. Do this for everyone, or don't do it at all.

Regards to the umpire decisions being reviewed, it has happened many times before. Either way, sports analogies are irrelevant. Soccer format is nothing like this.

It's two different things. I was the one to give walkover to xgking because i was discussing with both team leaders. inFi couldn't play on that week and said that if xgking can't re-schedule they will forfeit. xgking didn't want to re-schedule so i gave them the walkover.

Originally Posted by nRvBard

So what is the final decision? As I feel I have proved

"If you can show me that no onslaught players were not connected 15 minutes after the start of the game we'll give the walkover."

Saying in this thread that they were not connected is not enough. An admin needs to witness it.

[x5_Bard]

Its not just in the thread? I have a vod?