Moderator: Clan Directors
However, we knew rule was written like that so we respected the rule and did not bash the CD in threads for enforcing it but we rather accepted the decision as gentlemen so that is maybe the reason why most people will remember Dualta's case while nobody remembers thebest712's case.
Leehar wrote:With that said, this criterion will be raised during the deliberation of the next CCup as a topic for deliberation & possible amendment (It has been previously raised whether cup-tied should only last for 1 round etc)
Chuuuuck wrote:chemefreak wrote:Rodion wrote:Make it so that they are cup tied, but if they do join another clan they can be allowed to play as long as the opposing clan accepts it (and everytime they win and move forward they'll have to get permission from their next opponent).
The CDs would prefer that "cup tied" be the rule. We don't want clans to have to be the "bad guy" for enforcing the rule. So everyone better get in the clan they want to be in...soon!
I do agree that the other clan shouldn't be involved. I have learned my lesson with that one. The new player may give the clan an advantage but the other clan looks like the bad guy if they don't allow it. I still think the intent of hte rule is to stop gross abuse by trading players or something just to get to the finals. Or merging clans, etc.
I would like to find a way to allow players to play who switch 6 months ago after only playing in the initial round, which we have seen happy a lot in the first two go-rounds.
Maybe everyone would be okay with just letting me use my own judgement in being unbias as possible. I can say for the most part I will allow players to play as long as everything seems legitimate and it appears to be a real switch. But I wouldn't allow any sort of mergers, or large number of pickups or anything
Chuuuuck wrote:Rodion wrote:I like the Cup Tied rule. It can avoid major shenanigans such as clans "merging" just so eliminated players can have a 2nd shot.
I do agree with this. It is why the rule was originally there. We haven't had any real trouble with it though, and then the rule has only affected legitimate players who have switched clans and required them to sit out with their new clan for 6-9 months.
laughingcavalier wrote:I do believe this cup-tied rule is an example of us all taking ourselves WAAAY too seriously..... we're not a multi-million dollar sports league, we're just here to have fun. Have a rule to stop gross abuses if you like, and if you will frame it with some flexibility, but to lock out players who are genuinely just looking for a new clan to play with after their own clan got kicked out months ago.... that's just overkill.
iAmCaffeine wrote:laughingcavalier wrote:I do believe this cup-tied rule is an example of us all taking ourselves WAAAY too seriously..... we're not a multi-million dollar sports league, we're just here to have fun. Have a rule to stop gross abuses if you like, and if you will frame it with some flexibility, but to lock out players who are genuinely just looking for a new clan to play with after their own clan got kicked out months ago.... that's just overkill.
Don't be stupid! This is fucking serious business!
skillfull wrote:iAmCaffeine wrote:laughingcavalier wrote:I do believe this cup-tied rule is an example of us all taking ourselves WAAAY too seriously..... we're not a multi-million dollar sports league, we're just here to have fun. Have a rule to stop gross abuses if you like, and if you will frame it with some flexibility, but to lock out players who are genuinely just looking for a new clan to play with after their own clan got kicked out months ago.... that's just overkill.
Don't be stupid! This is fucking serious business!
Οοοps!
friendly1 wrote:Denise wrote:I agree with Foxy, too. Always in the past it was left up to the two clans involved to hash out if the rule should be enforced and never was the privilege of a clan to control this aspect of their war taken away.
I understand the need for consistency and if this has been the answer to all clans wishing to use an ineligible player, then I wouldn't want it changed this late in the competition. However, I strongly believe this is an example of the CD's taking too much control and think they should leave these types of things to the clans involved, unless for some reason the clans can't reach an amicable decision. I hope that we can change this rule for the next CCup, or do away with it completely.
A little off topic but why should the CD's take it upon themselves to try to prevent a player from changing clans if they want to? This rule has never made any sense to me.
I like what the CDs have done! They are enforcing the rule in place, and explaining that the rule needs to be reconsidered, not the enforcement of it. I do regret that this rule has prevented some players eligibility in CCup (and there has been a few) and I hope the rule is changed for CCup5 along with some others. But bashing the CDs for rules that exist makes no sense, or at least doesn't make sense to me. Course I'm pretty easily confused and rather moronic at the best of times...
hyposquasher wrote:You all will have to forgive angola. While we were a bit surprised at the request for an extension, angola is a big Seahawks fan. So he had been on a steady diet of beer and adrenaline all day. By the time he came here to post, the Super Bowl was over. He had shed his clothes and ran 4 laps around his house. So the combination of cold and black-out level inebriation may have made him a little punchy
Leehar wrote:Some general announcements.
The CD's have graciously allowed the 2 day extension requested by Tofu & the Ace-Tofu war will have games exchanged on the 4th of Feb.
Unfortunately at the same time, the CD's have not so graciously disallowed dualta from competing in the war, despite Ace agreeing to the waiver of the player eligibility criterion.
As always, slight rule adjustments are subject to CD approval, and in this instance it was felt by the CD team that the Player eligibility rule was outside the bounds of the adjustable settings regulations (which relate more to the likes of changing the tiebreaker map, decreasing/increasing the trench limitation etc)
It was felt that the Player Eligibility rule provides a crucial protection to smaller clans against the common ailment of 'sailing for greener pastures'. While I sympathise with dualta in my personal capacity on the disbandment of his clan, the player eligibility criterion as it is currently written has been used & previously conveyed throughout this current competition as a hidebound rule meant to dissuade more mercenary actions, and it was felt necessary to enforce it as written.
With that said, this criterion will be raised during the deliberation of the next CCup as a topic for deliberation & possible amendment (It has been previously raised whether cup-tied should only last for 1 round etc)
josko.ri wrote:benga, last year were different rules and negotiations about player eligibility was done among clans on player-by-player basis.
Obviously your clan agreed that 3 of our players can play, and the agreement possibility was supported by rules.
Rules are now different.
Doc_Brown wrote:The only thing that has changed is that previous TOs were willing to give clans more latitude in their negotiations than are the CDs his year.
Player Eligibility
We will be playing with an amended "cup tied" rule. The rules will be as follows:-If a player plays for a clan in a given round, they are cup-tied for that round and cannot play for another clan in that round
-If the old clan of a player loses the round in which the player has played, that player is considered "eliminated" with their old clan and cannot play for another clan for the rest of the tournament
-If the old clan of a player wins the last round in which the player has played with them, then they are not considered cup-tied at the conclusion of that war and are free to play with any other clan at the beginning of the next round of the tournament
As has been allowed in the past, each clan war can adjust the rules slightly to their liking if both clans agree on the adjusted rules before any games are started and they get my approval.
Player Eligibility
We will be playing with an amended "cup tied" rule. The rules will be as follows:-If a player plays for a clan in a given round, they are cup-tied for that round and cannot play for another clan in that round
-If the old clan of a player loses the round in which the player has played, that player is considered "eliminated" with their old clan and cannot play for another clan for the rest of the tournament
-If the old clan of a player wins the last round in which the player has played with them, then they are not considered cup-tied at the conclusion of that war and are free to play with any other clan at the beginning of the next round of the tournament
As has been allowed in the past, each clan war can adjust the rules slightly to their liking if both clans agree on the adjusted rules before any games are started and they get the CD's approval.
As has been allowed in the past, each clan war can adjust the rules slightly to their liking if both clans agree on the adjusted rules before any games are started and they get the CD's approval.
As has been allowed in the past, each clan war can adjust the rules slightly to their liking if both clans agree on the adjusted rules before any games are started and they get my approval.
benga wrote:ACE gets to have their training group, even if at first glance I don't see they have at least 50% of non ACE players in it, OSA can't
the less I read, the happier I get
Arama86n wrote:hyposquasher wrote:You all will have to forgive angola. While we were a bit surprised at the request for an extension, angola is a big Seahawks fan. So he had been on a steady diet of beer and adrenaline all day. By the time he came here to post, the Super Bowl was over. He had shed his clothes and ran 4 laps around his house. So the combination of cold and black-out level inebriation may have made him a little punchy
Thanks for your post Hypo.
I saw that post yesterday and was like "WTF??". DIdn't want to waste energy commenting it and getting into a discussion about it though.
Happy to see both you and angola explain that our dear friend Alcohol was at play, as I'm hoping this will be a war in good spirits, with goodnatured ribbing and poking, but no serious insults.
I'd lice to think both ACE and TOFU are better than that.
/Arama
hyposquasher wrote:Arama86n wrote:hyposquasher wrote:You all will have to forgive angola. While we were a bit surprised at the request for an extension, angola is a big Seahawks fan. So he had been on a steady diet of beer and adrenaline all day. By the time he came here to post, the Super Bowl was over. He had shed his clothes and ran 4 laps around his house. So the combination of cold and black-out level inebriation may have made him a little punchy
Thanks for your post Hypo.
I saw that post yesterday and was like "WTF??". DIdn't want to waste energy commenting it and getting into a discussion about it though.
Happy to see both you and angola explain that our dear friend Alcohol was at play, as I'm hoping this will be a war in good spirits, with goodnatured ribbing and poking, but no serious insults.
I'd like to think both ACE and TOFU are better than that.
/Arama
No worries
We've never spoken directly until now, so although this is a strange place to ask: what does your name mean? I've always wondered...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users