Important query regarding Week 8

[SwissToni]

At the end of the tournament Wales had beaten Scotland by 1 point and therefore closed the gap from Scotland to 3 points overall. Having looked at the result it appears that some "unregistered" player finished 22nd meaning that the 23rd and 24th that Scotland got becomes 22nd and 23rd an means the players earn 4 points between them rather than 2. This obviously means Wales actually end up losing to Scotland by 1 point and actually increasing our overall deficit to 5 points.

As one of my players quite rightly said, people"s positions should be people"s positions. While playing, players make decisions based on how many players are left, point jumps/bubbles, and also (on the final table) how many points their opponent"s teams have already scored. If an unregistered player finishes 3rd and scoops $250 would that money be passed on to the 4th place finisher along with their points? No. Forgive the essay but I (along with a number of my team) feel particularly hard done by.

I posted this on the Facebook page and was asked (I assume by Des) to post it on the forum so the guys can look into it.

Regards

Henry

[AMRN]

Haven"t yet got close enough to the points for this to be an issue for me, but in my opinion, Henry"s points are entirely valid. Decisions points crop up in the tourney that have substantial influence on decisions - surely we can"t have players finishing positions changing after the event.

Those unregistered players have occupied an important points scoring position - those points should just be null and void, not allocated to someone else, imo.

[Des]

I think it was Rich that suggested you post it Henry, but it"s very valid feedback. 

My own thoughts are that the scoring was as per the league rules at the start of the season, so should stand in this instance - however it is something APAT could address for the next league if players are in agreement.

We would welcome views.

[TightEnd]

I requested you post Henry, easier to look into it on here than on a facebook comments box.

Des has seen it as you can see, we"ll discuss.

All views welcome

[SwissToni]

Haven"t yet got close enough to the points for this to be an issue for me, but in my opinion, Henry"s points are entirely valid. Decisions points crop up in the tourney that have substantial influence on decisions - surely we can"t have players finishing positions changing after the event.

Those unregistered players have occupied an important points scoring position - those points should just be null and void, not allocation to someone else, imo.

These are my feelings precisely. I understand where you are coming from Des but I just think it is hugely unfair for player"s finishing positions to change after the event in which players have had to make decisions based on information they assume to be accurate

[SwissToni]

Also these unregistered players will have won pots from other players AND knocked players out too. Are players knocked out by him to be reinstated in the tournament? Of course not. I"m aware that"s a silly question but it"s simply to make a point. Either we have to assume the unregistered player didn"t play, in which case points can be reallocated along with monetary prizes and chips (obv can"t happen) OR we have to treat them as having participated and simply void their finishing position and take their chips/money/points out of the game. I don"t feel it"s fair to mix and match

[Des]

Haven"t yet got close enough to the points for this to be an issue for me, but in my opinion, Henry"s points are entirely valid. Decisions points crop up in the tourney that have substantial influence on decisions - surely we can"t have players finishing positions changing after the event.

Those unregistered players have occupied an important points scoring position - those points should just be null and void, not allocation to someone else, imo.

These are my feelings precisely. I understand where you are coming from Des but I just think it is hugely unfair for player"s finishing positions to change after the event in which players have had to make decisions based on information they assume to be accurate

I"ll certainly have a look into it with the regional controllers to ensure that the final result of match 8 was published completely in line with the rules of the league. 

If that"s the case then APAT would not change rules mid season as it would bring the whole league into disrepute.  As an example we would need to address points scoring where unregistered players finished in the top 27 at every match this season.

[SwissToni]

Haven"t yet got close enough to the points for this to be an issue for me, but in my opinion, Henry"s points are entirely valid. Decisions points crop up in the tourney that have substantial influence on decisions - surely we can"t have players finishing positions changing after the event.

Those unregistered players have occupied an important points scoring position - those points should just be null and void, not allocation to someone else, imo.

These are my feelings precisely. I understand where you are coming from Des but I just think it is hugely unfair for player"s finishing positions to change after the event in which players have had to make decisions based on information they assume to be accurate

I"ll certainly have a look into it with the regional controllers to ensure that the final result of match 8 was published completely in line with the rules of the league. 

If that"s the case then APAT would not change rules mid season as it would bring the whole league into disrepute.  As an example we would need to address points scoring where unregistered players finished in the top 27 at every match this season.

I can understand why changing rules mid season would be a poor idea but surely there has to be an element of discression in the event of an obviously poor rule? I doubt there would be anyone involved in the league who would dissagree that this is a poor rule. Even those in Team Scotland would struggle to logically back this rule I feel.

Perhaps there is room for a vote on the rule? Also to change previous results would be a matter of 5 minutes as I doubt this has happened more than 3 times so far.

[Chipaccrual]

Awwwwwww, can"t we just change the rules mid season ?

Even if it"s just to make up for the lost traffic on the site in the past month  

[Geo]

Unfortunately the rules set out only make the following point regards players unregistered for a region

3 - There is no limit to how many players can represent each region in a match.  However, players will be required to register for a region prior to the start of a match.  Non registered players will be disqualified from scoring points in a match.  

Lots of valid points ST, however I believe that a similar scenario occured in matchday 6 and same decision was taken. Everyone accepted it then and I believe team captains should have been more careful from then.

Whilst I participate for the team that benefitted, am sure everyone will know I say this with the greatest of integrity, had my team been on the wrong end of this I would honestly respect the decision from the APAT HQ.

Something to chew over for next season though.

Geo

[SwissToni]

Even though you are in Team Scotland you can see quite how poor the rule is though?

Also that rule says nothing whatsoever about other players being moved up. Technically.

[Geo]

Even though you are in Team Scotland you can see quite how poor the rule is though?

Also that rule says nothing whatsoever about other players being moved up. Technically.

I do agree sir, however as stated, the precedent was set on matchday 6 and wasn"t challenged at that time therefore my thoughts were that it was the accepted rule.

Geo

[Des]

Even though you are in Team Scotland you can see quite how poor the rule is though?

Also that rule says nothing whatsoever about other players being moved up. Technically.

Henry - I believe it"s quite normal for any contestant to be bumped up in position should another get disqualified.  Your feedback is good, however I wouldn"t dilute it by pushing too hard!

[SwissToni]

Even though you are in Team Scotland you can see quite how poor the rule is though?

Also that rule says nothing whatsoever about other players being moved up. Technically.

Henry - I believe it"s quite normal for any contestant to be bumped up in position should another get disqualified.  Your feedback is good, however I wouldn"t dilute it by pushing too hard!

Lol good feedback can"t be diluted. It stands on its own merit

[Chipaccrual]

Just to clarify, the way the rule has been interpreted is the way it was meant when it was first written last season.

However, neither I nor any of the organisers had ever looked at it from the angle that Henry has, and to be honest, it does make a difference to the dynamic of the game around the points levels.

Impossible to change the rules halfway through, but one that I would hope would be looked at before the next league.