FourRings Posted December 15, 2004 Share Posted December 15, 2004 If I'm the guy out of the playoffs I'm quitting the league. No way should 1 guy be allowed an exception and not me. 611361[/snapback] Yup me too I would be pissed off. Just sub in his lowest scoring player/s for the offending positions. Plain and simple, done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 15, 2004 Share Posted December 15, 2004 As I've learned today, the first guy did NOT get off... I mis-stated what happened. It was closer to two months ago and I was away that weekend so I missed it at the time... The commish found his illegal lineup BEFORE deadlines, and that owner argued that since it wasn't written down he could play it the way he wanted... Well the commish said no and forced him to play a legal lineup by swapping players... As it turns out the guy only had one other player on his bench to make his lineup legal so there wasn't a whole lot of choosing to do... Anyways, after he forced him to make his lineup legal BEFORE the deadline, he posted the rules and told everyone to check them and what the consequences were... So long story short, the first owner DID NOT play an illegal lineup and have a different punishment than this 2nd owner who's getting punished now. He was forced to submit a legal lineup per league rules BEFORE Sunday's games started. So this is the FIRST owner who actually went through games with an illegal lineup. That's a bit of a different story, if not still a very tough sentencing.... 612378[/snapback] Certainly that changes things. If the first guy was required to change his lineup prior to the deadline then there is no precedent to go by as I previously thought. If I'm the owner getting knocked out of the playoffs though I still have a gripe. Why was the commissioner pro-active with this other owner earlier in the season catching and correcting his illegal lineup ... but not proactive during the playoff season and catching my error. Having said that I see no reason not to enforce the rules. But I absolutely hate the solution that penalizes owners by giving them an automatic loss when the make a lineup error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.D.Morrison Posted December 15, 2004 Share Posted December 15, 2004 But I absolutely hate the solution that penalizes owners by giving them an automatic loss when the make a lineup error. 612577[/snapback] I agree HIGHLY....unfortunately that is the case this year, but you HAVE to change that next year.... as of now......The Commish must stay STRONG to the rules !! Especially after it was written down and the league was notified of any future mistakes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Red Posted December 15, 2004 Share Posted December 15, 2004 CBS Sportsline can be setup almost any way you want. I'm in a league where WRs and TEs are the same, you must start 2 but can start 3. If your commish was too stupid to set this up, smack him in the balls. All too often lineup configurations are not 'tested' by those who set them up and a situation like this results. <captain obvious> You have to let the guy slide. He obviously didn't do it to cheat as he lost potential points. Let him slide, write down the rules BEFORE next year and TEST the site you PAY to use. </captain obvious> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.D.Morrison Posted December 15, 2004 Share Posted December 15, 2004 almost </captain obvious> 612621[/snapback] That is the key word regarding the setup of Sportsline leagues...I have plenty of examples that don't work for our league..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynCrew Posted December 15, 2004 Author Share Posted December 15, 2004 There is no configuration in Sportsline that I'm aware of that currently solves our problem. We consider wr/te to be the same position at the moment. We have 2 wildcard spots in our active lineups that can be any offensive player. Hence an owner can start from 0-5 wr's or te's any given week. You could start 5 te's (as your 3 wr/te and 2 wilcard spots) or 5 wr's any given week. So right now the system will NOT catch someone who starts only 2 wr's as having an illegal lineup. If sportsline had the option of making wr/te the same position (as some sites do)... then we could set it as 3-5 any given week and it would alert you if you only started 2 wr's.... But sportsline considers the 2 positions as different, so you must enter 0-5 as acceptable for each position. This then creates the 'hole' and allows for the possibility of submitting an 'illegal' lineup by our league rules that the computer doesn't catch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 15, 2004 Share Posted December 15, 2004 The sad thing is that this year's superbowl winner will always be tainted. There will always be an asterick next to this win ... because one of the best teams was eliminated from the playoffs on a mere technicality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrick35 Posted December 15, 2004 Share Posted December 15, 2004 Another issue that I don't think has been brought up is, if your web site doesn't allow you to set up the proper lineup requirements in order to avoid "illegal" lineups from being submitted then isn't it the Commissioners responsibility to ensure that all the lineups submitted are "legal"? He did that earlier in the season for the other owner. He noticed an "illegal" lineup and insisted that the owner correct it before the games started. Now, this time the commissioner doesn't notice the "illegal" lineup in time, so he can't insist on a change before the games start. So basically what you are saying is the 2nd Owner to submit the "illegal" Lineup is only being penalized because the Commissioner didn't notice that his lineup was "illegal" in time to make him correct it. That seems a bit unfair to me. If the Commissioner intervened in time to help the 1st owner then the 2nd owner deserves the same opportunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynCrew Posted December 15, 2004 Author Share Posted December 15, 2004 I don't disagree with either of the last 2 remarks... and I voiced a similar opinion to the league... We still have a couple days to sort this out so I'm hoping we sway the crowd to let this owner into the playoffs... btw - I'm the #1 seed and I would be playing the owner that was booted. We played once during the regular season in one of the highest scoring matchups all year, and he edged me by a nose... I want the rematch, and have voiced that opinion with our league... and the 'replacement' team that would slip into the playoffs in his place is a much softer squad, I'll pummel him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I just don't understand the need for such punitive measures Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzarvell Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I don't disagree with either of the last 2 remarks... and I voiced a similar opinion to the league... We still have a couple days to sort this out so I'm hoping we sway the crowd to let this owner into the playoffs... btw - I'm the #1 seed and I would be playing the owner that was booted. We played once during the regular season in one of the highest scoring matchups all year, and he edged me by a nose... I want the rematch, and have voiced that opinion with our league... and the 'replacement' team that would slip into the playoffs in his place is a much softer squad, I'll pummel him... 612815[/snapback] Good to see someone playing the game for the right reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgcoach Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 I just don't understand the need for such punitive measures 613870[/snapback] That is pretty tough. Because you put in one player you shouldn't have, taking zero points for the week is a bit much. Why not just get a zero for that player you started that should not have been there. Example - Started three w/r's instead of two. Take the two lowest scoring w/r and give the team their points and take a zero for the highest scoring w/r. That would be taking it far enough IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.