Keaton Louth Rule

[Beketov 9,033]

1 hour ago, Beaviss said:

 

Next season I'm just gonna cpu start the next 8 games so I don't have to worry about it next time.

It’s definitely an option that some GM’s use. Better than forgetting about it until the end.

[Beaviss 4,957]

14 minutes ago, Beketov said:

It’s definitely an option that some GM’s use. Better than forgetting about it until the end.

 

Rip me 

[Beketov 9,033]

@Arthur as has been mentioned before it wasn’t an error on the Simmer not loading the files. GM’s were notified that lines were to be sent to the regular email address as well as @Devise in case of backup simming. @Beaviss did not notice this which is why his lines were not input. This isn’t the Simmer messing up as the Simmer was never sent lines to put in. It also happened plenty early in the season for backup games to be played after the fact but they weren’t because of the confusion. You can blame the league if you want but ultimately the onus falls on the GM and @Beaviss has admitted it’s on him.

 

I get that it sucks for you especially since you were the one removed from those games but ultimately the rules need to be enforced. We can’t simply let a team off immediately after announcing that punishment would occur. Both GM’s and players knew of the potential consequences.

 

For what it’s worth as well the punishment was decided to be subjective because no two cases will be identical. For example, this punishment wouldn’t work for a team that misses the playoffs so if the punishment was as black and white as that it would allow teams a complete pass if they were rebuilding.

[Bushito 1,945]

48 minutes ago, Arthur said:

 

What kind of fucking backward ludicrous punishment is this? This whole rule is a fucking joke with punishment being subjective. No shit everyone i know talk about the VHL as the retard little brother of sim league. There's no reason the punishment fall only on the GM when the simmer can possibly mess up as well. Beaviss mentioned the simmer failed to upload Quebec's line for THREE FUCKING DAYS. Jesus, i know full well it's not hard to import lines in the sim engine. There is no reason this should have gone for three days. Why isn't the simmer responsible of fucking over GMs as well like that? Fuck, being a simmer and hating a team, maybe i wouldn't want to play a back up goalie if the punishment they can get is to NOT PLAY THEM IN THE PLAYOFF. IT'S THE FUCKING PLAYOFF. What's better to fuck over a team that preventing them to play their starter. I'm highly surprised no one actually commented on this. Like no one care because that's one less team in the playoff? can't wait it fucking happen to them because this is ridiculous. That's the first league i see actually punishing a team in the playoff for something so fucking useless as back up games. 

 

I get you guys want to show you are 'serious' about your backup game but this is clearly not the way to go. Why do you feel the fucking need to punish a player that didn't do anything because a simmer was too incompetent to load game and a gm smart enough to check the difference between game played and game started? Thanks for nothing asshole because that's what you just did. As well as fucking my team over in playoff on something they don't really control, since the simmer can do whatever the fuck they want at anytime, it seems. Shit those backup game didn't even matter in the standing. This is basically a big joke. It's like you decided to nuke japan after Pearl Harbor.

 

If this is a way to fix your league's goalie problem, i mean you almost suceeded to free a starter job. On that, i would recomand you to go listen to a specific song of Lily Allen because that's the only thing this league deserve.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hopefully this end up in copy pasta 

Probably the most ridiculous post I've seen on this site today, I'd say this week but I think Beavis has you beat. You and the rest of Quebec want to toss blame around when the blame lies solely with your incompetent GM. I don't see what the big deal is anyway, there is no way Quebec was winning a game against Stopko. Just look back at the last 8 seasons, it's like you guys thought you stood a chance in this seasons playoffs or something which is asinine.

[Arthur 133]

14 minutes ago, Beketov said:

@Arthur as has been mentioned before it wasn’t an error on the Simmer not loading the files. GM’s were notified that lines were to be sent to the regular email address as well as @Devise in case of backup simming. @Beaviss did not notice this which is why his lines were not input. This isn’t the Simmer messing up as the Simmer was never sent lines to put in. It also happened plenty early in the season for backup games to be played after the fact but they weren’t because of the confusion. You can blame the league if you want but ultimately the onus falls on the GM and @Beaviss has admitted it’s on him.

 

I get that it sucks for you especially since you were the one removed from those games but ultimately the rules need to be enforced. We can’t simply let a team off immediately after announcing that punishment would occur. Both GM’s and players knew of the potential consequences.

 

For what it’s worth as well the punishment was decided to be subjective because no two cases will be identical. For example, this punishment wouldn’t work for a team that misses the playoffs so if the punishment was as black and white as that it would allow teams a complete pass if they were rebuilding.

 

Fair then, always knew @Beaviss sucked.

 

However i dont agree at all about the need for punishment to be subjective. You can't just apply whatever punishment you want and expect there will never be backslash. You are better off with a clear rule that can be applied at any time such as cap hit or extra backup game the next season. Fuck had you done that i wouldnt have complained. If you worry about team not able yo be punish cause they arent in playoff well MAYBE THATS NOT THE WAY TO GO. Pubishing so severely a team because they didnt reach the back up cap is the dumbest thing i have ever seen especially when it isnt even fucking relevent. Especially when there isnt even rules in place right now to force gm to have back ups. Hope QUE G really liked those fucking two playoffs game.

 

Also QUE G didnt even end up playing the three games. Should i expect him to start the first game of next season??? Or worst the playoff again? Or was getting me on the bench and us gettibg eliminated enough to rub your fucking ego power trip on gms?

[Bushito 1,945]

Just now, Arthur said:

 

Fair then, always knew @Beaviss sucked.

 

However i dont agree at all about the need for punishment to be subjective. You can't just apply whatever punishment you want and expect there will never be backslash. You are better off with a clear rule that can be applied at any time such as cap hit or extra backup game the next season. Fuck had you done that i wouldnt have complained. If you worry about team not able yo be punish cause they arent in playoff well MAYBE THATS NOT THE WAY TO GO. Pubishing so severely a team because they didnt reach the back up cap is the dumbest thing i have ever seen especially when it isnt even fucking relevent. Especially when there isnt even rules in place right now to force gm to have back ups. Hope QUE G really liked those fucking two playoffs game.

 

Also QUE G didnt even end up playing the three games. Should i expect him to start the first game of next season??? Or worst the playoff again? Or was getting me on the bench and us gettibg eliminated enough to rub your fucking ego power trip on gms?

You should have been allowed to play for sure. The punishment should have been loss of first round pick in this coming draft.

[Bushito 1,945]

1 minute ago, Arthur said:

 

 Vancouver and Beaviss have nothing to do with this rant. He even tried to stop me. this is solely me seeing myself sat out of the playoff because the league decided it was smart to pubish teams in the pmayoff that have a beef with this stupid retard rule that make no sense.

Rule makes sense to me, play your 8 backup games or lose that many starts in the playoffs, or if you aren't in the playoffs lose a pick or cap if you don't have the pick.

[Arthur 133]

3 minutes ago, Bushito said:

Rule makes sense to me, play your 8 backup games or lose that many starts in the playoffs, or if you aren't in the playoffs lose a pick or cap if you don't have the pick.

 

i should have been allowed to play but then i shouldn't ? i dont think i understand what you mean since you just contradicted yourself.

[Quik 4,113]

@Arthur I totally understand your frustration but this is something that was discussed before, and @Beaviss was fully a part of the conversation when deciding the punishment. GMs are aware that if you make the playoffs, a failure to start a second goalie means the second goalie will make up those games in the playoffs. The other language is in case a team that misses the playoffs fails to meet the requirements, they aren’t getting off without any punishment, or if there’s repeat offences (which, this is the second straight season Quebec has failed to meet the minimum)

 

As much as it sucks that you missed the games, at the end of the day it wasn’t the difference in the series. Unless you were going to post 2 shutouts, goaltending wasn’t even the problem. 

 

Hell, I was hit with the same punishment and @Sonnet wasn’t allowed to start our first game against Riga...

[Bushito 1,945]

1 minute ago, Arthur said:

 

i should have been allowed to play but then i shouldn't ? i dont think i understand what you mean since you just contradicted yourself.

No I was saying I understand the rule then explained what it is. In the other post I said IMO you should play and they should lose their first.

[Beketov 9,033]

20 minutes ago, Arthur said:

You are better off with a clear rule that can be applied at any time such as cap hit or extra backup game the next season.

Cap hit could potentially hurt the team for the entire season if they are near the cap which most teams are. So basically for 3 games you could lose a player forever? Hardly seems fair.

 

Extra backup games the next season, and really the cap hit as well, both punish in the future which doesn’t necessarily make sense. What if it was your last season competiting and you were going into a rebuild? Congrats, you get extra games with your starter basically because next season doesn’t matter. You see how it needs to be subjective? I like black and white rules as well, trust me I fought for them on this, but ultimately subjective makes more sense with all the variables with this.

 

When possible removing from the playoffs makes the most sense. It’s also not like there is no discussion. The admin team that isn’t involved (so for this season myself and Will) will make the decision based on the infraction severity and situation. We laid out in the rules what the options basically were.

[Bushito 1,945]

2 minutes ago, Quik said:

@Arthur I totally understand your frustration but this is something that was discussed before, and @Beaviss was fully a part of the conversation when deciding the punishment. GMs are aware that if you make the playoffs, a failure to start a second goalie means the second goalie will make up those games in the playoffs. The other language is in case a team that misses the playoffs fails to meet the requirements, they aren’t getting off without any punishment, or if there’s repeat offences (which, this is the second straight season Quebec has failed to meet the minimum)

 

As much as it sucks that you missed the games, at the end of the day it wasn’t the difference in the series. Unless you were going to post 2 shutouts, goaltending wasn’t even the problem. 

 

Hell, I was hit with the same punishment and @Sonnet wasn’t allowed to start our first game against Riga...

Technically they owed 3 games but their backup only played 2 in the playoffs. I assume a loss of pick or cap will make up the rest?

[Beketov 9,033]

Just now, Bushito said:

Technically they owed 3 games but their backup only played 2 in the playoffs. I assume a loss of pick or cap will make up the rest?

No, the loss in the playoffs is enough. If it was more games or if the standings were closer (IE if those games had potentially pushed them into the playoffs over Someone else) then maybe further punishment would be worth it but in this case I think those 2 games are fine.

[Bushito 1,945]

1 minute ago, Beketov said:

No, the loss in the playoffs is enough. If it was more games or if the standings were closer (IE if those games had potentially pushed them into the playoffs over Someone else) then maybe further punishment would be worth it but in this case I think those 2 games are fine.

They would have lost anyway, they technically received no punishment, lol.

[Arthur 133]

6 minutes ago, Quik said:

As much as it sucks that you missed the games, at the end of the day it wasn’t the difference in the series. Unless you were going to post 2 shutouts, goaltending wasn’t even the problem. 

 

Hell, I was hit with the same punishment and @Sonnet wasn’t allowed to start our first game against Riga...

 

So in your opinion difference in stats between my player ang QUE G wouldn't have make any difference? Rebound woulnd't have possibly ended somewhere else, my player woulnd't have been able to freeze play better than QUE G? Both game were lost by one goal. IMO that would have been a difference maker.

 

Sonnet should have been angry at this rule too if you want my opinion. It's a stupid rule.

[Beaviss 4,957]

There has never been a rule with a more suiting name.

[Arthur 133]

6 minutes ago, Beketov said:

Cap hit could potentially hurt the team for the entire season if they are near the cap which most teams are. So basically for 3 games you could lose a player forever? Hardly seems fair.

 

Extra backup games the next season, and really the cap hit as well, both punish in the future which doesn’t necessarily make sense. What if it was your last season competiting and you were going into a rebuild? Congrats, you get extra games with your starter basically because next season doesn’t matter.

 

When possible removing from the playoffs makes the most sense. It’s also not like there is no discussion. The admin team that isn’t involved (so for this season myself and Will) will make the decision based on the infraction severity and situation. We laid out in the rules what the options basically were. 

 

Instead of punishing the team and forcing the hand of the GM to do a move, probably getting rid of lesser player, you decided to punish the starting goaltender, most likely an active member of the forum, to play a bot since there is no fucking rule to even have a 'player' goaltender? Fucking clap. that's genius.

 

Damn i'm glad we have people able to predict the future in the management of the league. I'm reassured now that you'll be able to know exactly which team are at their last season of competing and who aren't. That sure gonna come handy in those situation. It's not like a GM could put some move out of their ass and end up being able to compete anyway the next season you know.

 

[Quik 4,113]

Just now, Arthur said:

 

So in your opinion difference in stats between my player ang QUE G wouldn't have make any difference? Rebound woulnd't have possibly ended somewhere else, my player woulnd't have been able to freeze play better than QUE G? Both game were lost by one goal. IMO that would have been a difference maker.

 

Sonnet should have been angry at this rule too if you want my opinion. It's a stupid rule.

You guys gave up what, 3 goals in 2 games? Sure, you may have made a difference in the series, but it’s pretty unlikely when Que G posted fairly insane stats. Whether you agree or not, it’s not rare for lesser players to play above their heads, especially in single games.

 

Either way, the loss is on your offence not clicking, which happens.

[Arthur 133]

1 minute ago, Quik said:

You guys gave up what, 3 goals in 2 games? Sure, you may have made a difference in the series, but it’s pretty unlikely when Que G posted fairly insane stats. Whether you agree or not, it’s not rare for lesser players to play above their heads, especially in single games.

 

Either way, the loss is on your offence not clicking, which happens.

 

I don't disagree nor agree with your statement. That QUE G posted insane number is great. That doesn't mean i have to accept a stupid rule that prevented me to play in the playoff.

However, stating that it wouldn't have make a difference is false. Anything is anyone's game with STHS with any change.

[Quik 4,113]

1 minute ago, Arthur said:

 

I don't disagree nor agree with your statement. That QUE G posted insane number is great. That doesn't mean i have to accept a stupid rule that prevented me to play in the playoff.

However, stating that it wouldn't have make a difference is false. Anything is anyone's game with STHS with any change.

With the rule, it was understood from last off-season that this would happen. Beaviss even hired an AGM, who could have made sure. Hell, you yourself could have kept track, same as Sonnet did with his own starts and reminded me when we were getting close to the end of the season (my screw up came with changing lines for the last sim, and accidentally overwriting the backup goalie game). Say what you will about the rule, but there was nothing unclear about any playoff team failing to meet requirements having to start a backup in the playoffs, and your team is the reason these rules came into existence lol. 

 

As for the series, there’s no way you or I can say that you definitely would have changed the series. If you want to believe that, that’s fine. But, as you said, anything is anyone’s game with STHS, so it’s also possible you would have been blown out had you started. We don’t know, we never will, and it’s not the league’s fault for that. No matter how much you wish to gripe, and I understand your anger with the situation, the rules are in place, understood, and for whatever reason, they were broken, so Quebec has to deal with the consequences. 

 

Going forward, I’m hopeful that neither Beaviss or myself make the same mistake and have to put this on you or Sonnet again, nor any other GM/goalie combination. The rules are clear, and will clearly be enforced, no matter who you are...

[Arthur 133]

2 minutes ago, Quik said:

As for the series, there’s no way you or I can say that you definitely would have changed the series. If you want to believe that, that’s fine. But, as you said, anything is anyone’s game with STHS, so it’s also possible you would have been blown out had you started. We don’t know, we never will, and it’s not the league’s fault for that. No matter how much you wish to gripe, and I understand your anger with the situation, the rules are in place, understood, and for whatever reason, they were broken, so Quebec has to deal with the consequences. 

 

Can you fucking show me where i said i would have changed anything? I stated that anything could have happened. We could have lost those two games still, i agree, but we could have won them as well. I don't care what would have been the end results. I care about the fact my player was sit out of fucking playoff games because some people think they can foresee the future and know when to punish in playoff or when to punish in regular season/draft instead of having a clear rule. Don't think anything will make me stop to hate on that fucking rule as soon as i can because it's possibly the worst rule i've ever seen in sim league of my life.

[Quik 4,113]

28 minutes ago, Arthur said:

However, stating that it wouldn't have make a difference is false

No need for hostility. 

 

Again, it was understood that playoff teams would be punished with playoff games. Non-playoff teams with picks/cap space. No situation is black and white, however, so the rule allows harsher punishment if the situation calls for it. As it is, the punishment lined up exactly as was expected. If you hate the rule, make sure you sit the required amount of games next season. 

[Arthur 133]

11 minutes ago, Quik said:

No need for hostility. 

 

Again, it was understood that playoff teams would be punished with playoff games. Non-playoff teams with picks/cap space. No situation is black and white, however, so the rule allows harsher punishment if the situation calls for it. As it is, the punishment lined up exactly as was expected. If you hate the rule, make sure you sit the required amount of games next season. 

Yeah you misunderstood that. Just as told me i can't say it would have changed something, i meant it as telling you you can't say it wouldn't.

 

If you think your rule is working as intended, so be it, but expect me to complain about it each time you gonna use it in playoff be my team or not.

[Beketov 9,033]

30 minutes ago, Arthur said:

 

Can you fucking show me where i said i would have changed anything? I stated that anything could have happened. We could have lost those two games still, i agree, but we could have won them as well. I don't care what would have been the end results. I care about the fact my player was sit out of fucking playoff games because some people think they can foresee the future and know when to punish in playoff or when to punish in regular season/draft instead of having a clear rule. Don't think anything will make me stop to hate on that fucking rule as soon as i can because it's possibly the worst rule i've ever seen in sim league of my life.

How is it at all forseeing the future? We only look at starts at the end of the season when the playoffs are set. IE we knew Quebec was in the playoffs after cheating in regards to the backup rule so they were punished accorsingly. Had they not been in the playoffs they would have been punished accordingly for that.

 

It makes far more sense to do that than potentially screw to entire team the next season with a cap hit or have no effect if they go into a rebuild. We recognize it sucks for the players that have to sit when they did nothing wrong. It was discussed at length that it’s an unfortunate side effect but ultimately a required one. If a goalie is getting concerned about the backup rules they can always PM the simming team about it. If it’s a situation where a GM hasn’t been updating their lines we’ll be reasonable and allow a substitution to be made.

 

We aren’t looking for reasons to punish teams. We would honestly rather not have to. But the rules exist and it’s no longer on the Simmer to do a GM’s job which is entirely fair.

[Beketov 9,033]

1 hour ago, Sonnet said:

We didn't take the time to play our backup when it didn't matter, when every other team did? Then we have to make it up during the games that DO matter, against teams that followed the rule

That’s actually a really good way of looking at it.