|
Post by albert2b on Jan 2, 2013 16:34:02 GMT -4
awesome so i get my games in on time and get two extra roster spots then have to replay albert a third time losing ONE roster spot hell im still ahead of the game by one IM all IN Hard to get all your games in on time if you're constantly playing replays, Kevin And if I get my way, you're not gonna lose one roster spot. Just a game in the standings.
|
|
|
Post by thecolonel on Jan 2, 2013 19:04:07 GMT -4
hahaha the Dice were loaded?? How the heck could I arrange that??!! I don't even know what a "loaded" dice would do!! They were tested huh. Thats awesome !!
|
|
|
Post by brodnine on Jan 3, 2013 12:52:05 GMT -4
10 Beers and 5 shots would do it.
|
|
|
Post by CCStegos on Jan 3, 2013 21:49:29 GMT -4
I'd like to point out that we have a whole section in the constitution where we added our own rules and some directly go against rules from Pope HAL. My point is, he is not infallible. Almost every league has their own set of "house rules". They go into effect because (a) HAL's rules make no sense or (b) they make game play more realistic or (c) they make game play more fun. Whatever the reason, we make changes. Hell, why have an annual meeting at all if we just go with what HAL says?
Here are some examples of going DIRECTLY against what HAL said. For usage, he says limit players to the amount they were used in real life. We instituted unlimited players. In the 2004 carded season he said to limit AFraud to 2 games at SS because he only played 2 innings there. We said unlimited games at SS. He once rated a guy for CF (I think Pierre) because his real team only used one player in CF the whole season and he thought two guys on the team should be rated for the position. We negated that rating.
Than there are rules we put in such as Rainouts, Coaching a runner on third, turning all H&R lineouts off the pitcher card into double plays.
The list goes on and on. So please don't take a stand against any proposal just because it goes against what HAL says. If you REALLY believe in HAL's infallability, then you should propose we strike all our rule changes from the constitution.
On the other hand if you really don't like a proposal for any OTHER reason, then that's a whole other story and you should make your opinion known and vote against it.
|
|
|
Post by albert2b on Jan 6, 2013 13:20:17 GMT -4
Ok, after speaking to a couple managers about my original proposal (first proposal on this thread), I decided to add a part B in the event the original proposal (now called part A) doesn't pass. So the entire proposal now looks like this:
PART A Let's say a manager makes a usage or roster mistake that results in a replay game. If the same manager makes a 2nd mistake in the replay game that results in ANOTHER replay game or partial replay game, I propose that the offending manager forfeits that game. The usage will be recorded for both teams using the PAs and IP of the last completed replay game. This rule only applies if the SAME manager makes the mistake in the replay game. If it's the other manager that makes a mistake that results in another replay game, then the 2nd replay must be played.
PART B If Part A doesn't pass, I would like to propose that instead of the forfeit, the 2nd replay game gets put on CPU from the beginning of the game and not from the point of the infraction. The offending manager will not have the opportunity to manage the game and must allow Hal to manage for his team. The non-offending manager will have the option of managing that game on the CPU or also allowing Hal to manage it. In addition, the offending manager will have all the usage in that game DOUBLED. This rule only applies if the SAME manager makes the mistake in the replay game. If it's the other manager that makes a mistake that results in another replay game, then the 2nd replay must be played.
I get the fact that we're all human and mistakes happen. That's why we allow a replay game when we make a mistake. However, if a manager is involved in a replay, they should take extra precaution and be more conscious of getting their usage/roster moves right, as opposed to being just as careless as before and treating it as "just another game." Getting together with people and getting games in on time is cumbersome enough without having to re-play games. It's incredibly frustrating for the manager who did nothing wrong to have to play a single game over THREE times! I just feel that having a rule in place will get managers to at least pay a little more attention to something they should have paid attention to from the beginning.
The revision is basically for those who don't like the idea of a forfeit. My reason for this proposal isn't so much about the penalty for the offending team as it is about protecting the NON-offending team that didn't do anything wrong. So, as long as that manager is protected and isn't required to spend more of his time playing this single game a THIRD time, I'm ok with whatever punishment the offending manager receives.
Bryan, please strike my original proposal from the agenda. I'll submit this as the new proposal. Thanks.
Albert
|
|
faggs
Short Season
Posts: 6
|
Post by faggs on Jan 6, 2013 23:36:09 GMT -4
NEW RULES 1) how bout instead of HR single chance we make it a HR / double we circumvent many other strat rules we can do this one to
2) same as above except we use fielder ratings if the outfielder is a 1 or 2 it stays a single a 3 or 4 it becomes a double
3) just like when the pitcher has used up all his innings and he induces a DP the manager is not penalized the same should happen for DPs during a game the pitcher should NOT be tired next game
4) how bout each manager plays every other manager twice No divisions this makes everything fair and easy same strength of schedule same amount of travel no third series travel dilemas i go to pete v once he comes to me once every year i go to adam adam comes to me if you want to bang out all 8 at once so be it
5) i would like to modify the RARE PLAY SI2 to read
|
|
|
Post by CCStegos on Jan 7, 2013 0:06:40 GMT -4
Someone call a medic. Kevin's #5 rule above looks like the Castle Aaaaarrrrrgh bit from Holy Grail.
|
|
|
Post by CCStegos on Jan 7, 2013 10:10:28 GMT -4
I got a text from Kevin saying he thought he fixed that to read :
i would like to modify the RARE PLAY SI2 to read "all runs score if it's the third out"
|
|
|
Post by brodnine on Jan 7, 2013 13:01:50 GMT -4
New proposal Do away with any changes to the x-chart except for hitter scoring on a DB 2 base error. Reason: If theres a X chart play I look at the X-chart. I don't know which results have been changed by the league.
|
|
|
Post by CCStegos on Jan 8, 2013 8:34:35 GMT -4
Why are you looking at the SOM X-charts? We have IMBA X-charts incorporating all the changes we've made over the years. Seems the reasonable thing is to look at our charts rather than try to find changes in our constitution at the same time you are reading the SOM X-charts.
|
|
|
Post by brodnine on Jan 8, 2013 13:48:25 GMT -4
I don't like the idea of you replay a game and the guy screws up again and you have to replay it over from the beginning on the puter. What if I was winning 10 -o at the time of the offense. We replay the guy screws up on purpose and bang game goes to the computer with a 0-0 score.
|
|
|
Post by Nyhitmen on Jan 8, 2013 15:41:28 GMT -4
I would hope we do not have anyone in the league who would make a mistake on purpose. That would be a low class move. And I thought replays only take place if the person who messes up was winning the game or won the game?
|
|
|
Post by albert2b on Jan 8, 2013 18:11:11 GMT -4
I don't like the idea of you replay a game and the guy screws up again and you have to replay it over from the beginning on the puter. What if I was winning 10 -o at the time of the offense. We replay the guy screws up on purpose and bang game goes to the computer with a 0-0 score. Mike, the replay rule doesn't work like that. If you're winning 10-0 and the OTHER manager screws up, no replay is necessary. He will lose the game and he will be punished if he overused or misused a player with usage penalties. The only way there's a replay is if the WINNING manager screws up.
|
|
|
Post by wilgpr1 on Jan 5, 2014 12:14:31 GMT -4
I propose that discrepancies if any are due with the usage at every deadline throughout the season.
|
|