ATG IV 16 event Franchise League

[majicmg]

I'd be in favor of being forced to start a bench player for the same number of games as the ineligible player was used (not just started).

Enforcing a temporary monetary fine seems logical on one hand, but on the other, it could be double jeopardy for the offending team because of the increasing penalties in waiver moves.

FYI: I will be out of the country and away from a computer from Sunday morning until late Wednesday. We've waited an eternity already for the next season to start, and I'd hoped it would be underway by now.

If draft and waivers occur during the period I'm away, I could be stuck with non-qualifying players on my roster, something I've been careful to avoid in setting up my draft. Hopefully, I won't be penalized severely if that comes to pass.

[FAaron]

I agree with making the back-up start for as many games as the ineligible player played. It is easier to enforce and seems the most equitable punishment.

[jpgavin]

[quote:d3fa952255="majicmg"]
FYI: I will be out of the country and away from a computer from Sunday morning until late Wednesday. We've waited an eternity already for the next season to start, and I'd hoped it would be underway by now.

If draft and waivers occur during the period I'm away, I could be stuck with non-qualifying players on my roster, something I've been careful to avoid in setting up my draft. Hopefully, I won't be penalized severely if that comes to pass.[/quote:d3fa952255]

Dan, if you get your team in tonight, waivers will run Saturday afternoon and majicmg will be ok.

[AeroDave10]

I disagree that starting a bench player is easier, only because we obviously have very little control over HAL, so who knows what will happen when he gets his hands on our players and substitutes at will :? The $$ penalty, as JP concurred, is much easier to enforce, and the double penalty of dropping and picking up is known and recognized as part of the punishment. Maintaining the integrity of the honor system is a fundamental of SOM online.

I don't doubt that this was an honest mistake (though we created our first season well before the second), but this just helps keep people on their toes. After all, 11 other teams were aware of the rules and abided by them. I'm fine with JP, our unofficial commish, proposing a fair resolution.

[pjatscfy52]

[quote:10f7db760c="AeroDave10"]I disagree that starting a bench player is easier, only because we obviously have very little control over HAL, so who knows what will happen when he gets his hands on our players and substitutes at will :? The $$ penalty, as JP concurred, is much easier to enforce, and the double penalty of dropping and picking up is known and recognized as part of the punishment. Maintaining the integrity of the honor system is a fundamental of SOM online.

I don't doubt that this was an honest mistake (though we created our first season well before the second), but this just helps keep people on their toes. After all, 11 other teams were aware of the rules and abided by them. I'm fine with JP, our unofficial commish, proposing a fair resolution.[/quote:10f7db760c]

Whatever, I'll drop my whole team if that'll maintain the "integrity of the honor system". Is there really need to question my integrity? This is SOM! I made a mistake. I'm glad the other 11 teams know the rules and abide by them. I know that if this happens to them at some point, I won't be condesending, and question there motives.

I'm aware the first season was created well before the second. I picked up Groh on Oct. 10th. That was right around the time that we were putting our teams together after the 4 round draft.

There's no need to act righteous, it won't impress anyone.

[AeroDave10]

[quote:accf49f5cb="Pjatscfy"]
Whatever, I'll drop my whole team if that'll maintain the "integrity of the honor system". Is there really need to question my integrity? This is SOM! I made a mistake. I'm glad the other 11 teams know the rules and abide by them. I know that if this happens to them at some point, I won't be condesending, and question there motives.

I'm aware the first season was created well before the second. I picked up Groh on Oct. 10th. That was right around the time that we were putting our teams together after the 4 round draft.

There's no need to act righteous, it won't impress anyone.[/quote:accf49f5cb]

:shock: Didn't know I hit such a sore spot. I was not making a personal attack. I was not trying to be condescending or righteous. I was also not questioning your integrity, but I do think it's fair to adhere to the rules and have some consequence if one is broken. JP asked for suggestions and opinions, and I offered mine.

I still don't understand why Groh hasn't been dropped yet. With 25 players, you (Swiper No Swiping) can drop him without deciding who to add in his place.

[jpgavin]

Idanred's in, so season 2 drafts tonight. :D Very excited to see what my 60 mil Cubs team can do. They could win 100, they could lose 100 and I wouldn't be shocked either way. :lol:

Yes, I did see the last two posts. :shock:

I think this is not the last time we're going to see this happen. That's why we need a long term rule based on majority opinion.

As for the current issue, Pjatscfy needs to know what to do with his roster tonight. Based on previous posts we had two in favor of using a backup and one for the monetary penalty. Both comments on the back up choice indicated that the backup should start as many games as the ineligible player started.

So, Pjatscfy, why don't you drop Groh, pick up a 3B and based on last night's games I think you had Frisch at 3B so put your back up 2B in the lineup. (If you want to keep Frisch at 2B and use a backup 3B that's fine.) We'll go with 14 games (I realize this will likely turn out to be 15 but there's no way around that.) This will be the rule for the remainder of this season.

See the next post for my opinions about the rule.

[jpgavin]

Ok, so se need to decide on a rule for penalties for ineligable players. I think it's important to consider the following when we make this rule.

1. Pjatscfy's mistake was an easy one to make, so the penalty we decide on will almost certainly come into play.

2. An honest mistake shouldn't cost a manager an entire season. The current case is a great example of this. My Reds team would be in last place whether I had Heinie Groh or not. Pjatscfy is in the midst of a great season. He has a good shot at the championship and he shouldn't lose that opportunity for this type of mistake. I think a 10% salary hit would probably take him out of the running. This is not to say we absolutely shouldn't use a monetary penalty, but the penalty needs to be appropriate.

3. We should decide on the rule in a timely fashion so that we're ready for the start of season 2. 8-)

So, let's get as many managers weighing in on this as possible...

[AeroDave10]

After watching the debate last night, I just wanted to "set the record straight" and "clarify" my idea because a permanent 10% salary hit is not what I suggested.

Let's say Team A plays Team B in the first 3 games of the season, and Team A has an illegal player. If Team A immediately drops that player after that series, his penalty should be enforced for the next 3 games he plays against Team B. If Team A does the same thing for, say, 30 or 40 games, then the penalty should be enforced over the next 30 or 40 games, respectively.

As I said, I think a monetary fine is easiest to enforce, though maybe it is tougher to agree on. First, I think an additional fine should only apply if the illegal player was at least $2M (maybe more). Next, I think the fine should be something like half of the illegal player's salary. I already outlined the duration of the fine.

[majicmg]

I'd propose a graduated scale of punishment for the infraction, and it should be scaled in proportion to the value of the player involved.

The probability of any of us making this blunder is great, considering that we're playing one season while constructing drafts for another go-round. Even if you've spent the time poring over a book or online to build a list of players available to each franchise, the task is fraught with pitfalls. And by enabling each owner to protect one of the four timeline rosters assigned to his/her team, we're adding another potential problem area.

I'm opposed to changing anything outlined in the previous paragraph. But simply stated, it'll be easy for any of us to make a mistake. Let's do the following:

[b:265cca45a7]1st offense[/b:265cca45a7] - Simply drop the offending player IMMEDIATELY upon discovery, replace him on the roster and use a benchwarmer valued at under $1 million in his place for the same number of games the ringer played.

[b:265cca45a7]2nd offense[/b:265cca45a7] - Follow the same procedure as in offense No. 1, while adding an additional financial penalty equal to the offending player's salary. The owner will regain the cash when the games-played penalty expires.

[b:265cca45a7]3rd offense[/b:265cca45a7] - Follow the same procedure as in offense No. 2, but double the financial penalty.

This outline should satisfy both sides of the argument. And, hopefully, keep peace.