by Proverbial Psalms » Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:16 pm
I can't comment on the "he-said", "she-said" portion of this, because I was not there when most of it was said.
But, I do see plenty of inconsistencies in how various rules are specified, interpreted, enforced, and selectively rejected or accepted by the community... most notably in live drafts.
In live drafts, it is common for some draftcard rules to be ignored completely... e.g. (a) not drafting 3 pure relievers, (b) ability to draft 11 pitchers and only 14 hitters. It frustrates me every time I see 6/7 SP's and a total of 11 pitchers drafted, but it is generally accpeted and, thus, so it goes. While the draft card loophole on catchers seems somewhat further out there re: limits of reasonableness, it is at least consistent in that the draft engine allows it despite it being clear in the rules, just as with the other rules mentioned.
Although I agree with folks who think the catcher loophole should be corrected, I also identify with Don's reaction to the reactions. I have seen similar polarization regarding the concept of intentionally using players out of position... e.g. having only CF-rated OF's and thus forcing HAL to use two of them in LF & RF. To me it is allowable, with a rules-specified penalty, so why isn't it acceptable? Yet, to others it is outright cheating... :roll:
Seems like there is consistency in the inconsistency