PC Pennant Race

My take on the penalty.

I believe the quote (which came from me) "You cannot impose a “penalty” on a team that does not count in the official standings anyway." was meant for filler teams reusing stadiums.

Having said that, my interpretation of the rule is that the team which incurs the penalty gets the 20 point penalty. It was not intended to be a penalty against the final score (best four teams). Since the team was Terry’s worst team and the score was dropped, there should be no further assessment.

The Commish may see it differently and you guys may see it differently. If anyone wants to open it up for discussion, you’re certainly welcome to. Adding a blurb to the rules for future clarity would probably not hurt.

Yes, the quote was referring to filer teams. Here is the entire section. I would favor clarifying the rule to impose a penalty regardless of that team's record to avoid future situations (may also include a rule that qualifying event standings are not final until potential penalties are enforced)

Ballpark Requirement

A player must not re-use a ballpark. For example, if he used Fenway in Event I, he may not use Fenway in Events II-V, nor may he use Fenway in any playoff round.

There can be more than one player using the same ballpark in the same event and/or league. For example, player X and player Y may both use Fenway in Event I, League 1 (In theory, the same ballpark could be used by all 12 teams in any league or event). The prohibition relates to the same player using the same ballpark twice during the Tour Championship.

A player who is acting as a "filler" for any particular event and league may use whatever ballpark he wants to use. You cannot impose a “penalty” on a team that does not count in the official standings anyway.

If a player re-uses a ballpark in the qualifying events, there will be a 20 point penalty.

This situation is not specifically defined in the rules.

Potential possibilities:

1. Penalty imposed against his one team (proceed as is).
2. Penalty imposed against his total (removing him from the semifinals).

Possibly, there might be an interim penalty: He must pick his stadium last regardless of his three round draft order (that is, last pick in 3rd round only). However, that might also be interpreted as an advantage. Who’s to say this late in the game?

We can run a poll later to decide how the rule should be interpreted in the future.

Thank you ScumbyJr and J-Pav for posting the rule and working hard to try and figure it out!

What’s your take on this situation? Or anyone else, for that matter?

What’s your take on this situation?

Looking at this closer --- If you look at the 2019 championship, there were two penalties assessed - Axelrod and brothersatm. In both cases, the 20 point penalty was assessed to the second team that reused a stadium. Not to the overall score. For Axelrod, that penalty was to his team that was not "dropped" but for brothersatm, it did end up reducing that teams score, which was dropped.

(There were actually two others who reused stadiums, DWG and laughren.francis, but they were way down in the standings so it doesn't appear they had penalties imposed from Strat.)

So, to be consistent in applying to rule, Terry should get a -20 on his PC 4 team, dropping that team to 63 wins. That won't change his score. This is what happened before, and therefore it should be the same here.

I've e-mailed the Commish so he can weigh in.

"Terry should get a -20 on his PC 4 team, dropping that team to 63 wins. That won't change his score. This is what happened before, and therefore it should be the same here."

I agree with this assessment.

"Terry should get a -20 on his PC 4 team, dropping that team to 63 wins. That won't change his score. This is what happened before, and therefore it should be the same here."

I agree with this assessment.

Yeah, people tend to get upset when rules are not consistent, and/or exceptions are made. "Don't change your horses midstream" seems to apply here.

I think we’re all pretty much in agreement. I’m guessing the twist this year was that no one in the past identified the “one more ballpark available” advantage.

My take is that no one forfeits a team score for this small advantage, so it’s hardly worth worrying about.

Really good thinking by everyone above in the Terri potential penalty situation. I like the way you have all explained your reasoning so clearly. Good research and Way to go gentlemen!