Wait, wait, wait. It's not even about a case by case basis. It's about the NT rule being waved week 1. He should have been waived week 1 since he joined right AFTER you increased the roster limit the day BEFORE week 1 started. And so, he should have been eligible for week 2.

Basically, killer is a bad case to argue here because he joined week 1 and should have been waived. More so, had he not made the deadline for week 1, the argument is that his week 1 should be the week he joined since he wasn't already on a squad, the roster was just increased and we are wanting to increase the player base? Here he is a perfect example. Not like he was trying to be a loaner player, or has a history of it?!

As far as I can tell, you are upset because the league mistakenly didnt let him play week 1. League mistake, not a problem with the rules.

@Jordan

Also it isn't the ref's job to know literally every player.

Like who is brewsdp? I've heard it's 3 different players from 3 different people. With your proposal we'd have to know 100% for sure he is whomever. Under the current rules though it doesn't matter who he is. Ref sees red next to his name? He can't play. No research required. No asking the captain to pick and choose their opponents. Done deal.

Didn't Killer join 15 minutes before your match and after the season had already started?

Emp are you kidding me? The refs SHOULDN'T know who player are? Then what's to stop them from double squadding? Or playing twice as an nt? That's an absolutely wrong point.


BB joined us on the 17th, and couldn't playon the 24th BB.

@Medic - Killer didn't play WEEK 2 not week 1.

The loaner program died with rule 2.6 unless. The key part of my proposal was that the player had to previously be squadless.

No Medic, he wasn't in the lineup for week 1. He was for week 2 and had 1 day wait period, when he shouldn't have to wait considering the roster was bumped up to 16 the day before week 1. Even though he joined before week 1 match he was still ineligible for week 2?

And not upset, just re-instating Jordan's request for a rule change. He wasn't on a squad before the season started, yet he was still considered ineligible. I can see the argument if he was on another squad, like hack.
Not arguing that. even though he didn't play on PC week 1 (he wouldn't have changed anything if he DID play for us week 2), but we are accepting of the wait period since he WAS on a squad.

Champ playing for friend wouldn't fall under my rule, as he was already on SN this season.

Killer being allowed to play week 2 would follow, because he was squadless.

If Killer was forced to sit Week 1 that was an oversight and should've been brought to my attention then...

And week 2?

Was he "forced" to sit or was he just not put in the lineup? Because I'm pretty sure Jordan told me the starting lineup and killer wasn't mentioned in the captain's chat, or even mentioned to be unspecced to the ref.

He was on the lineup week 2, and was forced to sit with 1 day ineligible. Not sure why if he joined 2/17 (week 1).

Emp - You're dismissing a rule proposal before reading it.

Let me try this one more time.

Killer was squadless, killer joins after we bump the roster lock killer is not allowed to play week 2 because he still had a day of being ineligible.

My rule is to prevent that, if you're squadless and you join a squad after week 1, you shouldn't be punished by not being allowed to play.

If YOU were previously on a squad then you have to wait the full 8 days.

Hack shouldn't have played week 2 and he didn't. Because he was on PC week 1.

KIller should have been able to play week 2 and he couldn't, even though he wasn't previously on a squad.

I'm confused now. Was killer supposed to play week 1 and he wasn't allowed to? Or was he sat week 1 and tried to be put in week 2 but wasn't allowed?

Also, not trying to argue or appeal it, just clarifying the week 1 rule and the request for the change from here on for a player not already on a squad and especially if roster limit is increased the day before the season starts.

Week 2 he was ineligible. I didn't make the 8 day wait period.

Also, refs do not have access to player account info. That's why we enforce rules like playing on the "correct" alias, aka the website alias. It's also why things like a wait time were initiated 20 years ago. To give staff who do have account access the chance to investigate players suspected of smurfing or double squadding and what not.

I didn't do lineup week 2, wasn't in caps chat til match started. He was in along with hack and they were both spec'd before game started on Emp/AM's ruling.

I know you didn't, I'm saying players under Killer's circumstance should be able to play. Staff should be vetting players anyways, doesn't take any effort at all to check if a player was on a squad already that season.

It was my ruling to sit both players week 2. They were ineligible and you had 10 eligible players online.

Also I'm not dismissing anything. I'm just not willing to change the rule midseason after it's been enforced one way.

If you want to change the NT/eligible player rules after this season, I've already said a few times it can be discussed and polled.

bullshit rules tbh, let me hop and be instantly eligible

fuck u ice

idk it's pretty simple to make a new alias and join a squad without any real proof of who it is.

neither emp or myself have access to *whois people to see who they are.