NPPL Results

[duffistuta]

I would be amazed if we do not see see an official reaction to the Tontons/Dogs scenario...I'd lay money on team and/or banning for the guilty party(s).

 

[Collier]

Originally posted by duffistuta
I would be amazed if we do not see see an official reaction to the Tontons/Dogs scenario...I'd lay money on team and/or banning for the guilty party(s).

Musta missed this, I saw the pics but what actually happened?

Paul

 

[sjt19]

Allegedly one of the ton tons ran out of his dead box as he was convinced that the dogs had been playing on, and tried to rip a dog players hopper off to prove to the judge he had been hit.

 

[Collier]

Originally posted by sjt19
Allegedly one of the ton tons ran out of his dead box as he was convinced that the dogs had been playing on, and tried to rip a dog players hopper off to prove to the judge he had been hit.

Yeah just read some more of the comments left for the photo.

Paul

 

[knobbs]

Originally posted by Paul_collier
Musta missed this, I saw the pics but what actually happened?

Paul

This is what I mean...not alot of stir on this one, yet everyone knows about Dynasty/Rage.

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by sjt19
Allegedly one of the ton tons ran out of his dead box as he was convinced that the dogs had been playing on, and tried to rip a dog players hopper off to prove to the judge he had been hit.

Sam, change the 'one' to 'all' and you are getting warm

 

[sjt19]

i had been told that it had been a number of them, but didnt want to stir it up, thats why it atarted with 'allegedly'.

Bloody French!

 

[Robbo]

Controversial Quarters

Originally posted by Baca Loco
And Pete--just a sidebar for you. Funny how in your mind the refs threatening to walk if the ruling was changed equates to integrity in this instance when Phil doing the same during your run-in was viewed entirely differently. I don't bring it up just to have a go at you--but the irony is rather pungent, ain't it? [Besides, Duffy says things are a bit dull of late, so--] I bring it up to demonstrate that virtually identical actions are open to wide interpretations and that what any individual chooses to believe isn't the issue. The issue is how any problematic situation is handled by the NPPL (or the PSP or the Millennium boyz). And I'm advocating a consistent pattern of pro-active responses instead of the traditional vaudeville routine that has been the norm up until now. At the very least if the NPPL were to break the old pattern it would signal to a percentage of those interested in all this that they really are different instead of the same old thing in a different package.

Ok, we need to lay out some info that you are probably not aware of; all, and I mean all of the refs that saw what happened agree that the Rage player was hit way before he shot Oli and then continued to play on.
The threatened walk out by the judges being equated to what happened in Chicago to Nexus and Rage is outrageous in my book.
In Chicago, Rage handed in a score sheet they knew did not have the correct points on, they also signed it knowing it was false.
When the head judge asked the field judges how many live Rage players there were left on the field, 5 out of the 7 said there were only two and that the sheet was wrong.
The head judge chose to believe the two judges who said there were three.
The head judge also chose to ignore about a hundred other people, including one of his own rules committe, Ronnie Kilbourne, all of Dynasty and God knows who else, all of whom said there were only two Rage players left, in favour of pushing Rage through to the next round.
The head judge has since emailed me and admittted he made a mistake.
The NPPL also have offically admitted a travesty took place.

All of the judges in New York agreed that the Rage player played on and was hit long before he got to Oli; the vast majority of the judges in Chicago also found Rage to be at fault, I don't see any problem or hint of ambiguity in any of this on my part.

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by knobbs
This is what I mean...not alot of stir on this one, yet everyone knows about Dynasty/Rage.

Tell us about the Enemy situation at Maxes and then explain how your views of that situation has any bearing on how the disciplinary committee--backed by the Mil promoters--dealt with it.

 

[Baca Loco]

Re: Controversial Quarters

Originally posted by Robbo
Ok, we need to lay out some info that you are probably not aware of; all, and I mean all of the refs that saw what happened agree that the Rage player was hit way before he shot Oli and then continued to play on.
The threatened walk out by the judges being equated to what happened in Chicago to Nexus and Rage is outrageous in my book.
In Chicago, Rage handed in a score sheet they knew did not have the correct points on, they also signed it knowing it was false.
When the head judge asked the field judges how many live Rage players there were left on the field, 5 out of the 7 said there were only two and that the sheet was wrong.
The head judge chose to believe the two judges who said there were three.
The had judge also chose to ignore about a hundred other people, including one of his own rules committe, Ronnie Kilbourne, all of Dynasty and God knows who else all of whokm said there were only two Rage players left, in favour of pushing Rage through to the next round.
The head judge has since emailed me and admittted he made a mistake.
The NPPL also have offically admitted a travesty took place.

All of the judges in New York agreed that the Rage player played on and was hit long before he got to Oli; the vast majority of the judges in Chicago also found Rage to be at fault, I don't see any problem or hint of ambiguity in any of this on my part.

C'mon, Pete. Get with the program. It ain't about the "facts." You and Knobbs both keep insisting on responding to incidents, one at a time, in isolation and then making general applications to how the NPPL should or shouldn't, can or can't, respond. What I'm suggesting to both of you is that the NPPL should have a policy and practice in place so they always respond in a consistent manner.

This situation is also the perfect example of what I'm talking about. Your views are predicated on what others told you. Knobbs' views are based on what he thinks he saw. I've heard firsthand and read other places lots of other views that are at odds in one way or another with your expressed views. There will inevitably be situations at dispute and the only thing the NPPL can control is how they deal with those situations when they occur and when they continue to abdicate that measure of control it is to their long term detriment.

Feel free to agree or disagree but for pity's sake at least address the issue.