After deep thought and consideration the 1er will be punished on the account of their players actions, honour compels me to do so as the rules are the rules and as head ref I must obey & up hold them. Although, the 1er won on the field the rules were indeed broken so Nr4 will take the 3 points. I expect all regiments and players to show respect and to behave like adults.
How is their situation different from our?
Feezy played in the Match 2Lr vs. 1er aswell.
The rules and situation are still the same, so why is there a different outcome?
I've heard one argument against a autowin for us
"
Because at this point I think it is pretty clear that the 2Lr also broke the rules by attending with the minimum attendance, even though they clearly had more people at hand (as it is proven by mutliple sources even in the regiment).
So it'd be rulebreak going against rulebreak"
Our Situation during the match
It is true that we didnt have a great attendance that day, sure, true.
But at this point the only rule regarding attendance was to bring at least 10 players and we had 12.
I trust that ppl. from 2Lr played on cavgf during our match as many have told me but I didnt know about it during the match.
As our TS was down during the match we didnt know if anyone else was there willing to play. I am glad the Nr. 13 allowed us to use their TS.
We started the tournament with a "small" team to play in the CL containing 20 ppl. (again, no rule says anything against this) and only 3 of them signed off. So we expected 17 ppl. to show up to the match... well, we all know how it went and only 12 actually came. As our TS was down we had to look for someone else's teamspeak we could use for the match and asked some other regiments. They allowed us to use their TS for the match but asked us to not use their TS as a backup for our TS. So we didnt publish their IP and instead only send the IP to the people in our CL team. Because of that the ppl. on cavgf didnt know where to find us and prob. forgot about the match or didnt know about it as we only mentioned it once and afterwards only in our CL Team.
I spoke with a few ppl. after out match against 1er and they all said it's not fair in their eyes to not bring everyone we had. Lindblom also made a rule that we had to bring atleast 15 ppl. We respect it and will try to get to 15 men in the future and disbanded our CL Team.
All this is just to show, that there was no rule breaking or vile intention in having a bad attendance that day, and after realizing that it appears like we had the intention to play with as few ppl. as posible we changed our plan.
We are not trying to rig the competition and are acting sportsmanlike.. We have been told our concept is not appropiate and we reconsidered it and eventually changed it.
I am saying this because we were accused of breaking rule § 1.
"
since they 'at least' violated § 1, especially when it comes to sportsmanship and respect for the competition and the ruleset as a whole"
We didnt break a ruleMinimum attendanceYou could say that we would harm the spirit of the rule when bringing only 10 (which we didnt) but why even make a rule of bringing at least 10 ppl. when you are not allowed to do that eighter?
We even had more than 10 and as stated multiple times now, we tried to bring more.
SportsmanshipI feel like I already made clear, that we didnt intend to act unsportsmanlike as we didnt intentionally had a low attendance and didnt know about the ppl. on cavgf during that time.
we expected 17 ppl. to come. We didnt ask the ppl, who played on cavgf to join us, because I didnt know about them being there and to this day I still dont know who 2/3 ppl. were who played on cavgf. Besides, having 3 ppl. play on cavgf during a match is not breaking a rule.
Not saying we did it on purpose, like I said above, I didnt even know about it, but even if it was on purpose, it would not have been against a rule.Like I already said, we even got rid of our CL Team to act according to the way Lindblom has intended the tournament. He said after our match that the tournament was meant so everyone could get a chance to play. We respect that.
With all this being said I really dont see how we broke a rule,
even Bedo agreed with me after our match that we didnt break a rule (but mentioned it's not nice to play with less than possible).
Spirit of the rulesAlso "the spirit of the rules" wasnt harmed in any way in my opinion as the only rule in terms of attendance was to bring at least 10 (the rule with min. 12 or 15 per match was introduced after our match against 1er).
We had more than that, so how is that against the spirit then?
1erHuss rulebreak against us is the same as their rulebreak against Nr. 4. Feezy used the hp mod.
As we didnt break a rule in our match there is no argument anymore speaking against us getting the autowin against 1er
Referring to this ("
Because at this point I think it is pretty clear that the 2Lr also broke the rules by attending with the minimum attendance, even though they clearly had more people at hand (as it is proven by mutliple sources even in the regiment).
So it'd be rulebreak going against rulebreak")
Leaving me with the opening question
Feezy played in the Match 2Lr vs. 1er aswell.
The rules and the situation are still the same, so why is there a different outcome?
It is the same case, so a diffrent punishment would be unjustified.
Repeating the most important points, as it is important to me that everyone knows about them and doenst call us unsportsmanlike. Because we didnt have a bad attendance on purposeWe disbanded our CL team and went back to playing with everyone as soon as we were told its not fair in their opinion. (We initially had a different oppinion on that but changed it afterwards. It is important to note that we still expected 17 ppl. besides having a CL team)
We didnt break a rule by having a bad attendance.
1er broke the same rule in their match against us as in their match against nr4.
I've tried to settle this without publically posting about it and adressed this already in the Cl ref. chat.
Even someone from 1er said "Just to Make sure, either 2Lr AND nr.4 get the points or none of these"I really cant see why our match was left unadressed then.
