Scoring discrepancy in playoff match (2 Viewers)

[toppshelff]

Folks, hate to put another of these in here, but I know that this one is going to be a battle, so wanted a vote on this. There is significant benefit to the victor here.

The Commish ended up beating another team by 1 point this past playoff weekend. In checking the scoring, a discrepancy was noted. In the written rules, a defensive 4th down stop is supposed to get 1 point, and the losing team's defense (GB) had two such stops. The Commish's defensed (Saints) had none. These points weren't included.

If corrected, the result would be reversed. The Commish would lose.

It ends up that the software was switched for the league a few years ago, but the written rule was never updated (although redistributed at the start of the year). The rules on the web site did not include the 4th down rule. Therefore, the last 3 seasons have never applied the rule.

The Commish has suggested that to remain consistent, and not go back and look at all past matches, the rule should not be applied here and will be removed for next year. In his opinion, Commish still wins.

In my opinion (I am not the other party, I'm out of the playoffs, just interested in fairness), all scores are final after a certain time, even if errors are found. We don't have a rule on this, but I think it is pretty standard in FF.

In my opinion, since this error was found quickly, the correction should be made, but only for this week's games (no other matches were affected).

How would you rule on this? Give me your reasons why?

 

[Crusaderfan]

If it is formally stated in your league rules and a league member points out the discrepancy within a day or so - I think it should be corrected. If not - then you have to let it remain as is. You certainly can't go back and check previous weeks/years.

 

[AcousticNut]

First I would make sure that from here on forward there is a rule clearly stated that, "All Scores are Final as of..... (our league is Thursday of the week the game is played).

Were this to happen in my league and it was pointed out to me, the score would be changed manually for that week to reflect what is written in our rules and would be changed in the software to make sure that it is accounted for in all week's going forward.

The rules of the league should always take precedent over a software mistake and should be manually fixed.

Commish loses.

 

[twitch]

So, the rule hasnt been applied in the league for 3 years? and you guys are basically now trying to apply it? I hope Im not the only one seeing something wrong with that, I dont care how quickly the error was discovered after than one isolated game. The 'error' hadnt been discovered in the 3 years. For that reason, I think the outcome should stand and the commish should win.

 

[DoubleG]

First I would make sure that from here on forward there is a rule clearly stated that, "All Scores are Final as of..... (our league is Thursday of the week the game is played).

Were this to happen in my league and it was pointed out to me, the score would be changed manually for that week to reflect what is written in our rules and would be changed in the software to make sure that it is accounted for in all week's going forward.

The rules of the league should always take precedent over a software mistake and should be manually fixed.

Commish loses.

 

[DoubleG]

So, the rule hasnt been applied in the league for 3 years? and you guys are basically now trying to apply it? I hope Im not the only one seeing something wrong with that, I dont care how quickly the error was discovered after than one isolated game. The 'error' hadnt been discovered in the 3 years. For that reason, I think the outcome should stand and the commish should win.

It is possible that no game was close enough for it to matter to this point. Similar to the Bears not calling a time out at the end of the game Monday. The Vikings would have just knelt again - what's the point? The other factor is that unless you watched every game, you would likely have no way of knowing your defense recorded a 4th down stop. IMHO, a league agreed upon rule should be followed, as long as it's noticed in a reasonable amount of time. A day or two after the affected game is reasonable.

 

[twitch]

So, the rule hasnt been applied in the league for 3 years? and you guys are basically now trying to apply it? I hope Im not the only one seeing something wrong with that, I dont care how quickly the error was discovered after than one isolated game. The 'error' hadnt been discovered in the 3 years. For that reason, I think the outcome should stand and the commish should win.

It is possible that no game was close enough for it to matter to this point. Similar to the Bears not calling a time out at the end of the game Monday. The Vikings would have just knelt again - what's the point? The other factor is that unless you watched every game, you would likely have no way of knowing your defense recorded a 4th down stop. IMHO, a league agreed upon rule should be followed, as long as it's noticed in a reasonable amount of time. A day or two after the affected game is reasonable.

Again, if the rule hasnt been applied for a single game for 3 years, why now? Sucks that it was overlooked that long, but now doesnt seem to be the time to make the one single exception. The rule was consistently overlooked and not applied, and week 15 is just not the time to do it. Alot could have changed in 3 years of not observing a rule. jmho.

 

[fsufan]

this type of stuff is why I do not do team DEF in my 2 dynasty leagues

if it is in the rules then it needs to be corrected

 

[toppshelff]

Thanks for your thoughts. For clarity:

The written rules were distributed at the start of the year. They gave a point for a 4th down stop.

The web site rules do not allow for that scoring, thus the rules on the web site do not include points for 4th down stop.

The draft took place before the web site scoring was available to view.

Not sure if that changes any opinions on this.

 

[Xenopax]

It is possible that no game was close enough for it to matter to this point.

You can't just wait until it's close enough to matter to point it out.There's a three year precedent to not use the rule. Since you guys already decided two season already without the 4th down rule it would make little sense to apply it now. Even if no one truly knew it was a problem till today the entire league has implicitly accepted the rule by not observing it.

 

[Road Warriors]

Thanks for your thoughts. For clarity:

The written rules were distributed at the start of the year. They gave a point for a 4th down stop.

The web site rules do not allow for that scoring, thus the rules on the web site do not include points for 4th down stop.

The draft took place before the web site scoring was available to view.

Not sure if that changes any opinions on this.

This statement, for me, makes it clear. Whether it's been applied in the past 3 years or not is irrelevant. It was in the league rules, as posted this season. The site doesn't score this automatically, so the Commish must apply the rule manually. It was brought to the league attention within a reasonable timeframe. The points should count by rule. Commish loses.

 

[twitch]

It is possible that no game was close enough for it to matter to this point.

You can't just wait until it's close enough to matter to point it out.There's a three year precedent to not use the rule. Since you guys already decided two season already without the 4th down rule it would make little sense to apply it now. Even if no one truly knew it was a problem till today the entire league has implicitly accepted the rule by not observing it.

Agree, thats basically my thought. Whether intentional or not, it was overlooked for 3 years. The rule therefore didnt apply for 3 years. And just from a pure #s standpoint, there were 447 4th down attempts this year, and 224 stops. That's a significant # of total stops made that could have altered scores. None of those other 222 didnt matter but these 2 should? I cant support that. Unfortunate situation, and I feel for you guys having to deal with such a dilemna.

 

[shadyridr]

I actually feel bad for the commish but I think its gotta be overturned.

 

[zed2283]

I think that the results should stand, pretty much based on the arguments that have already been presented. You can't not apply the rule for three years and then suddenly come back and do it this week because it just happened to be noticed.

 

[Butterbags]

It sucks...and as any commisioner knows, keeping up on rulebooks is a pain in the ###, but absolutely necessary.

The rules were distributed in clear black and white at the beginning of the season, and they must be honored as written...if this rule has not been enforced in 3 years because the software won't support it, then before next season change software, or change the rule, but you can't arbitrarily decide that now, after week 15 that rule isn't really valid.

If this discrepency cost anyone any games in the past 3 years, I say the owners need to check their scoring a little more closely.

It's a crappy scenario, but regardless of whether or not it involves the commisioner of the league, rules presented at season opening can't just go away when a sticky situation shows up later in the season...no matter how much past neglect of the problem has occurred.

Sorry Commish.

 

[Nemesis]

I voted to keep the score as is. This needs to be changed after the season......too much time has passed w/o using it.

 

[jagbag]

So, the rule hasnt been applied in the league for 3 years? and you guys are basically now trying to apply it? I hope Im not the only one seeing something wrong with that, I dont care how quickly the error was discovered after than one isolated game. The 'error' hadnt been discovered in the 3 years. For that reason, I think the outcome should stand and the commish should win.

This should be the correct answer.

 

[Sidewinder]

... I hope Im not the only one seeing something wrong with that, I dont care how quickly the error was discovered after than one isolated game. ...

you're not

 

[jagbag]

It is possible that no game was close enough for it to matter to this point.

You can't just wait until it's close enough to matter to point it out.There's a three year precedent to not use the rule. Since you guys already decided two season already without the 4th down rule it would make little sense to apply it now. Even if no one truly knew it was a problem till today the entire league has implicitly accepted the rule by not observing it.

Agree, thats basically my thought. Whether intentional or not, it was overlooked for 3 years. The rule therefore didnt apply for 3 years. And just from a pure #s standpoint, there were 447 4th down attempts this year, and 224 stops. That's a significant # of total stops made that could have altered scores. None of those other 222 didnt matter but these 2 should? I cant support that. Unfortunate situation, and I feel for you guys having to deal with such a dilemna.

More Even though I hate to agree with a Pats fan.

 

[Statcruncher]

So the question is:

A scoring rule that has been missed by software for 3 years came to light in the playoffs. Should you ignore the fla\/\/ed results of past games and implement it immediately, ignore the rule, or correct the current year? Given those options I would:

Best choice: Ignore the rule the rest of the year and correct or remove it in the offseason.

Fair choice: Correct all scoring for the year up to and including reseeding playoffs if needed

Never a choice: Implement the scoring from this point forward.

There is no way you can ignore a scoring issue for years and then suddenly apply it in the playoffs. Finish the year without the 4th down points and make it better next year. Commish wins.

 

[Nemesis]

I'm a little shocked at the poll results so far:

33% Keep score

67% change it

 

[Dirty Weasel]

I'm a little shocked at the poll results so far:33% Keep score67% change it

Me too. I voted to keep the score as is. Three years of FF has been played without that rule, and now you are gonna follow it? That's complete crap. Not once during the year did any owner point this out. Sure, the commish takes part of the blame for not catching the mistake, but remember, he is simply a team owner with an additional responsibility. All owners in the league share the blame for letting this go 3 yrs unnoticed. To accept this rule now isn't right. Remove the rule completely in 2008.

 

[massraider]

Thanks for your thoughts. For clarity:

The written rules were distributed at the start of the year. They gave a point for a 4th down stop.

The web site rules do not allow for that scoring, thus the rules on the web site do not include points for 4th down stop.

The draft took place before the web site scoring was available to view.

Not sure if that changes any opinions on this.

Follow the written rules. Just because no one has caught it before now doesn't make the rule any less valid.kudos to the other team for catching the error.

Commish loses.

I am not following ANY rationalization for not using the scoring method to score the game.

 

[-jb-]

what a mess. how many other close games has your league had this season? i can only imagine how many 4th down stands there have been.

 

[massraider]

I'm a little shocked at the poll results so far:33% Keep score67% change it

Me too. I voted to keep the score as is. Three years of FF has been played without that rule, and now you are gonna follow it? That's complete crap. Not once during the year did any owner point this out. Sure, the commish takes part of the blame for not catching the mistake, but remember, he is simply a team owner with an additional responsibility. All owners in the league share the blame for letting this go 3 yrs unnoticed. To accept this rule now isn't right. Remove the rule completely in 2008.

It is a rule. Just because it hasn't been enforced for a few years doesn't take away the owners right to point out that, in fact, he won.

 

[The Ref]

This is what you do.

Tie them both up and kidnap them.

Bring them to your house.

Put them in your basement.

Untie them.

Lock them in said basement.

Dont let them out until they figure it out like gentlemen.

There is no right or wrong answer here. You can't enforce a rule that has not been aplied in 3 years AND you can't ignore the rules as writen either. Don't show your cards as commish, tell them to work it out. if they cant work it out tell them you will work it out for them, and then do a coin filp.

 

[Pipes]

So, the rule hasnt been applied in the league for 3 years? and you guys are basically now trying to apply it? I hope Im not the only one seeing something wrong with that, I dont care how quickly the error was discovered after than one isolated game. The 'error' hadnt been discovered in the 3 years. For that reason, I think the outcome should stand and the commish should win.

I agree with this guy.

 

[Wu-banger]

I'm a little shocked at the poll results so far:

33% Keep score

67% change it

Me too. I voted to keep the score as is. Three years of FF has been played without that rule, and now you are gonna follow it? That's complete crap. Not once during the year did any owner point this out. Sure, the commish takes part of the blame for not catching the mistake, but remember, he is simply a team owner with an additional responsibility. All owners in the league share the blame for letting this go 3 yrs unnoticed. To accept this rule now isn't right. Remove the rule completely in 2008.

Seems the rule has been removed for 3 years....!!!! It appears that the written rule has not been ammended , which is an oversight.

The game should stand as is based on past presedance based on 3 years.

The owners and posters voting otherwise are not using common sense , the only fair way to change the game is to change everygame in the past 3 years since the rule has not been applied.

 

[Bobcat10]

If the parties involved, league, etc cannot come to a consensus, rule it a tie and go to the 1st tiebreaker.

 

[massraider]

I'm a little shocked at the poll results so far:

33% Keep score

67% change it

Me too. I voted to keep the score as is. Three years of FF has been played without that rule, and now you are gonna follow it? That's complete crap. Not once during the year did any owner point this out. Sure, the commish takes part of the blame for not catching the mistake, but remember, he is simply a team owner with an additional responsibility. All owners in the league share the blame for letting this go 3 yrs unnoticed. To accept this rule now isn't right. Remove the rule completely in 2008.

Seems the rule has been removed for 3 years....!!!! It appears that the written rule has not been ammended , which is an oversight.

The game should stand as is based on past presedance based on 3 years.

The owners and posters voting otherwise are not using common sense , the only fair way to change the game is to change everygame in the past 3 years since the rule has not been applied.

No, the rule wasn't removed. The software got changed, the rule stayed the same.As far as changing the rule goes, most leagues have rules where if you haven't pointed out a discrepancy by the following week, the score stands.

By claiming 3 years worth of scores should be changed, you are being obtuse.

Seems to me there is one owner, looking to see the rules applied as they are written, and one guy (The guy that screwed up), looking to bend the rules.

By rule, the commish lost. The fact that he is also the guy that should have caught the error is just sweet justice.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Tough call, but I don't think you can apply a rule that hasn't been followed for 3 seasons to one specific game.

Sure it's in the rules, and the rules should be followed, but for THREE YEARS the rule has been ignored, and unless you go back and determine that this definitely would not have changed any other games, you can't apply it to just one game now.

 

[massraider]

Tough call, but I don't think you can apply a rule that hasn't been followed for 3 seasons to one specific game.

Sure it's in the rules, and the rules should be followed, but for THREE YEARS the rule has been ignored, and unless you go back and determine that this definitely would not have changed any other games, you can't apply it to just one game now.

Frankly, unless there is a RULE that states as such, I don't see why you can't.If other owners would have won vital games due to the 4th down stop rule, and didn't catch it, that's their own fault.

This owner looked at the rules, said, "Hey, I actually won", and the commish is basically trying to insert a new rule, "If a rule hasn't been used in a while, it's not valid".

 

[Class Dismissed]

It ends up that the software was switched for the league a few years ago, but the written rule was never updated (although redistributed at the start of the year). The rules on the web site did not include the 4th down rule. Therefore, the last 3 seasons have never applied the rule.

The Commish has suggested that to remain consistent, and not go back and look at all past matches, the rule should not be applied here and will be removed for next year. In his opinion, Commish still wins.

In my opinion, all scores are final after a certain time, even if errors are found. We don't have a rule on this, but I think it is pretty standard in FF.

In my opinion, since this error was found quickly, the correction should be made, but only for this week's games (no other matches were affected).

How would you rule on this? Give me your reasons why?

So you want a rule, that has not been enforced for 3 years to be enforced, and make up a new rule that this score can be challenged and changed, but not any of the other scores?It's pretty clear to me that it was an oversight by all, and that the written rules were never updated to reflect the software scoring system.

Had it ever been determined who was responsible for adding those points to the totals after each game? Is the commish supposed to manually change the scores of each game, every week to add the 4th down stop points? How much do you all pay this guy for his time?

Has Team B had a game in which the 4th down stop points were NOT tallied. Did he say anything?

I would venture to say that he, and every member of this league has had a game where the 4th down stop points were not tallied, this makes everyone complicit.

In this particular instance, common sense must prevail, The points should not count, the game can not be challenged, and the commish should ammend the rules and make it effective retroactively to 3 years ago.

You all didn't care for 3 years, you shouldn't care now.

Personally, I wouldn't want to win on such a ##### move. The Commish is owed an apology.

 

[DoubleG]

Tough call, but I don't think you can apply a rule that hasn't been followed for 3 seasons to one specific game.

Sure it's in the rules, and the rules should be followed, but for THREE YEARS the rule has been ignored, and unless you go back and determine that this definitely would not have changed any other games, you can't apply it to just one game now.

Frankly, unless there is a RULE that states as such, I don't see why you can't.If other owners would have won vital games due to the 4th down stop rule, and didn't catch it, that's their own fault.

This owner looked at the rules, said, "Hey, I actually won", and the commish is basically trying to insert a new rule, "If a rule hasn't been used in a while, it's not valid".

You sir, would make an excellent lawyer. The fact that the rule hasn't been properly applied by the software, doesn't make it any less valid (or any less binding).

 

[Road Warriors]

Tough call, but I don't think you can apply a rule that hasn't been followed for 3 seasons to one specific game.Sure it's in the rules, and the rules should be followed, but for THREE YEARS the rule has been ignored, and unless you go back and determine that this definitely would not have changed any other games, you can't apply it to just one game now.

Seems to me that when the site change occurred, it then became incumbent on the owner to notify the commish of any 4th down stands that should be included in the scoring. The rule is on the books, but it requires an owner to notify the league of the scoring event.It wasn't that the rule was ignored ( ie. notitfied of the scoring, but not applied ), but rather that an owner whos score has been impacted doesn't know enough to notify the league or hasn't bothered because it didn't change the outcome or...In any case, the rule has been on the books, and was effectively re-iterated this year in a document. IMO, even if the rule hasn't been implemented in the past 3 years, it doesn't invalidate it. It's been noticed, notified, and should be applied.

 

[yellowdog]

Maybe this is the first time this particular owner has been effected by the rule. Is it his responsibility to check for every team, every week? NO! It is the commish and other owners' responsibility to check their own score. Change the score. It's the only option.

 

[fatkid]

Tough call, but I don't think you can apply a rule that hasn't been followed for 3 seasons to one specific game.

Sure it's in the rules, and the rules should be followed, but for THREE YEARS the rule has been ignored, and unless you go back and determine that this definitely would not have changed any other games, you can't apply it to just one game now.

Frankly, unless there is a RULE that states as such, I don't see why you can't.If other owners would have won vital games due to the 4th down stop rule, and didn't catch it, that's their own fault.

This owner looked at the rules, said, "Hey, I actually won", and the commish is basically trying to insert a new rule, "If a rule hasn't been used in a while, it's not valid".

I agree. Each owner is responsilbe for checking the scores in their game. If no one else checked in 3 years, that isn't this guys fault. If someone would have beaten him, but didn't complain that isn't his fault. The rules say one guy won. The Website says someone else won. Rules > Website

Next year, change the rule or change the website.

HOWEVER, I am a little surprised that this is not being handled by a simple vote of owners. The poll shows a pretty big disparity in what the Shark Pool thinks. This isn't a slam dunk issue. Get the un-involved owners togeather and have them vote.

 

[bigums]

By rule, the commish lost. The fact that he is also the guy that should have caught the error is just sweet justice.

By which rule? The one on paper or on the actual website where the games are played? Doesn't playing the game on the site and not verifying the rules THERE mean everyone is complicit in this error?And why is it sweet justice? How much does the commish get paid to do his job? Probably nothing (as most don't). He has enough trouble managing his own team and any problems that come up. Why should he be penalized because NO ONE ever checked the scoring for 3 years? What kind of doosh wants to win on a technicality that hasn't been used in 3 years anyway? In a league with the same players year to year (presumably friends like mine), I know that guy wouldn't be welcomed back. Lawyering for technicalities is low-rent and should be discouraged not celebrated. I guess it is the American way, though.

Another thought just popped in my head. Since a lot of you in the change camp seem to blame it on the commish, what if the roles were reversed and the commish is the one who finally noticed the scoring discrepancy and it would give him the win instead?

 

[Class Dismissed]

Maybe this is the first time this particular owner has been effected by the rule. Is it his responsibility to check for every team, every week? NO! It is the commish and other owners' responsibility to check their own score. Change the score. It's the only option.

Do you seriously think, that in the last 3 years, this owner has NOT had a defense that made a 4th down stop?

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

After 3 years. the statute of limitations on this rule has to have run out.

 

[yellowdog]

Maybe this is the first time this particular owner has been effected by the rule. Is it his responsibility to check for every team, every week? NO! It is the commish and other owners' responsibility to check their own score. Change the score. It's the only option.

Do you seriously think, that in the last 3 years, this owner has NOT had a defense that made a 4th down stop?

If it didn't effect win/loss, he may not bring it up.

 

[Sheriff66]

If it is in the constituion, it should be changed, if not leave it how it is.

 

[massraider]

By rule, the commish lost. The fact that he is also the guy that should have caught the error is just sweet justice.

By which rule? The one on paper or on the actual website where the games are played? Doesn't playing the game on the site and not verifying the rules THERE mean everyone is complicit in this error?And why is it sweet justice? How much does the commish get paid to do his job? Probably nothing (as most don't). He has enough trouble managing his own team and any problems that come up. Why should he be penalized because NO ONE ever checked the scoring for 3 years? What kind of doosh wants to win on a technicality that hasn't been used in 3 years anyway? In a league with the same players year to year (presumably friends like mine), I know that guy wouldn't be welcomed back. Lawyering for technicalities is low-rent and should be discouraged not celebrated. I guess it is the American way, though.

Another thought just popped in my head. Since a lot of you in the change camp seem to blame it on the commish, what if the roles were reversed and the commish is the one who finally noticed the scoring discrepancy and it would give him the win instead?

It doesn't matter if the commish gets paid or not. I am not asking him to sit down with the USA Today boxscores and add up everyone's score. Which is the way it used to be. Commish's today don't have to do much, so I won't be hosting any telethons for this poor, overworked commish. Making sure the dang scoring system is correct is kind of entry-level commish work, IMO.And everyone else is allowed to be ignorant. They are 'owners'. They can ignore any info they want. The commish should have noticed the change in the scoring software, and alerted the other owners. He didn't, and no one noticed till this week. Which I am guessing means no one voted to disallow points for 4th down stops. Which means the guy playing the commish has a valid argument.

Now, if the league decided to change the rule when they changesd software, and it never got removed from the rule book, then it shouldn't count.

Which I don't believe is the case.

The arguments basically line up this way:

For the commish:

We haven't noticed this before, so because we are all dummies, you don't get the points.

For the othr guy:

THE RULES

You have a rule book so you don't have to deal with these questions.

 

[Revo]

Is the commissioner the same commish from 3 years ago? Is this commissioner the same commish who established and wrote the rules?

If yes, while I do agree that a rule that's been bypassed for 3 years should not be enforced now, it would still be the commish's own fault that he missed revising a critical league document. If this was the case, I would have to think carefully about a solution, but would still lean towards not enforcing it. If I were the other team, I would be annoyed that he was careless in his job, and maybe ask for a resolution -- maybe splitting any money if possible.

If no, he simply may not have reviewed the document carefully enough, which quite frankly, I don't think he should be held responsible for. If he had been in the league a long time and recently became commish, he may have already known the rules (so he thought) and simply passed out the document as a "policy" without actually having read them through. If this is the case, no way can the rule be enforced.

 

[massraider]

Maybe this is the first time this particular owner has been effected by the rule. Is it his responsibility to check for every team, every week? NO! It is the commish and other owners' responsibility to check their own score. Change the score. It's the only option.

Do you seriously think, that in the last 3 years, this owner has NOT had a defense that made a 4th down stop?

If it didn't effect win/loss, he may not bring it up.

Here's a comparison, not sure how it flies (But I think it's pretty good):George Brett's pine tar homerun.Brett's bat always had too much pine tar on it. In violation of the rules. Th other team (Yankees, right?) noticd this, and bided their time, until he hit one off them. They invoked the rule. No homerun.Now, Brett probably had been in violation of that rule for some time. And hadn't been penalized. Doesn't make the rule any less valid when it is invoked.

 

[Class Dismissed]

By rule, the commish lost. The fact that he is also the guy that should have caught the error is just sweet justice.

By which rule? The one on paper or on the actual website where the games are played? Doesn't playing the game on the site and not verifying the rules THERE mean everyone is complicit in this error?And why is it sweet justice? How much does the commish get paid to do his job? Probably nothing (as most don't). He has enough trouble managing his own team and any problems that come up. Why should he be penalized because NO ONE ever checked the scoring for 3 years? What kind of doosh wants to win on a technicality that hasn't been used in 3 years anyway? In a league with the same players year to year (presumably friends like mine), I know that guy wouldn't be welcomed back. Lawyering for technicalities is low-rent and should be discouraged not celebrated. I guess it is the American way, though.

Another thought just popped in my head. Since a lot of you in the change camp seem to blame it on the commish, what if the roles were reversed and the commish is the one who finally noticed the scoring discrepancy and it would give him the win instead?

It doesn't matter if the commish gets paid or not. I am not asking him to sit down with the USA Today boxscores and add up everyone's score. Which is the way it used to be. Commish's today don't have to do much, so I won't be hosting any telethons for this poor, overworked commish. Making sure the dang scoring system is correct is kind of entry-level commish work, IMO.And everyone else is allowed to be ignorant. They are 'owners'. They can ignore any info they want. The commish should have noticed the change in the scoring software, and alerted the other owners. He didn't, and no one noticed till this week. Which I am guessing means no one voted to disallow points for 4th down stops. Which means the guy playing the commish has a valid argument.

Now, if the league decided to change the rule when they changesd software, and it never got removed from the rule book, then it shouldn't count.

Which I don't believe is the case.

The arguments basically line up this way:

For the commish:

We haven't noticed this before, so because we are all dummies, you don't get the points.

For the othr guy:

THE RULES

You have a rule book so you don't have to deal with these questions.

Which Rules?The ones on the website that people access weekly....or the ones on the sheet of paper that is passed out once?

Which set of rules is the Official set of rules?

Seems to me that if the rule is not listed in both places, it's an invalid rule.

 

[massraider]

By rule, the commish lost. The fact that he is also the guy that should have caught the error is just sweet justice.

By which rule? The one on paper or on the actual website where the games are played? Doesn't playing the game on the site and not verifying the rules THERE mean everyone is complicit in this error?And why is it sweet justice? How much does the commish get paid to do his job? Probably nothing (as most don't). He has enough trouble managing his own team and any problems that come up. Why should he be penalized because NO ONE ever checked the scoring for 3 years? What kind of doosh wants to win on a technicality that hasn't been used in 3 years anyway? In a league with the same players year to year (presumably friends like mine), I know that guy wouldn't be welcomed back. Lawyering for technicalities is low-rent and should be discouraged not celebrated. I guess it is the American way, though.

Another thought just popped in my head. Since a lot of you in the change camp seem to blame it on the commish, what if the roles were reversed and the commish is the one who finally noticed the scoring discrepancy and it would give him the win instead?

It doesn't matter if the commish gets paid or not. I am not asking him to sit down with the USA Today boxscores and add up everyone's score. Which is the way it used to be. Commish's today don't have to do much, so I won't be hosting any telethons for this poor, overworked commish. Making sure the dang scoring system is correct is kind of entry-level commish work, IMO.And everyone else is allowed to be ignorant. They are 'owners'. They can ignore any info they want. The commish should have noticed the change in the scoring software, and alerted the other owners. He didn't, and no one noticed till this week. Which I am guessing means no one voted to disallow points for 4th down stops. Which means the guy playing the commish has a valid argument.

Now, if the league decided to change the rule when they changesd software, and it never got removed from the rule book, then it shouldn't count.

Which I don't believe is the case.

The arguments basically line up this way:

For the commish:

We haven't noticed this before, so because we are all dummies, you don't get the points.

For the othr guy:

THE RULES

You have a rule book so you don't have to deal with these questions.

Which Rules?The ones on the website that people access weekly....or the ones on the sheet of paper that is passed out once?

Which set of rules is the Official set of rules?

Seems to me that if the rule is not listed in both places, it's an invalid rule.

I read the original post to mean that the scoring on the site never included the 4th down stops. In re-reading it, it appears the rules are listed on the website as well. Is that correct?If so, and you have two different rule books, then I would agree that it shouldn't be changed for the week.

if there is only one rule book, and the software is scoring it incorrectly, I would favor the other team.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

If this was in the rules (but hasn't been applied for 4 years) then to do it on this ad hoc basis is wrong. You should use the same scoring system that was in place this year, who is to say that the application of this rule earlier this year would put teams in or out of the playoffs?

 

[CravenM]

Rules are rules - correct it in the offseason

Commish loses

 

[toppshelff]

Guys, thanks for the responses. This is actually more controversial than I thought and you all make great points. It's gone to a league vote, we'll see what the outcome is.

BTW, here is a great link to ensure that a league has all of the right rules so that this never happens. In another league that I commish, I am going to incorporate every one of these. I don't want to end up in the same position as this commish.

Rules Every League Should Consider Having: Credit to GregR