Who should be rewarded a win (1 Viewer)

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Thanks again everyone for the replies.To go over a few things mentioned that I did not cover: Team B actually knew about this glitch before it happened but did not tell the commissioner about it (he claims he found out about it 2 weeks prior to it happening).

Then he effectively cheated, and he does not get rewarded for that. He's out. A and C go to the championship game. A wins. C gets second. D gets third. If there's money for fourth place, it goes into the pot for next year.

This is why you can't change the scoring parameters within a season. YOU CANNOT KNOW THAT THERE IS NO CORRUPTION. I've said it the entire time. He knew about the glitch in week 12 and didn't say anything about it until he used it to his advantage. That's what is called a COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE. At this point--I don't who to distrust more--the owner of Team B or the commish that ruled in his favor.

I cannot know that you're not a murderer. Better put you in prison just to be safe.

Honestly--that is the most unintelligent thing I have ever heard. The premise is that any game should be regulated to minimize the chances of corruption--and in this case the way to do it is to score the entire season in a consistent way. Whether or not we knew that Team B knew about the glitch--the fact is that changing the scoring parameters after 14 weeks allows for a possibility of corruption--while keeping the scoring system consistent throughout the entire way through gives no single owner a better probability of an advantage. If you are not intelligent enough to see this, nor man enough to admit you were wrong--that's not my problem.

At least you're consistent - and that's always a good thing!

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Sounds like everyone has a different understanding of how it went down. OP has added info that wasn't in the initial post. Kinda makes the poll invalid when members aren't even voting on the same thing. OP, you want an honest poll? Create a new thread and put ALL the info in the initial post. Short of that, everyone will keep arguing based on different understandings of the events.

while I don't like it now (knowing Team B owner was a d-bag)....I would still vote the same...you correct the error when it was brought to the commish's attention and you move on...the fact that correcting the error gives the d-bag a championship is just an unfortunate result....in fantasy football there aren't many things more sacred then the way things are set up prior to the draft...while I realize this league played a whole season with an error that went unnoticed...you fix it when you find out because that is the way it was supposed to be....you can't change the scoring rules after the draft...it happened in this case but it was an accident...so you fix it...

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Thanks again everyone for the replies.To go over a few things mentioned that I did not cover: Team B actually knew about this glitch before it happened but did not tell the commissioner about it (he claims he found out about it 2 weeks prior to it happening).

Then he effectively cheated, and he does not get rewarded for that. He's out. A and C go to the championship game. A wins. C gets second. D gets third. If there's money for fourth place, it goes into the pot for next year.

This is why you can't change the scoring parameters within a season. YOU CANNOT KNOW THAT THERE IS NO CORRUPTION. I've said it the entire time. He knew about the glitch in week 12 and didn't say anything about it until he used it to his advantage. That's what is called a COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE. At this point--I don't who to distrust more--the owner of Team B or the commish that ruled in his favor.

I cannot know that you're not a murderer. Better put you in prison just to be safe.

Honestly--that is the most unintelligent thing I have ever heard. The premise is that any game should be regulated to minimize the chances of corruption--and in this case the way to do it is to score the entire season in a consistent way. Whether or not we knew that Team B knew about the glitch--the fact is that changing the scoring parameters after 14 weeks allows for a possibility of corruption--while keeping the scoring system consistent throughout the entire way through gives no single owner a better probability of an advantage. If you are not intelligent enough to see this, nor man enough to admit you were wrong--that's not my problem.

Disagree. Our country is founded on innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. You are operating under the assumption that we cannot correct known errors because there is the POSSIBILITY that a corrupt person is taking advantage of the system. IE and I have been arguing that the probability is that no one has been taking advantage of the system (because it had not been proven) and therefore, it is okay to correct the scoring to what it should be. Now that it obviously has been proven that team B was corrupt, IE and I both agree that team B should not benefit from that corruption. I thought the murderer analogy was very intelligent and right on point.

Is it just me or do some people have a really hard time saying "My bad"? Go back through and read your arguments in this thread and read mine--and see who ended up making more sense. I'm not on a fantasy football site to post about the parallels between fantasy football and the way our legal system should be regulated. If you can't understand that a game filled with competitive interests needs to handled in a different way than a murder charge--there is seriously something wrong with you.

If I thought I was wrong I would clearly say so. Look, you said it earlier, we just have to agree to disagree. I don't think you are unintelligent or that there is anything wrong with you, I just think we see things differently in this situation. My acknowledgement of the murder analogy in no way means I was equating the severity of this situation to a murder situation. The comparison of making judgement based on what you think vs. what was proven was a fair one.Lighten up, Francis. It's a FF discussion board. I, personally, have enjoyed the debate.

I respect your input and your side on an interesting debabe. My entire point has always been that an even playing field is a requirement for any game to be played properly and fairly. Fantasy football is a game filled with people with competing interests. If everybody in fantasy football is predetermined to be innocent or honest--then why have a commissioner in any league? If we can all assume that people won't take advantage of loopholes and glitches--then why the need for a commish?? We all play in leagues with a commish because we know if there isn't somebody we put our faith in to make good decisions to keep our leagues fair--then the game would be filled with corruption. A good commish should make decisions that keep the playing field even for every owner in a league. In this case--the glitch was found soo late--and soo retroactively--that the commish should have said "it's been brought to my attention that there is has been a season long, system wide glitch in our scoring all season. Because the season has already been played out and the dynamics of the league have been set, I have no choice but to play the season out with the glitch and correct it next season. If results can be locked based on the scoring sytem, it's only fair that the scoring system be locked once the playoffs started. It doesn't make sense nor does it seem fair for us score an entire season one way and to change that scoring system to affect the result of one match retroactively. My bad for the error and I won't let it happen again". Although that would be a tough thing for the commish to admit--its the only decision that is guaranteed to have been fair to every owner in the league. The right decision in a "game" is the fairest one to everybody playing the game--the right decision in the legal system is to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent--it's a completely different dynamic.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Thanks again everyone for the replies.To go over a few things mentioned that I did not cover: Team B actually knew about this glitch before it happened but did not tell the commissioner about it (he claims he found out about it 2 weeks prior to it happening).

Then he effectively cheated, and he does not get rewarded for that. He's out. A and C go to the championship game. A wins. C gets second. D gets third. If there's money for fourth place, it goes into the pot for next year.

This is why you can't change the scoring parameters within a season. YOU CANNOT KNOW THAT THERE IS NO CORRUPTION. I've said it the entire time. He knew about the glitch in week 12 and didn't say anything about it until he used it to his advantage. That's what is called a COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE. At this point--I don't who to distrust more--the owner of Team B or the commish that ruled in his favor.

I cannot know that you're not a murderer. Better put you in prison just to be safe.

Honestly--that is the most unintelligent thing I have ever heard. The premise is that any game should be regulated to minimize the chances of corruption--and in this case the way to do it is to score the entire season in a consistent way. Whether or not we knew that Team B knew about the glitch--the fact is that changing the scoring parameters after 14 weeks allows for a possibility of corruption--while keeping the scoring system consistent throughout the entire way through gives no single owner a better probability of an advantage. If you are not intelligent enough to see this, nor man enough to admit you were wrong--that's not my problem.

At least you're consistent - and that's always a good thing!

Omg--you got me..wow..I sure look like a huge idiot after that post. How on god's earth can I even show my face after your vast exhibition of intelligence. I was totally proven wrong--go and read my posts on this thread--I've been soooo off point the entire time.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I respect your input and your side on an interesting debabe. My entire point has always been that an even playing field is a requirement for any game to be played properly and fairly. Fantasy football is a game filled with people with competing interests. If everybody in fantasy football is predetermined to be innocent or honest--then why have a commissioner in any league? If we can all assume that people won't take advantage of loopholes and glitches--then why the need for a commish?? We all play in leagues with a commish because we know if there isn't somebody we put our faith in to make good decisions to keep our leagues fair--then the game would be filled with corruption. A good commish should make decisions that keep the playing field even for every owner in a league. In this case--the glitch was found soo late--and soo retroactively--that the commish should have said "it's been brought to my attention that there is has been a season long, system wide glitch in our scoring all season. Because the season has already been played out and the dynamics of the league have been set, I have no choice but to play the season out with the glitch and correct it next season. If results can be locked based on the scoring sytem, it's only fair that the scoring system be locked once the playoffs started. It doesn't make sense nor does it seem fair for us score an entire season one way and to change that scoring system to affect the result of one match retroactively. My bad for the error and I won't let it happen again". Although that would be a tough thing for the commish to admit--its the only decision that is guaranteed to have been fair to every owner in the league. The right decision in a "game" is the fairest one to everybody playing the game--the right decision in the legal system is to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent--it's a completely different dynamic.

I think I will have to disagree with the bolded...."the right decision" is not always going to be a fair one to everybody....under your thinking Team B most certainly will not agree that the decison was fair to him.....so if it is not fair to him it is not fair to "everybody playing the game"....

the right decision is not to continue playing with a rule that was effectively changed after the draft.....

jv...I think the part you are really hung up on is that it happened "soooooo late" in the season....you have to get over that...when the error was discovered it needed to be fixed....and put back to how it was supposed to be at the time these teams were drafted....the damage is not that one team gets a win and another doesn't....the damage is that unfortunately you can't go back and fix the circumstances that were affected by this error EARLIER in the season.....you can fix it now....so you do so....whether it affects the outcome of the championship game or not, you do so....it is an unfortunate result, that after fixing the problem the d-bag gets a win, but thats the way it is....

as the commish in this situation if you agree to keep playing as is...you are basically agreeing to have changed the rules after the draft....and again I say at its core (putting the fact that it is only one point aside) you have to maintain the integrity of the way things were supposed to be as best as you can....and that means going back to how the rules were prior to the draft.....the timing of "discovery" and the fact that you can't go back and change everything sucks.....it would have been great for it to have been week 2 or something....but you can't continue to play under an incorrect scoring system just because thats the way the rest of the season had been played.....that would not be fair...

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

Omg wow--your exhibtion of intelligence is breathtaking. What a profound bucket of knowledge you are--to be wrong the entire time but to still back up your point of view--and to now use emoticons to put down the person who was right the entire time. You should really post some more--it'd be a shame if the world was unaware of your intelligence and maturity.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

let's say this game between Team A and Team B was the third place game.....and the championship game was between Team C and Team D (with Team C winning initially)....and this exact same thing happened in both games that week....they were both less than 1 point games and this scoring error if corrected would change the outcome in both games....(also remove the d-bag factor of anybody knowing about "the glitch" ahead of time)

so both Team B and Team D take a look at the scores and realize the error and ask for it to be corrected....

do you correct it...?

I do.....because just because you played the whole season under an incorrect scoring system, doesn't mean you thought you were playing under that scoring system....you can't go back and fix what happened previously, but you still have the ability to fix it now.....if you don't, you have a champ and a thrid place winner that really shouldn't have won under the rules at the beginning of the season....they won because of a glitch....

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

Omg wow--your exhibtion of intelligence is breathtaking. What a profound bucket of knowledge you are--to be wrong the entire time but to still back up your point of view--and to now use emoticons to put down the person who was right the entire time. You should really post some more--it'd be a shame if the world was unaware of your intelligence and maturity.

 

[dhockster]

I respect your input and your side on an interesting debabe. My entire point has always been that an even playing field is a requirement for any game to be played properly and fairly. Fantasy football is a game filled with people with competing interests. If everybody in fantasy football is predetermined to be innocent or honest--then why have a commissioner in any league? If we can all assume that people won't take advantage of loopholes and glitches--then why the need for a commish?? We all play in leagues with a commish because we know if there isn't somebody we put our faith in to make good decisions to keep our leagues fair--then the game would be filled with corruption. A good commish should make decisions that keep the playing field even for every owner in a league. In this case--the glitch was found soo late--and soo retroactively--that the commish should have said "it's been brought to my attention that there is has been a season long, system wide glitch in our scoring all season. Because the season has already been played out and the dynamics of the league have been set, I have no choice but to play the season out with the glitch and correct it next season. If results can be locked based on the scoring sytem, it's only fair that the scoring system be locked once the playoffs started. It doesn't make sense nor does it seem fair for us score an entire season one way and to change that scoring system to affect the result of one match retroactively. My bad for the error and I won't let it happen again". Although that would be a tough thing for the commish to admit--its the only decision that is guaranteed to have been fair to every owner in the league. The right decision in a "game" is the fairest one to everybody playing the game--the right decision in the legal system is to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent--it's a completely different dynamic.

Fair enough.I almost feel as if we have been led on a fishing trip by the slow release of information by the OP.Initial scenerio is laid out. Big question: Did the glitch affect any other games, and would that change anything?Yes, OP responds, it did affect another game and it would have changed the playoff teams.Big question: Did team benefitting from glitch know about glitch and use it to his benefit.Yes, OP responds, team did know and concealed the fact until it worked against him.The reason I feel it might be a fishing trip, is just the miniscule possibility that everything happened the way it did.First, the glitch only could affect games decided by one or fewer points. For games decided by one or fewer points it will only affect the outcome of25% of those games: Outcome 1, both teams get an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 2, both teams are scored properly, no change in outcome. Outcome 3, losing team gets an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 4, winning team gets undeserved point, outcome changed.So if we say there are 87 total games in a season (6 games per week, 14 weeks of reg. season, 3 playoff games) and one point games happen let's assume 5% of the time, then that is 4 games that should be decided by 1 point or less. If 25% of those games would have the outcome changed, that is one game that should have had its outcome changed. The fact that we discovered 2 games which would have their results changed, and they happened to a team that needed a win to make the playoffs and a team that lost its playoff game, seems highly unlikely.I am not a conspiricy nut, but I don't rule out the possibility that Mrfrood has taken us on a wild ride.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

Omg wow--your exhibtion of intelligence is breathtaking. What a profound bucket of knowledge you are--to be wrong the entire time but to still back up your point of view--and to now use emoticons to put down the person who was right the entire time. You should really post some more--it'd be a shame if the world was unaware of your intelligence and maturity.

I have refrained from making any personal comments....but your arrogance in thinking that you are right "the entire time" is uncool....it's pretty clear there are many people who disagree with you and think you are wrong.....I guess I missed the part where the supreme court came in and confirmed that your position is the right one.....so much for those "we'll have to agree to disagree" comments...I guess now it is "we'll have to agree that jvdesigns2002 is right"...

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I respect your input and your side on an interesting debabe. My entire point has always been that an even playing field is a requirement for any game to be played properly and fairly. Fantasy football is a game filled with people with competing interests. If everybody in fantasy football is predetermined to be innocent or honest--then why have a commissioner in any league? If we can all assume that people won't take advantage of loopholes and glitches--then why the need for a commish?? We all play in leagues with a commish because we know if there isn't somebody we put our faith in to make good decisions to keep our leagues fair--then the game would be filled with corruption. A good commish should make decisions that keep the playing field even for every owner in a league. In this case--the glitch was found soo late--and soo retroactively--that the commish should have said "it's been brought to my attention that there is has been a season long, system wide glitch in our scoring all season. Because the season has already been played out and the dynamics of the league have been set, I have no choice but to play the season out with the glitch and correct it next season. If results can be locked based on the scoring sytem, it's only fair that the scoring system be locked once the playoffs started. It doesn't make sense nor does it seem fair for us score an entire season one way and to change that scoring system to affect the result of one match retroactively. My bad for the error and I won't let it happen again". Although that would be a tough thing for the commish to admit--its the only decision that is guaranteed to have been fair to every owner in the league. The right decision in a "game" is the fairest one to everybody playing the game--the right decision in the legal system is to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent--it's a completely different dynamic.

I think I will have to disagree with the bolded...."the right decision" is not always going to be a fair one to everybody....under your thinking Team B most certainly will not agree that the decison was fair to him.....so if it is not fair to him it is not fair to "everybody playing the game"....

the right decision is not to continue playing with a rule that was effectively changed after the draft.....

jv...I think the part you are really hung up on is that it happened "soooooo late" in the season....you have to get over that...when the error was discovered it needed to be fixed....and put back to how it was supposed to be at the time these teams were drafted....the damage is not that one team gets a win and another doesn't....the damage is that unfortunately you can't go back and fix the circumstances that were affected by this error EARLIER in the season.....you can fix it now....so you do so....whether it affects the outcome of the championship game or not, you do so....it is an unfortunate result, that after fixing the problem the d-bag gets a win, but thats the way it is....

as the commish in this situation if you agree to keep playing as is...you are basically agreeing to have changed the rules after the draft....and again I say at its core (putting the fact that it is only one point aside) you have to maintain the integrity of the way things were supposed to be as best as you can....and that means going back to how the rules were prior to the draft.....the timing of "discovery" and the fact that you can't go back and change everything sucks.....it would have been great for it to have been week 2 or something....but you can't continue to play under an incorrect scoring system just because thats the way the rest of the season had been played.....that would not be fair...

I think we have to agree to disagree. The problem is to we don't play the game to enforce the rules--the rules exist to enforce the game in the fairest way possible. I would argue in a big way that the timing means everything. The entire premise of rules in any game is that they apply to every player. The playoffs started which means that probably half or close to half of the owners were eliminated. In essence to change a scoring parameter (whether its changing it to be correct or to change it to be incorrect) after the original scoring parameter resulted in eliminating half of the players in the game is in itself corrupt. You are eliminating players based on one parameter and then changing them to benefit one player. It doesn't make a difference who spotted the glitch--the problem is that the glitch was found too late to change things up. If this is a money league where each person paid equally to be in this league--then they all deserve to be scored equally. If the problem was found in the regular season where the thoughts of the entire league could be taken into account to come up with a resolution--that would be completely different. The fact is that 10-12 people played that entire season for 15 weeks an nobody noticed it. They all accepted results for 14 weeks based on the way the system was scoring the results--including the owner of Team B. For him to now say that I accept the results of the first 14 weeks but not the 15th week is absolutely absurd. It opens up the possibility for corruption--and sure enough--I was right. He knew about the glitch in week 12. You can stick to your point of view--and I will stick to mine. If you choose to play a game that's not regulated to be fair--that's your choice.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I think we have to agree to disagree. The problem is to we don't play the game to enforce the rules--the rules exist to enforce the game in the fairest way possible. I would argue in a big way that the timing means everything. The entire premise of rules in any game is that they apply to every player. The playoffs started which means that probably half or close to half of the owners were eliminated. In essence to change a scoring parameter (whether its changing it to be correct or to change it to be incorrect) after the original scoring parameter resulted in eliminating half of the players in the game is in itself corrupt. You are eliminating players based on one parameter and then changing them to benefit one player. It doesn't make a difference who spotted the glitch--the problem is that the glitch was found too late to change things up. If this is a money league where each person paid equally to be in this league--then they all deserve to be scored equally. If the problem was found in the regular season where the thoughts of the entire league could be taken into account to come up with a resolution--that would be completely different. The fact is that 10-12 people played that entire season for 15 weeks an nobody noticed it. They all accepted results for 14 weeks based on the way the system was scoring the results--including the owner of Team B. For him to now say that I accept the results of the first 14 weeks but not the 15th week is absolutely absurd. It opens up the possibility for corruption--and sure enough--I was right. He knew about the glitch in week 12. You can stick to your point of view--and I will stick to mine. If you choose to play a game that's not regulated to be fair--that's your choice.

see the bolded is what you are hung up on...."benefiting one player"....the fact that changing the score back to what it should have been (under the orginal rules) allows the outcome of this game to be changed DOESN"T MATTER.....even if Team A initially won 120 to 103....you go back and change the score to 119 to 103.....because that is when you found out about it and it is the way it was supposed to be scored.....

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

Omg wow--your exhibtion of intelligence is breathtaking. What a profound bucket of knowledge you are--to be wrong the entire time but to still back up your point of view--and to now use emoticons to put down the person who was right the entire time. You should really post some more--it'd be a shame if the world was unaware of your intelligence and maturity.

I have refrained from making any personal comments....but your arrogance in thinking that you are right "the entire time" is uncool....it's pretty clear there are many people who disagree with you and think you are wrong.....I guess I missed the part where the supreme court came in and confirmed that your position is the right one.....so much for those "we'll have to agree to disagree" comments...I guess now it is "we'll have to agree that jvdesigns2002 is right"...

Are you kidding me--I've tried to debate with everybody who has an opposing point of view in a mature way. I even debated that some poster in a very respectful way--he made some really nice points and I respect him for that. However, when he takes a good debate and taints it with a "laughing my butt off" emoticon saying that my position was consistently wrong--even AFTER the OP's information verified that my fears were correct is no longer a debate. At that point he chose to change the debate into a joke--and I have no motivation to feed his ego. I'd rather just go along with his joke and play along--while having a good debate with people who are able to do in a respectful manner.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

Omg wow--your exhibtion of intelligence is breathtaking. What a profound bucket of knowledge you are--to be wrong the entire time but to still back up your point of view--and to now use emoticons to put down the person who was right the entire time. You should really post some more--it'd be a shame if the world was unaware of your intelligence and maturity.

I have refrained from making any personal comments....but your arrogance in thinking that you are right "the entire time" is uncool....it's pretty clear there are many people who disagree with you and think you are wrong.....I guess I missed the part where the supreme court came in and confirmed that your position is the right one.....so much for those "we'll have to agree to disagree" comments...I guess now it is "we'll have to agree that jvdesigns2002 is right"...

Guy is seriously humiliating himself in here and doesn't even seem to realize it. He doesn't even appear to have any idea what my point all along has been, because I certainly haven't been "wrong the entire time" about anything. Then goes on to talk about maturity when he's the only one here acting like a child. It's an impressive display.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

Omg wow--your exhibtion of intelligence is breathtaking. What a profound bucket of knowledge you are--to be wrong the entire time but to still back up your point of view--and to now use emoticons to put down the person who was right the entire time. You should really post some more--it'd be a shame if the world was unaware of your intelligence and maturity.

I have refrained from making any personal comments....but your arrogance in thinking that you are right "the entire time" is uncool....it's pretty clear there are many people who disagree with you and think you are wrong.....I guess I missed the part where the supreme court came in and confirmed that your position is the right one.....so much for those "we'll have to agree to disagree" comments...I guess now it is "we'll have to agree that jvdesigns2002 is right"...

Guy is seriously humiliating himself in here and doesn't even seem to realize it. He doesn't even appear to have any idea what my point all along has been, because I certainly haven't been "wrong the entire time" about anything. Then goes on to talk about maturity when he's the only one here acting like a child. It's an impressive display.

Yes-- you are right. I'm very humiliated. You won. Well done. I'm sure that everybody can go back and read back and establish that you are the clear winner. I'll print you out an award and mail you a trophy.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I think we have to agree to disagree. The problem is to we don't play the game to enforce the rules--the rules exist to enforce the game in the fairest way possible. I would argue in a big way that the timing means everything. The entire premise of rules in any game is that they apply to every player. The playoffs started which means that probably half or close to half of the owners were eliminated. In essence to change a scoring parameter (whether its changing it to be correct or to change it to be incorrect) after the original scoring parameter resulted in eliminating half of the players in the game is in itself corrupt. You are eliminating players based on one parameter and then changing them to benefit one player. It doesn't make a difference who spotted the glitch--the problem is that the glitch was found too late to change things up. If this is a money league where each person paid equally to be in this league--then they all deserve to be scored equally. If the problem was found in the regular season where the thoughts of the entire league could be taken into account to come up with a resolution--that would be completely different. The fact is that 10-12 people played that entire season for 15 weeks an nobody noticed it. They all accepted results for 14 weeks based on the way the system was scoring the results--including the owner of Team B. For him to now say that I accept the results of the first 14 weeks but not the 15th week is absolutely absurd. It opens up the possibility for corruption--and sure enough--I was right. He knew about the glitch in week 12. You can stick to your point of view--and I will stick to mine. If you choose to play a game that's not regulated to be fair--that's your choice.

see the bolded is what you are hung up on...."benefiting one player"....the fact that changing the score back to what it should have been (under the orginal rules) allows the outcome of this game to be changed DOESN"T MATTER.....even if Team A initially won 120 to 103....you go back and change the score to 119 to 103.....because that is when you found out about it and it is the way it was supposed to be scored.....

I've made my points as good as I can--and you've made yours--and I respect that. We obviously don't see eye to eye--and thats okay. If we were all the same--it'd be a world of robots. In any case, I appreciate the debate and I respect your point of view even though I disagree. Happy New Year.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Yes-- you are right. I'm very humiliated. You won. Well done. I'm sure that everybody can go back and read back and establish that you are the clear winner. I'll print you out an award and mail you a trophy.

Let me try to help you out here a little, since it seems you do realize you've been a little ridiculous in the second half of this thread, but you don't really want to admit it. You go back and bump all of my posts where it sounds like I'm trying to establish myself as the "clear winner," and I'll bump all of yours where you're doing the same. We'll see which one of us has actually been interested in well-reasoned debate, and which one simply wants to beat their opinion over everyone's head until they acquiesce.I mean really, which one of us has been the champion for mature, well-reasoned debate, and which one of us has posted stuff like this?

your point makes zero sense

absolutely garbabe

possibly the most ignorant argument ever

Your entire argument is absolutely invalid.

that is the most unintelligent thing I have ever heardIf you are not intelligent enough to see this, nor man enough to admit you were wrong--that's not my problem.

there is seriously something wrong with you.

 

[rick6668]

I sure look like a huge idiot after that post.

Omg wow--your exhibtion of intelligence is breathtaking. What a profound bucket of knowledge you are--to be wrong the entire time but to still back up your point of view--and to now use emoticons to put down the person who was right the entire time. You should really post some more--it'd be a shame if the world was unaware of your intelligence and maturity.

I have refrained from making any personal comments....but your arrogance in thinking that you are right "the entire time" is uncool....it's pretty clear there are many people who disagree with you and think you are wrong.....I guess I missed the part where the supreme court came in and confirmed that your position is the right one.....so much for those "we'll have to agree to disagree" comments...I guess now it is "we'll have to agree that jvdesigns2002 is right"...

Guy is seriously humiliating himself in here and doesn't even seem to realize it. He doesn't even appear to have any idea what my point all along has been, because I certainly haven't been "wrong the entire time" about anything. Then goes on to talk about maturity when he's the only one here acting like a child. It's an impressive display.

 

[LuckyOne]

Sounds like everyone has a different understanding of how it went down. OP has added info that wasn't in the initial post. Kinda makes the poll invalid when members aren't even voting on the same thing. OP, you want an honest poll? Create a new thread and put ALL the info in the initial post. Short of that, everyone will keep arguing based on different understandings of the events.

while I don't like it now (knowing Team B owner was a d-bag)....I would still vote the same...you correct the error when it was brought to the commish's attention and you move on...the fact that correcting the error gives the d-bag a championship is just an unfortunate result....in fantasy football there aren't many things more sacred then the way things are set up prior to the draft...while I realize this league played a whole season with an error that went unnoticed...you fix it when you find out because that is the way it was supposed to be....you can't change the scoring rules after the draft...it happened in this case but it was an accident...so you fix it...

My point is that everyone is discussing and voting on different understandings of the facts. Therefore, the discussion and poll are worthless. If the OP actually wants legitimate input, he needs to make a post/poll where he presents the facts in the initial post. This is the reason I haven't added any input after the OP added additional information. In short, I think the thread is essentially dead.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Yes-- you are right. I'm very humiliated. You won. Well done. I'm sure that everybody can go back and read back and establish that you are the clear winner. I'll print you out an award and mail you a trophy.

Let me try to help you out here a little, since it seems you do realize you've been a little ridiculous in the second half of this thread, but you don't really want to admit it. You go back and bump all of my posts where it sounds like I'm trying to establish myself as the "clear winner," and I'll bump all of yours where you're doing the same. We'll see which one of us has actually been interested in well-reasoned debate, and which one simply wants to beat their opinion over everyone's head until they acquiesce.I mean really, which one of us has been the champion for mature, well-reasoned debate, and which one of us has posted stuff like this?

your point makes zero sense

absolutely garbabe

possibly the most ignorant argument ever

Your entire argument is absolutely invalid.

that is the most unintelligent thing I have ever heardIf you are not intelligent enough to see this, nor man enough to admit you were wrong--that's not my problem.

there is seriously something wrong with you.

If it makes you feel better to cut and chop a few words from entire paragraphs of debate to paint me as a d-bag--then I cannot stop you. More power to you--and I truly wish you a happy new year. If you feel like I've insulted you, that was not my intention. It gets frustrating trying to debate people comparing the fantasy world to the "real world". You made a comments about rules being rules, and others chimed in about "innocent until proven guilty"--and drawing parallels between rules in the real world and the fantasy world--is not appropriate--and it also strengthens my side of the argument. If one's take is that once a rule is found out--it HAS to be followed in every circumstance--then tell me should everybody who ran onto streets from collapsing buildings be charged with J-Walking? Should a driver who swirves from one lane into another lane to prevent himself from hitting a child who ran onto the street be charged with an illegal lane change? Should a child who has been put on "timeout"and sent to his by his parents--sit tight in that room if he hears smoke detectors going off? Do I need to continue--or can you just agree that rules and laws exist to keep things safe for the masses. There are times and instances where laws and rules are ENFORECED OR IGNORED for the greater good of the masses. If you want to relate this to the fantasy world-- the greater good is in keeping a consistent and stable scoring system that applies to EVERY OWNER equally. If the glitch was found earlier in the season where a fair resolution could be come up with to insure that it was fair for every owner in the league--that's one thing. However, to enforce a rule that was disregarded all season-- where the benefit of it results in only helping one player---while the non enforcement of it potentially screwed nearly over half the league over is not in the "greater good" of the league. For some reason, this train of thought annoys you--and that's not because I say so--it's because you have consistently made reference to rules having to be enforced once found out. Based on your logic, people running from collapsing building should make sure they only run on sidewalks, drivers should continue to stay in their lines and drive and not attempt to hit children in the street, and the kid in timeout should stay in his room with the room with the smoke detectors going off. I choose to disagree and you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

oooooooof

 

[Mr.Pack]

And yes, Team B did protest after the conclusion of the game against Team A.

So Team B benefits by making the playoffs because of the glitch--when he shouldn't have without the glitch--but complains about the glitch--when it would have cost him a playoff victory--and your commissioner grants that to him? This is EXACTLY why the entire league should have either been recalculated without the glitch--or the glitch should been able to stand the entire season. I can tell you that I would never play in that league again--that is one of the dumbest problem resolution scenarios that I have ever heard of in fantasy sports. Unbelievable.

Just wow.I would quit this POS league immediately and might even sue.

What a bunch of clowns.

Horrible just horrible

 

[Sam Quentin]

if team B knew about the glitch, then that changes things a bit

I still say he wins beacyse ithers didn't do their due diligence, but the win is unethical, unsportsmanlike and makes me think less of him as a person....but he still wins

 

[mrfrood]

I respect your input and your side on an interesting debabe. My entire point has always been that an even playing field is a requirement for any game to be played properly and fairly. Fantasy football is a game filled with people with competing interests. If everybody in fantasy football is predetermined to be innocent or honest--then why have a commissioner in any league? If we can all assume that people won't take advantage of loopholes and glitches--then why the need for a commish?? We all play in leagues with a commish because we know if there isn't somebody we put our faith in to make good decisions to keep our leagues fair--then the game would be filled with corruption. A good commish should make decisions that keep the playing field even for every owner in a league. In this case--the glitch was found soo late--and soo retroactively--that the commish should have said "it's been brought to my attention that there is has been a season long, system wide glitch in our scoring all season. Because the season has already been played out and the dynamics of the league have been set, I have no choice but to play the season out with the glitch and correct it next season. If results can be locked based on the scoring sytem, it's only fair that the scoring system be locked once the playoffs started. It doesn't make sense nor does it seem fair for us score an entire season one way and to change that scoring system to affect the result of one match retroactively. My bad for the error and I won't let it happen again". Although that would be a tough thing for the commish to admit--its the only decision that is guaranteed to have been fair to every owner in the league. The right decision in a "game" is the fairest one to everybody playing the game--the right decision in the legal system is to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent--it's a completely different dynamic.

Fair enough.I almost feel as if we have been led on a fishing trip by the slow release of information by the OP.

Initial scenerio is laid out. Big question: Did the glitch affect any other games, and would that change anything?

Yes, OP responds, it did affect another game and it would have changed the playoff teams.

Big question: Did team benefitting from glitch know about glitch and use it to his benefit.

Yes, OP responds, team did know and concealed the fact until it worked against him.

The reason I feel it might be a fishing trip, is just the miniscule possibility that everything happened the way it did.

First, the glitch only could affect games decided by one or fewer points. For games decided by one or fewer points it will only affect the outcome of

25% of those games: Outcome 1, both teams get an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 2, both teams are scored properly, no change in outcome. Outcome 3, losing team gets an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 4, winning team gets undeserved point, outcome changed.

So if we say there are 87 total games in a season (6 games per week, 14 weeks of reg. season, 3 playoff games) and one point games happen let's assume 5% of the time, then that is 4 games that should be decided by 1 point or less. If 25% of those games would have the outcome changed, that is one game that should have had its outcome changed. The fact that we discovered 2 games which would have their results changed, and they happened to a team that needed a win to make the playoffs and a team that lost its playoff game, seems highly unlikely.

I am not a conspiricy nut, but I don't rule out the possibility that Mrfrood has taken us on a wild ride.

I like the bolded part and I'm actually laughing about that because it sounds funny. It is cool hearing someone say how much of a miniscule chance this has to happening. It does frustrate me how the commissioner played his role in deciding the winner. I wish I was making this up. I really don't think anyone could make this up. It was just one of those things that has happened that we thought would never happen. Hopefully we will never go through this again in the league.

I'm going to edit my original post with things I left out just to get clarification. It seems as though the additional information (which is all true and I am not trying to sway one direction or the other, just stating facts) is really making things more clear which I like. I guess I did not include more information because I wanted to keep my post concise. I also originally did not have a poll because I wanted input as opposed to people voting without their opinion of the matter.

edit-I added the information I did not have earlier in my original post.

Again, thanks for the input everyone and please let's stay on topic.

 

[DropKick]

I respect your input and your side on an interesting debabe. My entire point has always been that an even playing field is a requirement for any game to be played properly and fairly. Fantasy football is a game filled with people with competing interests. If everybody in fantasy football is predetermined to be innocent or honest--then why have a commissioner in any league? If we can all assume that people won't take advantage of loopholes and glitches--then why the need for a commish?? We all play in leagues with a commish because we know if there isn't somebody we put our faith in to make good decisions to keep our leagues fair--then the game would be filled with corruption. A good commish should make decisions that keep the playing field even for every owner in a league. In this case--the glitch was found soo late--and soo retroactively--that the commish should have said "it's been brought to my attention that there is has been a season long, system wide glitch in our scoring all season. Because the season has already been played out and the dynamics of the league have been set, I have no choice but to play the season out with the glitch and correct it next season. If results can be locked based on the scoring sytem, it's only fair that the scoring system be locked once the playoffs started. It doesn't make sense nor does it seem fair for us score an entire season one way and to change that scoring system to affect the result of one match retroactively. My bad for the error and I won't let it happen again". Although that would be a tough thing for the commish to admit--its the only decision that is guaranteed to have been fair to every owner in the league. The right decision in a "game" is the fairest one to everybody playing the game--the right decision in the legal system is to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent--it's a completely different dynamic.

Fair enough.I almost feel as if we have been led on a fishing trip by the slow release of information by the OP.Initial scenerio is laid out. Big question: Did the glitch affect any other games, and would that change anything?Yes, OP responds, it did affect another game and it would have changed the playoff teams.Big question: Did team benefitting from glitch know about glitch and use it to his benefit.Yes, OP responds, team did know and concealed the fact until it worked against him.The reason I feel it might be a fishing trip, is just the miniscule possibility that everything happened the way it did.First, the glitch only could affect games decided by one or fewer points. For games decided by one or fewer points it will only affect the outcome of25% of those games: Outcome 1, both teams get an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 2, both teams are scored properly, no change in outcome. Outcome 3, losing team gets an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 4, winning team gets undeserved point, outcome changed.So if we say there are 87 total games in a season (6 games per week, 14 weeks of reg. season, 3 playoff games) and one point games happen let's assume 5% of the time, then that is 4 games that should be decided by 1 point or less. If 25% of those games would have the outcome changed, that is one game that should have had its outcome changed. The fact that we discovered 2 games which would have their results changed, and they happened to a team that needed a win to make the playoffs and a team that lost its playoff game, seems highly unlikely.I am not a conspiricy nut, but I don't rule out the possibility that Mrfrood has taken us on a wild ride.

I suspected we were on a wild ride after that convoluted original post. I had to read it several times just to understand what he was trying to say. Then, when the "finals" morphed into the semis, I really started to doubt the sincerity here... I just didn't want to be an ##### because, after all, some people are just illiterate.Regarding jvdesigns concern about an even playing field... If I had a mistake in my scoring system that we discovered right before the play-offs, I would correct it without hesitation. If this meant a change in play-off teams then so be it (I think this is a narrow window of opportunity though). Would this create an uneven playing field? I just don't think so. The entire league played by the same rules for the regular season and then by a revised set of rules in the pst season - to no ones advantage or disadvantage.

 

[CoachJankySpanky]

Team B should have been happy just to make the playoffs since he wouldn't have made it had the glitch been noticed sooner. It seems fishy that he noticed it two weeks before but didn't point it out, thinking it wouldn't matter. He very well could have noticed it earlier but kept his mouth shut since he knew it could have adversely affected his playoff hopes. He ultimately came out ahead with the scoring glitch and don't think he should come out ahead twice, using both sides of the glitch to his benefit.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I don't blame the OP for leaving stuff out. It was only later that he found out anyone actually cared about it. If he had added a ton of info, some genius would have posted "cool story bro," or "would read again," or some other useless comment.

This is one of those things where nobody will end up happy. In the end, the immoral/undeserving/unethical/dastardly Team B didn't win the title...and that's about the best resolution we could have hoped to see.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I respect your input and your side on an interesting debabe. My entire point has always been that an even playing field is a requirement for any game to be played properly and fairly. Fantasy football is a game filled with people with competing interests. If everybody in fantasy football is predetermined to be innocent or honest--then why have a commissioner in any league? If we can all assume that people won't take advantage of loopholes and glitches--then why the need for a commish?? We all play in leagues with a commish because we know if there isn't somebody we put our faith in to make good decisions to keep our leagues fair--then the game would be filled with corruption. A good commish should make decisions that keep the playing field even for every owner in a league. In this case--the glitch was found soo late--and soo retroactively--that the commish should have said "it's been brought to my attention that there is has been a season long, system wide glitch in our scoring all season. Because the season has already been played out and the dynamics of the league have been set, I have no choice but to play the season out with the glitch and correct it next season. If results can be locked based on the scoring sytem, it's only fair that the scoring system be locked once the playoffs started. It doesn't make sense nor does it seem fair for us score an entire season one way and to change that scoring system to affect the result of one match retroactively. My bad for the error and I won't let it happen again". Although that would be a tough thing for the commish to admit--its the only decision that is guaranteed to have been fair to every owner in the league. The right decision in a "game" is the fairest one to everybody playing the game--the right decision in the legal system is to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent--it's a completely different dynamic.

Fair enough.I almost feel as if we have been led on a fishing trip by the slow release of information by the OP.Initial scenerio is laid out. Big question: Did the glitch affect any other games, and would that change anything?Yes, OP responds, it did affect another game and it would have changed the playoff teams.Big question: Did team benefitting from glitch know about glitch and use it to his benefit.Yes, OP responds, team did know and concealed the fact until it worked against him.The reason I feel it might be a fishing trip, is just the miniscule possibility that everything happened the way it did.First, the glitch only could affect games decided by one or fewer points. For games decided by one or fewer points it will only affect the outcome of25% of those games: Outcome 1, both teams get an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 2, both teams are scored properly, no change in outcome. Outcome 3, losing team gets an undeserved point, no change in outcome. Outcome 4, winning team gets undeserved point, outcome changed.So if we say there are 87 total games in a season (6 games per week, 14 weeks of reg. season, 3 playoff games) and one point games happen let's assume 5% of the time, then that is 4 games that should be decided by 1 point or less. If 25% of those games would have the outcome changed, that is one game that should have had its outcome changed. The fact that we discovered 2 games which would have their results changed, and they happened to a team that needed a win to make the playoffs and a team that lost its playoff game, seems highly unlikely.I am not a conspiricy nut, but I don't rule out the possibility that Mrfrood has taken us on a wild ride.

I suspected we were on a wild ride after that convoluted original post. I had to read it several times just to understand what he was trying to say. Then, when the "finals" morphed into the semis, I really started to doubt the sincerity here... I just didn't want to be an ##### because, after all, some people are just illiterate.Regarding jvdesigns concern about an even playing field... If I had a mistake in my scoring system that we discovered right before the play-offs, I would correct it without hesitation. If this meant a change in play-off teams then so be it (I think this is a narrow window of opportunity though). Would this create an uneven playing field? I just don't think so. The entire league played by the same rules for the regular season and then by a revised set of rules in the pst season - to no ones advantage or disadvantage.

In regards to your hypothetical--if you were the commish and you found out about the glitch after the last week of the regular season but before the first game of the playoffs starting--and making an announcement to the league saying that you discovered the glitch--and that the glitch was going to be taken care of for the entire playoffs--that would definitely make things much closer to an even playing field. The basis for this is that it eliminates the possibility of one owner possibly using their knowledge of the glitch to their advantage should they lose a playoff game by less than one point--which is exactly what happened. Thus, my take would be that changing the glitch before the playoff started is far better than allowing an retroactive changes because it eliminates the possibility of anybody using the glitch to gain a competitive advantage. However, being that the playoffs started in this case-- this hypothetical would not work--so this is why I would still play the entire season through with the glitch in place and correct it for the next season. Great debate and great insight. This has been fun.

 

[Amused to Death]

FWIW, Team A has been leading this poll since it was added. Even more so now that there's additional info that would favor them being the winner.

 

[mrfrood]

FWIW, Team A has been leading this poll since it was added. Even more so now that there's additional info that would favor them being the winner.

The sad part is the fact that those in the league that were very much for Team B were saying there was no argument from Team A and that Team A's side was "crying injustice (saying it with a sarcastic tone)." I really hate how this played out in my league. The fact that my league was split on who should win was surprising. I felt that both sides had great arguments, but I figured that Team A would get more votes. Posting a poll and seeing people's responses with their sides only validated my thoughts that Team A should have been declared the winner. I hope that those who have read this thread learned a lot about preventing future mistakes from their leagues ever happening. Additionally, I sincerely hope a mistake never tears anyone's league apart.

 

[DropKick]

if team B knew about the glitch, then that changes things a bitI still say he wins because others didn't do their due diligence, but the win is unethical, unsportsmanlike and makes me think less of him as a person....but he still wins

Agreed.The behavioral aspect is the most interesting thing here... Had the scoring glitch not impacted another game and was discovered immediately after the controversial game, Team B would have strong support as the team that would have won IF the game were scored according to the intended league rules. Team B probably still has considerable support when you know the glitch is responsible for getting him into the play-offs. After all, giving the timing, you can't "do over" the entire season.Then, ultimately, Team B loses most support when you learn that he was aware of the glitch earlier in the season. I, like most people, don't like unethical behavior. However, I still think he has a valid argument for winning the game. As commish, maybe I would have awarded him the championship and booted him from the league; two distinct decisions based on two different things - the rules of the game and individual owner conduct.It's amazing how often threads come down to moral or ethical questions. I always see the commentary, "There is no rule against it" or "he did it to improve his chance of winning", to defend clearly improper behavior. It's comic to think a league could legislate against every possible negative situation. Or, that the goal of winning somehow justifies cheating. So, if these lowbrow comments sounds like you, maybe you should rethink your perspective. After all, it's just a game.It's probably not a bad idea to have someone review the league's set up prior to the season; especially if all the scoring rules have to be reentered. An ounce of prevention...

 

[DropKick]

Even the NFL knows the right way to handle situations when you know the scoring was messed up but the game is over.SCOREBOARD! Wins do not get taken away. Under any circumstances. Spygate, bountygate, Inaccurate Reception, Hocuhligate, tuckrule, etc, etc.Team A wins.

You mean the Immaculate Reception? Although certainly controversial and before the age of replay, this wasn't a situation where people knew the score was "messed up". Same with the tuck rule or either of the "gates". A better example of your point might be the Seattle/Green Bay replacement official debacle earlier in this season.But, with the huge amount of gambling dollars on the line, the NFL can't change things after the fact...

 

[Amused to Death]

I view it this way; I doubt any team would have altered their draft strategy based on the scoring difference. The season was played with an accepted setup - even if just by their ignorance. And like I mentioned earlier, I can't believe 14 weeks went by and not one team bothered to check their scores. Its not like defenses are hard to score, you get so much for a sack, a fumble, an INT...no one ever looked to see how it totaled up? And maybe some input from the OP...what website are you using? MFL is very clear on the scoring breakdown. You can't possibly miss how the total adds up. I don't know about other sites.