Edit: someone who plays in division A, that is. And before a game has advanced to turn 1

I am playing in this tournament on my alt and I want it to be recreated.

I don't think AI or M'H should be punished, I just think the sub should be made appropriately.

Outlaws is considering doing a similar switch of moving one player from one tournament to another and being replaced in their former tourney due to someone being unexpectedly not able to play, so if things stay the same we'll expect the same to apply to us, I presume.

If that would result in that player playing more slots than allowed, then no.

As i mentioned before:
"I do agree that a rule has been broken and i'll check the substitutions more carefully next time."
So no, this incident does not set a precedent as far as I'm concerned.

Why should AI be punished?

It's a general question of the competition and i asked because it didn't made sense to me to count it as a sub but not as a slot. Later i saw that the rules are clear so i pointed it out to make sure everybody is on the same page. If it's going to be allowed than take my posting as a suggestion to refine the rules in that regard.

Why do we need to make a huge discussion about it and expand it into a personal level? That makes no sense to me.

As a solution i think there are 2 options. Either a restart or there is an exception this season that others are able to do the same this season. In our case that specific player wouldn't have exceeded the 3 slot limit, but instead he used the 3rd slot now. So if we take him out of the other spot before that tournament starts we would be able to get that slot back (not the sub). MH would be able to get the slot back for Rogue, Stats for GOA and the others as well. You get the picture. And again the sub obviously still counts against the limit.

The later would be the easiest solution. I think that would be totally fine, since everybody is getting treated the same in the end.
If TBest thinks that this isn't an option than there should be a restart and obviously AI should be able to play Cookies again. If he wouldn't be allowed to do that in such a case it would be nonsense as Math Wolf pointed out with the example of his case.

AI shouldn't be punished. He made a substitution he thought was legitimate. I handled the substitution so in the end i should've noticed. That being said, I'd like to add one other option to Edge's propositions:
We agree that a mistake was made, no harm has been done and minor slip-ups happen when we work with manual creation. Therefore we just continue the league as usual and let this one slip under the radar. It's not as if M'Hunters gained an advantage with this.

haha, is this a new record?
drama before games even started?

A) let it slip

B) don't demand the rights to the same mistake, respect the people that put in their time for this

C) stop hating on edge, really

Unfortunately it's not a record at all.
Also, agreed with all of the above.

Wow everyone getting their panties in a bunch it seems! Make we wonder why I play cl at all. Insert prerogatives here that would get me banned if typed. Chill out ya'll.

Of course it sets a precedent.

Njord (british raj) suddenly says he can't play. aoc is currently on two slots (hannibal and cookies). If we move aoc to british raj and cookies and have someone else take hannibal, will aoc be charged two or three slots?

Edit: Here's the spoiler alert before you answer - if you say 2, then fine, you're handling it the same way. If you say 3 then I call BS. This is not a hypothetical suggestion, by the way.

Edited 2/13/2019 16:20:35

In my opinion, although i don't make the decisions, three. So go ahead and call BS.

Shouldn't that also depend on whether or not a tournament has started though?

I agree with Bonsai that that is the exact same thing, whether it's going over to 4 slots or going from 2 to 3 slots, the circumstances are basically the same, and while I agree that no harm has been done and agree with timi that this should absolutely not influence your slots, it should also not reduce your slots if you switch from 2 to a different 2; as long as the tournaments haven't started. And ofcourse it would count as substitutions, so if you decide to do 6 subs right at the start to get a more profitable line-up you take the risk of someone dropping out halfway and you being unable to switch someone in again.

imo if right now aoc would switch to british raj & cookies it should still only count as 2 slots, as he hasn't played any games in his hannibal tournament.

Was a rule broken if we follow the letter of the law? Yes.
Did MH break it on purpose? No.
Does it give them an unfair advantage over other teams? No.

So really, what's the problem? Let's all just accept that a mistake was made, but since it doesn't have any unfavourable consequences, we should proceed with the 3v3 EU tournament as it is.
I'm speaking as someone who is playing that tournament, is totally fine with AI being on the MH team, and would be really annoyed if any game had to be remade.

I think that league needs more bureaucracy to ensure fairness. That way it will be more fun for everyone! I promise

Ok, then I call BS, because it's the exact same situation and you're saying that you would charge us an extra slot, but not MH, mainly based on the premise that it is more of a pain in the ass to correct the MH issue.

AI should go back to his slots and they should figure something else out. Or you count the aoc issue as only two slots. I don't care, just be consistent.

Edited 2/13/2019 18:43:26

Interesting that the only people that are complaining are from Outlaws, and not even the Outlaws players that are in the tournament...

Ok, then I call BS, because it's the exact same situation and you're saying that you would charge us an extra slot, but not MH, mainly based on the premise that it is more of a pain in the ass to correct the MH issue.

AI should go back to his slots and they should figure something else out. Or you count the aoc issue as only two slots. I don't care, just be consistent.

It's not based on that premise. Let's see what happened: a sub was made when it shouldn't. Nobody has profited from it. After this, people (mainly outlaws) start to complain that it's against the rules. That's fine. So from now on, i'll enforce that rule. I'd recreate the tournament if you want, which is why is stated twice that if you want it recreated, just say so. So far i've not received any messages from anyone that the tournament should be recreated. Let's wait for TBest's response and please stop calling BS on a rule you want enforced.

I am terribly sorry for suggesting that rules should be enforced. It's very silly of me and I should be heavily criticized, but mainly because I'm an Outlaw, like usual.

Isn't it just ironic that the 'Outlaws' are the most adamant to stick to the law hah!

-- On a side note lets reserve judgement on what the actual decision TBest decides to do until he actually does it, alright?

edit: and maybe lets stop this tradition of going around in circles between the same people with the same arguments? Maybe?

Edited 2/13/2019 19:15:51

I will make two comments.

Firstly, this is similar to the Stats MW situation last season as he mentioned. However there is one small difference, which actually led to the decision that was made last time. In CL10 we used a clot to track all of these things (subs, slots, etc.). In order to let that count as a sub and not a slot Deadman would have had to go into the data manually and modify things, which would have been a pain (and might have upset some constraints and introduced bugs). Therefore we decided to count it as a slot. Now there is no clot, so these things are tracked manually. This means that the argument above is not relevant anymore, so the organizers should not consider that to be a binding precedent.

Secondly, as someone playing in the tournament (which has already begun) I have already put significant effort into picks in one of our games and it would be a pain to have to do this again. In addition, the tournament already exists and the games will be created regardless of whether or not it is recreated.

RIP poor farah's nice little commentary.