wishing
Junior Strategist
Posts: 353 
|
Post by wishing on Oct 10, 2017 12:56:35 GMT
The head judge was under the impression the Norwegians were aware the game was still in progress. Not aware that "the game was still in progress", I think, since it clearly was not, but aware that the result of the game was a point of contention. It seems like the picture that the head judge is going with is that Norway knew that there was kwetching about the results going on, but they had to leave to get their cab. Norway turned to a lesser judge and said "Our win stands, right?" The lesser judge said "Yeah" (according to Norway). So Norway went "We can't wait on this discussion any longer - Norway out" and went to catch their plane, feeling confident that they had been assured that their win would stand. But then subsequently, the head judge decided to take on the case - and since Norway wasn't there anymore, he felt he had to give the win to the other team. One of the main arguments seems to be that you shouldn't be able to dodge a win being disputed by leaving the venue. |
|
|
|
WTC Stats
Oct 10, 2017 12:59:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by elladan52 on Oct 10, 2017 12:59:18 GMT
One important detail: apparently the team standings showed Norway having won, and then changed later. That makes it seem like the situation was resolved, then reopened, then re-resolved.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Oct 10, 2017 13:05:35 GMT
The point is that after hand are shaken (proven fact), miniatures packed (another proven fact) and sheets delivered (proven fact too, to the point that the website was already updated with victory to Norway), there is no possible claim to say that the game isn't finished.
Even if was true that the Norway had voices of the Head Judge being called (a thing that Norway strongly refuses, and French team also sayd to not be informed about, and is only supported by some random un-proved "voices" that said that they said "we cannot wait", a vague phrase that can mean all or nothing), the game was still finished. If it wasn't, the judges should have refused the sheets, and said to people to not pack their miniatures.
At that point, the game was totally finished, even "IF" the Judge was called, since even arriving, there would be no chance for him to make an informed guess (the minis weren't on the table anymore), nor to replay turns (same reasons).
Even if Norway didn't left the building, there weren't any means to rewind or "continue" the game, so the game was finished.
Also, by standard custom, when a player shakes hand and admits defeat, the game is over no matter what. So, again, no possible excuse to consider someone "forfeiting".
|
|
|
|
Post by Aegis on Oct 10, 2017 13:10:34 GMT
One important detail: apparently the team standings showed Norway having won, and then changed later. That makes it seem like the situation was resolved, then reopened, then re-resolved. Yeah, the claim that the win was disputed doesn't stand. The opponent shaken hands and filled the sheet writing that he lost, so the result was not contested. The judges accepted the sheets and updated the website, so again, no show of someone contesting. Even the French team said that they "were not aware that the thing had escalated", so if Norway wasn't aware and France wasn't aware, and the normal Judge wasn't aware (since he accepted the sheets and updated the site), who was? That mysterious third party? Again, the whole management of the issue by Jarle, since the table discussion to the blog post, was terrible, but the Judge call is without reason. |
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Oct 10, 2017 13:37:24 GMT
One important detail: apparently the team standings showed Norway having won, and then changed later. That makes it seem like the situation was resolved, then reopened, then re-resolved. Yeah, the claim that the win was disputed doesn't stand. The opponent shaken hands and filled the sheet writing that he lost, so the result was not contested. The judges accepted the sheets and updated the website, so again, no show of someone contesting. Even the French team said that they "were not aware that the thing had escalated", so if Norway wasn't aware and France wasn't aware, and the normal Judge wasn't aware (since he accepted the sheets and updated the site), who was? That mysterious third party? Again, the whole management of the issue by Jarle, since the table discussion to the blog post, was terrible, but the Judge call is without reason. Perhaps it is important to note that the team that processes the results are not the judges, otherwise they would have literally no time to make actual rule calls during the final hour of a round because they have to accept and process all the sheets, so the results that may or may not be posted on the website in no way reflect the judges' opinions on any particular game. If the sheets were turned in before any disputes were settled, why would the logistics team suspect anything more going on? We don't know under which circumstances the sheets were filed, who made the complaint or in what situation the ruling was made except that the Norwegian team wasn't there when the head judge arrived, for whatever reason |
|
|
|
Post by eldrak on Oct 10, 2017 14:22:31 GMT
Yeah, the claim that the win was disputed doesn't stand. The opponent shaken hands and filled the sheet writing that he lost, so the result was not contested. The judges accepted the sheets and updated the website, so again, no show of someone contesting. Even the French team said that they "were not aware that the thing had escalated", so if Norway wasn't aware and France wasn't aware, and the normal Judge wasn't aware (since he accepted the sheets and updated the site), who was? That mysterious third party? Again, the whole management of the issue by Jarle, since the table discussion to the blog post, was terrible, but the Judge call is without reason. Perhaps it is important to note that the team that processes the results are not the judges, otherwise they would have literally no time to make actual rule calls during the final hour of a round because they have to accept and process all the sheets, so the results that may or may not be posted on the website in no way reflect the judges' opinions on any particular game. If the sheets were turned in before any disputes were settled, why would the logistics team suspect anything more going on? We don't know under which circumstances the sheets were filed, who made the complaint or in what situation the ruling was made except that the Norwegian team wasn't there when the head judge arrived, for whatever reason They way the Norwegians did it was that they collected every sheet for their players and their opponents and turned them in at the same time. So every player on the norwegian and french team should know that the match was over and that the result was going to be reported to the data staff. If any player thought the result was still disputed they shouldn't have handed them over and/or told the norwegians to wait. |
|
|
|
Post by quicksand on Oct 10, 2017 15:58:08 GMT
]Perhaps it is important to note that the team that processes the results are not the judges, otherwise they would have literally no time to make actual rule calls during the final hour of a round because they have to accept and process all the sheets, so the results that may or may not be posted on the website in no way reflect the judges' opinions on any particular game. If the sheets were turned in before any disputes were settled, why would the logistics team suspect anything more going on? The main question is why should head judge make rule calls if a game result has been accepted by both players (and even by floor judge)? This is the part that makes this case worrisome. It seems that the head judge unfortunately dropped the ball, but doesn't want to admit so. The committee does not want to throw their judge under the bus so they have to release a cryptic statement and refuse to comment more. This mysterious "3rd party" isn't shown in very good light either, but the committee wants to protect him too. Unfortunately this doesn't look good from outsider perspective. Another thing is that the way Norwegian team came into public was not appropriate at all. |
|
|
|
Post by snarlyyow on Oct 10, 2017 18:01:53 GMT
]Perhaps it is important to note that the team that processes the results are not the judges, otherwise they would have literally no time to make actual rule calls during the final hour of a round because they have to accept and process all the sheets, so the results that may or may not be posted on the website in no way reflect the judges' opinions on any particular game. If the sheets were turned in before any disputes were settled, why would the logistics team suspect anything more going on? The main question is why should head judge make rule calls if a game result has been accepted by both players (and even by floor judge)? This is the part that makes this case worrisome. It seems that the head judge unfortunately dropped the ball, but doesn't want to admit so. The committee does not want to throw their judge under the bus so they have to release a cryptic statement and refuse to comment more. This mysterious "3rd party" isn't shown in very good light either, but the committee wants to protect him too. Unfortunately this doesn't look good from outsider perspective. Another thing is that the way Norwegian team came into public was not appropriate at all. My feelings on this matter have bounced around a lot. From not caring to being angry to frustrated to now...thinking the WTC was correct. I know the WTC's response was vague and not what we wanted. But I don't think the Head Judge was ruling on the illegal counter charge, I think he was ruling on a sportsmanship matter regarding the Norwegians. I think the Norwegians left and were unable to counter the sportsmanship claims. Instead of DQ'ing them the Judges gave them a loss. Instead of making it public, I think the WTC wanted to handle it politely behind closed doors. But then the Norwegians beat them to the punch and made it public, forcing the WTC to also respond publicly. The WTC, not wanting to throw anyone under the bus, created this vague statement saying "Norway wasn't there so we had to rule against them." This leaves us to suspect the matter was the counter charge when it was really a matter of sportsmanship. |
|
|
|
WTC Stats
Oct 10, 2017 18:16:21 GMT
via mobile
Post by slaughtersun on Oct 10, 2017 18:16:21 GMT
The main question is why should head judge make rule calls if a game result has been accepted by both players (and even by floor judge)? This is the part that makes this case worrisome. It seems that the head judge unfortunately dropped the ball, but doesn't want to admit so. The committee does not want to throw their judge under the bus so they have to release a cryptic statement and refuse to comment more. This mysterious "3rd party" isn't shown in very good light either, but the committee wants to protect him too. Unfortunately this doesn't look good from outsider perspective. Another thing is that the way Norwegian team came into public was not appropriate at all. My feelings on this matter have bounced around a lot. From not caring to being angry to frustrated to now...thinking the WTC was correct. I know the WTC's response was vague and not what we wanted. But I don't think the Head Judge was ruling on the illegal counter charge, I think he was ruling on a sportsmanship matter regarding the Norwegians. I think the Norwegians left and were unable to counter the sportsmanship claims. Instead of DQ'ing them the Judges gave them a loss. Instead of making it public, I think the WTC wanted to handle it politely behind closed doors. But then the Norwegians beat them to the punch and made it public, forcing the WTC to also respond publicly. The WTC, not wanting to throw anyone under the bus, created this vague statement saying "Norway wasn't there so we had to rule against them." This leaves us to suspect the matter was the counter charge when it was really a matter of sportsmanship. I find this hard to believe and if this is true its not a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by snarlyyow on Oct 10, 2017 18:21:17 GMT
I find this hard to believe and if this is true its not a good thing. Can you elaborate? |
|
cain
Junior Strategist
Posts: 243
|
Post by cain on Oct 10, 2017 18:24:30 GMT
The main question is why should head judge make rule calls if a game result has been accepted by both players (and even by floor judge)? This is the part that makes this case worrisome. It seems that the head judge unfortunately dropped the ball, but doesn't want to admit so. The committee does not want to throw their judge under the bus so they have to release a cryptic statement and refuse to comment more. This mysterious "3rd party" isn't shown in very good light either, but the committee wants to protect him too. Unfortunately this doesn't look good from outsider perspective. Another thing is that the way Norwegian team came into public was not appropriate at all. My feelings on this matter have bounced around a lot. From not caring to being angry to frustrated to now...thinking the WTC was correct. I know the WTC's response was vague and not what we wanted. But I don't think the Head Judge was ruling on the illegal counter charge, I think he was ruling on a sportsmanship matter regarding the Norwegians. I think the Norwegians left and were unable to counter the sportsmanship claims. Instead of DQ'ing them the Judges gave them a loss. Instead of making it public, I think the WTC wanted to handle it politely behind closed doors. But then the Norwegians beat them to the punch and made it public, forcing the WTC to also respond publicly. The WTC, not wanting to throw anyone under the bus, created this vague statement saying "Norway wasn't there so we had to rule against them." This leaves us to suspect the matter was the counter charge when it was really a matter of sportsmanship. One of the biggest problems with your argument is that there is nothing which seems to indicate that the norwegiens was notified that the reason for the loss was unsportmanship. Neither before Jarles blog outburst or parallell with this wtc publication. There is no reason to believe that the norwegiens would press so hard If that was the reason told them. |
|
|
|
Post by snarlyyow on Oct 10, 2017 18:40:28 GMT
My feelings on this matter have bounced around a lot. From not caring to being angry to frustrated to now...thinking the WTC was correct. I know the WTC's response was vague and not what we wanted. But I don't think the Head Judge was ruling on the illegal counter charge, I think he was ruling on a sportsmanship matter regarding the Norwegians. I think the Norwegians left and were unable to counter the sportsmanship claims. Instead of DQ'ing them the Judges gave them a loss. Instead of making it public, I think the WTC wanted to handle it politely behind closed doors. But then the Norwegians beat them to the punch and made it public, forcing the WTC to also respond publicly. The WTC, not wanting to throw anyone under the bus, created this vague statement saying "Norway wasn't there so we had to rule against them." This leaves us to suspect the matter was the counter charge when it was really a matter of sportsmanship. One of the biggest problems with your argument is that there is nothing which seems to indicate that the norwegiens was notified that the reason for the loss was unsportmanship. Neither before Jarles blog outburst or parallell with this wtc publication. There is no reason to believe that the norwegiens would press so hard If that was the reason told them. I don't think it was relayed to them. I think the Norwegians left so quickly that the mattered was being looked into as they left. Once they had left the WTC judges had no choice but to rule against them. |
|
|
|
WTC Stats
Oct 10, 2017 18:40:50 GMT
via mobile
Post by slaughtersun on Oct 10, 2017 18:40:50 GMT
I find this hard to believe and if this is true its not a good thing. Can you elaborate? I'm on my phone right now but i'll try. The facts we know have been explained above: the fact that there was agreement between teams and the first judge. We also know that those results were given to the organization and entered into the site. We also know that given these facts the norwegian team left the building saying "we cant wait...". We know that the head judge was called to rule "something" we dont know. What was it? The table situation? It shouldnt be, because the table state was impossible to replicate because both teams had already cleared the tables. The ruling? Both teams had agreed on the original ruling and results had been given... why and most importantly how can you overrule something when there is no evidence? (See tables cleared). The sportsmanship issue makes no sense...if the team had been bad they should all be disqualified. That didnt happen. If the norwsy player was bad...he should have been disqualified by the judge... he wasnt. So this leads us to hearsay and speculation. Nothing leads us to believe the behaviour issue... all other arguments point to a strange decision indeed andvwithoyt more information we cant know for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by oncouch1 on Oct 10, 2017 18:42:07 GMT
The main question is why should head judge make rule calls if a game result has been accepted by both players (and even by floor judge)? This is the part that makes this case worrisome. It seems that the head judge unfortunately dropped the ball, but doesn't want to admit so. The committee does not want to throw their judge under the bus so they have to release a cryptic statement and refuse to comment more. This mysterious "3rd party" isn't shown in very good light either, but the committee wants to protect him too. Unfortunately this doesn't look good from outsider perspective. Another thing is that the way Norwegian team came into public was not appropriate at all. My feelings on this matter have bounced around a lot. From not caring to being angry to frustrated to now...thinking the WTC was correct. I know the WTC's response was vague and not what we wanted. But I don't think the Head Judge was ruling on the illegal counter charge, I think he was ruling on a sportsmanship matter regarding the Norwegians. I think the Norwegians left and were unable to counter the sportsmanship claims. Instead of DQ'ing them the Judges gave them a loss. Instead of making it public, I think the WTC wanted to handle it politely behind closed doors. But then the Norwegians beat them to the punch and made it public, forcing the WTC to also respond publicly. The WTC, not wanting to throw anyone under the bus, created this vague statement saying "Norway wasn't there so we had to rule against them." This leaves us to suspect the matter was the counter charge when it was really a matter of sportsmanship. There is nothing to support that opinion. You are filling in a lot of lines without any support. |
|
|
|
Post by snarlyyow on Oct 10, 2017 18:56:30 GMT
My feelings on this matter have bounced around a lot. From not caring to being angry to frustrated to now...thinking the WTC was correct. I know the WTC's response was vague and not what we wanted. But I don't think the Head Judge was ruling on the illegal counter charge, I think he was ruling on a sportsmanship matter regarding the Norwegians. I think the Norwegians left and were unable to counter the sportsmanship claims. Instead of DQ'ing them the Judges gave them a loss. Instead of making it public, I think the WTC wanted to handle it politely behind closed doors. But then the Norwegians beat them to the punch and made it public, forcing the WTC to also respond publicly. The WTC, not wanting to throw anyone under the bus, created this vague statement saying "Norway wasn't there so we had to rule against them." This leaves us to suspect the matter was the counter charge when it was really a matter of sportsmanship. There is nothing to support that opinion. You are filling in a lot of lines without any support. I get that. For the record, I do have support that this is exactly what happened. I can't name my source. I know that sucks and doesn't help my cause. But, essentially, I laid out my argument on the WTC Facebook page and within 20 minutes had someone respond to me privately that my gut was correct. The alternative is to believe that the judges at the WTC are absolute hacks, which is what I and many others' knee jerk reaction was. But the more I thought about it the less and less likely that seemed. I came to three conclusions: 1) Norway Cheated; either intentionally (a blatant mismeasurement) or unintentionally (had too many models on the table) 2) Did something unsportsman-like 3) Something I can't think of. If the first option happened I think the WTC would have named it ("X player deployed an extra/illegal model"). If the second option then the EOs of the event would not want to publicly shame anyone. The WTC response seems to indicate the second option, their response was vague, which is an indicator of trying to not publicly humilate anyone. The Unnamed Third Party supports this as well, why have an anonymous complaint? The only real reason is to make an allegation on sportsmanship. A complaint that says "X player was being a dick" is a very real reason to stay anonymous, and it's also a reason why a head judge would be called, and it's also a reason why a game that had been "won" would be reversed. |
|
