I agree with Graeme at GM.

Take a team like MON this season. 5 blowouts already, so 600k in fines.

There is a 5/15 GK sitting on trade list this week for 100k. That may well have saved 1 or both Blowouts yesterday.

With 600k, a very decent GK could have been traded, or a top DF.

This team is simply not trying enough, and if were foot of Div 3 would surely be sacked, per the rules.

While I do not want weak teams to be punished, if MON accept 600k in fines, then the deterent may need to be higher.

I dont.

Its still possible to get a blowout even if you're trying. Such sweeping statements help no-one.

I do think, though, that sliding scales though perhaps not as draconian as those suggested might be an interesting idea. 120K + 10K per extra goal afterwards or 5K per pip under 50% or something might be possible ideas.

I've personally sailed close to the 50% wind a couple of times and would gladly take whatever penalty there was.

============== BUT ==================

Fining people enormous amounts means they leave the game disillusioned as they were trying their best with a strategy they thought was going to save the team - who knows they might manage to avoid relegation. Now you personally might think their exit is OK, possibly even to be encouraged, but it means the next person along running that team has to pick up the pieces and they too may leave after a short spell of struggling with a dud and now severely weakened team. With this being repeated a couple of times.....

Keeping 48 managers in this game is difficult enough for Mark, lets not start suggesting things to make it more difficult. I agree we dont want to keep the chancers around for long, but lets not shoot ourselves in the foot.

GMcD.

Lineups like this ABE one could force the blow out rule to be increased as an incentive to 'play by the rules' and not deliberately weaken ones team with an obvious 120k blowout fine.

match 37: April 23, 2008

http://www.olmec.org/sesl/matchreport.jsp?MatchId=936

Min 0: Aberdeen opens up with a 7-3-0 S while the Vale will play a 5-2-3 N.

Aberdeen
Nm Ef Mk Sh
Ps Name SL SL SL SL EL Ag DP Sv Gl Sh Mn Rt
----------------------------------------------------------------
GK Mark McGeown 12 12 12 5 4 n 0 2 0 0 90 0
SW Daniel Bonera 5 5 5 4 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 4
DF Danny Gabbidon 6 6 6 4 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 5
DF Michael Owen 5 4 4 4 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 5
DF Jamie Smith 12 9 9 10 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 4
DF Stephen McKenna 6 6 6 4 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 5
DF Roberto Donadoni 4 3 3 3 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 4
MF Matt Kennedy 11 11 11 9 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 5
MF Scott Severin 14 17 17 12 1 a 0 0 0 0 90 5
MF Graeme McLaren 9 7 7 8 4 n 0 0 0 0 90 5
FW Jeffery De Vischer 26 20 20 23 0 n 0 0 0 0 90 6

BLOWOUT!!! ABE used on average 29% SL,
which is less than the required 50%.

In a knockout cup match a blow hurts no one whatsover, and therefore perhaps the penalty should not apply to these matches.

The rationale behind the blow out rule is surely to prevent big scorelines affecting league positions through goal difference.

Ross should be congratulated in managing to field such a pitiful side. I doubt there are many other teams that could manage it!

... see EST in todays league match with GRE.

22%.

22% is a fine achievement - totally unnecessary. And they had a couple sent-off

James

The blow out rule was to stop teams playing T11, T11, nothing in a 3 game sequence. It should still apply to cup games. Aberdeen used our game to rest players - it cost him a blow-out penalty but the gate fees covered nearly all of that anyway.

As for Aberdeen being pitiful? They might not have much of a T17 but T11 is 9th in the division.

I was only referring to the team he put out not his squad.

Agreed the purpose of the rule is to avoid T11, T11, limited team, but this is only unacceptable becuase goal difference is affected in the league.