I swore I wouldnt use this, but finances are such that I'm going to eat humble pie and appeal the blowout penalty for the following game:

CB v STJ May 9th SESL Cup

While I definitely suffered from a blowout, I think given my suspensions I put out a fairly competitive squad and brief look at the stats and the shots for both teams show I was definitely in the game. The teams were unbalanced only in that the STJ team could put out their first keeper whilst we had to put out the rookie (who will be a great keeper one day).

6-0 flatters a little, i think we deserver to be beaten but not blown out......

I throw myself on the tender mercies of the appeals rabble.

GMcD.

Graham understates his case. Nightmare first half hour for CB who put out a semi-decent team despite relegation concerns in the league.

A clear YES to appeal.

Ive taken a long look at this and in summary, i am in favour of the appeal. But im not 100% convinced.


Yes the stats werent massively out of proportion:
1 STJ E 38.00 93.63 214.78
1 CB E 39.00 84.04 196.09
46 CB E 39.00 84.04 193.09
61 STJ O 49.75 135.38 48.38
61 CB E 39.00 84.04 209.34

and CB had MORE shots, and on target, the difference on the day did turn out to be the keepers
Shots On Target 6 14
Shots 7 16
Saves 14 0

and its fair to say EL permitted no stronger squad to be put out.


What dissapoints me is no conditionals in place to prevent a thumping.

And also, its true to say, the way CB squad is set up they couldnt really have fielded a weaker lineup either.

But to be fair, we have all been there and the result is certainly more harsh that it deserved, these results happen from time to time, weve all been there.
Appeal agreed here.

Having looked at the stats and the shots along with the attacking tactic (didn't try to "O" or "S" in the game), I agree that the appeal be upheld. The defence was not the best that could go out but at the same time the overall team would have been expected to compete if not win. [U]

Actually, I did do conditionals to revert to a defensive formation in case of a solid advantage. How was I to know that my lads shall score 6 goals in the first half?

Appeal DENIED!

Graham, you got humped 6-0 and got 2 bookings, 1 of which resulted in yet another of your Goalkeepers serving a 1 match ban.

The truth is there for you to see... OLMEC HATES YOU... Get up off the floor, dry your eye's and get on with it...

Only kiddin'

If only to stick it to OLMEC who seems to hate everyone...

Appeal GRANTED

I don't entirely agree with the other opinions. CB's team was not much weaker than StJ's team - until Yoav swtiched to Opportunistic in the 60th minute the average shot count should have been StJ 12 CB 9 - and CB couldn't have played a much stronger side. With all those fit WGs and FW, playing a defensive lineup would have been ridiculous.

The difference was the quality of the GKs and FWs - StJ's main strikers would expect to score around 2 goals from every 3 shots whereas CB's main strikers would expect to score 1 goal from every 3 shots, and CBs defenders generally only had a 10% chance of scoring. This means that STJ scoring six goals from seven shots was fairly lucky (probably about a 2-3% chance), CB failing to score from 16 shots was fairly unlucky (also about a 2% chance) and the overall combination was unlikely.

Having said that, I still feel that the appeal should be granted as CB did not deliberately field a weakened team and didn't deserve to lose 6-0.

I am also in favor of the appeal and refund. The discrepancy in saves by the goalies cannot be accounted for by anything other than extreme luck by both sides and so heavily lopsided in favor of the one team that further punishment through fines is not warranted here. I see every indication that Graham made a very good effort to try and win this game despite EL issues, especially on defense. To not even get one goal back after STJ switched to O while CB stayed at E only makes the blowout even more bizarre.
My vote is YES, uphold the appeal and refund CB's fine.

APPEAL SUCCESSFUL.

120k to be returned to CB team bank,
plus small monetary award to the Appeals Panel for their opinions.


--
Mark
Commish