After the problems of yesterdays site crash and teams NMRing, (me being one of them), I would like to see a rule change which rules out the possability of the NMRing team winning the game.

I believe that the team that enters his/her team should get all the points and an automatic 3-0 victory.

It doesn't seem fair that a team that turns up can be beaten by a team that doesn't!

I am saying this after beating SM yesterday 3-2 and I NMR'd.

I don't believe this to be a true reflection of how the outcome of the match would end if one team didn't appear.

The argument all along against this though is what happens to teams relying on the results of games where NMR are involved. What if last game of the season 2 teams are vying for the title and a manager with nothing to play for NMR's. Somebody wins by default then rightly the possibly title losing manger has a valid complaint about having lost out through no fault of their own. It could also have the effect of relegating somebody also.

Unfortunately there is no easy answer to this.

Marc, the team is not absent.
The manager is absent.
It's normally taken that an assistant manager organises the team, eg the Olmec software.
That's why they play your best, fit-*test*-('") players, but to indicate the lack of management, they play passive.
This will tend to result in a loss, and certainly loses you opportunities for coaching and training.
It wrecks any rotation policy your squad may have and you often spend the next couple of games recovering from it.

Some people seem to think that No Moves Received is some sort of punishment.
No, it isn't.

NMR was only brought in as a mechanism to let the game sessions run successfully.
It's to avoid having to wait for managers to submit their teams when, in some cases they are just never going to be able to, for whatever reason.
The reason it plays your suitable players passively is not to try and guarantee that you'll lose, but in fact to try and minimise the disruption to your team. Nothing else.
It's not designed to 'make' you lose.

The reasons I've already given inconvenience the manager enough. Nobody likes to NMR because of this.

I NMR'd but certainly don't plan to make a habit of it. 12 hour shifts coupled with some computer problems, meant I was looking to submit on my next day-off.

Didn't work out, but hey, that's life.

If a team who rate high above me in T11 and/or T17 NMR, they will still probably beat me, and I have absolutely no problem with that.

What he said.

I'm in a minority of one in thinking that an NMR team should play n rather than p for most of the reasons David says.

Anyway, how are you going to work out EL if the teams don't play?

No rule change necessary.

I think the previous 16 season's of MSWL and 18 of SESL show that this rule is fine as it is.

I think that the change of the rule is not working. Any alterations can be made though.

I agree with Steve that the players should play n and not p. This because the NMR teams have less loss of EL in matches as compensation for the NMR lineup. If they use n the effect is bigger with the management of EL.

I'd keep all players on passive
and set the NMR team tactic to Stall so a draw is maybe their best chance.

NMR teams winning is not ideal and may be demoralising for the active manager.

Think you will get your wish TODAY Marc with your NMR STJ having no possibility of winning v HIB in SESL Cup.

Last 2 STJ lineups have been a shambles of handful of suspensions and a injury.

Ironic I should find this topic you started exactly 1 year ago.

I wish you well, and wish you back running STJ soon.