Page 2 of 2

Re: Permits - the age old debate

PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 12:27 pm
by jake the snake
Down the Hill wrote:Yes it does. The team that receives the forfeit is entitled to load a team sheet on PlayHQ. That's been a rule for many many years.


Incorrect

Re: Permits - the age old debate

PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 12:54 pm
by Down the Hill
You've got me Jake. I forgot about the "Jessie White" rule change that removed that provision coming into the 2023 season. However, the league did make the following statement when they explained this year's rule changes.

Only matches PLAYED will be considered for eligibility. Permit Committee has discretion to consider extenuating circumstances. I.e. Shortened seasons/forfeits/legitimate claims.

Re: Permits - the age old debate

PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 1:09 pm
by beef
Down the Hill wrote:You've got me Jake. I forgot about the "Jessie White" rule change that removed that provision coming into the 2023 season. However, the league did make the following statement when they explained this year's rule changes.

Only matches PLAYED will be considered for eligibility. Permit Committee has discretion to consider extenuating circumstances. I.e. Shortened seasons/forfeits/legitimate claims.

So i assume the "legitimate claims" clause is why this permit got approved despite only playing 2 games + 1 forfeit?

Re: Permits - the age old debate

PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 2:44 pm
by amber_fluid
beef wrote:
Down the Hill wrote:You've got me Jake. I forgot about the "Jessie White" rule change that removed that provision coming into the 2023 season. However, the league did make the following statement when they explained this year's rule changes.

Only matches PLAYED will be considered for eligibility. Permit Committee has discretion to consider extenuating circumstances. I.e. Shortened seasons/forfeits/legitimate claims.

So i assume the "legitimate claims" clause is why this permit got approved despite only playing 2 games + 1 forfeit?


So they bring in a new rule with a clause that negates the original new rule.
Silly much?