The slightest evidence of 'dodging' and that team starts losing points.

If there has to be a starting position for a default score then it should be zero. You should not be able to score any points for not particularly trying to get a game played.

At the moment two players making no real effort to play can still probably score at least 7 points each.

Make the swing of points available -15 to +15 (a 30 point difference) based on effort (evidence of which has to be critically examined) and that might make certain people try a bit harder, or at least might make their team mates try and make all attempts to get that game played in whatever way possible. A 30 point single swing will affect the overall score of the majority of fixtures therefore people will not want to risk it.

Combine that scoring system with Keith's idea above at the end of the third week.

Love this penalty point swing to encourage players to play

If only it was in place for last season for the cup game

Lowering defaults has been a key issue the past few seasons, and increasing the clan numbers is the usual attempt at answering this and it usually seems to work, then doesn't really cause much change in the end. Its sort of been brought up a few pages ago but you need to think of alternatives, rather than 'trialing' an increase in clan size every season or two.

Instead of increasing the amount of players available to be subbed in (which itself has knock-on effects to the amount of clans, as well as forcing some captains to bring in less reliable players because of a lack of numbers anyway) is the easiest option for a league runner to take.

The sorts of players causing the defaults needs to be looked at, as well as when the defaults are occuring.

Re-introducing the bannings for players with more than one default against them can be good - and the above suggested system would be perfect for this, say a person gets less than 5 on average out of all their defaults in the season or 2 or more defaults with a minus score

As for when the defaults are occuring, you said there was 15 in the last fixture, that suggests that the season could be too long maybe?

1 thing i dont see is why should clans need 3 weeks to complete a clan game?

cup final on snooker has no deadline but if its slow i pick up the pace but that took 3-4 weeks last time which was atrocious.

i think a deadline should be a deadline without any extensions unless its a league runners fault.

We need it because 2 weeks isn't working like it should if teams were run properly.

We also need it to stop the arguments regarding league runners doing defaults which clans think are poor.

If we get rid of defaults as much as possible everyone should be happier.

It is league runners who keep saying 2 weeks is enough, yet 13 seasons and we still get loads of defaults. It is time to stop dragging our heads in the sand and try something new.

Punishing players with negative defaults against them wouldn't work because the players that end the fixture have in most places been subbed in to try and get it played.

If you upped the bonus points for completing with no defaults to 50 you would probably get rid of them overnight without all this complication. You're saying dodging doesn't happen if it didn't then every game would get played.

3 weeks to play 15 or at most 30 frames is far too much..2 weeks should be sufficient for the reliable players the league is looking for

No one is arguing, it should be long enough, the problem is it isn't as every year loads of games go to default.

You're not punishing the player - you are punishing the team. It's a team game.

players who get a certain number of defaults should get some sort of suspension from the league...unless it can be shown it not being their fault

Why not keep it simple and do a red card yellow card system.

Your game goes to default and its decided you are at fault, no harm no foul.

If a second game goes to default and you are again at fault then your out. Full stop!!! No suspension, no other warnings, plain out of the season.

Would encourage folk to either get it done or ask for a sub quicker. None of this we have plenty time to play nonsense. You have a two week deadline yes. Why not try to get it done on day one!!!!!

Just think we are pandering for the unreliable all the time.
We want strong teams, strong captains and reliable players say we had 12 in a squad if someone is unreliable the captains going to boot them quickly and get someone else in.
With clans of 14/15/16 the unreliable players complete 1 in 3 of their games and get left on the team sheet cos games are getting done by subs...
All fine but at some point the balancing act goes wrong

There is a system in place to suspend players who get defaults against them it just shows that it isn't working as we still have loads of defaults.

And if everyone was like you mate and played day 1 this chat wouldn't be happening but they don't.

Thus why someone needs to come up with something that gets games played and games that go to default are penalised.

Easily solved by giving seperate scores which add together to form the overall default score of the individual matches - just make the scores relative to the time they have been in the fixture.


Incredibly presumptuous that clans are much more cynical than they actually are, could be the simple fact that a usually reliable player has lost internet connection, with no subs available. You do this then all's you would do would put those clans lucky enough to get another reliable clan in their match above the clans that are better than them but have a less reliable opponent

Think everyone agrees on bigger penalties to teams for defaults, bigger bonuses for completing a full set and allowing swaps at the end of a fixture.
Should get that introduced and we would be there without any extra weeks.

What i like about my idea is it specifically punishes the individual rather than the team. I do play my games as soon as possible, correct me if i'm wrong anyone, I havent ever had a default in all the games i played.

I would hate a team punishment for any team I play for because someone in the clan can't be bothered to post they are unable to play or just didn't make the effort. Why should I be punished. My idea gives everyone a chance. You then are given the incentive to get yourself out of the next fixture if you cant play or simply get your game played.

If clans think the defaults going their way they don't do all they can to get things played sometimes.
As for the other bit you've got 14 players!! You only need 8 of them to find an hour in 2 weeks so no available subs shouldn't be an issue.

seems an awful amount of discussion,, when really its up to clan captains to ensure games get played

with 14 players this should be easy, however leaving subs till the last 2 days of the fixture causes problems.

i think 1 week to play a fixture is enough time, if it isnt played how about subs MUST be made at that point.

cuts out the tactical element also

and zante no words of your wisdom please , maybe try and be constructive with your views and put ideas forward, rather than commenting on other ppls views

lets hear what you have to say, lets listen to your majestic solutions

if you been in clan for years the good players leave to the last moment to play they games
be there seen it loads of times with the good players

Eh? Makes no sense whatsoever...you don't rate onevisit then?