Allegations?? I was in the clans for Christ's sake, I remember them folding!! lol

And unfortunately it's too late for you not to tell me your life story. You play the sympathy card on a daily basis, and I'm really bored of your personal life. I concur 100% that it's "naff all to do" with me, and I really hope you stop inflicting it upon me.

I do see circles, I see you still pretending that a frame count scoring system exacerbates the problem of defaults.
Defaults are a problem in any scoring system, equally so.
Yes, team match count renders some defaults irrelevant, but at the same time, when one decides a team match it has a huge impact (it sways 100% of the points for that team match).
So they average out about the same, defaults are a real problem, but no more of one with frame count than with any other scoring system.

You don't even know what you're doing or saying, you mentioned 'skyblade kept folding his clans and i wanted stability'. Are you that dense? That's making an accusation, without proof I suggest you don't make them.

As for my personal life, yeah only told you to shut you up - going on about the same drivel 'you shouldn't be able to captain this season', blah blah blah.

Dense am I? You don't seem to know who half of your own team are!!!

I know who ALL of them are, that's for me to know and you'll find out when we beat you again.

As Been has just said, and was said plenty of times last season, any system which allows defaults, is flawed from the start.

No system has come up yet that allows a fair judgement on how to negate the affects of a default.

I thought of a system last year, a few agreed, but more were against it.

In an ideal world, there will be no defaults, but this is far from an ideal world, so we need to figure out whether to allow defaults to remain or stop them

The problem is:

Not all players bother to message their opponents, instead they don't and just bombard them with pm's expecting to play there and then. Unfortunately not everyone can just play at the drop of a hat. This gets interpreted as 'refusal to play' then becomes a snowball effect.

Their team Captain jumps on their opponents and demands they make a sub there and then. Create some codswallop about players not going to be active till deadline day (if that's the case don't pick them from the start)

IF ALL players followed set Clan guidelines ie: messaged opponents, followed up arrangements, communicated with their designated Captains or Vices then defaults wouldn't occur as often as they have.

Expression: 'can lead a horse to water, but can't make it drink'.

A Captain can ONLY ask their players to message their opponents can't do it for them, but a Captain can follow up with their opponent and see IF heard from their player. Which is what I try to do. Communication is KEY

Edited at 14:37 Thu 20/11/14 (GMT)

Not all players do bother to message, but it is usually unfortunate to get both players not messaging each other.

I have never had a problem asking for a sub off opponents, if there a legitimate reason, most captains will straight away do a swap.

As most teams have faith in all their players to do exactly the same job, so it subbing/swapping should not need to be too much of an issue.

Most Captains do make a sub/swap I agree. I like to give my players as long as necessary to either reply to my message (s) or failing that we make a sub/swap. The end goal is always the same to try get ALL fixtures complete within their time frame.

Each Captain to their own, just some have more patience with others, happy to wait and give players the benefit of the doubt.

Not saying your idea can't work, but as someone else said earlier, what if their player can only make the first week, and yours only the second?

Would the fairest thing to do, swap both players or something

Then a big word 'Compromise' should take effect. Find a player more suited who can play either or BOTH.

In any other scoring system the default has the same effect as a potentially played game. In the example I gave, Uprising play the game and get the win, The Pros dont play the game and get the win. Now if its a case of 2 points for an individual win then the outcome for both clans is exactly the same. If its team games, the outcome for both clans is exactly the same (assuming both clans beat Wolf Pack of course) - either side's match win does not unduly affect the other.

Now in frame count Uprising might have played and won 8 points whilst The Pros might get 12 or more in a default. Even if you make the argument that had Pros managed to play the game they could have won it 15-0 so they may have lost 3 points, or the Uprising player should have done better than the 8-7, the fact remains that the best way is to say 'a win is equal in impact to any other win however achieved'. The Pros have gained from something completely outside of Uprising's control and that 4 or more points difference (plus any others elsewhere throughout the season) is something that Uprising would have to make up across the rest of the season through no fault of their own in addition to looking to simply defeat The Pros when they play them.

Now that does not happen in match scoring systems except where clans finish level on team match points but at least by then Uprising have to have at least not won all of their team matches or possibly not beaten The Pros. Before that they would be 100% in control of their own destiny regardless of what effort any other clan makes in their other games and regardless of any default scores.

Edited at 15:08 Thu 20/11/14 (GMT)

I am staying quiet, I could argue all day again

You are welcome to argue all day but you can't not agree with that point.

Even if it isn't a refusal to play, if they aren't going to arrange to play another time then they're useless in the fixture. A bombardment of pms is still better than refusing at that one and not bothering to offline message someone.

On the spot messaging does get a lot of games done, when there are issues wth that then arranging a time comes in.

3 defaults rule was in clans a while back but it rarely got to a 3rd, and runners often thought it was a harsh punishment (they would be banned for a season). As this might just make more defaults, maybe a punishment on an individual level, a team gets punished by missing out on potentially vital points.

There was a similar thing with captains who folded mid season, but exceptions became the norm and any rule there was for that was scrapped. Whether there was a necessary folding last season is another story, (not the captains absense, but the captain folding a clan that could've continued).

Defaults are likely to happen, to reduce it to zero would be a great feat. A fair method might be hard to come by, extensions and exceptions can only work if all agree.

On the personal level, Uprising were far ahead in the greater picture and never threatened even when beaten by a team fighting for 4th

But the reverse of your argument is also valid, if pros were to only get 8 points from their defaults, and upr achieved 12 points in matches, then it's the defaults that are the issue, not the scoring system. (Sorry for the confusing way I write!)

And yes, I do agree with what you write, but that is also a chance you take, you have to rely on the fact that you have tried the best you can to get the game played.

The bit in bold is spot on!!! It doesn't matter which way round it is as the overall impact would be identical in match scoring formats and so not effect the other clan.

Yes you do the best to get the game played and you get the default win. The outcome is identical to the other team playing and winning. You can control winning the default quite rightly. But you shouldnt be able to control winning a default and score more points than a player that controls getting the game played even better. At its best, worst or fairest (whichever you prefer) both end up coming out the other side with the exact same outcome in a match scoring format.

Edited at 15:15 Thu 20/11/14 (GMT)

But that would take us further away from the frame scoring format which me and Been have campaigned for

I understand your point though, it is a fairer method to class matches as win/draw/lose, and it helps with the default, but the FBL has that, let the FCL free

I am not set on changing the FCL scoring at all. It is the 20 bonus points which largely negate the problems of Frame Count in the FCL (not completely but enough to make the current system credible).

As the FCL is considered to be the senior and best competition, the one thing it needs to be is credible.

Been actually mentioned the season before last and said how close the frame count was although Uprising had actually gained better team vs team match results. One of the reasons it was so close was that The Pros gained a number of very large default wins whereas Uprising played far more actual games, including pinning down the very same opponents that The Pros couldn't for whatever reason(?!), taking their chances in play, either good or bad, in terms of comparable results to the defaults awarded for The Pros.