PDC
street spirit fade out
Both the Tyrants (John W - 16k) and Cryonicles (spies - 14.5k) lost a quintessential player post-auction. Both of these players were banned/tourbanned close to the tournament beginning. Both teams dealt with delay, and now a circuit of Tournament Director decisions which objectively decreased the value of their team, with no fault of their own (as acknowledged by all parties). The current decision of granting both teams 6.5k/6k to be applied at midseason is incorrect, as contested by both the teams involved and other SPL managers, and we request that this be overturned. Initially I was willing to put this to rest with the revised credit amounts (as per PMs with august), however this still places two teams at a stark disadvantage proportionate to the others. After further consultation with my teammates and other managers, I realize this is unacceptable not just to me but per the tournament's integrity.
I will mostly be talking about the Dragonspiral Tyrants' position, as I cannot speak for the Cryos' management. We paid 16k for John W pre-auction, and after his ban, ended up with a 3k value pick. After a sequence of reversals, we were given 6.5k credits to be applied at midseason. Currently, this means, even with the revised decision, we lack 6.5k in value. Further, since these picks will be applied at midseason in a bid format, this means we stand at an even greater disadvantaged portion going into the initial stages of the tournament with only 3k of that initial 16k compensated, and also now have to deal with that 6k being buttressed further through competition during the midseason auction. We are asking that the 16k value be fully recuperated, as this would represent a fair return in value for us.
Part of the issue at hand appears to be that of precedent. As a user who has both played, spectated, and managed SPL over a decade long period, I can say that precedent receives a reworking every year. This is a byproduct of the TD team changing in composition constantly, the yearly nature of these tournaments, and the general lack of a clear pedagogy. If we were to look towards precedent to seek to 'justify' a ban/tourban credit relief, then I would suggest looking towards the Ojama scenario from SPL 11. ABR outlined this further in his post in the Commencement Thread.
I don't quite understand the unwillingness of the TD team to revise this decision. So far, no coherent explanation has been given by any TD regarding either decision. Clearly, they acknowledge their initial mistake by revising the decision, but why do it in such a half-measured fashion? Why only allow an initial 1-1 trade? Why revise that for the Cryonicles? Why then retract both, but still rob both teams of half their credit value? The only explanation I can think of is that the TD team believes that having more players = having more value, and through the 1/2 credit cap, prevents both teams from gaining more than they initially had. This, however, does not make any sense in terms of auction prices -- if anything, this acts as a punishment to the impacted teams. It cannot be construed any other way.
The attitude some TDs have taken towards this has been embarrassing. The "rape w" line by SoulWind was particularly ridiculous. Not only did you insinuate that we were trying to cheat in the pre-season, but also that we drafted him with prior knowledge of his remarks/actions. As per The Dove I will refrain from any other combative statements, but this insinuation coming from a TD is unacceptable to the Tyrants. We would like an explanation for the TD thought-making process from those applicable, and also desire a full refund for our auction credits.
️
I will mostly be talking about the Dragonspiral Tyrants' position, as I cannot speak for the Cryos' management. We paid 16k for John W pre-auction, and after his ban, ended up with a 3k value pick. After a sequence of reversals, we were given 6.5k credits to be applied at midseason. Currently, this means, even with the revised decision, we lack 6.5k in value. Further, since these picks will be applied at midseason in a bid format, this means we stand at an even greater disadvantaged portion going into the initial stages of the tournament with only 3k of that initial 16k compensated, and also now have to deal with that 6k being buttressed further through competition during the midseason auction. We are asking that the 16k value be fully recuperated, as this would represent a fair return in value for us.
Part of the issue at hand appears to be that of precedent. As a user who has both played, spectated, and managed SPL over a decade long period, I can say that precedent receives a reworking every year. This is a byproduct of the TD team changing in composition constantly, the yearly nature of these tournaments, and the general lack of a clear pedagogy. If we were to look towards precedent to seek to 'justify' a ban/tourban credit relief, then I would suggest looking towards the Ojama scenario from SPL 11. ABR outlined this further in his post in the Commencement Thread.
I don't quite understand the unwillingness of the TD team to revise this decision. So far, no coherent explanation has been given by any TD regarding either decision. Clearly, they acknowledge their initial mistake by revising the decision, but why do it in such a half-measured fashion? Why only allow an initial 1-1 trade? Why revise that for the Cryonicles? Why then retract both, but still rob both teams of half their credit value? The only explanation I can think of is that the TD team believes that having more players = having more value, and through the 1/2 credit cap, prevents both teams from gaining more than they initially had. This, however, does not make any sense in terms of auction prices -- if anything, this acts as a punishment to the impacted teams. It cannot be construed any other way.
The attitude some TDs have taken towards this has been embarrassing. The "rape w" line by SoulWind was particularly ridiculous. Not only did you insinuate that we were trying to cheat in the pre-season, but also that we drafted him with prior knowledge of his remarks/actions. As per The Dove I will refrain from any other combative statements, but this insinuation coming from a TD is unacceptable to the Tyrants. We would like an explanation for the TD thought-making process from those applicable, and also desire a full refund for our auction credits.
️