Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick TYler
We had this discussion with our teams and the conclusion was that if I ever had proof that one of our teams threw a qualifying match, either they could quit or I would.
|
By "threw a match" do you mean finding out after the match that they surreptitiously, and without the permission of their ally(s), used less than their full ability in order to purposefully lose a match? or do you mean announcing before the match that they and their ally(s) have agreed to not score because they all have determined that outscoring their opponents lowers the chances of at least one team winning the tournament (and the match outcome is irrelevant to any other allies)?
These are not the same situation. Everyone I know or have corresponded with agrees that the first is deceitful/bad/wrong/unethical and should not be entertained. I would call the it "throwing a match" and would tend to agree with your reaction.
The second is 100% out in the open, occurs by consensus, and might not be a bad thing to do in some very rare, but possible situations. I would not call it "throwing a match" any more than I would say that intentionally walking a batter is throwing a baseball game.
If you agree with the way I use the terms, then we might be on the same page. If you don't, reasonable people can disagree.
Under the heading of "Reasonable people may disagree", someone who considers using the latter option should perhaps either be dissuaded or told how to do it correctly; but they should not be scolded or threatened with figurative banishment, in the vehement manner most replies used.
Blake