Quote:
Originally Posted by topgun
I find it interesting that for all the lawyering people play with the rules, that this one isn't a rule, but just seems to be a common perception. But if someone challenged it (on the field during alliance selection) wouldn't the ref have to allow it?
|
No. He wouldn't. See below.
The FIRST thing to happen would be an
immediate call to HQ, or whoever representing HQ is available, for clarification. Bill Miller, any GDC members onsite, whoever the ref and regional director need to get ahold of. This is because it's a situation that is not in the rules. (The fourth thing to happen would be that it would be in the rules in following years.)
The second thing to happen would be the announcement of the GDC ruling.
The third thing to happen would be either the picking team picking again, which is more likely,
or a ton of confusion as the entire picking would need to be redone. Let's face it, if #1 picks #6 as the final pick, the #6 alliance has to have another team, or quite possibly the #7 and #8 have to move up, leaving the #9 team to move up and now they have to get picks...
And the final thing to happen is memory. Your team, if they insisted on challenging this during alliance selection, would be remembered for
years as "that team that caused the big mess in the Magnolia Regional alliance selection" if it was successfully challenged. (And if it was unsuccessful? Everyone knows where the rule explicitly disallowing picking alliance captains who have already picked comes from for years to come.)
Of course, this is an easy tactic to defeat: All the lower-seeded captain has to do is say "We decline. As you can see, we already have an alliance." and that's that. That's been the de facto reason for years when someone who's been picked is picked again; it just hasn't been stated as such.