Re: Tests Round 1: Madrid Magic v Nairobi Nuggets @ Santiago Bernabeu
I really don't mind how it is worded as long as everyone is in agreeance with and knows about the rule. A player that gets banned is always going to affect the side regardless of whether the rule tries to only punish the player or not.
Either,
Frodo;230363 said:Actually, I think the wording does not reflect the intent of the rule. IIRC the thought was that the 'team' should not be punished by a single player infracting on another board. The individual cannot post, so is punished in the normal way. If the infraction is on the fantasy cricket board, the playing ban is imposed because it directly involves the integrity of the competition.
I really don't mind how it is worded as long as everyone is in agreeance with and knows about the rule. A player that gets banned is always going to affect the side regardless of whether the rule tries to only punish the player or not.
Frodo said:This does seem reasonable. If the banning applies then what happens if a wk is banned? The game can't be played.
Either,
- Use the club's second wicketkeeper
- Use a player change type and change a current player with a different player type to a wicketkeeper
- Recruit a player to play as a keeper until the ban expires