Last updated: 22nd May 2017

Case Studies 

Actual Past Issues and Resolutions:

Case Study 1

[Decision on breaking "One Club, One Season" rule]

Case: {PLAYER} found to play for both {TEAM1} and {TEAM2} in the same season, breaking the "One Club, One Season" rule.

Facts:
- {PLAYER} is a new player in SGFIFAVP in FIFA16 (different from new player for the season)
- {PLAYER} played for {TEAM1} at 11.30pm
- {PLAYER} played for {TEAM2} at 1am
- {TEAM2} discovered {PLAYER} played for {TEAM1} after matches

Decision:
- {PLAYER} will be considered as {TEAM1}'s player for this season (fielded first)
- {TEAM2} vs {TEAM3} will replay only one match ({TEAM2} 3-1 {TEAM3})
- {TEAM3} 1-0 {TEAM2} will remain valid

Reason:
- {PLAYER} is a new player for this season, so he is not in the list of active players
- {PLAYER} was last involved in SGFIFAVP league 2 years ago, it will be assumed he is not aware of the "One Club, One Season" rule
- {TEAM1} and {TEAM2} matches were played on the same day and within hours of each other, active players list not updated immediately
- Considering the reasons above, admins feel that the guidelines for both matches for {TEAM2} (where {PLAYER} was fielded) to be forfeited is too heavy

Note:
It is still the manager's responsibility to ensure that the "One Club, One Season" rule is not broken, by asking the player first before fielding the player. Future similar incidents may not end up with the same decision as above.

 

Case Study 2

[Decision on {TEAM1} vs {TEAM2}]

Case: {TEAM1} missed a scheduled match with {TEAM2}

Facts:
- {TEAM1} manager was working and forgot about the match
- {TEAM1} does not have an assistant manager in the group
- Arrangements for this match was made in PM, not in public group
- {TEAM1} was ready, but there was no link between their assistant manager and {TEAM2}

Decision:
- Both matches will be forfeited in {TEAM2}'s favour (as per the rules)
- Procedures on match confirmation between managers will be updated to prevent similar occurrences in the future

Reason:
- Straightforward case where a team forgot about a match
- {TEAM1} had no assistant manager to liaise with {TEAM2} when manager is busy

Note:
- All communication on match arrangements should be done in the public League WhatsApp group
- Assign an assistant manager in case the manager is not always available
- "Not being notified because the group chat is mute" is NOT an excuse for missing a scheduled match
- New rules on match confirmation from Week 2 onwards (on a trial basis)

 

Case Study 3

[Decision on {TEAM1} vs {TEAM3}]

Case: {TEAM1} fielded {PLAYER}, who played for {TEAM2} on {DATE}

Facts:
- {PLAYER} was looking for a club to play with, {TEAM2} was available
- {PLAYER} was only informed of the league match when the match started
- {PLAYER} did not inform {TEAM1} when he played their league match
- {TEAM1} was not aware (nor check the active players list) on {PLAYER} status

Decision:
- {PLAYER} will stay registered to {TEAM2} for {SEASON}
- {PLAYER} will be banned for matches in Week 2, 3, and 4 (total 6 matches). If he is fielded, the match will be forfeited
- {TEAM2} will not be allowed to field new players for matches in Week 2, 3, and 4. If there are new players (other than the ones currently registered), the match will be forfeited
- {TEAM1} vs {TEAM3} will have 1 match forfeited in favour of {TEAM3}, and 1 match to be replayed

Reason:
- {PLAYER} should be responsible on informing {TEAM1} that he was fielded in a league match by another team
- {TEAM2} should be responsible to inform {PLAYER} that they are going to play the league match BEFORE it started (as the player will be registered to {TEAM2} upon being fielded)
- {TEAM1} should be responsible of ensuring their players have not played for any other teams in the league (by asking and checking the SGFIFAVP Active Season Players list) before playing the league game

Note:
- It is still the manager's responsibility to ensure that the "One Club, One Season" rule is not broken, by asking the player first before fielding the player
- Managers are reminded to read the rules again (http://www.sgfifavp.com/ -> "Rules" -> "Domestic") and to raise questions if they are not sure
- Future similar incidents may not end up with the same decision as above

 

Case Study 4

[Decision on {TEAM1} vs {TEAM2}]

Case: {TEAM1} requested for rematch due to lag, which {TEAM2} agreed to. However, after the rematches, {TEAM1} would like to stick to the original results

Facts:
- {TEAM1} asked to replay both matches ({TEAM2} 1-2 {TEAM1}, {TEAM1} 1-4 {TEAM2}) again due to lag, mentioning that it will be fair for both teams
- {TEAM1} asked for the initial matches to be considered as warmup matches
- {TEAM2} agreed, even though the match results were posted
- After the 2nd set of matches were played ({TEAM1} 0-0 {TEAM2}, {TEAM2} 1-0 {TEAM1}), {TEAM1} requested to stick with the original match results

Decision:
- {TEAM1} should honor what they had requested for
- 2nd set of matches ({TEAM1} 0-0 {TEAM2}, {TEAM2} 1-0 {TEAM1}) will be considered as official matches
- {TEAM1} and {TEAM2} are reminded to make any future match arrangements publicly in the WhatsApp group (not via PM)

Reason:
- {TEAM1} had specifically requested for rematch of both matches, and to consider the 1st set of matches to be warmups
- Even though {TEAM2} has posted the results, but they agreed for a rematch (the decision would be different if they had refused a rematch)

Note:
- Testing of connections should be clearly indicated before the start of the match. Such "test matches" should be ended before half-time
- Communications between managers should be done publicly in the WhatsApp group, and not via PM
- Future similar incidents may not end up with the same decision as above

 

Case Study 5

[Decision on no player list screenshot for {TEAM1} 0-4 {TEAM2}]

Case: There was no player list screenshot for {TEAM1} 0-4 {TEAM2} due to the match being played over 2 games, where the first halves of both matches are used for reporting

Facts:
- {TEAM1} got disconnected at half-time, but {TEAM2} did not take screenshot as it was planned for end of the match
- {TEAM1} and {TEAM2} started a new match to continue from where the disconnection occured
- {TEAM1} players disconnected from the match after the whistle was blown for half-time
- {TEAM2} unable to take screenshot as the message of opponent not having enough players was shown

Decision:
- Player list screenshot from the first match will be used
- {TEAM1} 0-4 {TEAM2} scoreline will stand
- Procedures on match disconnection will be updated to prevent similar occurrences in the future

Reason:
- Unique situation which rarely happens
- Replay of the match will be unfair for both teams

Note:
- Managers are advised to take player list screenshots as early as possible in the match
- New rules on match disconnection are updated with immediate effect
- Future similar incidents may not end up with the same decision as above

 

Case Study 6

[Decision on {TEAM1} vs {TEAM2}]

Case: There has been no agreement between {TEAM1} and {TEAM2} for their match for a few weeks. When the match was arranged, {TEAM2} was late by 14 minutes

Facts:
- Match took several weeks to be arranged
- Match was finally set on Thu 11pm
- {TEAM2} was late by 14 minutes

Decision:
- Both matches to be played between both teams (in Week 11, set by Admins - popular day/time)
- Warning given to {TEAM1} for prolonging match fixture
- Warning given to {TEAM2} for delaying game beyond 10 minute

Reason:
- Fixtures are allowed to be postponed as long as a team does not have more than 2 pending matchweek fixtures
- Rules on match arrangements will be adjusted next season to address similar issues in the future
- Communication on the match should be done in the public WhatsApp group

Note:
- All communication between both teams should be done in the public League WhatsApp group
- Managers are reminded to read the rules again (http://www.sgfifavp.com/ -> "Rules" -> "Domestic") on match arrangements and to raise questions if they are not sure
- Future similar incidents may not end up with the same decision as above

 

Case Study 7

[Decision on {TEAM1} vs {TEAM2}]

Case: There has been a complaint from {TEAM1} with regards to {TEAM2} fielding of glitched players

Facts:
- Video evidence submitted by {TEAM1}'s manager after match (https://youtu.be/GtMNrj_ESLc)
- Video shows {PLAYER} having 50 points in total

Decision:
- Both matches will be forfeited by {TEAM2} for fielding glitched player {PLAYER}
- {PLAYER} will be banned for 3 matchweek fixtures (from Season 2 Week 11 to Season 3 Week 2)

Reason:
- Glitched players are not allowed to play any matches under the jurisdiction of SGFIFAVP
- Clear video evidence submitted by {TEAM1} manager

Note:
- This is a good example on how video evidence should be made (https://youtu.be/GtMNrj_ESLc)
- It would be good to include the check before and after the match
- Managers are reminded to read the rules again (http://www.sgfifavp.com/ -> "Rules" -> "Domestic") on match arrangements and to raise questions if they are not sure