I'm making a motion that we create a panel of GMs to review injury cases in a timely and consistent manor. Since we are having controversy, I think that it would be in the exco's (and league's) best interest to separate from these decisions. I don't think that there would be anything wrong with having exco members on it, but I think it would be good to have others.
And I nominate Zalaski, Ropers and Gabe to be on it because they usually have input when the topic is discussed and obviously took an interest in this case.
Injury review panel
Moderator: Executive Committee
-
Dodgers
- Site Admin
- Posts: 5783
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fort Lauderdale
- Name: Shawn Walsh
I'm fine with the idea of creating an injury review panel. I think we should also complete a full review of our injury rules to ensure we're providing the clearest information possible.
As for who serves on the injury panel, I have no idea who I would suggest. My concern is that the ones who are usually interested are usually the most opinionated and therefore most likely to act irrationally.
As for who serves on the injury panel, I have no idea who I would suggest. My concern is that the ones who are usually interested are usually the most opinionated and therefore most likely to act irrationally.
-
Rangers
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4048
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:00 am
- Location: Prosper, TX
- Name: Brett Perryman
I agree about the full review. Our role would be to provide them with the clearest possible set of guidelines for them to interpret.Dodgers wrote:I'm fine with the idea of creating an injury review panel. I think we should also complete a full review of our injury rules to ensure we're providing the clearest information possible.
As for who serves on the injury panel, I have no idea who I would suggest. My concern is that the ones who are usually interested are usually the most opinionated and therefore most likely to act irrationally.
On who serves, I think that part of the process should be an available league appeal with a pretty low threshold. Something like, if a GM chooses to appeal an injury panel decision, he needs 60% of votes (not league members but those who vote) by a pre-set deadline. No arguing, just appeal it and let people vote.
Since Nils basically insinuated that any decision on the exco's part that he sees as misguided could be overturned by him and/or Bren like they're the friggin Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and since his participation comes and goes, I don't think that he should be on it.
Considering that Ropers called our integrity into question, I'm a little hesitant to nominate him on that basis, but I think that he can handle it.
Zalaski and Gabe might as well serve on something since they're very involved, and I thought that Gabe had good comments in that thread. I don't know how large it should be, probably pretty small, right?
Ropers called our integrity into question, the hell with him. Gabe and Z works, but I think a 3 man group is too slim, I'd like to make it 5. I still don't think this is something that HAS to be done, cause let's face it, this all came about cause Jake was pissy he blew a huge lead and was looking for excuses. We all voted on this as soon as Game 163 2009 was over. Hamilton shouldn't be playing, plain and simple. There is a reason we were elected to run the league, and the fact that we're even considering letting him play because Ropers, Z and Nils have sand in their vaginas is crazy
