Login

ACapitalChicago · 02-23-2022, 05:05 PM

What a doozy of a title.

So, howdy everyone. These are never fun to write, but unfortunately they must happen. During the playoffs, @Air Crou missed a Goalie Swap request submitted through the official Team Lines subsection of the forums. In addition, @Pythonic failed to stream a playoff game and did not notify SMJHL HO or the SMJHL Simmers of their absence in a reasonable time with a valid excuse. Normally, this would result in a single $1mil fine for each. However, due to the nature of these infractions in playoffs, SMJHL HO voted to restructure our policies on simmer infractions made during playoffs. SMJHL HO felt strongly that our simmers must be held accountable and to higher standards during the playoffs due to the playoffs’ competitive nature requiring precision and attentiveness beyond that of the regular season.

Infractions made during the regular season will remain with the current precedent found HERE of:
- 1st offense: $1mil fine
- 2nd offense and onward: $2mil fine
All subsequent offenses after the first must be in the same regular season for the increased fine.

Infractions made during playoffs will follow this new structure of:
- 1st strike: $2mil fine
- 2nd strike: Loss of that season’s pay
- 3rd strike: Termination of simmer’s position
All subsequent offenses after the first must be in the same season of playoffs for the increased punishments
Regular season infractions will not count as a strike for playoff punishments

These new punishment guidelines, as well as the previous ones that were not officially codified within the rulebook, will be added as section 9.L: Simmer Infractions at the bottom of the SMJHL Rulebook. We would like to thank everybody for their patience and understanding with this matter. As always, both Air Crou and Python are free to appeal this to the Appeals Committee should they wish to.

Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any questions.

EDIT: The Appeals Committee has voted to reduce the user fine to $1 million in both cases. Full arguments can be read here.

S66 Damian Littleton

||

||

|

|

***boom*** · 02-23-2022, 05:12 PM

pay stanton with the money collected from the fines

***CampinKiller*** · 02-23-2022, 05:14 PM

Out of curiosity because I don’t see it clarified, were they punished under the old system or new system?

PremierBromanov · 02-23-2022, 05:14 PM

so just to clarify, the punishment is the new updated one?

***CampinKiller*** · 02-23-2022, 05:15 PM

02-23-2022, 05:14 PMPremierBromanov Wrote: so just to clarify, the punishment is the new updated one?

Too slow old man

ACapitalChicago · 02-23-2022, 05:18 PM

02-23-2022, 05:12 PMboom Wrote: pay stanton with the money collected from the fines

Btw, we are currently investigating that situation, in case anyone was worried

S66 Damian Littleton

||

|

PremierBromanov · 02-23-2022, 05:19 PM

02-23-2022, 05:15 PMCampinKiller Wrote:
02-23-2022, 05:14 PMPremierBromanov Wrote: so just to clarify, the punishment is the new updated one?

Too slow old man

i retire

ACapitalChicago · 02-23-2022, 05:25 PM

02-23-2022, 05:14 PMCampinKiller Wrote: Out of curiosity because I don’t see it clarified, were they punished under the old system or new system?

J HO voted to punish both AC & Python under the new system. The discussion began with a general consensus that a $1mil fine was not enough for missing a properly requested goalie swap in playoffs, and moved into a consensus of $2mil and probation. From there a 3 strike system instead of "two and done" was suggested, and HO voted on approving the guidelines in the post. They also approved retroactively punishing these infractions with the new guidelines for various reasonings, such as 2 more mistakes in the remaining playoff games being acceptable grounds for termination, and missing a correctly requested change in the playoffs as a severe offense among other discussed points. I completely understand the concerns with a retroactive punishment, and I encourage both Python and AC to submit appeals to the Appeals Committee should they wish to.

S66 Damian Littleton

||

|

ACapitalChicago · 02-23-2022, 05:25 PM

02-23-2022, 05:14 PMPremierBromanov Wrote: so just to clarify, the punishment is the new updated one?

Too slow but yes, please see the response to CK for more information

S66 Damian Littleton

||

|

***Rangerjase*** · 02-23-2022, 05:26 PM

@TheSparkyDee dodgin bullets

***CampinKiller*** · 02-23-2022, 05:29 PM

02-23-2022, 05:25 PMACapitalChicago Wrote:
02-23-2022, 05:14 PMCampinKiller Wrote: Out of curiosity because I don’t see it clarified, were they punished under the old system or new system?

J HO voted to punish both AC & Python under the new system. The discussion began with a general consensus that a $1mil fine was not enough for missing a properly requested goalie swap in playoffs, and moved into a consensus of $2mil and probation. From there a 3 strike system instead of "two and done" was suggested, and HO voted on approving the guidelines in the post. They also approved retroactively punishing these infractions with the new guidelines for various reasonings, such as 2 more mistakes in the remaining playoff games being acceptable grounds for termination, and missing a correctly requested change in the playoffs as a severe offense among other discussed points. I completely understand the concerns with a retroactive punishment, and I encourage both Python and AC to submit appeals to the Appeals Committee should they wish to.

Gotcha, appreciate it. I’ve no issue with it, I was curious. Not streaming is a pretty significant offense, (man who would ever do that?)

LordBirdman · 02-23-2022, 07:46 PM

I don't disagree with the outcome of the fine being $2 million, but changing the rule to enact a punishment seems wrong from the outside looking in. At that point any rule can be changed after an infraction with a steeper punishment inflicted on the good citizens of the SHL.

Skeleton Party · 02-23-2022, 07:55 PM

02-23-2022, 07:46 PMLordBirdman Wrote: I don't disagree with the outcome of the fine being $2 million, but changing the rule to enact a punishment seems wrong from the outside looking in. At that point any rule can be changed after an infraction with a steeper punishment inflicted on the good citizens of the SHL.

we dont have any good citizens wtf are you talking about.

fine python more

ACapitalChicago · 02-23-2022, 08:01 PM

02-23-2022, 07:46 PMLordBirdman Wrote: I don't disagree with the outcome of the fine being $2 million, but changing the rule to enact a punishment seems wrong from the outside looking in. At that point any rule can be changed after an infraction with a steeper punishment inflicted on the good citizens of the SHL.

Completely understandable, the Appeals Committee should have a decision either way soon

S66 Damian Littleton

||

|

trella · 02-23-2022, 09:47 PM

I think we should ban python

Thanks to @karey and @JSS for the sigs!

Former USA Fed Head, Carolina Kraken Co-GM, Tampa Bay Barracuda GM

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us