I'm sure there are some far right conspiracy theorists pointing out the glitch is called "Islam" anyway thats just an aside... I guess ultimately this glitch (like many that have gone on before it) needs to be fixed whilst it is , debatably, unsporting to use it there is no way to know whether someone else is going to use it against you, so short of agreeing before each match with your opponent not to incorporate it I can't see any way around it. (i'm pretty sure we don't use it, doesn't fit our scheme) I know thats not much consolation to the teams that have been 'beaten' by it and sorry for that I its just one in a long list of complaints with this game, thankfully the lists of benefits still outways the glitches for me, and its great you guys are gonna have an exhibition game.
Phildo
offline
offline
Originally posted by ReadingFC
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
bullish.. your exploited it by running it in the 3rd quarter.. Running the same play 24 times in a row is an exploit.. You contradict yourself.. "it may have been cheesy" "it wasn't that cheese" "it only affected one drive".. that drive was the entire 3rd quarter.. not to mention the many times it was run earlier in the game
you actually initiated the exhibition.. was that done for the fact that you realized the mistake you make and how you tainted this leagues playoffs?
this is the last I will discuss of this
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
bullish.. your exploited it by running it in the 3rd quarter.. Running the same play 24 times in a row is an exploit.. You contradict yourself.. "it may have been cheesy" "it wasn't that cheese" "it only affected one drive".. that drive was the entire 3rd quarter.. not to mention the many times it was run earlier in the game
you actually initiated the exhibition.. was that done for the fact that you realized the mistake you make and how you tainted this leagues playoffs?
this is the last I will discuss of this
Phildo
offline
offline
Originally posted by dariusralph
I'm sure there are some far right conspiracy theorists pointing out the glitch is called "Islam" anyway thats just an aside... I guess ultimately this glitch (like many that have gone on before it) needs to be fixed whilst it is , debatably, unsporting to use it there is no way to know whether someone else is going to use it against you, so short of agreeing before each match with your opponent not to incorporate it I can't see any way around it. (i'm pretty sure we don't use it, doesn't fit our scheme) I know thats not much consolation to the teams that have been 'beaten' by it and sorry for that I its just one in a long list of complaints with this game, thankfully the lists of benefits still outways the glitches for me, and its great you guys are gonna have an exhibition game.
A glitch is a glitch indeed.. A glitch pointed out by the administrator of the game and then used is cheating.. differences are not arguable.
EOM
I'm sure there are some far right conspiracy theorists pointing out the glitch is called "Islam" anyway thats just an aside... I guess ultimately this glitch (like many that have gone on before it) needs to be fixed whilst it is , debatably, unsporting to use it there is no way to know whether someone else is going to use it against you, so short of agreeing before each match with your opponent not to incorporate it I can't see any way around it. (i'm pretty sure we don't use it, doesn't fit our scheme) I know thats not much consolation to the teams that have been 'beaten' by it and sorry for that I its just one in a long list of complaints with this game, thankfully the lists of benefits still outways the glitches for me, and its great you guys are gonna have an exhibition game.
A glitch is a glitch indeed.. A glitch pointed out by the administrator of the game and then used is cheating.. differences are not arguable.
EOM
Coach Greedy
offline
offline
Hi I am the OC of Walthamstow and if Amsterdam give an undertaking to not exploit this play then we will also promise not to exploit it, infact we would be happy not to run it at all if we can find agreement.
I do not like it one bit and have had to deal with it all season on other teams I run, and if we can come to agreement then we can look forward to an open, exciting conference final, the ball is now in your court.
And yes with a very good O line and Powerback runners we would benefit greatly from using it, What do you say Amsterdam ?
I do not like it one bit and have had to deal with it all season on other teams I run, and if we can come to agreement then we can look forward to an open, exciting conference final, the ball is now in your court.
And yes with a very good O line and Powerback runners we would benefit greatly from using it, What do you say Amsterdam ?
JStu
offline
offline
Originally posted by Coach Greedy
Hi I am the OC of Walthamstow and if Amsterdam give an undertaking to not exploit this play then we will also promise not to exploit it, infact we would be happy not to run it at all if we can find agreement.
I do not like it one bit and have had to deal with it all season on other teams I run, and if we can come to agreement then we can look forward to an open, exciting conference final, the ball is now in your court.
And yes with a very good O line and Powerback runners we would benefit greatly from using it, What do you say Amsterdam ?
Coach Greedy
I run the offense for Amsterdam. I have never exploited the play this season nor do I plan on doing it against you guys in the conference final. I would be happy to take it out of my playbook if you take it out of yours and let the 2 teams play the game without this glitch play. So if you agree I will take the Strong I HB Slam out from my playbook and we can have a conference final where the better team wins and moves on to the league championship.
What do you say?
Hi I am the OC of Walthamstow and if Amsterdam give an undertaking to not exploit this play then we will also promise not to exploit it, infact we would be happy not to run it at all if we can find agreement.
I do not like it one bit and have had to deal with it all season on other teams I run, and if we can come to agreement then we can look forward to an open, exciting conference final, the ball is now in your court.
And yes with a very good O line and Powerback runners we would benefit greatly from using it, What do you say Amsterdam ?
Coach Greedy
I run the offense for Amsterdam. I have never exploited the play this season nor do I plan on doing it against you guys in the conference final. I would be happy to take it out of my playbook if you take it out of yours and let the 2 teams play the game without this glitch play. So if you agree I will take the Strong I HB Slam out from my playbook and we can have a conference final where the better team wins and moves on to the league championship.
What do you say?
JStu
offline
offline
Originally posted by Coach Greedy
Agreed.
Strong i HB slam deleted from our playbook.
Done deal - removed from the Smugglers playbook
Agreed.
Strong i HB slam deleted from our playbook.
Done deal - removed from the Smugglers playbook
RAnderson33178
offline
offline
Originally posted by ReadingFC
The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that.
If it was an experiment why not do it in an exibition game like every other team does? I have a hard time believing that you would try something new to see if it would work in a playoff game that much if you didnt already know that it would.
The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that.
If it was an experiment why not do it in an exibition game like every other team does? I have a hard time believing that you would try something new to see if it would work in a playoff game that much if you didnt already know that it would.
Leerolie
offline
offline
Originally posted by ReadingFC
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
ReadingFC I have had nothing but great respect for you and your team since you joined the league last season, but right is right. The slam definitely did not have anything to do with you beating us (Oklahoma), but I think it had alot to do with the Belfast game. How about let us know what the outcome of this exhibition game is.
I agree with Randerson why not try this in an exhibition game when nothing is at stake?
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
ReadingFC I have had nothing but great respect for you and your team since you joined the league last season, but right is right. The slam definitely did not have anything to do with you beating us (Oklahoma), but I think it had alot to do with the Belfast game. How about let us know what the outcome of this exhibition game is.
I agree with Randerson why not try this in an exhibition game when nothing is at stake?
Last edited Apr 2, 2009 13:59:45
Bum74
offline
offline
Originally posted by ReadingFC
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
Where did I say you did use it against us. I just stated my opinion of those who do choose to use it.
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
Where did I say you did use it against us. I just stated my opinion of those who do choose to use it.
ReadingFC
offline
offline
Originally posted by Chris Cole
Originally posted by ReadingFC
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
Where did I say you did use it against us. I just stated my opinion of those who do choose to use it.
You didn't, I am feeling a little defensive I guess.
Originally posted by ReadingFC
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
Where did I say you did use it against us. I just stated my opinion of those who do choose to use it.
You didn't, I am feeling a little defensive I guess.
ReadingFC
offline
offline
Originally posted by Leerolie
Originally posted by ReadingFC
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
ReadingFC I have had nothing but great respect for you and your team since you joined the league last season, but right is right. The slam definitely did not have anything to do with you beating us (Oklahoma), but I think it had alot to do with the Belfast game. How about let us know what the outcome of this exhibition game is.
I agree with Randerson why not try this in an exhibition game when nothing is at stake?
Thank you, and you are right, it did have an effect on the game. How much of an effect is hard to say.
I offered the challenge to Belfast to show that we could beat them without a gimmick play. I guess I need to just come clean and say I do feel guilty after the fact. I wanted to win so bad that I pushed it a little to far. I thought if I only use it for one quarter it would be alright. But now I feel a little slimy. Everyone makes mistakes, so I would like to officially apologize to the Belfast Brawlers. When we play our re-match I will remove it entirely from the playbook.
I have enjoyed competing and playing against all the coaches in this league. I don't want to have a reputation as an exploiter. But I also like to win, which I think is an attribute we all share. Consider it a lesson learned. Good luck tomorrow to Clydesdale as well as to the teams in Zeta.
Originally posted by ReadingFC
If I wanted to exploit it I would have ran it all game. Our team has consistently ran James Sargent 35-40 times a game. We pound the ball, that's the way we play. The third quarter all I-Slam was an experiment due to all the hype on the forum. Half of his runs in this game were I-Slam due to that. Usually he has a handful of outside runs, a ton of off-tackle and some slams. I didn't run Islam 50 times. And I certainly didn't run it all game. So it may have been cheesey, but it wasn't *that* cheesey. It really only affected *one* drive, the other one late in the third resulted in a punt. So 7 points due to the slam.
Belfast and Reading have agreed to an exhibition. I will run a variant of our normal offense for the game, no 18-slams in a row.
And Oklahoma, the slam had nothing to do with us taking you to the woodshed in our game. So if you dropped your wallet we never saw it.
ReadingFC I have had nothing but great respect for you and your team since you joined the league last season, but right is right. The slam definitely did not have anything to do with you beating us (Oklahoma), but I think it had alot to do with the Belfast game. How about let us know what the outcome of this exhibition game is.
I agree with Randerson why not try this in an exhibition game when nothing is at stake?
Thank you, and you are right, it did have an effect on the game. How much of an effect is hard to say.
I offered the challenge to Belfast to show that we could beat them without a gimmick play. I guess I need to just come clean and say I do feel guilty after the fact. I wanted to win so bad that I pushed it a little to far. I thought if I only use it for one quarter it would be alright. But now I feel a little slimy. Everyone makes mistakes, so I would like to officially apologize to the Belfast Brawlers. When we play our re-match I will remove it entirely from the playbook.
I have enjoyed competing and playing against all the coaches in this league. I don't want to have a reputation as an exploiter. But I also like to win, which I think is an attribute we all share. Consider it a lesson learned. Good luck tomorrow to Clydesdale as well as to the teams in Zeta.
vikings72
offline
offline
Too bad that Reading can't forfeit there win to Belfast for using a play that everyone knows is a bug. But the game is in the past and nothing can be done about it. Plus it's only a game.
Belfast will come into the game and prove that 17-0 was no fluke aand we belonged in the conference championship game over ReadingFC
Belfast will come into the game and prove that 17-0 was no fluke aand we belonged in the conference championship game over ReadingFC
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
