And i am a lowyer and i could win easily a case like this since the rule isn't giving a specific time range, we have two faces of the coin, a lot of you guys are applying ur own logic statements and i see everyone is assuming that 4:00 is the limit, but guess what the rule has no limit regarding to seconds, so basically 4:10 or 4:59 are within the 4 mins mark, if the rule would have writen 4:00 then it would be totally different.
Eh? The rules say "no longer than four minutes" i.e 4:00 - pretty clear to most!
The rule barely makes any sense, it doesn't say the first four minutes of the game at all. Obviously everyone knows that it should say that, because we're so accustomed to it - the point is, people who say the rules are 'strict' or 'clear' are plain wrong. That rule needs to be rewritten, first to make it clear that a restart should take place in the first four minutes of a game, and secondly to clarify whether that means before 4:00 or before 4:01.
Give that tolken guy a candy and some juan's poster already :lol:
And i am a lowyer and i could win easily a case like this since the rule isn't giving a specific time range, we have two faces of the coin, a lot of you guys are applying ur own logic statements and i see everyone is assuming that 4:00 is the limit, but guess what the rule has no limit regarding to seconds, so basically 4:10 or 4:59 are within the 4 mins mark, if the rule would have writen 4:00 then it would be totally different.
In law there is this basic principle "what is not forbidden is allowed"
BTW what happens now... the current score is 2-2 or 2-1? :?
will there be more games? I'm a bit confused (since i only watched the first 2 games live in the stream ops: )
BTW what happens now... the current score is 2-2 or 2-1? :?
will there be more games? I'm a bit confused (since i only watched the first 2 games live in the stream ops: )
Officially it's 2-1, unless admin says otherwise.
so u changed ur mindEDIT: Whatever
+1Today I witnessed for 40 minutes the most pathetic discussion in my 5 years of aoc, and I bet 400 viewers agree with me (399 maybe if we remove influenza)
Regardless of what happened with the pauses, if the game time read 4:01 when the restart was called, it was obviously too late. Which I guess is totally fine, Norway just has to continue playing the game as they were too late to call the restart. Instead, they decided to RESIGN from the game, which means they LOST the game. There is no need for an AW, because the decision should be very obvious. Norway lost because they resigned. And there's no need to call me out as if I am all alone, because I am not.
What happened to Juan's post on the matter?
And i am a lowyer and i could win easily a case like this since the rule isn't giving a specific time range, we have two faces of the coin, a lot of you guys are applying ur own logic statements and i see everyone is assuming that 4:00 is the limit, but guess what the rule has no limit regarding to seconds, so basically 4:10 or 4:59 are within the 4 mins mark, if the rule would have writen 4:00 then it would be totally different.
In law there is this basic principle "what is not forbidden is allowed".
And i am a lowyer and i could win easily a case like this since the rule isn't giving a specific time range, we have two faces of the coin, a lot of you guys are applying ur own logic statements and i see everyone is assuming that 4:00 is the limit, but guess what the rule has no limit regarding to seconds, so basically 4:10 or 4:59 are within the 4 mins mark, if the rule would have writen 4:00 then it would be totally different.
In law there is this basic principle "what is not forbidden is allowed".
You are a "lowyer" (="internet lawyer"?)? If people like you are lawyers in mexico, I can understand the current state of affairs there.
Anyway, the most ridiculous thing about this thread is that so many people are claiming that ARG A was looking for an admin win which is blatantly false. When norway resigned they just had to options: either let norway get away with this, granting a re to them when their right to call re has already expired, or to ask for an admin win. Why would they take the first possibility? They had the right to deny it as it was already too late, and norway attempted to enforce a re just by resigning instead of playing on, so norway basically forced them to choose the second possibility. (Viper's fanboys probably won't understand this.)
:lol:Jesus tolkien you have like 14 posts in this topic defending the args, you must really love them :?
What about grow some balls and post with your real Nick?And i am a lowyer and i could win easily a case like this since the rule isn't giving a specific time range, we have two faces of the coin, a lot of you guys are applying ur own logic statements and i see everyone is assuming that 4:00 is the limit, but guess what the rule has no limit regarding to seconds, so basically 4:10 or 4:59 are within the 4 mins mark, if the rule would have writen 4:00 then it would be totally different.
In law there is this basic principle "what is not forbidden is allowed".
You are a "lowyer" (="internet lawyer"?)? If people like you are lawyers in mexico, I can understand the current state of affairs there.
Anyway, the most ridiculous thing about this thread is that so many people are claiming that ARG A was looking for an admin win which is blatantly false. When norway resigned they just had to options: either let norway get away with this, granting a re to them when their right to call re has already expired, or to ask for an admin win. Why would they take the first possibility? They had the right to deny it as it was already too late, and norway attempted to enforce a re just by resigning instead of playing on, so norway basically forced them to choose the second possibility. (Viper's fanboys probably won't understand this.)