I understand that what he did was wrong but shouldn't that be held on its own merit? And I think the game should of been simmed or they should of made arrangements for subs
I'll leave it at this: It was the most flagrant violation of the rule that I can remember. There was no gray area or possibility that it was a mistake. Very serious consideration was given to banning him outright.
Man told us he was leaving for 8 days and tried to have two significantly better players sub for him, which we declined (partially because of what he'd done). He can take this time off from the league to reflect on running up the score on people and why it's wrong. If nothing else, let this prove that we are deadly serious about curbing this shit.
That's it. We're not going to get into a big debate about it, all three commissioners were in agreement on the seriousness of what he'd done and that a strike alone wasn't sufficient. Think about whether its worth casting in your lot with someone who threw for a TD with a minute left in a game they were already winning by 30+. At least on this issue. Sometimes there just aren't two sides to a debate.
When man selected his sub the commissioners denied his request. But his choice wasn't based on how much better his sub would be but simply based on who he could trust with his gamertag info.
I understand that, but that doesn't make it fair. It's unfortunate that this is the only way to do subs now, but it is what it is. He's in no position to make the playoffs, and having one of the better players in the league sub for him at this point is neither fair for the Redskins or fair for any of their opponents.