De-Pip Squad lose tournament

@12345 said:

@Shipthebread said:

@12345 said:

@Shipthebread said:

@12345 said:

@ZombieGenesis said:

Bahroo thinks marth should have won. Jandenese thinks Marth should have won. Tyde thinks Marth should have won. Swift thinks Marth should have won. But you guys with your bias only named one guy who shares your opinion. Actually not even sharing your opinion he is just asking in the clip why did he swing not really saying anything else. Maybe if Zubat just sit a second in front of a dictionary and read what a standoff is he would understand that a timeframe where you can lost a standoff if by rules whoever get there first wins does not exists. If you hit the survivor and as retaliation he jumps inside the hatch by definition you were on a standoff.

I don't care about people's opinions, the rule was vague and as you see plenty of people interpret it different ways. Same thing happened in the NFL, to some people it was a catch to others it wasn't. Ref's ruled no catch the Steelers lost the damn game. NFL Revised the wording and made it more complete. End of story. To reverse it now is childish. I like Marth a lot he's a great streamer and amazing player, but he should help heal wounds not keep opening them. He lost, he didn't play till the whistle and lost.

No I see the same 3-4 guys who keep "interpreting" it the way they want even if to them was given a complete explaination on how logic is applyed to natural languages and how that marth was in was indeed a standoff by definition of standoff.

Again you keep ignoring the perfect example of the NFL Catch rule, how does that concept not apply here? My comment about playing till the end, not assuming things?

Because it is not a perfect example. You were talking about a situation where interpretation was a thing. Here interpretation is not a thing. By definition of standoff Marth was on a standoff. What they had to do was to add a new line to the rule post match but this is unethical.

How is interpretation not a thing? People are saying you can't have a hatch standoff if the hatch isn't open. So by that definition as soon as the the 2nd to last survivor is hooked if the survivor finds the hatch they have won the standoff right? Or is it only when the person on the hook is past 1 stage? Or 2nd stage? Or near dead and thus its close enough? When is it a closed hatch standoff? When the hatch appears and all 4 survivors run to it?

It far and away more clear cut and less vague to say a hatch standoff starts when the survivor has the possibility to get out but doing so would get him grabbed, Killer has the chance to hit survivor but doing so would cause him to jump in the hatch.

@ZombieGenesis said:
@Shipthebread Dude, there's literally no point arguing with these guys. Things are only true when they point in their favor, period. Be they words, definitions, feelings, or otherwise. If it does not support their story, it does not count and it is false.

What is interesting, is that it looks like the Mods removed this thread from tracking new updated posts so it gets buried? No new posts in this thread since 9:40am but I just tested other threads and they track new posts.

@ZombieGenesis said:
Wow, yeah. It's buried on the second page now. Bizarre!

It says new when you go look, but the last post time doesn't go passed 9:40 am

LOL censorship.