07-03-2012, 01:14 PM
My recollection of the 2009 meeting was that there were less than a handful of people against the proposal.
I agree with the reasons stated by Ken but would also add that removal of the word 'normal' could prevent important decisions being taken. The procedure must take account of legal processes as well.
As a hypothetical case - an arbiter is provoked into punching a player. He is charged with assault. If the result of the court case has to be awaited (normal practice) then removal of 'normal' prevents procedures being continued.
Is such a situation really desirable? It may be that the legal process is all that is needed but this may not be so.
I agree with the reasons stated by Ken but would also add that removal of the word 'normal' could prevent important decisions being taken. The procedure must take account of legal processes as well.
As a hypothetical case - an arbiter is provoked into punching a player. He is charged with assault. If the result of the court case has to be awaited (normal practice) then removal of 'normal' prevents procedures being continued.
Is such a situation really desirable? It may be that the legal process is all that is needed but this may not be so.