Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.
Doesn't your post remind you of Roger's stance on politics? They appealed to the judges (and not just one), and the judges' response didn't satisfy Darka. You're taking sides and talking about "hairy paws" without even bothering to look at the saves. How can you comment on your behavior like this? Perhaps you could answer...?
My post isn't about "taking sides," but rather an objective legal interpretation of the episode.
In my opinion, it's so obvious that I'm surprised that two members of the Arbitration Committee came to a different conclusion. The phrase about "hairy paws" is a joke, emphasizing my bewilderment.