and so are substitutes, you can read the OP, a situation like that is really not supposed to happen, plus the fact that it's not a consequence-free game means that the captain of Afrabs has no excuse for such negligence
what part of afrabs had no subs is too hard to grasp.
this is pretty clear cut in my opinion, i agree with everything panamaxis said. the only way any other outcome could come out of this would be if you completely remove every activity win that has been given this tour, make them get played and go from there. sadly not only is this impractical for obvious reasons, but its also unfair for the teams that were readily available during the timeframe given. not even mentioning the dangerous precedent this sets.
also i want to point out if you want to go with the "fair" option, it wouldnt be to remove the activity wins, and succesfully screw over teams that were ready, but instead punish those who didnt get their matches completed for x or y reason. 3 weeks was a monstruous amount of time to get *3* matches done. if you want fairness, create a blacklist and ban tourney players that lose on activity (there could be exceptions, leave it to host discretion).
shit happens in tournaments, i learned this the hard way through Latin America missing playoffs with a 13-11 record when 2 teams that advanced were at 12-12. Shitty point system and whatnot, and due to that it was changed the following years.
Canada didn't play his last game. If we play a tiebreaker, it is as if they had played it.
da fuck? no it isnt, its literally shafting canada out of a game because their opponent wasnt available. how would you feel if we say: Okay France, you get to play 23 games while everyone else plays 24. It is extremely unfair.