Hi all, there a few details I feel are missing from tribunal cases and it seems like it would be pretty basic to provide the info below to the judges. I am wonder if this has been brought up before and if anyone knows the reasons why the following are not included in cases for review.

1) Summoner level or total number of games played in the game mode of the case.
My thoughts this would defiantly help determine intentional feeding. A lower level player with a score 1/12/1 is ok as they are new and have not learned things like the range of towers and how to duck into bushes to avoid minion damage, but in a ranked game this is most likely feeding.

2) More details on the game type Ranked, Blind, Draft, or VS AI.
I am not sure if all these are need but it would be nice to know if it is a bot game and what difficulty the bots are.

3) Deaths vs Executions
I watched a fairly good player who was using revive in the a non traditional way. He would get executed by minions or turrets in order to gain the health bonus from revive in order to win his lane or turn team fights it was pretty amazing. Executions do not give the enemy team gold or xp (AFAIK) and therefore should not show up as deaths in the score card, or there should be someway to differentiate between the two.

4) The enemy team champions and stats
I know this would help if say the reported player was fighting vs a counter pick. It would also be nice to know how bad someone lost their lane.

TL;DR
Just curious if this has been brought up before and what the reason are to why this info is not provided in cases.
1) Summoner level or total number of games played in the game mode of the case.
2) More details on the game type Ranked, Blind, Draft, or VS AI.
3) Deaths vs Executions
4) The enemy team champions and stats

These two points ought to have no bearing at all on your judgment. Toxic behaviour is unacceptable, whether the instigator is in a Bot game or a ranked game, whether they're level 3 or level 30.

Additionally, the enemy champions and their builds have no direct impact on the person being accused. Such information is irrelevant.

This, on the other hand, would be nice. However, in cases where a player is intentionally feeding, they only need to be smacked once by an enemy while running head first into a tower in order for it to be classified as a Kill as opposed to an Execution.

You wouldn't judge a low level summoner game with inexperienced players differently than one with pro players? I think there is a reason why tryd dominates low level games. There are over 100 champions in league now and to expect a new player to know all of them is insane. Tryds ult is a perfect example of this, a new player may die to him multiple times in a game before they figure it out. My girlfriend died to a tryd multiple times, and she even made me watch the replay because she couldn't understand why she wasn't dying. Yes her team was yelling at her.

There should be some way whether it is summer level, number of games played, elo, or something else in order to determine the players experience / skill level.

Saying toxic is toxic regardless of any other factors, like the player not understanding the enemy champions mechanics due to being new an inexperienced, does not help explain why this information should not be added. Was my GF being toxic by not knowing the how tryds mechanics work? Should she not play when I am not around to look over her shoulder and explain how the game works?

I guess visual replays would help the most, but as long as they are not around why not have more information for the judges.