It seems like quite a few high-rated players have been caught recently by chess.com for using computers to play their games.  The normal response is to close their account, ban them, and let them lose any games they are playing by timeout.

However in a team match, having a strong player on the top board helps the rest of the team, because they play one board lower than they otherwise would.  For example, three of Team Ireland's recent team matches were against England, Romania and Turkey, all of whom fielded cheats on their top board (donkenmar, MirceaH, FAKETeimourRadjabov).  While two of those matches are rather one sided, it's reasonable to say the Turkey game might be swinging the other way if every Irish player got to play one board lower.

In most real life team chess competitions, if a team fields an ineligible player on a high board they can be punished by forfeiting some or all of the points gained on lower boards.  Why shouldn't chess.com do the same?

I know these forums can be filled with half-baked ways to prevent or combat cheating, often from players who have no chance of ever playing against a high-rated computer cheater.  But this affects almost anyone who plays in team matches AND it would have the effect of encouraging teams to police themselves and not allow suspected cheaters into their team matches.

I agree in principle, but think it would be harsh on the legitimate players within the group.

With online groups nobody actually 'knows' the person who has cheated and therefore could not realistically have contributed to it discontinuing.

Common, have you realised how many people would be unhappy if they would not be allowed to play in the team matches because an admin suspects them of cheating? Have you thought how many complaints to the chess.com staff these people would fill? What you propose is a generalised witch-hunting and paranoia in each group.

Cheaters should be banned, that's the whole story. Or marked with a (C) and allowed to play between them only.

As a side note, who really cares so much about team matches? Is this the chess olympiad, are there money prizes and I haven't known of that? Or maybe chess.com will award FIDE-recognized titles ? :))

I think the OP has a valid point but it is not practical to implement it here for the reasons cited above by other users.

Also, I find it amusing that there are a good many here that really seem to care quite a bit about team matches, whereas I see them as a fun way to meet other players with whom I may not have oridinarilly crossed path.

In fact, I don't even get the "team" concept application to chess since no communication (help) is allowed between players, which is essentially what makes a team a team -- the notion that people work together, communicating intent, and following the path of what is best for the team, oft sacrificing individual goals for team success. 

But, I still enjoy the chess games I get from group matches....as chess games.

Of course it would be harsh on the legitimate players.  But when you play as a team, you are affected by everything your teammates do.  It's harsh when you are playing football and your teammate gets sent off leaving you to play with 10 men against 11.  Or if you are a rally driver and your navigator tells you to turn left instead of right.  But still, you must win and lose as a team.

Would this create a witch hunt by group admins?  I don't think so.  For the most part they would still want to have high rated players on their teams.

As for "who cares so much about team matches?" -- I'm sure some people take them very seriously.  Certainly I don't see why they are any less important than other games.

Depending on the group the team matches are taken not at all seriously or very seriously.  Some groups are constantly cheering each other on, congrtulating people on wins etc.  I think it would be very difficult to be fair about it by taking extra points off the cheater's team.  I know in chess leagues a deliberate default on a higher board is punished by loss of extra points but I think it would be hard to apply here. For the admins to remove someone from a team match because of "suspected" cheating means that we would be setting oursleves up as judges rather than chess.com staff.  A slippery slope.

I have to say I knew teimour was cheating for sure as I had played him twice under his previous incarnation of tigerpetrosian, if esox lucius had not played him I would not have played in the Turkey match at all, which would have made the lower boards even more difficult for Ireland. I didn't realise donkenmar was gone too!? I didn't play him when we played England before. 

Cheating in chess is an issue that Chess.com takes seriously. That said, it has minimal impact on the site and shouldn't be a concern for 99.9% of players. Unfortunately, there is much more paranoia about the topic than it actually deserves. Also, having several constant and redundant threads on the topic that circulate with the same questions and comments over and over again isn't helpful, and instead causes people to worry more than they need to. We have posted FAQs below that should address all questions on the topic. We have posted the Chess.com FAQs and policies here:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom-policy-on-cheating?page=1

 
Thanks for helping keep Chess.com safe and friendly!