nah... both teams should have done their due diligence befort the match, and should have known what they were getting into. also, the lower rated team can be competitive. for example
Team organized Team Entropy
Joe 2550 (captain, and leads an organized discussion)
Moe 1850
Tom 1250 Jack 1750
Dick 1500 Jill 1800
Harry 1200 Larry 1805
Manny 1500 Curly 1800
Team average 1600 Team average 1801
Now imagine team organized is a well organized team where the strong players are respected and listened to, and the votes are held until the last possible moment when a consensus has reached, and the approval of Joe has been obtained. Further imagine that team Entropy is disorderly with drive-by voting, little collaboration, and a free-for all.
The results: Team organized would normally trounce them!
This does not even consider the role that a few inactive low rated players in the team would play. the average team rating does not necessarily correlate with that tteams playing strength.
Would anyone be interested in a rule that didn't permit Team Vote games to begin when the average team ratings were more than 200 (or whatever) pts apart? If so I suppose the higher rated team could have one or more players drop out and/or the lower-rated team could be given more time to "beef up" its rating. Or should this rule be made optional if both teams agree to it before enlisting players?