We can only apologize about the disconnect in that second game. The player who usually hosts on our side(with a god tier connection) wasn't present for this tournament, and we hadn't discussed who should host on our side in his absence. I don't know how the conversation between you and our leader went, but within our own chat we weren't saying that our team should get to host, we only wanted to ensure that you didn't host, because of the amount of lag and teleporting in the first game; but we weren't expecting to host ourselves. For some reason, it was accepted too quickly and without discussion, when the player with probably the least reliable connection on our team volunteered to host.
I agree that it makes sense that there should be rules for extreme situations. We had one ourselves before, in which we had a lead of about 95-10 with less than thirty seconds left when the host got disconnected. We asked our opponents wether they wanted to forfeit that game or replay it, and as they wanted to replay it and had the rules on their side, we did so with no hard feelings. The problem is that there are two teams and eight players who have different experiences of what happens in these situations. In the match between BI and CG, Zolairx thought it should have been counted as a win for their team, because it was a big lead with not much time remaining. To us, that just sounded ridiculous, because not only was there more time remaining than what was suggested, not only is 50 points not a huge lead in Rainmaker and not only was that the only push of the game, but it all happened right before the crash, and we had been experiencing huge issues such as ink not being able to paint the turf well before they reached ~50 points, leaving us incapable of properly defending. In our view, they wouldn't even have had those points, had the crash not been imminent.
Zolairx might disagree with that and that's fine; in fact, it would only reinforce my point about that there will be very different opinions about wether a game should be replayed or not, which makes this a very difficult subject to make fair rules about. And the issue is even bigger when it comes to Rainmaker, due to the possibility to get points much faster in that game mode compared to SZ and TC. So even though it would be nice to not have to replay games that seem like obvious wins, I'd imagine that harsh rules when it comes to lobby crashes would do more harm than good in the long run. Games that should have been clear wins will likely end up as clear wins in replays anyway.