I'm not, but it would set a precedent that there's no lower limit to the amount of people who have played a game, so if you had this same kind of situation and got a 1-0 result, it wouldn't be all that difficult to argue that in this match it was apparently okay and we let it get all the way to tiebreakers and so it's hypocritical that we'd try and overturn the 1-0 result.
Granted, I'm not sure how many people would really care if we just went "Who cares" in response and overturned it anyway in that kind of situation, but if it's a matter of appearing consistent on the rules, it really looks like this match is going to force the issue of that rule. For MAXIMUM INTEGRITY, I'd say that rule shouldn't be implemented, but I'd also say the C/D tiebreaker is arguably a (very minor) concession on that point, though a completely reasonable one, and so in this kind of super extreme case, I can't say I'd be opposed to putting in that kind of DQ rule in as well.
--
xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out?
GotD (219/384) Melee v FFX