Joy Stockholm official comment on OC NPPL

[Chicago]

3-- Nice effort to use that 'or less' in there and then try to rationalize your whole argument off that one tiny bit of prestidigitation but that still leaves you trying to explain why only a Major penalty--still assigned at the official's discretion--gets some extra oomph within the 90 second window and a Minor doesn't as plainly the full effect of the Minor is also "diminished" if your rationale is to be accepted.

I find it amusing when you suddenly forget what English words mean when convenient to making an ad-hominem attack. There is certainly no trickery involved. You can say a major penalty that results in a point has a more significant impact. Or you could say that a major penalty that doesn't result in a point awarded has a less significant impact. It's the same thing. I was just correcting your error in implying that having a penalty that was more significant was not OK, but having one that was less significant would be OK. It's both or none.

4--even with you're qualification you're still dancing. A rule shouldn't have more or less impact --except when it should have more impact so that it doesn't have less. That may work in Wisconsin ...

A rule should provide for the same penalty for the same infraction. The 90-second rule helps compensate for the fact that a major infraction committed with less than 5 minutes on the clock DOES NOT have the same penalty as a major infraction committed with 5 or more minutes on the clock. And the penalty for a major infraction with less than 90 seconds on the clock is SO MUCH LESS than the penalty would be were that infraction committed with a full 5 minutes of game time remaining that just awarding the point is a proper action to at least bring some balance.

There is also a world of difference in imagining there are "benefits" from breaking rules and getting caught and suggesting there is an inequality of punishment. I don't buy either one but your continued suggestion that the issue is a team or player benefiting from breaking the rules when caught doing so goes a long way to explaining your p.o.v. It is also, IMO, a poor position to evaluate and make rules from.

It's a great position to evaluate rules from. If the penalty for breaking the rule is less than the benefit of breaking the rule, then you don't have a rule, because following the rule is stupid.

No, that is one reason you made up for why you think the 90 second rule is a good one. Same with your other reasons. The fact is, regardless of the rationales, the rule is problematic when considering what the "rules" are and should be as you have amply demonstrated in attempting to dance around the parts of my argument you can't actually answer.

I'm sorry, are are you using <FONT=#FFFFF> around those arguments? Because I don't see 'em....

6--this one is pure desperation and is almost totally divorced from the reality of actually playing the game. Though it did make me smile.
Btw, 4 of the 6 Major penalty definitions listed in the rulebook have nothing to do with any sort of playing on. Are you still prepared to award a point in the last 90 seconds for any Major?

I don't have the NXL rules handy, but at least two of those are extreme gun penalties (velocity/ROF), and are under the control of the player. That's 4 of 6 right there. And yes, I'm prepared to award a point in those cases, because, again, if a major penalty is going to be a major penalty, then you NEED to award the point when there's less than 90 seconds left if it's going to be in any way equitable to a major penalty received with 5 or more minutes of game time.

7--I feel pretty confident saying I deal with reasonably smart teams all the time and I also happen to have actual experience both with and without the rule in place. So on that score I know what I'm advocating. But I do appreciate your concern.

I disagree, especially before the 90 second rule was implemented. Some NXL coaches are still figuring out they need to throw the towel before the 5-minute warning to get any extra game time.

 

[Magued]

What?

So all three is on me now? hehe
Tell you what, If you all come down to HB I get you guys a room!
Then Baca can do bullet points while Robbo talk about hes women he had back in 1942 and Chicago can argue against everything they say. And we can even have a guest preformance from Nick.

How about that boys?

Magued

 

[mikey601]

So all three is on me now? hehe
Tell you what, If you all come down to HB I get you guys a room!
Then Baca can do bullet points while Robbo talk about hes women he had back in 1942 and Chicago can argue against everything they say. And we can even have a guest preformance from Nick.

How about that boys?

Magued

HAHAH owend i think the expression is

 

[Revolt]

lol my reply was just gona be "OWNED" until i read mikeys reply


*takes a min to think up something original*

*gives up*

btw magued your banjo comment on pbn was probably the funniest quote ever, tis a shame like max says that all those (kids) - *not kicks, lol - are keyboard cowboys, would love to see them act like that at hb ! damn id even make lump pay for my flight just to go over and kill some people ^_^

 

[Furby]

So all three is on me now? hehe
Tell you what, If you all come down to HB I get you guys a room!
Then Baca can do bullet points while Robbo talk about hes women he had back in 1942 and Chicago can argue against everything they say. And we can even have a guest preformance from Nick.

How about that boys?

Magued

If you get me a room, I'll photograph and report the whole thing.

But only if you bring along some fine Swedish women to keep things interesting.

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

Robbo talk about hes women he had back in 1942 and ........... we can even have a guest preformance from Nick

No way dude, within minutes, Pete would be ban me from the room, for questioning his alleged conquest of Vera Lynn

But only if you bring along some fine Swedish women to keep things interesting

Furby, you are requesting the wrong thing here...

As my former canadian team mate Chris Gosling said after our first trip to the Joy Masters:

"Swedish women are 5 % more beautiful than Danish women.... but Danish women are 95 % easier"

Nick

 

[Chicago]

"Swedish women are 5 % more beautiful than Danish women.... but Danish women are 95 % easier"

Wow... and my experience is Swedish women are pretty easy.

Then again, it seems European women in general are much more friendly than their American counterparts.

Either that or I'm just sexier when there's a language barrier.

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

Wow... and my experience is Swedish women are pretty easy.

Operative word was "easiER"

- and that is discounting all female paintball players ofcourse (or Anja and my sister will beat me to death next time I see them)

Nick

 

[Baca Loco]

I find it amusing when you suddenly forget what English words mean when convenient to making an ad-hominem attack. There is certainly no trickery involved..

No ad-hominem involved. You might check that definition again.

You can say a major penalty that results in a point has a more significant impact. Or you could say that a major penalty that doesn't result in a point awarded has a less significant impact. It's the same thing.

I was just correcting your error in implying that having a penalty that was more significant was not OK, but having one that was less significant would be OK. It's both or none.

It's not the same thing at all.

It is only less significant according to you and that is because the time has run out and the game is OVER.

A rule should provide for the same penalty for the same infraction. The 90-second rule helps compensate for the fact that a major infraction committed with less than 5 minutes on the clock DOES NOT have the same penalty as a major infraction committed with 5 or more minutes on the clock. And the penalty for a major infraction with less than 90 seconds on the clock is SO MUCH LESS than the penalty would be were that infraction committed with a full 5 minutes of game time remaining that just awarding the point is a proper action to at least bring some balance.

So you're saying it's okay that Minor infraction penalties have less impact in the final 90 seconds because in your judgment it isn't that much less? Is that it?
What are you gonna do about Match Misconduct penalties? They are 10 minutes but have no point assignement provisions. In fact they don't even put anyone in the penalty box.
Btw, there is no guarantee in assessing the Major that any points will be scored. By anybody. So just how is the atypical awarding of a point compensation for something that may or may not happen during the normal play of the game?
Why don't you just come out and say you think the point needs to be assessed because you don't think the refs can handle those situations without the threat of the penalty point?

It's a great position to evaluate rules from. If the penalty for breaking the rule is less than the benefit of breaking the rule, then you don't have a rule, because following the rule is stupid.

The impact of any penalty--except game suspensions--will always be "less" by your definition yet you only want to deal with one category of penalty. If you want to be consistent and equitable then explain how you'd deal with all the other penalties in the last 90 seconds.

I don't have the NXL rules handy, but at least two of those are extreme gun penalties (velocity/ROF), and are under the control of the player. That's 4 of 6 right there. And yes, I'm prepared to award a point in those cases, because, again, if a major penalty is going to be a major penalty, then you NEED to award the point when there's less than 90 seconds left if it's going to be in any way equitable to a major penalty received with 5 or more minutes of game time.

I know, let's extend the match time instead. As long as there's a Major on the board the game keeps going. That way every Major result is always equitable. (Yes, that was just a tiny bit sarcastic.)

I disagree, especially before the 90 second rule was implemented. Some NXL coaches are still figuring out they need to throw the towel before the 5-minute warning to get any extra game time.

Disagree with what? That the NXL teams can or should be characterized as reasonably smart or that I have actual experience with and without the rule in place?
Perhaps you should volunteer your services to some unworthy effort.

Btw, I'm done so feel free to have the final word. I have no doubt the rule won't be reconsidered or changed in any case.

 

[Robbo]

Frikkin 'eck, I'm taking a hammering here regarding my age, and Mag, get your facts right mate, it was 1943 not 1942 !!!!!!

As for you Nick, 'Vera fackin Lynn'..now that made me laugh out loud

But I will ask all you young bucks diggin this ole boy out a simple question, do you think when you reach my age, you will have a physique that even partly resembles yours truly?
Baca is a strong mofo 'yes' but...in terms of Adonis type physiques, he is aesthetically challenged shall we say.
As for Chicago, my my, I ain't saying he is skinny but I have used thicker dental floss.
Magued looks athletic but that I'm afraid that's about it, he just looks it, he's all show - no go, in fact, our Magued is an Egyptian / Swedish version of a tanned Ooompah Loompah...

Nick is a little bigger but I'm afraid that extra weight can be accounted for in the form of 100% fat that is distributed around his waist and tongue in equal proportions

I'm outa here before things get nasty