Ímportant All Millenium Teams Plz Read!

[Robbo]

Bull**** !!!!!

I can't believe I am reading some of this stuff from Alvaro and Jean-Manuel who are supposedly both respected people within the sport !!!!
As most of you know, I hate it when people bull****, and these two have just handed us all two enormous dollops of it.
Let me just tell you where I am coming from in all this and I will let u know where Alvaro and Jean-Manuel are at.
I have no allegiances to anybody but PGI and myself, I have no agendas in paintball other than to try and do what is right and to make damn sure the players don't get screwed and are treated fairly.
If any of you doubt this, then cast your mind back to some of the articles I have written or tihngs I have posted on this board in the past which have cost me dearly in certain ways when I have criticised events or people.
So, my dissatisfaction is purely from a players point of view, coz first and foremost, that's what I am.
Laurent Hamet is the organiser of the Toulouse event and it is he, who is digging his heels in over this.
The motives of Jean and Alvaro are unclear to me at the moment but it sure ain't common sense that's motivating them.
Now the reason I bring this up is because this rule is so damn stupid and inappropriate that it beggars belief when so called 'reasonable' people try to convince us of the rule's integrity.
For Jean Manuel to quote the ratio of well behaved paintballers to bad as a 10 to 1 just shows us all how ignorant he is, the ratio is more like 100 to 1 not frikkin 10 to 1.
A couple of *******s who shoot their mouths off makes a big impression on us all but let's not lose sight of the ACTUAL number of incidents compared to the ACTUAL number of non-incidents.
And if Alvaro and Jean-Manuel are seriously thinking that the type of people who would run on the field, shoot up their opponents, engage in fights, are going to be deterred just because they are told to NOT LOOK somewhere, you gotta be kiddin me and insulting my intelligence.
If they take no notice of rules that apply to physical assaults, aggressive and abusive behaviour, they sure as **** ain't gonna give two w@nks about looking over their shoulder.
And Jean / Alvaro, don't frikkin tell me that BECAUSE they are not looking they will then not see incidents that may well provoke them to become involved because they can HEAR what’s going down and this will incite them to look round and get involved anyway.
So what are you gonna do now ?
Get ear plugs for us all ?

So as paying customers, we are told (after we have been eliminated) to go and sit over there, keep our mouths shut, don't look behind, and stick our fingers in our ears !!!!!
We’ll all end up looking like those Taliban prisoners in Camp ‘X’ in Cuba if Laurent has his way.
For God's sake, use some sense !!!
Just because a couple of *******s can't hold their temper, this does not give you the right to treat us all like kids no matter what you try to justify.
The answer is ( I will for once partially agree with Nick Brockdorff) is for the judges to actually enforce the rules as they stand now with the 'no look' rule replaced by a 'no-speak rule and a 'no-moving' outside the boundaries of the dead zone.
This way, we achieve exactly what we want without being treated like 5 year olds, everybody's happy, no argument, no bull****, just common sense.
And if you have any doubt with regard to the working of this, I will ask you to recall a game at the Campaign Cup where a well known top pro American team were playing and ended up getting 'one for oned', something like four times, their behaviour after that was exemplary.
Strong judging, commonsense rules and the game is in order.
Let's not allow a couple of *******'s behaviour dictate wholly inappropriate rules to be written in the book just because some of the organisers want to crack a nut with a sledgehammer and end up hurting us all.
We ain't kids, no matter what Laurent says, don't frikkin treat us like them !!!!!
Robbo

 

[NIALL]

It was me who introduced the idea to the board after Mayhem last year after all the trouble there. This was after long discussions with Ledz on how to improve the game and make it easier to marshal.

After 8 months of its implementation what is my opinion. I THINK IT IS WRONG.

Now yes for sure it solves the problem of players running on the field and causing problems. If we de-capitated the dead players it would have the same effect, the games would be easy to marshal . But we would have a bloody horrible mess to clear up. This is not a million miles from where we are now.

JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING WORKS DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT.

Paintball is moving at an incredible speed. We have to try things out, adapt and evolve. The adoption of this rule is part of the process.

Trying to stop people from watching is like trying to stop the tide. Human nature will make every player react to a shout on field etc. We can't stop people listening. So that is the fatal flaw within the "No Look" rule.

So how do we change. Would allowing players to see whats going on be that bad? In my opinion id dead players are separated from their markers and watched by a judge that will help solve the problem.

Magued opened this thread asking for input, I ask the same. I have not made my mind up on what the best way forward is. Nor could I make that choice any way, I just feel the current way is wrong. The Millennium Board will take a majority vote on the way forward. Lets give them a few ideas !

All I ask, especially those who have seen "The dark side" at Mardi Gras not to blinded by this. How else could this have been solved?

It is easy to use the media as an excuse to justify the implementation of this rule. Sorry I don't buy that. No one does more than me with the media & seeing a load of kids like naughty schoolboys behind a screen is not particularly interesting. Stick them in a clear dead zone where everyone can see them. Players/Spectators Cameras. Make it part of the game.

Just my opinion.

Niall

 

[Robbo]

Niall

It may well be 'just' your opinion as you put it but at least it's a well informed, well considered one you post....unlike a few others I have seen.
It takes a lot of balls to come on here and say what you have said, I just hope Laurent takes note and sees the light as well.
Well done Niall (And I am not being patronising), common sense is obviously alive and well and resident in England, we'll see if it manages to cross the channel !!!
Robbo

 

[TJ Lambini]

Seems to ,llil ol' moi that the constant theme running thru most of these posts is, as Niall says: "dead players are separated from their markers and watched by a judge that will help solve the problem."

It ain't rocket science and aligned to strong judging it will work.

Make it so Mr Squires - Robo tells me you am de man as far as the Brit scene goes.

Peace

 

[Buddha 3]

Okay, being no more than a lowly none pro player, my opinion may weigh a lot less than that of some people who have posted on this thread. But, since the majority of players who play at the events concerned`aren't pro, I feel our (in this case my) opinion is at least worth listening to.
For the most part I agree with what Robbo and Nick have put forward. I think putting players in blind areas is a silly plan, and will actually cause the sport to make a stand still. Yes, it's all fine and dandy doing hours and hours of drills on practice days, but how can a team know whether they've spent their energy on the right things if they can't watch (and analyse) the game after elimination? If it isn't possible to analyse, and subsequently improve your game, paintball ain't going nowhere.
So, I agree with having a judge for the deadboxes, and I particularly think Nick's plan for having both boxes side by side is a very simple, but brilliant plan.
What is needed though, are judges with balls big enough to throw hotheaded players back into the deadbox and/or out of the game. I know some people are scared to do so, but it is, in my opinion, a problem that has to be overcome.
Also, I don't think it is such a bad plan, like Nick said, to impose bigger penalties on transgression on the rules. Banning them for a game is a good plan, perhaps changing that to saying the team has to start their next game with a player less (stops them from replacing the banned player with a backup guy).
Not being allowed to look at what's going on makes a tourney far less enjoyable, and is, in my opinion, not very smart marketingwise.
The only time players should be treated like 5 year olds, is when they behave like 5 year olds.

Thanks for listening.

 

[Magued]

rule

I hope people keep sharing there ideas here beacuse it helps.
What we need to understand is that people have different opinions on this issue and I wish that we can set the tone down alittle.

people tend to defend there stands on a issue when they are attacked. Its harder to change minds when they are pissed off.
So lets all solve this ****.

My personal opinion is that I hate the rule when im playing
but like it when the events goes smoother.

It may be a overkill but just to go back to the old system isnt acceptable. Sure it may only be a fraction of players that cant behave but alot of rules are written for that fraction of people.

Dont forget also that alot of times you wont have reffs that have the guts our the brains to keep the players under control.

We have all seen that for years and it wont go away just beacuse we wish it would.


Anyway I seen some good ideas here.

1. seperate guns from players ( thats for sure )
2. Eliminated players leave the field with there gun and cant come back in. ( worth thinking about, but the captain have to stay)
3. Super hard rule - have the penalty for leaving the deadbox
-100 points. would make me as a captain kill anyone who broke that rule in my team. Its like missing the semis beacuse 1 idiot had something to say. Still we would need good reffs to have the guts.
4. Nicks idea with a dead zone reff. The small problem that can be solved is the lack of reffs. On the other hand it takes alot of reffing energy to inforce the no look rule. But still deadzones in the middle and have the players next to the other teams can couse problems.
5. Cut eliminated players head of. Lets not drop this idea yet


Give us more ideas

Magued

 

[Mr Big]

It's simple

Magued, I think your # 3 rule - superhard penalties for leaving the deadbox, or doing anything from the deadbox that affects the game - is the only solution, and not something that's very difficult to enforce.

Example: I was at Mardi Gras and what happened in the Shock Dynasty game was something else. But how it was dealt with afterwards is what was important. Dynasty had three players suspended for three games, and Shock had one player suspended for three games. This destroyed both teams and they got knocked out of the tournament as a result. When a punishment like this is handed out, word spreads fast and every team at the event starts to watch their behaviour. there weren't any problems after this.

My argument is that harsh punishment is the best deterrent, rather than an attempt at prevention. Player suspension is the best form of this, and if you want to throw in some penalty points as well, cool. Don't treat the players like out of control children before they even do anything - don't stop them watching the games - but as soon as any team pulls such a stunt as shooting from the deadbox, running out of the deadbox, talking to judges or live players from the deadbox, hit them where it hurts. That team will lose any chance of doing well in the tournament, and no one else will risk the penalty by behaving like that.

You don't need the no-look rule, it's so simple. It worked in Mardi Gras, and any teams who saw or heard about what went down will think twice before trying that on at any NPPL event this year. I predict that if you lose the no-look rule and add player suspension and points penalties for deadbox infringements for the maxs masters, you won't have any trouble. If you do, it'll happen once and that will be it for the 2002 millennium series.

 

[Robbo]

rule

Originally posted by Magued
I hope people keep sharing there ideas here beacuse it helps.
What we need to understand is that people have different opinions on this issue and I wish that we can set the tone down alittle.
people tend to defend there stands on a issue when they are attacked. Its harder to change minds when they are pissed off.
So lets all solve this ****.
My personal opinion is that I hate the rule when im playing
but like it when the events goes smoother.
It may be a overkill but just to go back to the old system isnt acceptable. Sure it may only be a fraction of players that cant behave but alot of rules are written for that fraction of people.
Dont forget also that alot of times you wont have reffs that have the guts our the brains to keep the players under control.
We have all seen that for years and it wont go away just beacuse we wish it would.
Anyway I seen some good ideas here.
1. seperate guns from players ( thats for sure )
2. Eliminated players leave the field with there gun and cant come back in. ( worth thinking about, but the captain have to stay)
3. Super hard rule - have the penalty for leaving the deadbox
-100 points. would make me as a captain kill anyone who broke that rule in my team. Its like missing the semis beacuse 1 idiot had something to say. Still we would need good reffs to have the guts.
4. Nicks idea with a dead zone reff. The small problem that can be solved is the lack of reffs. On the other hand it takes alot of reffing energy to inforce the no look rule. But still deadzones in the middle and have the players next to the other teams can couse problems.
5. Cut eliminated players head of. Lets not drop this idea yet
Give us more ideas
Magued

All sounds good to me Mag, I think Laurent and Co have made a fundamental error in trying to prevent this type of behaviour with a no-look rule when punishment has to be the answer.
You give guys a 100 point penalty and this will be a 1000 times more effective than trying to stop them looking behind just because it's 'in' the rulebook.
I don't even think we have to section players off, I like the idea of separating the guns from players once eliminated but if we say, No leaving the dead box (100 point penalty if done) and no shouting at refs or live players from the dead box (a 50 point penalty) then this solves all the problems.
Whilst Laurent will quote recent events at Mardi Gras as a good reason for implementing the No-Look rule, most normal people will soon realise that those events would have occurred in spite of some stupid No-Look rule and the penalties handed out to those teams was enough to see them both on the wrong side of qualification as a direct result of the penalties being imposed.
Basically, the two offending teams had players banned for a number of games thus making sure they had very little chance of winning any subsequent games.
I bet they won't be doing that sh#t again !!!

Robbo

 

[Beaker]

i would be in favour of the deadbox with MAJOR penalties for leaving it/influencing the game. We got stuffed at Mayhem by a team doing exactly that - influencing judges from the box, but then the penalties weren't really harsh or spelt out.

Seperating guns from players also gives the dead box judge the ability to chrono guns of players who are eliminated while the game is going on. Thus saving some time and effort.

 

[goose]

All of the ideas brought up by Brockdorff, Robbo & others are excellent. The idea regarding tougher penalties is fantastic...

... however (I bet you knew that was coming, huh?)

The main problem lies in the lack of "cajones" when it comes to the reffing staff at tournaments, and I mean this from the Ultimate on down.

When was the last time that anyone heard of the Millennium Ultimate ever changing a ruling - no matter how much evidence there was to support it. The standard answer was "DUH, you may be right but I can't do anything". If this is the case whay do we even have an ultimate ref. I thought their job was to make the hard decisions that the field judges couldn't? Up until now all that has ever been done is uphold every ruling ever made.

Now down to the field refs...
Tell me how the hell we can have unbiased reffing when the Pro level is so incestuous, I will never know. I am not saying that certain refs straight out cheat for their buddies, but I am saying what sould be 3-4-1 is easily turned into either a 1-4-1 or a non-call.

Also how can (in some pro's mind) a lowly Amateur ref (even if he/she playes for a team in the top 5 in the Am standings) call a penalty on them. The attitude that many pros have is "my $hit don't stink" - need an example, check Lasoya when he get's eliminated, I have numerous time seen him remove his armband and drop it away from the ref, who is approaching him to remove it.

Lastly - I turn my sights on the Millennium committee. The rule book is written like something a "wanna be lawyer" would write. It should be in plain english - with examples for the more "muddy" rules - ex. If player A does such & such then the refs shall...

They also need to get a set of balls (and I don't mean paintballs), was there any disciplinary action taken in Portugal when the hotel was trashed - not that any of us could see. There should have been quick & harsh punishment and then, issue a damn press release, let the Millennium players around the world know, who messed up, what will happen to them and why. Stop letting us find out by rumour and 1/2 truths.

What happened to the reffing points removed from a certain for screwing up when they had reffing duties?? They where given back when they promised to clean up after Mayhem. So much for rules...

I understand that a game costing 3-4-1 in the finals against, say Avalanche, could lead to some very pissed off players. Especially when the Ultimate backs up the reffs, or even if the Ultimate reverses the call and says the game has to be played over and they then win (the other team is now pissed). So this now means that one of these teams doesn't want to play in your even anymore - SO F^&KING WHAT!!!! Do we really have to sell our soles that badly, that it screws with the integrity of the game??

So back to the original question (I know I strayed from the path, but I found my compass and I am on my way back) the blind dead boxes should be eliminated - but until there is something that can fix the problems I named above, it may be the lesser of 2 evils.

Love, peace & hairgrease

goose