A Moving Performance

[Joe "get" Carter]

I received a letter today from some guy with a rules question. I'm no rules lawyer, so hopefully somebody who keeps closer tabs on these things could give him the definitive answer:

Dear PGI,

Yesterday I was watching my Trauma Head Sportz DVD and I saw two things that confused me. Firstly, in both of the Trauma games their front player tries to do a superman dive over the snake. Both times he lands on the top of the snake and moves the bunker out of place right in front of a reff.
I was talking about it at my field and someone said that they thought there was a rule where the bunkers could not be moved. So when Trauma's front man dived and moved the bunker, should he have been called out?
I tried to ask some other people about it and they went both ways. But in the video they let him continue playing.
In the second game he does the same thing but his goggles come off. Again I was talking about it at my field and someone said that if you lose you goggles while playing you should be called out. In the video they let him play on again.
Were the calls this Reff made right or wrong? I am just wondering for future reference. Thanks again.

 

[Baca Loco]

That's so easy

First situation--under normal circumstances ref would have some discretion in judging the contact but c'mon, the guy plays for Trauma! Doh.
Second situation--most rulebooks would remove that player from the game and one would hope the refs would also take steps to ensure the player's safety but again, the guy plays for Trauma! (Insert name of any well-known bigtime team for same result.)
Newbs. When will they learn?

Note to PGI Towers--Would someone let Joe see light of day occasionally? Even convicts get yard time.

 

[duffistuta]

Nope - his kind crumble when exposed to sunlight.

Next question.

 

[Matski]

I think its pretty easy to make a fair call in situation 1. Moving a barricade while attempting to dive over it is not the same as unpegging it and rolling it down the field. Only clear, deliberate barricade moving should be penalised.
As for the goggles, I think they should remain the players responsibility at all times, the judge should have nothing to do with it. If I were the player and my gogs fell off, a judge called me neutral/eliminated me whatever, I'd litigate the judges ass, not the guy who shot my eye out, the second he becomes involved he becomes liable.

 

[Piper]

Originally posted by matski
If I were the player and my gogs fell off, a judge called me neutral/eliminated me whatever, I'd litigate the judges ass, not the guy who shot my eye out, the second he becomes involved he becomes liable.

So what your saying is if a judge called you neutral so that players would stop shooting at you and you lost an eye you would sue him? So the judges tries to help and gets sued by you......

Is that right?


Piper

 

[Matski]

Im not saying it's right, but it could happen and I think people could blame the judge (CERTAINLY in the US ). It dosn't say anywhere that it is a judges job to protect your safety nor has he had any kind of training for this situation, so he could be seen as making a bad situation worse....
It's like a policeman trying to give CPR to a man who's having a heart attack, he or his family could sue the policeman.

 

[Piper]

I guess from your first post you are the man to start it then. I think maybe you are going a bit far here. Does it say anywhere in the police manual if you see someone dying just cross the road and carry on with your day? No it does not so what makes this any different. If your goggles fell off and I was judging I for one would call you neutral.

But then I guess if I did I would get sued.

 

[Matski]

Not by me, Im not like that, but many people are! If guys can sue people cos they fell down their stairs...while robbing their home, then a judge could easily get into trouble over safety......

 

[shamu]

The 2002 PSP/NPPL rules used to state specificall that any player who loses their goggles during a game is automatically eliminated for safety reasons. Both PSP and NPPL rules now list "failure to wear goggles" as a reason for elimination (section 12.91.9), which isn't as clear.

I think this is more for players who don't wear goggles when they're supposed to, like the doofus who stands in the start box with his goggles on his forehead (saw it happen at World Cup).

 

[raehl]

1st case is a judgement call. Some tournaments don't allow going over bunkers at all for insurance reasons; NCPA we don't let anyone go over any barrier higher than 18" - both for safety (you might land on top of someone on the other side) and for the bunkers.

If it was a PSP event, which it probably was if Trauma was playing, I'm not surprised the player wasn't called out, and I doubt any player doing that at that tournament would have been called out. Players slide into and disrupt bunkers all the time - usually not to their advantage. DELIBERATELY dislodging a bunker should get you an elimination, but I'd say it's pretty standard that incidental movement isn't penalized.


As for the mask, definitely should have been eliminated, for the very simple reason that eliminating a player who does not have his goggles on means no one on the other team has any reason to shoot at him. Let people who don't have their goggles on stay in the game and the other team *DOES* have a reason to shoot at them, and I don't care what league you're running, you don't want to deal with all the BS that will follow if a player gets their eye shot out.


As an event promoter, NOTHING scares me more than a player on a field without a mask on. And I would not play a tournament where losing a mask didn't cause my immediate elimination. I'll happily trade losing a game to losing an eye.


- Chris