Cheat and be proud?

[Buddha 3]

Originally posted by goose


P.S. Buddha where you in Toulouse? If you where how come you didn't look me up? I was the goofy looking dude on field one speaking perfect english

Simple really: Ever since we played them, I have been afraid of the Ducklings. Oh well, at least I did learn to say 'strawberry sauce with whipped cream' (or something) in Danish.
I was going to come over, not to play, but just to have a look, but some none too pleasant family matters got in the way.
I thought you were Canadian? How can you claim to speak perfect English when you say things like anyhoo, and aboot? (perhaps I should watch less cartoons)

 

[Baca Loco]

Re: Playing on and wiping...

Originally posted by Hotpoint
that's just a stupid conspiracy theory...

No such thing, just misunderstood conspiracy theories

Goose, you are 100% right on the calculated, premeditated playing on vs. wiping issue.

So if the penalty for a blatant playing on is a 3-4-1 what should the penalty be for wiping?

 

[goose]

According to the rules...

12.02. The penalty for playing on is the removal of a teammate in a one for one call, unless in the judge’s opinion such playing on has materially influences the course of the game giving the offending player’s team an advantage, in which case the penalty for playing on is the removal of two teammates in a two-for-one call.

and

12.12. Wiping is penalized by the immediate removal of the player from the game and the simultaneous removal of three additional players from the same team.

I just think that the penalties should be reversed - i.e. a wipe gets you a 2-4-1, and a calculated play-on gets you a 3-4-1.

goose

P.S. Buddha & Nick - bite my little white Canadian A$$

 

[Matski]

Hmmmm great

So you get judges dishing out 341's or whatever for 'calculated playing on'.........

The only problem here is that less experienced or BIASED judges will penalise for unavoidable/unintentional playing on or small infringements to screw over certain teams or highly aggressive teams.
Further more, we will all have to get used of some damn boring, slow ass games or even stalemates where players know they can make the break move but will likely get tagged doing it...so dont.......

 

[Baca Loco]

Hmmmm great

Originally posted by matski
So you get judges dishing out 341's or whatever for 'calculated playing on'.........

The only problem here is that less experienced or BIASED judges will penalise for unavoidable/unintentional playing on or small infringements to screw over certain teams or highly aggressive teams.
Further more, we will all have to get used of some damn boring, slow ass games or even stalemates where players know they can make the break move but will likely get tagged doing it...so dont.......

Certainly a possible problem but I think you're misunderstanding just what calculated or premeditated playing on is. A player making a run to bunker an opponent out may end up playing on depending on when he gets hit but that's nothing like what I'm talking about. I'm talking about circumstances where 2 or 3 players get up and make coordinated runs, know they are being hit as they are intentionally distracting both the refs and the other team while the rest of their team then rush down field. it frequently ends with mass confusion, no one knowing exactly what happened or did what to whom when.
I must also must say however I haven't seen those kinds of maneuvers as often as I used to either.

 

[goose]

Baca you're right ...

... on both counts.

The single play-on by someone with too much energy/adrenalin is not a problem - a quick 1-4-1 and it's solved.

I also haven't seen too many all-out-chaos-shoot-em-all-let-the-refs-sort-it-out play ons in a while, but we had a couple close ones down in Toulouse and I wonder if it had been a little less experienced reffing crew, if all hell would have broken loose.

Matski, biased judges will always find a way - and considering the current rules allowing for a 2-4-1, and it hasn't been abused....

goose

 

[Mark/Static]

I don't know if it's been said already, partly because I didn't feel like reading EVERY post on this subject, but I think the reason their is such a stigma associated with cheating is because the officiating, by and large, is fundamentally inadequate, and it's an unwritten rule that players have to officiate themselves in this game.
When they don't, it's the worse thing since the concept of the so-called reality TV genre.

 

[Matski]

Goose, so youve never seen one of your players moving to bunker another player and either done the same or at least moved?

This kind of rule could cause whole teams to be penalised just because 1 player decided to bunker another and other players on his team simply reacted, their aim being to put pressure on the other team, not cause confussion.
You dont win games at pro level by just allowing the other team to fill a gap or respond to one of your players moves.

I agree that a player intentionally causing confusion to allow his team to abuse the situation is wrong but it can be very difficult to draw the line, especially as teams are having to become more and more fast paced so that they dont get blown off the field.

 

[Baca Loco]

Guess you ain't seen it

Originally posted by matski
Goose, so youve never seen one of your players moving to bunker another player and either done the same or at least moved?

I agree that a player intentionally causing confusion to allow his team to abuse the situation is wrong but it can be very difficult to draw the line, especially as teams are having to become more and more fast paced so that they dont get blown off the field.

Matski,
There is a huge difference between what Goose and I are talking about and the scenarios you're suggesting. Seriously.

Fess up, Mark, I know you're watching The Mole 2.

 

[TJ 2]

Reality TV

...now that's pure unadulterated evil that makes wiping, pre-meditated playing on and killing vicars look angelic in comparison.

Whass tha deal with freight training in tha Millennium - y'all got a specific rule to stop that?

peace