CPL Coaching, Dump It

[Chicago]

If a good player from a pro team has the advantage of knowing 100% for sure that a guy on the other team is loading, what chances does the other team have?

But this has nothing to do with coaching - a good player should NEVER have the advantage of knowing that the other team is reloading because the other team should be good enough at reloading that it takes them a second to do - far less time than it takes for a coach on the sideline to communicate this to the opposition.

Again, what coaching does is take situations where you could get away with being unskilled and change them into situations where if you are unskilled, the better team is going to own you.

Your argument seems to be that coaching is bad because it makes it hard for unskilled players to get lucky. This is a sport - anything that makes the better player win more consistently is good. Therefore, coaching is good, for the very reason you say it's bad.

 

[Chicago]

Also...

It also evens the playing field for the less skilled. It evens the odds a lot.

So does ramping. And ramping sucks for the same reason coaching is good.

 

[rpcruzr]

Coaching

But this has nothing to do with coaching - a good player should NEVER have the advantage of knowing that the other team is reloading because the other team should be good enough at reloading that it takes them a second to do - far less time than it takes for a coach on the sideline to communicate this to the opposition.

Ok, I think I see your point. So, in your opinion, the best teams, with the best conditions in which to play this sport should win every time? If skill is paramount (as you seem to advocate), then why have bunkers? Get each team on each side of the field, and the team with the most accuracy wins. No excuses, just skill.

Again, what coaching does is take situations where you could get away with being unskilled and change them into situations where if you are unskilled, the better team is going to own you.

I fully understand that, what I don't is agree with that. As a player, I don't like the idea of beying an automaton for some guy to manipulate for the sidelines. It takes the fun out of the game.

Your argument seems to be that coaching is bad because it makes it hard for unskilled players to get lucky. This is a sport - anything that makes the better player win more consistently is good. Therefore, coaching is good, for the very reason you say it's bad.

Sorry to say that you totally missed the point. I never said "coaching is bad". I agree with players paying the price, in trainning, to improve. I also so fully support the role of the "coach", the more experienced guy that helps the team improve, each coach with his/hers technique and so forth. What I don't agree with is "online" sideline coaching.

Without trying to be overtly philosophical, let's dissect your final argument:

This is a sport - anything that makes the better player win more consistently is good. Therefore, coaching is good, for the very reason you say it's bad.

First of all, this is a sport, however not EVERYTHING that makes a player win more consistently is necessarily good as it was proved by the extensive "XSV" thread. That must be the American mentality of win-at-all-costs that we're hearing so much about lately.

Coaching, as a whole, has nothing to do with the current version of "coaching" that we are observing in the Millennium events. Even if it did, I don't disagree with coaching per se, I thought it was pretty obvious that I was refering to "sideline coaching". I'm sorry for not making my point across clearly enough.

In conclusion, I take it that you, as a player, would rather have a guy in the sidelines, barking commands at you that you would blindly obey, just to win consistently? Ok, I value your opinion, we see things different, help me understand, because I think that that ruins the game completely.

Your opinion is that sideline coaching is good, my opinion is that it is bad. I think we can agree to disagree.

 

[Giles]

I totally agree

Gents

I have to say I think the sideline coaching sucks on the snake side, keep all the spectators in the stands its close enough to the action and let them shout what they want
Keep the coach over in the pits, soon we will have people on the field with the players walking them up the field.

 

[PEBBLE]

.

I think jeff has the best idea,

But next to me in the stands Joy had about 10 people contected to joy in some way (swedish) screaming yoy yoy yoy yoy (Joy) and all shouted important things to Joy division when Magued looked at them

So what im trying to say is even if coaching is banned and the crowd can still get involved, organised groups can orchastrate plays if they shout the same thing together very loudily

question! are you allowed to have megaphones (XSV used whistles)? why doesnt anyone use them? cus i think they wud be really helpful

 

[Giles]

I think jeff has the best idea,

But next to me in the stands Joy had about 10 people contected to joy in some way (swedish) screaming yoy yoy yoy yoy (Joy) and all shouted important things to Joy division when Magued looked at them

So what im trying to say is even if coaching is banned and the crowd can still get involved, organised groups can orchastrate plays if they shout the same thing together very loudily

question! are you allowed to have megaphones (XSV used whistles)? why doesnt anyone use them? cus i think they wud be really helpful

Peb

I only know that in the stands its not so easy to get direct involvement like you can from the sidelines due to the mixed crowd and distance all causing issues

Know you are not allowed any megaphones or any noise increasing insrument

 

[Christian-Malera]

If we allow crowd participation we HAVE to have coaching if it is supposed to be an even playing field.
If we move the stands back and allow the crowd to participate but say no to coaching the teams with the most spectators on their side will have an advantage.
In this case it will still be coaching, example, we played Nexus at 0900 in the morning and both teams could coach as much as they liked without interference......

The solution and the only solution is, if we want the crowd to participate, is to allow a coach at the netting and then move the crowd into the stands.
This way we can have the crowd participate without spending their time just fu!§#%&......with other spectators and we will not have arguments of different characters at the netting and we will have a level playing field for everyone.

There is no other way as long as we want the crowd to participate!

 

[Giles]

If we allow crowd participation we HAVE to have coaching if it is supposed to be an even playing field.
If we move the stands back and allow the crowd to participate but say no to coaching the teams with the most spectators on their side will have an advantage.
In this case it will still be coaching, example, we played Nexus at 0900 in the morning and both teams could coach as much as they liked without interference......

The solution and the only solution is, if we want the crowd to participate, is to allow a coach at the netting and then move the crowd into the stands.
This way we can have the crowd participate without spending their time just fu!§#%&......with other spectators and we will not have arguments of different characters at the netting and we will have a level playing field for everyone.

There is no other way as long as we want the crowd to participate!

I disagree Christian as the stand is some 20 metres from the players with all the screaming its difficult to get whats being said directly.....yes you may get simple instructions like mugger, but players react to noise
The amount of times I have seen a player flinch when the crowd get animated thinking the mugger is coming, and sometimes he is not
With a coach at the netting the crowd will bring instruments to drown out a certain end of the field again gaining advantages
Best way fcuk them off to the stands and play with it like a player
Im very tired of watching teams get beaten by coaching or who has the most specattaors at the field or crowd it should be down to playing skill

 

[HERMITT]

As I mentioned before, just move the snake tape (where coaching has the greatest impact) to the other side of the field. Why is this not possible?

That way only credited coaches would be allowed in the pit area and along the snake tape. We could easily limit the numbers and it would still allow the spectators to cheer on their teams.

 

[Christian-Malera]

I disagree Christian as the stand is some 20 metres from the players with all the screaming its difficult to get whats being said directly.....yes you may get simple instructions like mugger, but players react to noise
The amount of times I have seen a player flinch when the crowd get animated thinking the mugger is coming, and sometimes he is not
With a coach at the netting the crowd will bring instruments to drown out a certain end of the field again gaining advantages
Best way fcuk them off to the stands and play with it like a player
Im very tired of watching teams get beaten by coaching or who has the most specattaors at the field or crowd it should be down to playing skill

Several of the games are played without alot of spectators and "coaching" from the stands 20 meters away will be very effective. That means that teams will need "coache" for those games and the same problem occurs....
With the " coach spectator" at the net and the stands at 15-20 meters there is a better chance of an even playing field.
Moving the stands back 20 meters want solve anything.