Enforcing the rules and unsportsmanlike conduct
- Thread starter Wadidiz
- Start date
Isn't that the whole point? To put the fear of even trying something into them, you need to have penalties that may be considered overly harsh. I have no problem with this plan.
It's just too extreme, a season is a very long time to sit out for playing on 6 times, especially if paintball is your primary source of income as may be the case for true paid pros in the near future.
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. As Buddha said, the whole point is to give pause to players who seem to play on with "extreme prejudice".
What's the matter? Is this going to cramp your style too much? If your livelihood depends on paintball start following the rules.
Besides, it will take some time to get the whole Millennium/NPPL circuit to start enforcing the rules consistently. Is it pretty common for players to get penalized 6 times in a tournament for playing on? And if it happens in 2 out of 5 (NPPL) or 2 out 6 (Millennium) then that player definitely needs to be dealt with.
All it's going to take, in my opinion, is a few players to get pulled or suspended to start making players see what the game is all about: when you feel that you've been hit you stop pulling the trigger as soon as humanly possible, and you stop aggressive movement. What's hard to understand about that?
Steve
Everyone take a breath...
... and think about things.
Penalizing players harshly for bad behaviour I agree with. Someone physically abuses someone else - toss their butt. Someone throws a marker - he can join the guy above.
But banning someone because they played on too many times....
The problem here is the never-ending debate on rules, refs & penalties. The penalties aren't harsh enough, the refs either can't or won't enforce them - and the rules can't be understood by anyone.
A debate was started (by myself
) in another thread on why people think that wiping is the most vile thing any player can do. Sure it's not right - but in comparison to BLATANT & ORGANIZED playing on, it pales in comparision. For those who missed it here is my thinking - if a player wipes, sure he keeps himself in a game a little longer, MAYBE he is able to shoot some players, MAYBE he will effect the outcome of the game - also there is very little chance that a player wiping will ever hurt someone. However "properly executed" play-on WILL eliminate more players and it WILL effect the outcome of the game - and in the extreme cases it could end up in overshooting or even physical confrontation.
The perfect-play on causes confusion amongst the refs, lets teammates take advantage of this confusion and genrally ends up in a shouting match or worse, that makes us all look like a bunch of children.
These 2 examples could possibly be compared to offside (wiping) and a combination of pass interference and/or face masking (playing on) in american football. When it comes to penalties for these infractions what penalized hardest - not the offside, this is just on team trying to get a small (fraction of a second jump) advantage on the other. While the penalties for pass interference or facemasking - one that is a deliberate penalty when someone tackles or interferes too early and the othe can just end up being dangerous and hurt (I love the videos of players having their helmets turned all the way around on their head) - are much harder.
But in neither case is a player banned because he does either too much - say 6 times in a season. If he keeps causing all these penalty yards - he may be dropped by his team (because he costs them games - or he may even be "disciplined" by his teammates (for costing games) - but in nothing but the most extreme cases will the league do anything.
The wipe currently gets you a 3-4-1 and a play on gets you a 1-4-1. My proposal - switch the penalties for wiping and BLATANT playing-on. Someone gets too many 3-4-1's for his team and things might change - right now a 1-4-1 is worth the chance. Now all we need is a reffing crew with the BALLS & ability to make the call - but this is a whole other story.
Cheating will happen - it does sports at all levels (I seem to remember age fixing in the Little League world series a while back). I don't condone it - nor do I excuse it - but until the officiating catches up to the playing this will always be the problem. But banning someone - who gets caught for continually breaking the rules is overkill. If the initial penalties (during a game) are harsh enough, the chances are they won't try too often - they will probably have already cost their team too many games.
goose
P.S. It would be nice to live in a world where sponsors would actually give a damn about players conduct - but as long a they help them sell product, they will keep paying them. Very seldom is an athlete dropped by sponsors - Dennis Rodman was Nike sponsored for years, so was Charles Barkley, even Michael Ervin was heavily sponsored AFTER his little hotel drug party arrest.
... and think about things.
Penalizing players harshly for bad behaviour I agree with. Someone physically abuses someone else - toss their butt. Someone throws a marker - he can join the guy above.
But banning someone because they played on too many times....
The problem here is the never-ending debate on rules, refs & penalties. The penalties aren't harsh enough, the refs either can't or won't enforce them - and the rules can't be understood by anyone.
A debate was started (by myself
) in another thread on why people think that wiping is the most vile thing any player can do. Sure it's not right - but in comparison to BLATANT & ORGANIZED playing on, it pales in comparision. For those who missed it here is my thinking - if a player wipes, sure he keeps himself in a game a little longer, MAYBE he is able to shoot some players, MAYBE he will effect the outcome of the game - also there is very little chance that a player wiping will ever hurt someone. However "properly executed" play-on WILL eliminate more players and it WILL effect the outcome of the game - and in the extreme cases it could end up in overshooting or even physical confrontation.The perfect-play on causes confusion amongst the refs, lets teammates take advantage of this confusion and genrally ends up in a shouting match or worse, that makes us all look like a bunch of children.
These 2 examples could possibly be compared to offside (wiping) and a combination of pass interference and/or face masking (playing on) in american football. When it comes to penalties for these infractions what penalized hardest - not the offside, this is just on team trying to get a small (fraction of a second jump) advantage on the other. While the penalties for pass interference or facemasking - one that is a deliberate penalty when someone tackles or interferes too early and the othe can just end up being dangerous and hurt (I love the videos of players having their helmets turned all the way around on their head
) - are much harder.But in neither case is a player banned because he does either too much - say 6 times in a season. If he keeps causing all these penalty yards - he may be dropped by his team (because he costs them games - or he may even be "disciplined" by his teammates (for costing games) - but in nothing but the most extreme cases will the league do anything.
The wipe currently gets you a 3-4-1 and a play on gets you a 1-4-1. My proposal - switch the penalties for wiping and BLATANT playing-on. Someone gets too many 3-4-1's for his team and things might change - right now a 1-4-1 is worth the chance. Now all we need is a reffing crew with the BALLS & ability to make the call - but this is a whole other story
.Cheating will happen - it does sports at all levels (I seem to remember age fixing in the Little League world series a while back). I don't condone it - nor do I excuse it - but until the officiating catches up to the playing this will always be the problem. But banning someone - who gets caught for continually breaking the rules is overkill. If the initial penalties (during a game) are harsh enough, the chances are they won't try too often - they will probably have already cost their team too many games.
goose
P.S. It would be nice to live in a world where sponsors would actually give a damn about players conduct - but as long a they help them sell product, they will keep paying them. Very seldom is an athlete dropped by sponsors - Dennis Rodman was Nike sponsored for years, so was Charles Barkley, even Michael Ervin was heavily sponsored AFTER his little hotel drug party arrest.
Everyone take a breath...
You are wrong when you say that the league (NFL in this case) does not do anything about these infractions. Players get slapped with fines for all sorts of crazy stuff nowadays. Most defensive players are afraid to hit the quarterback, for fear of getting a huge fine. That's why you mostly see really wimpy tackles nowadays. And that's also why college football is much more fun to watch... Point of the story, slapping people hard with penalties or whatever will, in my opinion, have results in the end. Whether that's the way you want to go or not, is another point in this discussion. Personally I have no problem with it, but I do agree that playing on should be considered a bigger infraction than wiping.
Personally I'd see wiping more as holding, but anyway...Originally posted by goose
...
These 2 examples could possibly be compared to offside (wiping) and a combination of pass interference and/or face masking (playing on) in american football. When it comes to penalties for these infractions what penalized hardest - not the offside, this is just on team trying to get a small (fraction of a second jump) advantage on the other. While the penalties for pass interference or facemasking - one that is a deliberate penalty when someone tackles or interferes too early and the othe can just end up being dangerous and hurt (I love the videos of players having their helmets turned all the way around on their head
But in neither case is a player banned because he does either too much - say 6 times in a season. If he keeps causing all these penalty yards - he may be dropped by his team (because he costs them games - or he may even be "disciplined" by his teammates (for costing games) - but in nothing but the most extreme cases will the league do anything.
You are wrong when you say that the league (NFL in this case) does not do anything about these infractions. Players get slapped with fines for all sorts of crazy stuff nowadays. Most defensive players are afraid to hit the quarterback, for fear of getting a huge fine. That's why you mostly see really wimpy tackles nowadays. And that's also why college football is much more fun to watch...
Point of the story, slapping people hard with penalties or whatever will, in my opinion, have results in the end. Whether that's the way you want to go or not, is another point in this discussion. Personally I have no problem with it, but I do agree that playing on should be considered a bigger infraction than wiping.
Now we're talking...
On the one hand, experienced players know what's going on but either have too much respect for some players/teams or are afraid of looking like dicks.
On the other, PRO refs either can't tell the difference between real hits and something else. Experienced judges can easily see the difference (although an occasional neutral call may be necessary).
Another matter is that I suspect even the top level, experienced player/refs might think they know the rules and perhaps don't. Or they substitute what they think is "common practice".
An example of this is from the same tournament I mentioned earlier:
On the break in one game I saw a player change his direction and jump into a close bunker that already had two players. I, of course, suspected something foul and moved toward that bunker to check the middle guy only to be distracted by a call for a paintcheck (on his mask, he was clean) by the outside guy and then by another of his teammates who was handing me his armband after he had been hit.
Then I checked the middle guy and saw that he was hit squarely on his back shoulder (maybe hit by his own player on break?). I then, of course, pulled a 1-4-1. He and his captain argued with me after the game was over.
My fellow judges (all members of one of the top 5 teams in NPPL) said that I was being too tough and they would never do that. I said that with all respect I disagreed with them.
I later asked the tourney promotor what he would do (without loading the question) and, separately, a member of another judging team. These two top level players said they would not have taken a 1-4-1, that I was being too harsh.
The rule I applied is very clear in both Millennium and NPPL rules. They both happen to be paragraph 10.06. Read it yourself. You'll see. I have been aware of, and have applied this rule for years. No one has ever told me different.
The point is: we need to all be singing from the same sheet of music. What will it take to get us there?
I also agree with Goose's point about wiping compared with playing on. But don't reduce the penalty for wiping. Perhaps make it an automatic 2-4-1 or 3-4-1 for playing on, in lieu of or in addition to the 3-strikes-you're-out penalty.
As for the suspension, I still hold to my idea. But perhaps make it 3 times pulled from a tournament = suspension.
Concerning sponsors: good point Chris. That's why I suggested boycotting or some kind of action to let the sponsors know there are many of us who care about some semblance of fairness. If enough of us write, call or send e-mails saying we associate their products with cheating teams/players, then they may apply some pressure to get this slowed down. You're right: sales and the bottom-line is all that really counts. I admit this may be slightly unrealistic thinking.
Like a broken record I say again: Make the players who systemize playing on pay such a high price that a change in behavior will be forced.
Paintball is a game in which players try to win by shooting each other. The principle is simple: you shoot a player and she/he is out of the game. You get shot, you're out of the game. Too bad that it takes pages of rules and a field full of properly educated and trained refs to enforce that simple principle. Such is human nature.
Steve
I agree with Goose that the main problem is getting the judges to consistently stay on top of and enforce the rules. For player/refs they tend to be way too lax. If some of the reports about the recent Atlantic City tourney were correct, the PRO refs were tough but went over the edge and pulled people for bunker smear or kneeled-on paintmarks.Originally posted by goose
... and think about things.
Penalizing players harshly for bad behaviour I agree with. Someone physically abuses someone else - toss their butt. Someone throws a marker - he can join the guy above.
But banning someone because they played on too many times....
The problem here is the never-ending debate on rules, refs & penalties. The penalties aren't harsh enough, the refs either can't or won't enforce them - and the rules can't be understood by anyone.
A debate was started (by myself
The perfect-play on causes confusion amongst the refs, lets teammates take advantage of this confusion and genrally ends up in a shouting match or worse, that makes us all look like a bunch of children.
These 2 examples could possibly be compared to offside (wiping) and a combination of pass interference and/or face masking (playing on) in american football. When it comes to penalties for these infractions what penalized hardest - not the offside, this is just on team trying to get a small (fraction of a second jump) advantage on the other. While the penalties for pass interference or facemasking - one that is a deliberate penalty when someone tackles or interferes too early and the othe can just end up being dangerous and hurt (I love the videos of players having their helmets turned all the way around on their head
But in neither case is a player banned because he does either too much - say 6 times in a season. If he keeps causing all these penalty yards - he may be dropped by his team (because he costs them games - or he may even be "disciplined" by his teammates (for costing games) - but in nothing but the most extreme cases will the league do anything.
The wipe currently gets you a 3-4-1 and a play on gets you a 1-4-1. My proposal - switch the penalties for wiping and BLATANT playing-on. Someone gets too many 3-4-1's for his team and things might change - right now a 1-4-1 is worth the chance. Now all we need is a reffing crew with the BALLS & ability to make the call - but this is a whole other story
Cheating will happen - it does sports at all levels (I seem to remember age fixing in the Little League world series a while back). I don't condone it - nor do I excuse it - but until the officiating catches up to the playing this will always be the problem. But banning someone - who gets caught for continually breaking the rules is overkill. If the initial penalties (during a game) are harsh enough, the chances are they won't try too often - they will probably have already cost their team too many games.
goose
P.S. It would be nice to live in a world where sponsors would actually give a damn about players conduct - but as long a they help them sell product, they will keep paying them. Very seldom is an athlete dropped by sponsors - Dennis Rodman was Nike sponsored for years, so was Charles Barkley, even Michael Ervin was heavily sponsored AFTER his little hotel drug party arrest.
On the one hand, experienced players know what's going on but either have too much respect for some players/teams or are afraid of looking like dicks.
On the other, PRO refs either can't tell the difference between real hits and something else. Experienced judges can easily see the difference (although an occasional neutral call may be necessary).
Another matter is that I suspect even the top level, experienced player/refs might think they know the rules and perhaps don't. Or they substitute what they think is "common practice".
An example of this is from the same tournament I mentioned earlier:
On the break in one game I saw a player change his direction and jump into a close bunker that already had two players. I, of course, suspected something foul and moved toward that bunker to check the middle guy only to be distracted by a call for a paintcheck (on his mask, he was clean) by the outside guy and then by another of his teammates who was handing me his armband after he had been hit.
Then I checked the middle guy and saw that he was hit squarely on his back shoulder (maybe hit by his own player on break?). I then, of course, pulled a 1-4-1. He and his captain argued with me after the game was over.
My fellow judges (all members of one of the top 5 teams in NPPL) said that I was being too tough and they would never do that. I said that with all respect I disagreed with them.
I later asked the tourney promotor what he would do (without loading the question) and, separately, a member of another judging team. These two top level players said they would not have taken a 1-4-1, that I was being too harsh.
The rule I applied is very clear in both Millennium and NPPL rules. They both happen to be paragraph 10.06. Read it yourself. You'll see. I have been aware of, and have applied this rule for years. No one has ever told me different.
The point is: we need to all be singing from the same sheet of music. What will it take to get us there?
I also agree with Goose's point about wiping compared with playing on. But don't reduce the penalty for wiping. Perhaps make it an automatic 2-4-1 or 3-4-1 for playing on, in lieu of or in addition to the 3-strikes-you're-out penalty.
As for the suspension, I still hold to my idea. But perhaps make it 3 times pulled from a tournament = suspension.
Concerning sponsors: good point Chris. That's why I suggested boycotting or some kind of action to let the sponsors know there are many of us who care about some semblance of fairness. If enough of us write, call or send e-mails saying we associate their products with cheating teams/players, then they may apply some pressure to get this slowed down. You're right: sales and the bottom-line is all that really counts. I admit this may be slightly unrealistic thinking.
Like a broken record I say again: Make the players who systemize playing on pay such a high price that a change in behavior will be forced.
Paintball is a game in which players try to win by shooting each other. The principle is simple: you shoot a player and she/he is out of the game. You get shot, you're out of the game. Too bad that it takes pages of rules and a field full of properly educated and trained refs to enforce that simple principle. Such is human nature.
Steve
Okay - wiping = holding
Agreed that the penalties for certain things should be higher - but what I was getting at is that unless a football penalty is one where harm can be done (as you said a late hit of the QB) the league won't step in, you don't see a player getting fined for holding or pass interference.
Higher penalties - either during the game or by the league - I agree completely with - but what occurs during a game (that is not violent) should be handled during the game. If a player wipes 10 games in a row he should be given 10 1-4-1's, sooner or later his teammates might have something to say about it. If he plays on 3-4-1 him, if he overshoots or does some other unsportsmanlike thing - then the league can step in.
goose
Agreed that the penalties for certain things should be higher - but what I was getting at is that unless a football penalty is one where harm can be done (as you said a late hit of the QB) the league won't step in, you don't see a player getting fined for holding or pass interference.
Higher penalties - either during the game or by the league - I agree completely with - but what occurs during a game (that is not violent) should be handled during the game. If a player wipes 10 games in a row he should be given 10 1-4-1's, sooner or later his teammates might have something to say about it. If he plays on 3-4-1 him, if he overshoots or does some other unsportsmanlike thing - then the league can step in.
goose
Let's apply your (Goose's) suggestions to X-Ball:
Theoretically a game could be in the last minutes (or seconds) of the finals. A team could have all five players left and blatantly play on and shoot out all remaining players on the opposition team. The playing-on player would then be pulled, along with 3 teammates, leaving 1 player to hang the flag. No further penalties would be forthcoming. Brazen, systematic cheating would be rewarded with a tournament win (if only one point were needed).
In X-Ball, it has been decided that penalties will no longer be carried over from one "game" to the next. So cheat and pay the price in that game only. No consequences will be carried over after the flag's hung.
That kind of cynicism could also be applied, and probably already is, to standard paintball. If you have enough players left to survive a 3-4-1 (more likely for 10-player) then go ahead and "get the job done" and absorb the penalties.
Comparisons with other sports (like I have also done) can have illustrative value but we don't have to slavishly validate what we do in paintball by always referring to other sports (and I'm not saying you do that, Chris).
Instant penalties have helped paintball a lot. But it might take more to put a stop to brazen playing-on and to unsportsmanlike conduct.
Maybe penalize playing on by giving an automatic hang to the other team? I don't know. Probably a ridiculous notion.
A player who causes a 3-4-1 will probably not be that ostracized because his teammates know they apply pressure to their players to "get the job done".
The penalties I suggest will take out the particular offending players. The main point here is to change behavior. Therefore I still hold to my suggested system, at least so far.
And let's keep in mind that even with the best judges it is virtually impossible to catch even the majority of playing on situations (as has been discussed a lot on other threads).
I'm still listening and thinking...
Steve
Theoretically a game could be in the last minutes (or seconds) of the finals. A team could have all five players left and blatantly play on and shoot out all remaining players on the opposition team. The playing-on player would then be pulled, along with 3 teammates, leaving 1 player to hang the flag. No further penalties would be forthcoming. Brazen, systematic cheating would be rewarded with a tournament win (if only one point were needed).
In X-Ball, it has been decided that penalties will no longer be carried over from one "game" to the next. So cheat and pay the price in that game only. No consequences will be carried over after the flag's hung.
That kind of cynicism could also be applied, and probably already is, to standard paintball. If you have enough players left to survive a 3-4-1 (more likely for 10-player) then go ahead and "get the job done" and absorb the penalties.
Comparisons with other sports (like I have also done) can have illustrative value but we don't have to slavishly validate what we do in paintball by always referring to other sports (and I'm not saying you do that, Chris).
Instant penalties have helped paintball a lot. But it might take more to put a stop to brazen playing-on and to unsportsmanlike conduct.
Maybe penalize playing on by giving an automatic hang to the other team? I don't know. Probably a ridiculous notion.
A player who causes a 3-4-1 will probably not be that ostracized because his teammates know they apply pressure to their players to "get the job done".
The penalties I suggest will take out the particular offending players. The main point here is to change behavior. Therefore I still hold to my suggested system, at least so far.
And let's keep in mind that even with the best judges it is virtually impossible to catch even the majority of playing on situations (as has been discussed a lot on other threads).
I'm still listening and thinking...
Steve
As far as I am concerned this should never happen and here's why...
Any ref worth anything, will wipe off any player who is shot by a player playing-on. So sure a game can be 5 on 5 and a player plays on (he may even get the first guy) but the refs catch his play-on and then penalize him & his team. It is now 4 on 1 for the team who was played-on against (after the players where wiped clean and put back in the game).
Not only that, according to the rules, if any of the other players where marked in the period of time that the 3-4-1 is called and the actual removal of their armbands - by any of the players who will also be removed - those players should be cleaned off and put back in, because the elimination of the 3 other players is deemed to have occured at the same time as the 3-4-1 call.
Don't see a problem here.
goose