Maxs Masters - Finals & various problems

[manike]

Jim I have John and Marks addresses but not yours. Drop me a quck line at manike@corin.com and I'll get back to you with it.

I take it you guys are at Mayhem? I look forward to seeing you there.

Gordon and I would also like to drop by for a 'training session' in Ireland sometime. I'm dieing for a decent pint of guiness or twenty.

manike

 

[JeanManuel]

Originally posted by Robbo
OK, here's the deal, as Nick rightly says, the Ton Tons were initially handed out 100 penalty points for gun infractions.
Jean Manuel Maries, head of the Millennium rules commitee, who also works closely with Laurent, owner and captain of Ton Tons told me on the Saturday that Laurent had been putting him under a huge amount of pressure to change the rules mid-way thru the tournament so as to negate that penalty points but Jean was going to stand firm and not allow pressure from Laurent to sway him.

(bla bla bla)

And Jean-Manuel, you better take some Nytol tonight mate cuz if I did what you did, I couldn't frikkin sleep a wink !!!!!
Robbo

If my first reply actually got posted, I apologize for repeating myself.

I am frightened as how the facts got twisted ! I am hurt that people I trusted would lie for reasons I can't fathom, except maybe to have somthing to print and have themselves talked about. I feel it's an insult some should say we took a decision because of outside pressure. I wish some people would think a bit before posting or saying things that are obviously stupid when one knows the facts:
- the Tontons scored 803 points during the prelims. The 9th team (the Daltons) scored 614. The Tontons could have received 188 penalty points more and still have qualified.
- the rules were not changed by our decision to re-calculate the penalty points. The rules were changed when refs decided to have chronographing after the end of the game, when it had been said at the captains' meeting there would be no such chronographing. What is said during the captains' meeting ovverrules what's in the book.

So the situation was, the Tontons and Center Flag should not have been chonoed, and could rightly ask for their penalty points to be cancelled.
I hadn't attended to the captains' meeting and wasn't aware of that fact when I first talked to Robbo. I then told him hte penalty points would stand. I wans't aware either, at that time, of the mistyping in the rules (my fault entirely and I apologize).
When I heard about what had been said at the meeting, then the decision was obvious. The rules, as established at the captains' meeting, said there wouldn't be any chronographing at the end of the game. We're trying to get rid of everything that changes the cores after the end of the game, for various reasons including better understanding from the spectators.
The fair and by-the-rules decision would have been to cancel the points. The problem is we knew that players are always going to say a decision was taken because a Pro team was involved ,because a no-name team was involved, because a foreign, local or whatever team is involved. The fact the Tontons are owned by a promoter meant we COULND'T take the fair, normal, legal decision, because people who didn't know and didn't care about the facts would say we had obeid orders. If we had known such people were going to howl anyway, we'd have taken the fair decision : cancel the penalty points.
But we decided to rule against the Tontons, and that's something teams who are related to a promoter have to get used to : unfair treatment when fair treatment might be misinterpreted.
We ruled we were going to keep the penalty points, and that's that.
Now, the rule had always been you calculate the penalty points by multiplying by two feet per second above the average of 300, round to ten if below, round to 50 if over. Robbo agreed when I spoke to him the second time that was indeed the correct rule. He's forgotten it now. Take your medicine, Pete. When there's a mistyping in the rule, you correct it. There are other mistypings in the rules nobody complained when we corrected them.
Pete told me he'd make a great fuss about that if re-calculating the Tontons penalty points meant an ENGLISH team didn't make it to the semi-finals. Why ? Don't you care about other countries??

Some misinformed or malevolent people say I took the decision. Well, I'm the one who wanted the Rules Committee to consist of three people : not a person alone, and an odd number so there wouldn't be ties. I had a vote, and so had Moose and Joern. If you cast a stone at me, you're forgetting that I couldn't take that decision alone, and that Moose and Joern were there too. And you insult them too. They have done an outstanding job. They were fair, they studied the rules carefully, voiced very clever opinions and are the best Ultimates I've ever worked with. Moose is English, in case you forgot that too, and Joern has no links with Laurent whatsoever.

Now you have it. You are right if you say we took a wrong decision : we should have cancelled the points.
I'll take the criticism for mistyping a paragraph. I've spent so much time working on the rules my eyes somtimes blink in front of the screen. I sincerily apologize.
But I won't take criticism that are lies, or twisting of the facts done by people who don't know what they are talking about. There are true mistakes I've made you could crticize me for. But don't go inventing, especially if you've never done anything yourself, or if you just need to spit sh*t to have the lights on you or something to write.
I am disappointed, Pete. Whatever you had to say you could have said without lies and insults.

Jean-Manuel

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by JeanManuel


If my first reply actually got posted, I apologize for repeating myself.

I am frightened as how the facts got twisted ! I am hurt that people I trusted would lie for reasons I can't fathom, except maybe to have somthing to print and have themselves talked about. I feel it's an insult some should say we took a decision because of outside pressure. I wish some people would think a bit before posting or saying things that are obviously stupid when one knows the facts:
- the Tontons scored 803 points during the prelims. The 9th team (the Daltons) scored 614. The Tontons could have received 188 penalty points more and still have qualified.
- the rules were not changed by our decision to re-calculate the penalty points. The rules were changed when refs decided to have chronographing after the end of the game, when it had been said at the captains' meeting there would be no such chronographing. What is said during the captains' meeting ovverrules what's in the book.

So the situation was, the Tontons and Center Flag should not have been chonoed, and could rightly ask for their penalty points to be cancelled.
I hadn't attended to the captains' meeting and wasn't aware of that fact when I first talked to Robbo. I then told him hte penalty points would stand. I wans't aware either, at that time, of the mistyping in the rules (my fault entirely and I apologize).
When I heard about what had been said at the meeting, then the decision was obvious. The rules, as established at the captains' meeting, said there wouldn't be any chronographing at the end of the game. We're trying to get rid of everything that changes the cores after the end of the game, for various reasons including better understanding from the spectators.
The fair and by-the-rules decision would have been to cancel the points. The problem is we knew that players are always going to say a decision was taken because a Pro team was involved ,because a no-name team was involved, because a foreign, local or whatever team is involved. The fact the Tontons are owned by a promoter meant we COULND'T take the fair, normal, legal decision, because people who didn't know and didn't care about the facts would say we had obeid orders. If we had known such people were going to howl anyway, we'd have taken the fair decision : cancel the penalty points.
But we decided to rule against the Tontons, and that's something teams who are related to a promoter have to get used to : unfair treatment when fair treatment might be misinterpreted.
We ruled we were going to keep the penalty points, and that's that.
Now, the rule had always been you calculate the penalty points by multiplying by two feet per second above the average of 300, round to ten if below, round to 50 if over. Robbo agreed when I spoke to him the second time that was indeed the correct rule. He's forgotten it now. Take your medicine, Pete. When there's a mistyping in the rule, you correct it. There are other mistypings in the rules nobody complained when we corrected them.
Pete told me he'd make a great fuss about that if re-calculating the Tontons penalty points meant an ENGLISH team didn't make it to the semi-finals. Why ? Don't you care about other countries??

Some misinformed or malevolent people say I took the decision. Well, I'm the one who wanted the Rules Committee to consist of three people : not a person alone, and an odd number so there wouldn't be ties. I had a vote, and so had Moose and Joern. If you cast a stone at me, you're forgetting that I couldn't take that decision alone, and that Moose and Joern were there too. And you insult them too. They have done an outstanding job. They were fair, they studied the rules carefully, voiced very clever opinions and are the best Ultimates I've ever worked with. Moose is English, in case you forgot that too, and Joern has no links with Laurent whatsoever.

Now you have it. You are right if you say we took a wrong decision : we should have cancelled the points.
I'll take the criticism for mistyping a paragraph. I've spent so much time working on the rules my eyes somtimes blink in front of the screen. I sincerily apologize.
But I won't take criticism that are lies, or twisting of the facts done by people who don't know what they are talking about. There are true mistakes I've made you could crticize me for. But don't go inventing, especially if you've never done anything yourself, or if you just need to spit sh*t to have the lights on you or something to write.
I am disappointed, Pete. Whatever you had to say you could have said without lies and insults.

Jean-Manuel

Jean, before you open your mouth again and call me a liar, you had better make damn sure you are right.
Tell me one thing where I have knowingly lied !!!!
Because if you cannot, then I await your apology !!!!!
Pete

 

[JeanManuel]

I wouldn't bet on it TJ

Originally posted by Nick Iuel-Brockdorff
- I actually think Bill may have overlooked that fact... but we'll see.

I would also like to hear whether it is true, that the whole player registration thing went haywire, with players being registrated on wrong teams, with wrong nationalities and wrong status... if at all registrated (some people didn't get the cards the paid for... myself included... apparently they couldn't "find the card" ???).

Nick

About the registration : not everything went as planned -as I had planned. We apologize for all inconveniences, it is true some mistakes happened. We registered roughly 605 player. The printing process of a card takes a bit over 30 seconds, and whil the computer prints, you can't use it for anything else, like typing the data in or taking pictures. Taking a picture is another 30 seconds, and typing in the data takes one minute (I chronoed the light I stayed up 'till 4 typing froms in, some mistake come from the fact I was falling asleep -not an excuse, though).
So that's a total of 20 hours (at best !!). We were supposed to have two machines to speed up the whole process, but the NPPL one broke down and stayed in the US.
Two persons supposed to help didn't show up, that happens.
Well, all in all, we spotted mistakes on about 35 cards (that's 5-6%) and I sincerily apologize again to the players who had to have their card reprinted or didn't get it yet. Don't worry, you're in the system and you will have your card in Portugal.
The organization of that booth will be improved, based on our experience.
And a BIG BIG Thank You to Camille, without whom no one would have had his card !
I am thinking of putting the form on the Millennium website so players can send their information beforehand, which will speed up their registration. The picture will have to be taken on the spot, though -or will it?
At any rate, I understand the frustration of the few of us who paid for our lack of experience and bad luck. Please accept my apologies.

Jean-Manuel

 

[Solonor]

?

Pete told me he'd make a great fuss about that if re-calculating the Tontons penalty points meant an ENGLISH team didn't make it to the semi-finals. Why ? Don't you care about other countries??

Pete ,personally if I was on your place, that would piss me off if it was a lie...

 

[JeanManuel]

JM

Originally posted by Nick Iuel-Brockdorff
Mistyping ???????????

What on earth are you on about JM ???

You posted the rules on the Millennium website.

EVERY team there believed it to be the rules they played by.

NO captains meeting was summoned in order to change the rules you made public.

That you suddely realised you had mistyped something in the rules, should have made you call a captains meeting - not just change the rules without bothering to inform anyone except the ultimate and organiser !

Nick

Well, you may not view my explanation as an excuse. Yes, there are mistyping in the rules, I should have see nthem haveing spent so much time working on the rules, upgrading here and there and missing some obvious loopholes and mistakes. The rules were posted on the website and neither I nor anybody else spotted the fact paragraph 10.28 states you'll be eliminated from play if your marker shoots in excess of 310 fps while paragraph 7.03 set the limit to 300 fps (we corrected that error by setting the limit to 310), nor that the rule forbid eliminated players to look at the game (paragraph 8.11) and no one complained we didn't apply that rule but a new, non written one.
You're not consistent. You focus on a issue you believe political.
I repeat : we didn't modify the rules ! The rule 12.41 (Chronographing at the end of the game) had been CANCELLED -that means WRITTEN OFF, NULLIFYED, ZAPPED- during the captains meeting. From a "legal", rulebook point a view, the judges applied a non-exixtent rule ! As if they had suddenly decided to eliminate players with green jerseys. Had they done so, you would have applauded at our "changing the rules". Changing the rules back to their last version : the captains' meeting's one!
Or, yes. We did modify the rules. But not to lessen the amount of penalty points -which should have been 0!- we increased it! To two points per foot (on average) above 300 with a minimum of 10 points and a maximum of 50. We used the standard rule, as should have been written had I not made an obvious mistake -so obvious Robbo easily admitted it was one- so obvious the judges had, at first, applied that method to inflict penalty points to the Tontons, before a player pointed paragraph 12.41 to them.
In all you say, there's one criticizm that isn't pure fantasy : we should definitely have explained our ruling during the Monday morning meeting. We should have explained and informed you of all the facts. I'll take the blame for that, it is true that was a fault.
Had a team not linked to a promoter been penalized for end-of-game chronographing, we'd have immediatly cancelled the points. That was the rules. If pressure made us not apply the rules, it's not that of the promoters : it's you, all the players so prone to seeing political issues. It's thinking of what loud mouthes would say that we ruled against a promoter's team. That's the truth.
If it had been your team, Nick, who had been inflicted those points, we'd have cancelled them. But I'd be now explaining we didn't take our decision to please the big customer of one of the promoters... People will always find hidden reasons.
Whatever decision we will take on issues involving the Tontons, Campaign Cup, the Mayhem Tigers, Joy Division, Estratego, those teams will be pointed at, we (the Ultimates) will get angry and insulting messages. It's a no-win situation.
So, people are going to say dirty things on me. I've been there, as all Ultimates. In the mean time, I try to take the fairest decisions possible. And three persons take even better decisoins, especially when they are as competent, as dedicated, as straight-minded as Moose and Joern.
I don't have to prove myself. During all my years as an ultimate, I've ruled against the Tontons, against my own team, against my friends when that was fair. And Laurent has never, never applied any pressure on me, because I would have kicked him out and he respects me for that.
I'm sad when I see respectable people -or people I though of as respectable- talk before thinking, before knowing, insult me, insult valuable persons who treat every team fairly, from unknown Novices to famous Pros.
But I take the lesson : we should have kept you informed. That's our fumble, and I apologize. I also apologize for the mistakes in the rules, it's a neverending task, but I hope to have a cleaned-out version ready for Portugal.
And, talking of information : just so you know, we are also working on a "rules for the refs" book that will allow to give the marshalls an incentive to avoid bad calls and bad work.
We're also thinking of a "Disciplinary Committee" that will deal with special problems such as hotel trashing or other particularily bad behaviors. That committee will consist of players not related to the Millennium, helped by an Ultimate who will be there as a consulting -but not voting- member.

Jean-Manuel

 

[manike]

JM, thank you for your posts and I respect your application of them in this scenario. I understand it is not easy.

The fact that really bothers me in all this is that players were found to have hot guns which had been used in play. There must be (and was) a punishment for this. Such issues when found can never be answered by 'it wasn't within the rules so they should have zero penalties' This isn't just about the rules of our game it is about much more. They should and to be honest MUST be punished or teams will continue to risk it as a way of getting an advantage and at the same time are risking other people's health and safety.

It's not just about the changing of scores after a game is over it's about promoting the safety of a game.

While it is nice to think we do not need to chrono at the end of a game I do not think it is something that should be ruled out. I believe players should be liable to chronographing at any point around a game situation and when caught MUST face penalties.

I think this situation and rule needs seriously looking at again.

manike

 

[Solonor]

hmmm

I guess you're right Nick...
Either way It serves no actuall reason to be written.

Oh and ok ,Robbo might have written some bad things about that situation that might not be correct-as JM claims-but honestly I don't think that Jean Manuel should complain about that.
I don't know what exactly happened but Jean you're wrong if you're dissapointed with Robbo.With so many things that you've forgotten to mention (and as you say,you apologise for them) you should expect a reaction like this...

And you also wrote
"it's not that of the promoters : it's you, all the players so prone to seeing political issues. It's thinking of what loud mouthes would say that we ruled against a promoter's team. That's the truth. "

What? So you expect us to shut our mouth and trust the good rightfull refs? Like in football,huh?(especially in Greece) No way. I respect you and I'm sure that you're honest and true to paintball man. But its exactly because of that certain fact that you should be HAPPY of players talkin'loud about such situations. You should be PROUD,cause if we shut our mouth now ,when the paintball becomes mainstream and MORE money's involved I'd expect to open my mouth wide again ,stunned from the **** we'd all see....
Respect

 

[Robbo]

hmmm

Originally posted by Solonor

Oh and ok ,Robbo might have written some bad things about that situation that might not be correct-as JM claims-Respect

Solonor, listen up and take note, I have written something 650 posts on this thread, answered God knows how many emails because of this thread, written over 250 articles........all about paintball and the personalities within it.
I have NEVER and I mean NEVER lied in any of them, I have nothing to feel bad about what happened in Germany, I NEVER did anything there so I have nothing to hide, what the hell is my reason for fabricating any truths?
If I said 'bad' things as you put it, it's becasue the subject matter was bad not the way I wrote it.
Jean Manuel is the hapless fool who f##ked up and then buckled under the pressure his peer, Laurent put him under.
These are the facts that help us understand who, if anybody, is not telling the truth, I have no reason to lie, and therefore no motive.
Jean Manuel has both.
He has to try and minimise the damage, deflect criticism, maintain his position and defend his actions that he knows were not only biased but were also unprofessional.
What are my motives?
I told you guys exactly what happened and what was said, to invent anything, one iota, is to allow my report on things to be undermined.
Most every person coming on this thread has condemned Jean Manuel and Laurent’s actions, is it any wonder that Jean should then come on here and seem a lone voice ?
Ring any bells, Jean and Laurent being the lone voices in the 'No Look' debate ?
Nah, it's no coincidence, it's connections at work, lack of resolve and lack of professionalism.
There is absolutely no mileage in me even exaggerating facts let alone creating them.
If you peeps want to try and work out who is telling the truth in this, look at over 650 posts that I have written, look over all the posts that are concerned with what happened in Germany, then look over Jean's, I need say no more cuz it ain't my frikkin ass on the line, is it Jean?
Do you know what sickens me the most in all this?
It's when after all the damage has been done, all the incompetence and bias been laid bare for all to see, it's when they turn round and say, 'Oh, it's gonna be alright from now on, don't worry about anything, we are gonna put it all right for you guys'
Well, I tell ya what pisses me off real bad about that, it's like they are running around to try and accommodate us, giving the impression they are helping us out in fixing all the rules and procedures and they THINK that this should be the end of it.
What about the penalty for such actions ?
Did Laurent have a momentary revelation immediately after the event ?
I mean, one second Laurent is twisting the arm of Jean Manuel to change the rules mid tournament (which Laurent has assured me was impossible and illegal at last year's Campaign Cup) and the next second, Laurent after the event, tells everybody that no longer will promoters be able to influence the rules and accepts what he did was wrong.
Now where and when exactly did that epiphany take place ?
He frikkkin knew it was wrong the day he did it and yet still done it so his team would benefit and it is now his team who should pay the price of point reduction.
Grrrrrr !!!!
Jean, please don't call me a liar again !!
I can hold my head up in all this, you nor Laurent, can do the same !!
Robbo

 

[Buddha 3]

In all honesty, I couldn't give a flying f*ck anymore about who's telling the truth, and who isn't...
What is important to me is that (for whatever reason) decisions have been made that were wrong. Changing rules during a captain's meeting is (in my opinion) a bit iffy, changing rules concerning safety is just stupid! It should never have been decided in the first place that there should be no after game chronoing! What a major foul up that is! I don't care if it's the world cup, or the gahoogamaville 2-men cup, safety should always come first, and the rules concerning safety should only be made more strict, not be overruled.
I just hope that someone, somewhere learned from all this, and I'm happy that (as far as we know) no one has taken advantage of this ruling to the point that live and limbs were in danger...