Millennium rosterlock.

[Nick Brockdorff]

I'm arguing that at the moment it's EQUALLY unfair on everyone, by creating an exception you are being "fair" to teams with sister teams, and unfair on any normal, single roster team - generating an unnecessary inequality.

Aaarrrrggghhh - that is just semantices - because in reality, you are advocating we keep the sport at a level where there is a benefit to being less serious about it and not try and create a real organisation around your team.

"Fair to everyone" effectively means "better for the less serious".... if we differ in a fundamental sense, where you want that rather than promoting the sport evolve, then we just have to agree to disagree

Nick

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

in soccer, the second team is in the same division as the first team in fact they are the same team. they do not have players coming from division 2 to play in div 1 and div 1 players going to div 2. real madrid has one team but has a big squad to choose best players.

No, Real Madrid has a second team (and 3rd)... and those teams play in a lesser league - against the 2nd teams from other clubs.

Now, that is possible in football, because of the money involved... we do NOT have that option in paintball, because of the finances (lack of) and structure of the sport.

But, what I want, is for my paintball club (and any other) to effecively be able to run it LIKE Real Madrid does - because they CAN move players up and down between their teams, as much as they want, all year.

My point is, that without that flexibility, there is no real benefit to starting a second team or to having a big roster.

AND - I honestly don't really see how it would make the Millennium Series worse, if the larger teams had this possibility - especially if the 2nd teams could not be promoted or relegated?

Rather, it would mean more teams and more quality players at the events - and that the teams fighting for promotion, got quality opposition that prepared them better for what they faced next season.

Win/win as I see it.

Nick

 

[jotajotaZ]

The problem that I see is that we are comparing apples and oranges. A CPL team is in no way (not a single one) similar to a premier league soccer team.

Every single soccer team in Spain that is playing any of the top three divisions has a roster of 22 people to choose from and several sister teams playing in the lower divisions. The key here is "every single soccer team".

Since sister team are (sadly!) the exception in paintball they should not get any benefits or as Beaker says you would be giving some team an unfair advantage in order to pursue a desirable goal (teams becoming full-blown sport organizations). When this goal is nearer (more and more teams are well-run, have big rosters, sister teams etc) it might be the moment to push this changes to tilt the balance.

2c

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

Since sister team are (sadly!) the exception in paintball they should not get any benefits or as Beaker says you would be giving some team an unfair advantage in order to pursue a desirable goal

I strongly disagree - nobody is stopping anyone from making a 2nd team - every single MS team can do it - and the only thing stopping them, is having the energy or desire to do so.

What you and Beaker are advocating, is that it should not pay to do so..... and that it is better for the sport, to restrict teams from reaping the benefits of enlarging their organisations.

Nick

 

[jotajotaZ]

What I am trying to explain is that nobody is punishing anyone by appliying the same rules to all the teams. If you run a sister team you get benefits and I can number a few of them out of my head if you want. You just don't get the benefit you want in the series you choose to play. Because the majority of the teams that play that series are not organized that way and you getting that benefit would be unfair to the majority of the teams.

Should teams organize themselves? Yes.

Should rules benefit organized teams? Not yet.

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

So, essentially you are saying what is commonplace in every other sport, should not be allowed in paintball - because of the poor poor people that don't want to work hard at creating a successfull team ?

Well ok - let's just agree to disagree..... because I do NOT see why it should be illegal to be able to switch around players within your team - except to benefit the teams that can't be bothered to try and develop the sport.

But hey - I can just cut 10-12 players for next year, tell them to fcuk off and find somewhere else to play, because they can't get to play in the first team anyway, no matter how hard they work for it.

Nick

 

[Beaker]

It's not common place!

Having a 22 person football first team is no different to having 15 guys on a paintball roster, your roster is bigger than the number that can actually play. If you want to play any of those 15 you can, if they aren't playing the event they go off and play a different competition just like they do in football. I concede the Danish league appears to different but in the major leagues a first team player that happens to not be selected can not just go out for a lower, related, team in the same competition. This is no different to reserves (not the first 11) playing in a reserve league which is your non-first paintball teamers playing Centurio / X5 etc etc. You don't get Premiership teams playing their reserves in Division 2 or Serie A reserves playing in Serie B. They don't play in the same competition.

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

Fine Beaker - but what is the cruix - is the PRINCIPLE that you are able to get ALL your players game time, via a second team.... and be able to move players up and down between the two teams according to their form.

Now, please tell me why that should not be possible in paintball?

Why is it SO important to you, that these second team players do not play in the Millennium Series in a lower division?

Why is it SO important to you, that second team players can only be moved up to the first team, if coming from Division 1 in the Nordic Series - instead of Division 1 in the MS?

Why do you NOT want these players playing Millennium Series?

I honestly don't get why you have a problem with the flexibility a team needs, when running a big roster - and I don't see how it is "unfair" - you might as well say it was "unfair" that one player was better than another?

Nick

 

[DeanH]

A large team that is well organised but not rich, can in essence compete with small filthy rich teams.


but the smaller, the roster allowed and the less flexible the rules are, the more the rich teams benefit.

It creates a bigger gap, and will make it even harder for new teams with less sponsor support to enter the scene and make a splash.

Saying that organized teams should not get benefits ? and that its unfair ? then we are at the kindergarden argument, why is it fair that some teams are better funded ? have better players ? are located in a better geographical place to enter all tournaments cheaper due to less travel expenses .


Fairness is as with all other things relative, being organised should always pay off, it helps make the sport in general to get more organised, organised teams can help influence things more(player/team rights) everyone benefits more with a larger amount of teams that are well run and dare i say organised again

If nobody pushes to make the teams more proffesional at the top level, then we might as well call it a festival gathering and not a sports event.