Millenniumrule 19.6 is BAD
- Thread starter drhp
- Start date
In a perfect world, then any gun shooting over 300 fps would have to be intentionally setup that way. But due to things that are beyond the player's control, sometimes guns that have sat for a minute or two will creep above the allowed limit.
This is due to a number of things, one of which is Dirty Air supplied at Millennium Series events. Cleaning Regulators on a regular basis would help this, so maybe this is the player's responsibility.
How many time have we seen top teams go onto the field with less players?
I agree in the long run, this rule needs to be changed, and players need to have guns that NEVER shoot over 300 fps. Safety first.
This is due to a number of things, one of which is Dirty Air supplied at Millennium Series events. Cleaning Regulators on a regular basis would help this, so maybe this is the player's responsibility.
How many time have we seen top teams go onto the field with less players?
I agree in the long run, this rule needs to be changed, and players need to have guns that NEVER shoot over 300 fps. Safety first.
In my opinion some things have been done with the Millennium rules that should not be done. I have discussed that with Joern Windler, the Millennium rules commissioner and he knows how I stand on it.
Otherwise Joern has added several good rules and has done a great job in sorting through a lot of difficult issues.
Here's what I think:
1. I think it is a mistake to have changed the entire order and sequence of the rules compared to our sister league NPPL. It just makes it harder for our players and refs and their players and refs to compete and ref in each others' events.
2. I think it is a mistake to change any rules during the season, except in extreme cases. It is already hard enough for players and judges to have a command of the long-standing rules, much less have to study them between every event.
Joern and I have discussed many of the past rule changes and he has changed some of them but we have agreed to disagree on some others.
We have also agreed that the language in many places needs correcting and polishing. I have offered my help with it and he has expressed willingness to go over the rules to improve the language. The problem is we are always too busy at the tournaments and otherwise to get together.
Here are some of my opinions about the current revisions:
__________________________________
9.1...Three layers will be allowed if the temperature is less than 10°C
__________________________________
Probably not so significant because what tournaments are played when it is less than 10 degrees C? I guess refs will have to start carrying a thermometer with them.
__________________________________
14.1-3...14.1 An “active” player is every player on the field which is in the game, but not “inactive” nor “neutral”.
14.2 A “neutral” player is a player on the field which is in the game, but declared as “neutral” by a judge.
14.3 An “inactive” player is every player, which is eliminated by a valid hit, by surrendering or by disqualification due to a penalty.
____________________________________
Why make it complicated with all this inactive and active BS? A player is either in the game, eliminated or neutral.
____________________________________
17.6 All players whose markers have not passed the chronograph and cannot remedy on time
will be counted as eliminated and therefore inactive.
____________________________________
Why change the 10-year old NPPL rule? If a player has the bad fortune to not be able to get her/his marker working in time then let him/her "play" without a marker. He or she can spot, call positions, keep the communication going, etc. She/he just can't cause an elimination directly, unless she/he charms a player into giving up!
One of the funnest games I saw in Amsterdam was one where a back player played without a marker and the other team didn't know it. It looked like he was going to succeed in holding the opponents off until time ran out.
_____________________________________
19.6...The following chrono-procedure will be done with the “red”
radar field chono on which the players checked in with exactly two clearing shots and a single (the 3rd!) shot which is the official result of the velocity check.
_____________________________________
I disagree. What if the first shot or two is 350? I don't want to get shot at that velocity. And some of the netting I've seen lately wouldn't tolerate that velocity. If a marker spikes then the player must put in a safety margin.
_____________________________________
27.1...leaves a mark no matter of what size it is.
_____________________________________
If a player is hit it should be solid and at least as large as a krona or a €2 coin. But it must be seen to have been a direct hit and it that size can be spread out or oblong (oval). I've seen too much bitching about players being taken out without an apparent hit.
_____________________________________
27.4...Players using electric or electronic markers must ask for permission from a judge before operating buttons during the game. That includes turning the marker off. Players who operate buttons without permission of a judge will be eliminated from play.
_____________________________________
I'm not sure about this one. I think judges need to closely watch a player who is tinkering too much with his toy, for obvious reasons.
_____________________________________
28.5 If a player is eliminated while in possession of a flag, the flag judge will radio his
counterpart at the opposition flag station to rehang the spare flag.
_____________________________________
This one I strongly disagree with. NPPL has had a player who is eliminated with the flag stand up ever since the beginning 10 years ago. I've never seen a problem with that. Sure, once in a blue moon a player gets an extra hit, but not so often.
The games are much too fast to have the disruption or time run out because judges are trying to sort out getting a flag re-hung at the base of origin. Things are complicated enough as it is! And I disagree with the X Ball rule of dropping the flag if hit. Then it gets lost.
____________________________________
29.1 Playing on entails continuing to act as an active player in the game after getting inactive. Playing on includes...saying “hit”, “out” or “eliminated”, which constitues a playing on.
______________________________________
I totally disagree with this one. I have been saying "hit" for 11 years now (the few times I get hit). I was mugged during a game in Amsterdam and I screamed, "Ow! O.K.! I'm hit," as a natural reaction. I should have had a 1-4-1 pulled if they had followed this rule. It is clear when a player is shouting hit to stop the pelting and when he/she is talking to teammates.
Again, just my thoughts on the issue.
Steve
Otherwise Joern has added several good rules and has done a great job in sorting through a lot of difficult issues.
Here's what I think:
1. I think it is a mistake to have changed the entire order and sequence of the rules compared to our sister league NPPL. It just makes it harder for our players and refs and their players and refs to compete and ref in each others' events.
2. I think it is a mistake to change any rules during the season, except in extreme cases. It is already hard enough for players and judges to have a command of the long-standing rules, much less have to study them between every event.
Joern and I have discussed many of the past rule changes and he has changed some of them but we have agreed to disagree on some others.
We have also agreed that the language in many places needs correcting and polishing. I have offered my help with it and he has expressed willingness to go over the rules to improve the language. The problem is we are always too busy at the tournaments and otherwise to get together.
Here are some of my opinions about the current revisions:
__________________________________
9.1...Three layers will be allowed if the temperature is less than 10°C
__________________________________
Probably not so significant because what tournaments are played when it is less than 10 degrees C? I guess refs will have to start carrying a thermometer with them.
__________________________________
14.1-3...14.1 An “active” player is every player on the field which is in the game, but not “inactive” nor “neutral”.
14.2 A “neutral” player is a player on the field which is in the game, but declared as “neutral” by a judge.
14.3 An “inactive” player is every player, which is eliminated by a valid hit, by surrendering or by disqualification due to a penalty.
____________________________________
Why make it complicated with all this inactive and active BS? A player is either in the game, eliminated or neutral.
____________________________________
17.6 All players whose markers have not passed the chronograph and cannot remedy on time
will be counted as eliminated and therefore inactive.
____________________________________
Why change the 10-year old NPPL rule? If a player has the bad fortune to not be able to get her/his marker working in time then let him/her "play" without a marker. He or she can spot, call positions, keep the communication going, etc. She/he just can't cause an elimination directly, unless she/he charms a player into giving up!
One of the funnest games I saw in Amsterdam was one where a back player played without a marker and the other team didn't know it. It looked like he was going to succeed in holding the opponents off until time ran out.
_____________________________________
19.6...The following chrono-procedure will be done with the “red”
radar field chono on which the players checked in with exactly two clearing shots and a single (the 3rd!) shot which is the official result of the velocity check.
_____________________________________
I disagree. What if the first shot or two is 350? I don't want to get shot at that velocity. And some of the netting I've seen lately wouldn't tolerate that velocity. If a marker spikes then the player must put in a safety margin.
_____________________________________
27.1...leaves a mark no matter of what size it is.
_____________________________________
If a player is hit it should be solid and at least as large as a krona or a €2 coin. But it must be seen to have been a direct hit and it that size can be spread out or oblong (oval). I've seen too much bitching about players being taken out without an apparent hit.
_____________________________________
27.4...Players using electric or electronic markers must ask for permission from a judge before operating buttons during the game. That includes turning the marker off. Players who operate buttons without permission of a judge will be eliminated from play.
_____________________________________
I'm not sure about this one. I think judges need to closely watch a player who is tinkering too much with his toy, for obvious reasons.
_____________________________________
28.5 If a player is eliminated while in possession of a flag, the flag judge will radio his
counterpart at the opposition flag station to rehang the spare flag.
_____________________________________
This one I strongly disagree with. NPPL has had a player who is eliminated with the flag stand up ever since the beginning 10 years ago. I've never seen a problem with that. Sure, once in a blue moon a player gets an extra hit, but not so often.
The games are much too fast to have the disruption or time run out because judges are trying to sort out getting a flag re-hung at the base of origin. Things are complicated enough as it is! And I disagree with the X Ball rule of dropping the flag if hit. Then it gets lost.
____________________________________
29.1 Playing on entails continuing to act as an active player in the game after getting inactive. Playing on includes...saying “hit”, “out” or “eliminated”, which constitues a playing on.
______________________________________
I totally disagree with this one. I have been saying "hit" for 11 years now (the few times I get hit). I was mugged during a game in Amsterdam and I screamed, "Ow! O.K.! I'm hit," as a natural reaction. I should have had a 1-4-1 pulled if they had followed this rule. It is clear when a player is shouting hit to stop the pelting and when he/she is talking to teammates.
Again, just my thoughts on the issue.
Steve
A--agree with Steve on this one. Actually, I agree with Steve on most of 'em.
B--if the question is spiking then you need to do away with clearing shots cus most spikes as Colin described them are the first and/or second shot.
C--this one is a no win proposition. If a ref is watching a player in his (her) zone and see a ball break on a hopper, for example, but the paint sprays away leaving little or no mark is the player out? If a ref across the field sees the same thing and signals to the zone ref to pull that player but the ref finds no mark should he still pull him? Personally I'm inclined to go with the must leave an obvious mark call in ALL situations. After all, sometimes paint bounces too, right? So maybe 1 in a 100 breaks will leave virtually no mark--good for you. At least that way there can be no controversy as to whether any player was marked or not.
D--this issue ain't gonna be solved by refs on the field but in the meantime players shouldn't be allowed (as possible) to alter the marker in any way after elimination including pulling the trigger. [And no, I ain't gonna explain that if you don't already know why as it's another can o' worms.]
E--As it reads it also penalizes the team that had the flag until their player was eliminated. Flag was grabbed, advanced and player hit. Now "a" flag should be put back where the first flag was grabbed and the advancement made not count at all?
F--Yep, we've always allowed that but what ought to be important, as Steve mentioned someplace, is that as many of the rules as possible should coincide. So, allow it or disallow it, but everybody do it the same if possible.
New rules once again...
Do we really need a new set of rules before (well, almost) each Millennium Event?
Is it that hard to make changelogs to the rules? I am one of the guys who translate the Millennium rules into Spanish for better understanding of the few Spanish players and it is a real pain in the a$$ to proofread the whole book every four weeks...
Now, onto Steve's points:
A.- Agreed. If you're cold wear a sweater to the field and put it after the game. It's not like we're still playing one-hour long games, is it?
B.- Absolutely agreed. One shot, any shot, over 300 and you're out. I still have not made my mind about what should be done with shots over 311 before the game starts, but I guess they should be punished harder as they are during the game.
C.- Hard one. I guess the player should still be on game if there is no visible hit. As Nick put it, balls bounce and sometimes it is hard to tell when a ball has broken on the player and when on the bunker (if the ref is not close enough).
D.- Right. In a perfect world I should be able to turn my COPs/eye off... but.
E.- I have yet to see a radio in use by the refs in a Millennium Event (apart the one used by the Head Judge to talk to the Organization). I don't really see the point of this rule, in fact.
F.- Maybe I'm the only one who reads the rules like this but:
If I discover that I'm hit, I'm still in play until I call myself out. That can be done by saying "out", putting my barrel condom, throwing my armband...(rule 27.7 of rulebook version 1.1 and first note to rule 36.1, same rulebook) So I could get a hit, shout "out" and get off the field. However, if the reff pulls my armband then I'm out and I cannot say anything at all or I will be playing-on.
Since I'm such a newbie I can very well be mistaken
Do we really need a new set of rules before (well, almost) each Millennium Event?
Is it that hard to make changelogs to the rules? I am one of the guys who translate the Millennium rules into Spanish for better understanding of the few Spanish players and it is a real pain in the a$$ to proofread the whole book every four weeks...
Now, onto Steve's points:
A.- Agreed. If you're cold wear a sweater to the field and put it after the game. It's not like we're still playing one-hour long games, is it?
B.- Absolutely agreed. One shot, any shot, over 300 and you're out. I still have not made my mind about what should be done with shots over 311 before the game starts, but I guess they should be punished harder as they are during the game.
C.- Hard one. I guess the player should still be on game if there is no visible hit. As Nick put it, balls bounce and sometimes it is hard to tell when a ball has broken on the player and when on the bunker (if the ref is not close enough).
D.- Right. In a perfect world I should be able to turn my COPs/eye off... but.
E.- I have yet to see a radio in use by the refs in a Millennium Event (apart the one used by the Head Judge to talk to the Organization). I don't really see the point of this rule, in fact.
F.- Maybe I'm the only one who reads the rules like this but:
If I discover that I'm hit, I'm still in play until I call myself out. That can be done by saying "out", putting my barrel condom, throwing my armband...(rule 27.7 of rulebook version 1.1 and first note to rule 36.1, same rulebook) So I could get a hit, shout "out" and get off the field. However, if the reff pulls my armband then I'm out and I cannot say anything at all or I will be playing-on.
Since I'm such a newbie I can very well be mistaken
R
raehl
Guest
The thing about hits...
IS if you've been playing paintball for a while, you can tell with 99.8% certainty what's a hit and what isn't by looking at the mark, regardless of size. Splatter looks like splatter.
Now, actually DESCRIBING that in writing - well, that's a pain in the butt.
I honestly think this a case where it should really be judge's discretion, combined with some training. A judge knows what a hit is, just like an umpire knows what a strike is.
- Chris
IS if you've been playing paintball for a while, you can tell with 99.8% certainty what's a hit and what isn't by looking at the mark, regardless of size. Splatter looks like splatter.
Now, actually DESCRIBING that in writing - well, that's a pain in the butt.
I honestly think this a case where it should really be judge's discretion, combined with some training. A judge knows what a hit is, just like an umpire knows what a strike is.
- Chris
Chris is right, describing a hit so that it fits every eventuality isn't so easy.
I think a hit should always be the size of a US quarter-dollar/2 euro coin UNLESS it hits a squeegee or visor or some similar place and a part of that "quarter" sprays elsewhere AND is definitely witnessed by a judge. Any other direct hit, such as on a player's body, should always be that size.
Otherwise we will just continue to have disputes and word-against-word situations. I have heard countless numbers of times, "He took me out for THAT?!"
Another point in the current rules needs some work:
_________________________________
6.7 A field is defined as being a flat, level area, surfaced to minimise players injury and completely surrounded by netting to ensure safety, and of a maximum size of 10 metres by 6 metres per player on a team. A field is to hold at least 2,5 obstacles (bunkers) per player on one team. A field is always to be greater in length than in width.
_________________________________
Could someone interpret for me what the maximum size is for 7-player? I mean 7-player is what these rules are written for, right?
And isn't the MINIMUM size more important to define than the maximum?
It would be simpler to just write: "The minimum size for a 7-player field is....and the maximum size is...."
And what is the minimum and maximum number of obstacles?
Clarity helps!
I think a hit should always be the size of a US quarter-dollar/2 euro coin UNLESS it hits a squeegee or visor or some similar place and a part of that "quarter" sprays elsewhere AND is definitely witnessed by a judge. Any other direct hit, such as on a player's body, should always be that size.
Otherwise we will just continue to have disputes and word-against-word situations. I have heard countless numbers of times, "He took me out for THAT?!"
Another point in the current rules needs some work:
_________________________________
6.7 A field is defined as being a flat, level area, surfaced to minimise players injury and completely surrounded by netting to ensure safety, and of a maximum size of 10 metres by 6 metres per player on a team. A field is to hold at least 2,5 obstacles (bunkers) per player on one team. A field is always to be greater in length than in width.
_________________________________
Could someone interpret for me what the maximum size is for 7-player? I mean 7-player is what these rules are written for, right?
And isn't the MINIMUM size more important to define than the maximum?
It would be simpler to just write: "The minimum size for a 7-player field is....and the maximum size is...."
And what is the minimum and maximum number of obstacles?
Clarity helps!
R
raehl
Guest
So does Math Steve
Minimum size is unspecified. Max size is 42,70 meters. Min. number of bunkers is 17.5, which to me seems incredibly low for 7-man.
As for hits, what about those hits that hit the edge of a hopper, and leave paint, and are OBVIOUSLY hits, but not big enough?
You're already asking judges to look at an area of paint and figure out if it's combined area is so big - if you're going to do that, you might as well just let the judge figure out if its a hit or not. They're probably much better at saying "This is a hit" and "This is not a hit" than they are saying "This paint splat has a surface area exceeding 5 square cm".
- Chris
Minimum size is unspecified. Max size is 42,70 meters. Min. number of bunkers is 17.5, which to me seems incredibly low for 7-man.
As for hits, what about those hits that hit the edge of a hopper, and leave paint, and are OBVIOUSLY hits, but not big enough?
You're already asking judges to look at an area of paint and figure out if it's combined area is so big - if you're going to do that, you might as well just let the judge figure out if its a hit or not. They're probably much better at saying "This is a hit" and "This is not a hit" than they are saying "This paint splat has a surface area exceeding 5 square cm".
- Chris
So does Math Steve
S
42.7 meter? I rest my case about the unclarity. Some Swedes on a different forum came up with a two dimensional measurement that didn't include 42.7 m.
That's what I was referring to with "UNLESS it hits a squeegee or visor or some similar place and a part of that "quarter" sprays elsewhere AND is definitely witnessed by a judge." What I don't like to see happen is for a player to get taken out by a hit on the chest that leaves a drop-sized mark on him/her.
S
Where did you guys take Math ????
6 meters by 10 = 60 square meters
per player on a team = 7 players, there are 7 players on a team
7 x 60 = 420 sq. meters, a pretty damn small field and that's max.
14 x 60 = 840 sq. meters, bigger but not big enough since a 30 x 60 meter field comes up to 1800 square meters. Magued's fields at Joy would be too big if you read it just as it's written.
Just write the minimum and maximum dimensions!
That's exactly my point, Nick. The wording can easily lead a native speaker of English, such as me, who teaches English to a strange conclusion. Maybe it's easier for you since your native tongue is a few steps closer to German.
6 meters by 10 = 60 square meters
per player on a team = 7 players, there are 7 players on a team
7 x 60 = 420 sq. meters, a pretty damn small field and that's max.
14 x 60 = 840 sq. meters, bigger but not big enough since a 30 x 60 meter field comes up to 1800 square meters. Magued's fields at Joy would be too big if you read it just as it's written.
Just write the minimum and maximum dimensions!