Moving the Goal Post

[Tom Tom]

(Baca, Sorry if this aint the right idea for Tourneys)

Right a bit of a question for the mind.

With all the things I have read about Tourney ball recently and the big players putting weight on their representatives on commitees and boards to over turn decisions. Also the way "banning" players for games and tourneys has been "inconcistent" would an external "board" be the answer?

Most of paintball (because it is young) seems incestious (correct me if I have the wrong end of the stick).

If another group of people was asked in to draw up laws or guidelines on recomedaitions of players and the Millenium board etc and become an external body for the sport (like the F.A yes they are into football but have no affiliations to any one club or person so each player is dealt with due to acts he has commited)

Would an external "board" be able to help regulate the Tourney scene to a less personal way.

Also they are not allied to a team or want to play themselves in the tourneys etc etc?

I hope that makes sense?

 

[Hotpoint]

Paintball does clearly require it's equivalent of FIFA, or at least UEFA, but every time the issue is raised nobody (or hardly anybody) seems enthusiastic

There are people willing to run it but the question is one of both their legitimacy to do so and whether the infamous "powers-that-be" would be willing to accept an external authority which is beholdant nether to Industry nor players

Until everyone grows up and puts the interests of paintball before their own we'll never be a properly managed Sport

Just my 0.02 Euro's

 

[Liz]

I think the problem with this would be that there are so few people with any kind of power & who know anything about the sport that AREN'T team owners, event organisers & such like. All the top "name" players are in teams that are obligated in some way to the movers & shapers in the industry so we can't even go down that route without there being implications of undue influence. The very few people in Europe with the necessary knowledge & influence who aren't tied in some way to the industry seem to be the guys on the Millennium disciplinary committee.
I've thought about this quite a bit over the last few months as there's been a number of discussions here on the subject, but still can't come up with a solution that would keep everyone happy. These people need to have at least some knowledge of the sport, which bearing in mind how few people have even heard of it means either players or manufacturers/promoters. I think everything I've read recently on these boards suggests that we wouldn't be happy with this "official" body being made up from the manufacturers & promoters which leaves players or ex-players. People in this kind of position of authority would have to be respected by the rest of the sport, so this would mean pro level players who would have the necessary profile - you can't really respect anyone who you've never even heard of, and I can't see pro players looking up to novices exactly!
But now we have the problem that sponsorship is a necessary evil if you want to play at the highest level as I know very few people who could afford to play all the Millenniums, plus some warm up tourneys, plus do training, unless they have at least SOME assistance e.g. paint, kit, entries etc. So now the few players who are known well enough to be respected are tied in with the manufacturers which means the accusations of bias would fly in this situation.
The ONLY people I could see that would fulfil the criteria of being respected and being seen to be neutral are ex-pro players who haven't ended up in the business in any way who had a good reputation when they were still playing.
Of course, even with this solution there would be accusations of bias towards their old mates who now ARE involved in the industry, but I think it's the closest we could get. Naturally, these ex-players would have to be briefed back up to date with the current rules & regulations, and there would be central costs to be taken into consideration like flights & hotels to the millennium events etc (which I can't see the sport supporting right now).

 

[Hotpoint]

Whilst I have to agree that many "Pro" Players would be unwilling to put their ego's on old and be willing to accept the authority of paintballers from the Nov or Am ranks. Surely that division is one of the difficulties we face in the game?

Do we need famous players to run things? Surely that would just exacerbate the problem. What we need ideally is enthusiastic non-entities with no to axe to grind either way. Maybe a famous 'baller as a figurehead Chairman but the real power should be with a (preferably elected) council or commitee

As for funding. Well I can't disagree with Liz there. It'll all cost money and despite the amount of the stuff that exists in Paintball I doubt you could get much of it directed the right way.

Idealistic but pesimistic... that's me

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by Tom Tom
(Baca, Sorry if this aint the right idea for Tourneys)

Spot on and excellent thread starter for the new and improved and more relevant than ever Tourney Forum.

I think the present state of affairs allows only for incremental changes and those are instituted from the top down. So don't expect miracles. Right now most of the things that are changing may seem like relatively small things but they aren't. There certainly isn't an inevitability to recent improvements but there is some momentum and as long as the players continue to pay the frieght they have a voice. They just have to use it.

 

[Tom Tom]

Originally posted by Baca Loco

Spot on and excellent thread starter for the new and improved and more relevant than ever Tourney Forum.

I've been called many things in my time but how......Ohh it was a good thing

Originally posted by Baca Loco
I think the present state of affairs allows only for incremental changes and those are instituted from the top down. So don't expect miracles. Right now most of the things that are changing may seem like relatively small things but they aren't. There certainly isn't an inevitability to recent improvements but there is some momentum and as long as the players continue to pay the frieght they have a voice. They just have to use it.

So how long do we have to wait on these "incremental" changes? Small things do make a difference and I for one would like to see such a great development in anything that helps "standadise" the sport. But if the small things aren't put into any kind of context and adapted to fit the bigger jigsaw puzzle will things really move on from jut the development process?

 

[Baca Loco]

Re: Re: Moving the Goal Post

Originally posted by Tom Tom
So how long do we have to wait on these "incremental" changes? Small things do make a difference and I for one would like to see such a great development in anything that helps "standadise" the sport. But if the small things aren't put into any kind of context and adapted to fit the bigger jigsaw puzzle will things really move on from jut the development process?

Think of it like the collapse of the Soviet Union where relatively modest changes turned out to be like a crack in a dam--there's a lot of pressure suddenly applied to the weak spot.
At this point the small changes are both providing structure and leading toward standardization which will be or could be the basis for the "great development" you'd like to see. That, however, only is possible if/when the primary revenue sources change.