NPPL Super Seven Series

[Mark/Static]

Re: Re: Re: 3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Wadidiz
With tight fields the muggings could come from an almost infinite number of directions. We also have to be careful about too much pre-positioning. We don't want to tell a player he's about to get done.

A ref in the clear can see who is about to make a move, when a game comes to that there are usually fewer players on the field, the size of the field has been shrunken due to the advantage one team has over the other, and if the refs keep moving throughout the course of the game, no hands will be tipped. Another thing I always do when reffing is to wear smoked lenses, and always use my eyes rather than turn my head towards a pending mugging.

 

[Baca Loco]

3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Mark/Static
always use my eyes rather than turn my head towards a pending mugging.

Hehehehe Mark said, mugging. You closet Anglophile, you.

 

[Wadidiz]

3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Baca Loco
1--now wasn't what we were talking about was it? 2 or 4 of the world's most gifted refs ain't gonna be able to control a 10-man game regardless but anybody who understands the game can walk a field and have some pretty clear indicators where the "problem" areas are gonna be and during the play of the game that is refined by where players are positioned.
2--so they could but only to a limited number of opposition players. I don't care if 10 guys could make the move if they're only gonna end up in 3 places it ain't that hard. Additionally, refs will, when there is a standardized number always on the field, have overlapping zones of responsibility. I guess in this discussion I'm more a of a nuts and bolts kinda guy as it's one thing, an essential thing, to have a clear, concise well ordered rules structure and another to devise exactly how one goes about training refs to be competent to effectively implement the rules--and nobody has really dealt with that issue yet.
3--as you've written it I've no problem with 3 strikes rule but I wouldn't apply it to X-Ball

With all the respect in the world I have to ask: have you reffed very much? I see from all your posts that you must be experienced and are very knowledgeable, but I wonder about the reffing.

I have reffed with some very experienced and competent refs, and even with 8 of us in 7-player games, we still miss some close situations. Maybe I should change "miss most" or "miss a lot" to "miss some". Who knows how many but we can't catch them all.

And I think my rule is needed as much, if not more, for X-ball as anywhere else. But how can I convince?

Steve

 

[Baca Loco]

3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Wadidiz
1--With all the respect in the world I have to ask: have you reffed very much? I see from all your posts that you must be experienced and are very knowledgeable, but I wonder about the reffing.

2--I have reffed with some very experienced and competent refs, and even with 8 of us in 7-player games, we still miss some close situations. Maybe I should change "miss most" or "miss a lot" to "miss some". Who knows how many but we can't catch them all.

3--And I think my rule is needed as much, if not more, for X-ball as anywhere else. But how can I convince?

Steve

1--unfortunately I have. Last event I reffed I was the ultimate on my field and we had one complaint all day and after the guy calmed down and I explained the situation and call to him everything was fine as it was more a heat of battle kind of response not a question of rules or interpretation. In fact we had numerous teams tell us all day long they wished they could play all their games on our field alone.
2--which is exactly my point of HOW refs are prepared to do their job. Same as a team playing, 10 great players don't make a great team necessarily. Either you don't trust your own judgments or you aren't really comfortable with how you're reffing. I'm not saying it's easy cus it ain't, I'm saying that proper prep and organization of the refs is critical to doing the job correctly.
3--I have no problem with suspending pro players for certain kinds of infraction--physical contact and so on but as penalties are enforced during play of the game and isolated specific incidents have much less impact on final outcome of the matches I wouldn't be inclined to add an extra penalty. Besides, if a coach wants to keep putting in a player who continually puts his team in a hole that's his call, too. Just my opinion.

 

[Wadidiz]

3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Baca Loco
1--not if he can only see one at a time which is why we have usually ended up with simo's in those situations regardless. One ref who is close is watching one player, usually the defender--God knows why--and waits to see him hit, then checks attacker to see if he's hit too. Then they're both gone. No other refs are usually willing to offer any assistance as they were further away, don't want to get into a big argument, and tend to defer to the present ref as there have never been any provisions made for how to handle such situations in an organized, coordinated manner. ultimately HOW refs are trained will be as important as the rules they, and we, operate under.
2--I hear that.

1. That is basic but you're right, a lot of refs miss this or don't bother to co-ordinate it. Getting the whole ref corp singing from the same sheet of music and discussing such things at a pre-tourney briefing is part of the whole package I suggested in the "Enforcing the rules..." thread.

2. Refs that would work in a program I'm suggesting would be held accountable and have an on-field boss. They better work hard or get gone.

Steve

 

[Robbo]

cool

Originally posted by Bigdog
So call it an even hundred years of experience on your side.
So that means i have to find three teamates to make up the years??
Of course, you should be proud, if it was a legit call, then don't back down, thats exactly what I'm talking about. Make the calls & stick with it. If that makes a nazi, then get the swastika for the new refs badge. Nice that because you didn't agree with them it automatically makes you a facist *******, but them doing whatever they want on the field is ok, screw that!

And I gain what exactly by beating y'all ?
I mean, if I win, well, 'God dammit Pete, you're expected to win' and if I lose ?
'Well, what a dick, the old sod can't hold a conversation let alone a marker' !!!!!
Hmmm, methinks the ratio of risk / gain ain't to my liking.
Steve, if you wanna m8, he's yours
Pete

 

[Mark/Static]

Re: 3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Wadidiz
I have reffed with some very experienced and competent refs, and even with 8 of us in 7-player games, we still miss some close situations. Maybe I should change "miss most" or "miss a lot" to "miss some". Who knows how many but we can't catch them all.

And I think my rule is needed as much, if not more, for X-ball as anywhere else. But how can I convince?

Steve

8 experienced refs? I'll leave that one alone.
So in missing "some" how do you justify a 3 strikes and you're out penalty for playing on? If it's excessive and you missed it, you still missed it.

 

[Bigdog]

Re: cool

Originally posted by Robbo
And I gain what exactly by beating y'all ?
I mean, if I win, well, 'God dammit Pete, you're expected to win' and if I lose ?
'Well, what a dick, the old sod can't hold a conversation let alone a marker' !!!!!
Hmmm, methinks the ratio of risk / gain ain't to my liking.
Steve, if you wanna m8, he's yours
Pete

IF you win it would be more like "See he really doesn't need that zimmer frame & guide dog after all", but when you lose it'll be "Shame on that youngster for beating a poor OAP like that"

Hey Pete - what was it like in London before cars?

just kidding, man I can't wait till I know that much about that many years of stuff

Is there any new news on the X-ball front?

 

[Wadidiz]

Re: Re: 3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Mark/Static
8 experienced refs? I'll leave that one alone.
So in missing "some" how do you justify a 3 strikes and you're out penalty for playing on? If it's excessive and you missed it, you still missed it.

Don't understand the question or point about "experience"? Do I need to spell out who they were or how much experience we had?

>>So in missing "some" how do you justify a 3 strikes and you're out penalty for playing on? If it's excessive and you missed it, you still missed it.

That's exactly the point. Because no reffing team on earth (unless there's 2 refs for every player) is going to catch every play-on. Therefore the ones that get caught need to pay for it so they'll change their behavior.

Pretty simple concept to me. Am I missing something in my ability to communicate it?

Steve

 

[Mark/Static]

Re: Re: Re: 3 strikes your out...

Originally posted by Wadidiz
Therefore the ones that get caught need to pay for it so they'll change their behavior.

Ahh! The old example makers. I hate that! I believe a reffing crew needs to go out there determined to not miss a thing, the whole aim small miss small thing. To assume you'll miss a call here and there, while realistic, should never be settled for.
As for the "8 experienced" comment, I just thought it a bit hard to fathom coming off of a tourney with sometimes half as many inexperienced refs on the field. But I think with the right philosphy, 8 refs would be more than enough for a 7-man game.