Now when this post first formulated in my head I was fired-up and ready to shout, just like when you get bonus balled by a guy you didn’t even realise was halfway up the snake.
Now I’ve had time to chew. A leisurely drive home, a long bath and good food have calmed me. However, there’re still issues that need to be resolved:
Anyone who played in the NSPL today will have noticed the one-for-one ruling if you’re hit, even if you don’t spot it. This is a retarded rule in itself, but I’ll get on to that later. I don’t know which aspect of the new “rule” peeved us off the most - the actual rule or the way it was implemented. The unbelievable inconsistency with which the marshals floundered around the field, tapping entire teams on their shoulders, whispering “one for one mate, you’re eliminated” was absolutely astounding.
Case number one: The very first game. Four of us live after a good game with XM7, Dave went to hang the flag and after some calls from the dead box that he’d gone on one of his pots, two marshals came over to check it out. The first couldn’t decide. The second was a little less decisive. The ultimate, after some deliberation, decided it was a break and therefore the flag was dead and had to be re-hung. Of course, now there were only two live players left in the game as Dave had been 1-4-1’d, taking me out with him. Would the first marshal have called him live if XM7 weren’t trying to influence him? (No offence to you XM7 guys, we’d do the same, but this is an important point that will become obvious later so REMEMBER THIS BIT…).
Case number two (which made me want to vomit in my own hopper): Burty gets taken on the opposite side of his hopper (the side he can’t see) and because of the way he plays, he wouldn’t be able to spot the spray if he was clipped anyway (he’s a bit of a contortionist), and he gets 1-4-1’d within seconds of being drilled. Fair call? Maybe it is, but you’ve got to think about the rule. It’s to stop people CHEATING. It’s to stop the little sh1ts who are obviously hit and keep on playing. So Burty, hit on an inanimate object, unaware of being marked, plays on for two/three more seconds before being called - and subsequently 1-4-1’d. Isn’t it the marshal’s job to call hits? Especially if a player can’t see he‘s been hit? Otherwise, what is the actual purpose of the marshal, apart from to keep score and call “game on”? This new rule calls their purpose into question, particularly in the NSPL being one of the more friendly communities. Anyway, now the marshal has decided our left side should be completely exposed so he takes our back left player out too (due to Burty breaking the new law).
Insult to injury, Dave gets called again on the pot, and I get pulled out with him because of it. Surely the marshals should be doing their job and pulling players out who haven’t noticed they’ve been shot ASAP, not punishing them for not being able to defy physics and constantly monitor their pots/gun/hopper, and any other part of their body/kit they might not be able to instantly notice that they’ve been hit on. If it’s an obvious hit, goggles, hand, chest etc, then go for it! 1-4-1 is a fair way to punish cheating teams. But to simply pull two players out because one didn’t spot it, (and the marshal didn’t spot it either, otherwise he would’ve surely called it), is utterly insane.
So now we’re four players light and naturally we get beat.
Case number three: Ady, (he was our back right player), gets pulled because of a dribble of green paint on his knee. 1-4-1’d, actually, which means the marshal wasn’t doing his job and watching the game. We argued the point that the mark was hardly a hit - much, much more likely he knelt onto a ball and it broke on his playing pants- but no, he’s called out and another of our players with him. Then we find out the other team are shooting yellow paint, not green. But the marshal refuses to admit he’s made a mistake. So the ultimate is brought into it. He says that maybe one of us shot him out became we‘re using green paint. But he’s our back player. Unless one of us accidentally turned completely round and accidentally aimed at his kneecaps and accidentally shot him and it accidentally didn’t make much of a mark and the marshal accidentally didn’t see it for ages… it’s not very likely.
But then he comes up with this corker: Perhaps there was one stray green ball within all the yellow paint they were shooting! And that single stray ball happened to be the one that made its way all the way over to our back corner (where Ady was kneeling), managed to get round the bunker and break on his knee. WHAT?! Obscene.
Case numero quattro (my personal favourite): Bob gets taken on the break and before he even has a chance to fire his marker he stops, checks himself, calls himself out and walks back to the dead zone. While he’s walking off a marshal trots over… calls Bob out, THEN ONE FOR ONES HIM BECAUSE HE “PLAYED ON”! Utterly amazing! He didn’t even get one ball out his gun and yet the marshal 1-4-1’s him!
Case number five: Our final game, It’s three against one, I take out the guy on the snake. It’s obviously on his forearm (Syd, come on, it was obvious. Two clear patches of paint with shell on his sleeve). But this guy in the snake is apparently clean so he pops up and drills the other three of us. He wanders over and hangs the flag. The marshal checks him after we point out the paint all over his forearm (bear in mind our game with XM7 earlier in the day where they did the same to us), and he’s called out. Dead flag situation. He obviously argues. Five minutes later, Syd says he’s live! The marshal that called him out was apparently under “too much pressure” from us so he called him out. Too much pressure? Surely this means he can’t do his job properly! Why was he paid when he obviously can’t work to a good enough standard, screwing our points?! So we lose that game too.
Now don’t get me wrong. We’re not bad losers, as long as it’s a fair game. We were on for first place until the marshals decided they were going to become mentally unstable and flail their arms around, pulling two, three, four players out at a time.
And now I come to London Tigers AM.
Who claimed a stray ball took out one of their players.
Against Bournemouth Riptide.
Who started with only six anyway.
So the game was called void and Riptide were told they had to have a rematch.
Why the fukc should they? They won!
I know why: It’s because the London Tigers have a bigger name than Bournemouth Riptide so they get to make up the rules if they want to. Where was OUR rematch offer when Ady got taken out by a ball that WASN’T EVEN THE SAME COLOUR AS WHAT THE OPPOSITION WAS SHOOTING?? And we’ve been in the league from the very beginning! That’s loyalty for you.
If we could vote with our feet we would. But there’s no point. There’s always a team to fill our spot if we refuse to play, there’s always going to be someone bringing in that game fee if someone makes a stand.
I’d like to show my respect to Riptide for forfeiting that rematch on principal. If the whole league was made up of teams like you guys (and marshals that could actually implement a rule evenly across the board - no matter how stupid), the NSPL would be nigh on perfect.
Thank you.
Now I’ve had time to chew. A leisurely drive home, a long bath and good food have calmed me. However, there’re still issues that need to be resolved:
Anyone who played in the NSPL today will have noticed the one-for-one ruling if you’re hit, even if you don’t spot it. This is a retarded rule in itself, but I’ll get on to that later. I don’t know which aspect of the new “rule” peeved us off the most - the actual rule or the way it was implemented. The unbelievable inconsistency with which the marshals floundered around the field, tapping entire teams on their shoulders, whispering “one for one mate, you’re eliminated” was absolutely astounding.
Case number one: The very first game. Four of us live after a good game with XM7, Dave went to hang the flag and after some calls from the dead box that he’d gone on one of his pots, two marshals came over to check it out. The first couldn’t decide. The second was a little less decisive. The ultimate, after some deliberation, decided it was a break and therefore the flag was dead and had to be re-hung. Of course, now there were only two live players left in the game as Dave had been 1-4-1’d, taking me out with him. Would the first marshal have called him live if XM7 weren’t trying to influence him? (No offence to you XM7 guys, we’d do the same, but this is an important point that will become obvious later so REMEMBER THIS BIT…).
Case number two (which made me want to vomit in my own hopper): Burty gets taken on the opposite side of his hopper (the side he can’t see) and because of the way he plays, he wouldn’t be able to spot the spray if he was clipped anyway (he’s a bit of a contortionist), and he gets 1-4-1’d within seconds of being drilled. Fair call? Maybe it is, but you’ve got to think about the rule. It’s to stop people CHEATING. It’s to stop the little sh1ts who are obviously hit and keep on playing. So Burty, hit on an inanimate object, unaware of being marked, plays on for two/three more seconds before being called - and subsequently 1-4-1’d. Isn’t it the marshal’s job to call hits? Especially if a player can’t see he‘s been hit? Otherwise, what is the actual purpose of the marshal, apart from to keep score and call “game on”? This new rule calls their purpose into question, particularly in the NSPL being one of the more friendly communities. Anyway, now the marshal has decided our left side should be completely exposed so he takes our back left player out too (due to Burty breaking the new law).
Insult to injury, Dave gets called again on the pot, and I get pulled out with him because of it. Surely the marshals should be doing their job and pulling players out who haven’t noticed they’ve been shot ASAP, not punishing them for not being able to defy physics and constantly monitor their pots/gun/hopper, and any other part of their body/kit they might not be able to instantly notice that they’ve been hit on. If it’s an obvious hit, goggles, hand, chest etc, then go for it! 1-4-1 is a fair way to punish cheating teams. But to simply pull two players out because one didn’t spot it, (and the marshal didn’t spot it either, otherwise he would’ve surely called it), is utterly insane.
So now we’re four players light and naturally we get beat.
Case number three: Ady, (he was our back right player), gets pulled because of a dribble of green paint on his knee. 1-4-1’d, actually, which means the marshal wasn’t doing his job and watching the game. We argued the point that the mark was hardly a hit - much, much more likely he knelt onto a ball and it broke on his playing pants- but no, he’s called out and another of our players with him. Then we find out the other team are shooting yellow paint, not green. But the marshal refuses to admit he’s made a mistake. So the ultimate is brought into it. He says that maybe one of us shot him out became we‘re using green paint. But he’s our back player. Unless one of us accidentally turned completely round and accidentally aimed at his kneecaps and accidentally shot him and it accidentally didn’t make much of a mark and the marshal accidentally didn’t see it for ages… it’s not very likely.
But then he comes up with this corker: Perhaps there was one stray green ball within all the yellow paint they were shooting! And that single stray ball happened to be the one that made its way all the way over to our back corner (where Ady was kneeling), managed to get round the bunker and break on his knee. WHAT?! Obscene.
Case numero quattro (my personal favourite): Bob gets taken on the break and before he even has a chance to fire his marker he stops, checks himself, calls himself out and walks back to the dead zone. While he’s walking off a marshal trots over… calls Bob out, THEN ONE FOR ONES HIM BECAUSE HE “PLAYED ON”! Utterly amazing! He didn’t even get one ball out his gun and yet the marshal 1-4-1’s him!
Case number five: Our final game, It’s three against one, I take out the guy on the snake. It’s obviously on his forearm (Syd, come on, it was obvious. Two clear patches of paint with shell on his sleeve). But this guy in the snake is apparently clean so he pops up and drills the other three of us. He wanders over and hangs the flag. The marshal checks him after we point out the paint all over his forearm (bear in mind our game with XM7 earlier in the day where they did the same to us), and he’s called out. Dead flag situation. He obviously argues. Five minutes later, Syd says he’s live! The marshal that called him out was apparently under “too much pressure” from us so he called him out. Too much pressure? Surely this means he can’t do his job properly! Why was he paid when he obviously can’t work to a good enough standard, screwing our points?! So we lose that game too.
Now don’t get me wrong. We’re not bad losers, as long as it’s a fair game. We were on for first place until the marshals decided they were going to become mentally unstable and flail their arms around, pulling two, three, four players out at a time.
And now I come to London Tigers AM.
Who claimed a stray ball took out one of their players.
Against Bournemouth Riptide.
Who started with only six anyway.
So the game was called void and Riptide were told they had to have a rematch.
Why the fukc should they? They won!
I know why: It’s because the London Tigers have a bigger name than Bournemouth Riptide so they get to make up the rules if they want to. Where was OUR rematch offer when Ady got taken out by a ball that WASN’T EVEN THE SAME COLOUR AS WHAT THE OPPOSITION WAS SHOOTING?? And we’ve been in the league from the very beginning! That’s loyalty for you.
If we could vote with our feet we would. But there’s no point. There’s always a team to fill our spot if we refuse to play, there’s always going to be someone bringing in that game fee if someone makes a stand.
I’d like to show my respect to Riptide for forfeiting that rematch on principal. If the whole league was made up of teams like you guys (and marshals that could actually implement a rule evenly across the board - no matter how stupid), the NSPL would be nigh on perfect.
Thank you.
