Opinions 141 rules?

[Chicago]

I think THIS is something they try to avoid! Because you´ll give the players opportunity to DISCUSS with a ref. "No, I just played 2.55 sec. on." U know what I mean.

I in no way meant to imply that the rule should say '3 seconds or less'. The practice should just be, if the ref sees the hit, and the ref pulls you immediately, then no penalty is assessed. As a practical matter, this should restrict any extra 'live' time to 3 seconds or less. (Probably less than that even.)


Also, as a general note, no rule gives the players the opportunity to argue, if they properly assess the 1-4-1's for players not getting their asses off the field.

 

[Lex]

Sry Chicago, was a mistake in readin your post, that´s why I edited it as fast as possible. But you where faster

As I readed it again, I noticed what you mean!

Cheers, Lex

 

[Beaker]

Chicago,

My point was, at the moment the ref will assess the 1-4-1 on the players reaction to being hit, not whether he sees the hit in principle. To be fair there have been refs that "wait" for players to play on and then give them a 1-4-1 when if they just eliminated them straight away then it'd be avoided.

I agree with your amendment though, more sensible.

 

[ThreeD]

2-4-1 would kill the games even more. I think 1-4-1s and 3-4-1s are fine. I know there are rules about a 2-4-1 but they were never used, same to neutraliziations on the field.

I am fine with pack hits in CPL and SPL, perhaps they should be softer in D2 and M5. D1 has to learn knowing where the paint is coming from.

 

[SAMUEL.D.RYAN]

What's unfair about it? The effect of the foul is the same, the penalty should be the same.

The effect is the same, but the intent is different, the one who knowingly played on is more likely to do it again IMO

 

[Chicago]

The effect is the same, but the intent is different, the one who knowingly played on is more likely to do it again IMO

But you can't enforce intent. You can only enforce effect. If you attempt to enforce intent, all you'll end up doing is giving a free pass to the cheaters who are good at making it look like they didn't mean it.


This is one of the big areas that I think paintball gets VERY wrong, and is a key failure in some of the training classes. Too many officials don't want to pull the penalty if you don't think you MEANT to do it, so all the good cheaters have just figured out how to cheat without LOOKING like they meant to do it. No one has taken the time to teach the officials WHY they should not care one bit if the player meant to do it or not.


This is one of the reasons the NXL refs are the best. If you do something that should get a penalty, you get the damned penalty. None of the judges care if you meant to do it. If you didn't mean to do it, but you still did it, it's still your fault for not making sure you didn't do it. That keeps the game under much better control than, say, a NPPL game, where the officials are very lax about actually enforcing penalties, and the players take that wiggle room and create chaos in the game (and then get mad when they chaos doesn't work out to their advantage.)


And that's really all in the training. If you talk to trained, experienced refs in any other sport and you suggest that penalties shouldn't be called if the player 'didn't mean it', they'll laugh at you. The NXL refs will give you a similarly crazy look. But most paintball refs, who are mostly current and ex paintball players, tend to think like players - "I may not have known I was hit and wouldn't want a penalty so I don't want to penalize this guy" - which is exactly what the cheaters use to wreak their havok.

 

[BOOGIE]

Ok heres somthing to think on: What dose unobvious mean??? Correct me if im wrong but a 1-4-1 or 2 min or 1 min depending on your format means you are hit in a unobvious location and are playing on. I still cant understand why you get so worked up over a ref making a call instead of just standing there and doing nothing. As long as they are consistant and make the same call on everyone thats all you can ask for.As a player you are responsable for your actions and a 1-4-1 on a pack hit is just bad luck nothing you can reall do about it.As a player for 27 years i can in all honesty tell you that i know 95% of the time im hit in the pack and if i ever do get a 1-4-1 for it ill write it off as bad luck.I cannot tell you the times i have had discussing this with players and we will be continue this discussion for the entire life of paintball.
As for the retard center punched in the chest ,thigh,or right between the eyes you gonna fry like bacon boy and deservingly so.

 

[Oli HPG]

2-4-1 would kill the games even more. I think 1-4-1s and 3-4-1s are fine. I know there are rules about a 2-4-1 but they were never used, same to neutraliziations on the field.

I am fine with pack hits in CPL and SPL, perhaps they should be softer in D2 and M5. D1 has to learn knowing where the paint is coming from.

I am sorry to burst your bubble here and reading this is quite shocking!

D, this is not aimed at you as a personal dig but just to ease some peoples pain here.

The 1-4-1 rule has improved the game. Over the past few months we have seen that teams are not less likely to play on with hits. Before they did tend to not "feel" a hit. A 1-4-1 is pulled if you are hit and you play on. Playing on even counts when you are just posting with your marker.

We DO pull 2-4-1 depending on the effect the playing on had during the game.If your playing on did effect the game and the Ref see it to implement a 2-4-1 you will receive that penalty!

I know for a fact that there have been a fair few 2-4-1 been given in Paris.

Some players should really take the rule book and read it before they comment on things. It is shocking how few players actually know the rules of the sport they play. They act on things they might have heard but not actually understand.

The marshalling standard has gone up and has made a very positive impact on the game.

 

[shamu]

two things

1. Good comments from chicago, boogie and beaker.

2. if you want better, more consistent reffing, writing "new and improved" rules won't do it. Regardless of how fantastically well written the rulebook is, it has to be enforced by flesh and blood referees. Those referees have their own minds and will see situations differently. The best way to improve the quality and consistency of reffing is to improve the refs themselves, which means an ongoing training and proficiency system. Train, evaluate, coach - that's what you need.

To elaborate on one of Chicago's comments - the NXL refs are the best for two reasons: they work together all the time and they have people watching over them. By working together over a long period of time, the calls they make will be more consistent from ref to ref and from game to game.

PS - Personally I prefer the impact interpretation of the rule. Did the player (regardless of where they were hit) have an impact on the game? Impact doesn't just mean shooting their marker, it means continuing to act as a live player by talking, loading or just sitting in their bunker. If the player is not actively checking or trying to check themself and a ref has to run over to get them, they've had an impact on the game by distracting the other team and a 1-4-1 is warranted.

 

[tech]

141

I have done my fair share of marshalling and i know how difficult it is but i think that the marshals have to be impartial to the outcome of the game, not be assosiated to any of the teams involved and implement the rules with comon sense.

I always believed the refs job was to imporm a player that he had been eliminated from the game and if he believed that a player had broken the rules of the tournamet was to asses a penalty acordingly.

I now believe that refs are there to impliment penilties rather than to marshal a game in the object of fair play.

The marshal now has a greater say in the outcome of the game than a cheat could in many occasions. a player now has to be more concerned about been eliminated by a marshal than by his opposition!! how can this be right.

The revised 1-4-1 rule in the millenium series was put in to cover all events and avoid arguments, if a player is playing on with a hit he should be penalised.
it has been taken to far, the pack should not be a 1-4-1, just an elimination.

i would strongly earge the millenium to alter this and allow the refs to use common sense and not encourage them to be so automaton.