Read all about it: $500 Fine for Cheaty Guns, no team DQ

[stongle]

Originally posted by paintballma

One change in NPPL rules will be no more team DQ for guns. Individual player gets suspended and $500 fine. Team plays short handed, but are not tossed from the event.

Fo'real????

All levels or just Pro? This may be enforcable at the Pro level, but can you see this at Rookie?

Also, how will the fines be imposed, forced and appealed?

Kinda seems the NPPL has launched an all out Pro offensive and little mention or trickle down of thought to the lower levels. Not really acceptable policy if you ask me. After all there are 10 times as many non-pro teams at an event. MLTs are not played by just 18 teams, the NPPL and PP should give just as much if not more thought to the majority.

 

[paintballma]

The rule is applied across the board, all levels. Enforcement came up of course and the player will not be allowed to play another event until the fine is paid, it follows him.
Safety was a huge part of the meeting and illegal markers have to be dealt with.
Personally I like this rule better than the whole team being disqualified for one persons cheat.

The Pro division is the "elite" division, but they are looking to do the best they can for all of us, believe me, that is why I went to the meeting

 

[vlad]

money is a serious thing -- are they going to bring the robot to the european events?

 

[stongle]

Originally posted by paintballma
The rule is applied across the board, all levels. Enforcement came up of course and the player will not be allowed to play another event until the fine is paid, it follows him.
Safety was a huge part of the meeting and illegal markers have to be dealt with.
Personally I like this rule better than the whole team being disqualified for one persons cheat.

The Pro division is the "elite" division, but they are looking to do the best they can for all of us, believe me, that is why I went to the meeting

Yes, the rule is a good one and is better than the Team DQ. However I forsee enforcement issues, but also those of appeal. It also penalises the poorer players more, but I suppose the "don't like the fine don't do the crime" saying comes into force.

Still think the appeal issue needs to be clearly thought through.

 

[paintballma]

Is there an appeal for DQ in the current rules? I have never heard it discussed. Teams just took their medicine as far as I have heard. Hopefully this will cause the players to think twice before modifying guns. Basically hit them where it hurts.

 

[stongle]

Originally posted by paintballma
Is there an appeal for DQ in the current rules? I have never heard it discussed. Teams just took their medicine as far as I have heard. Hopefully this will cause the players to think twice before modifying guns. Basically hit them where it hurts.

Ma,

Yes, but now we're talking hitting players directly in the pocket.

What if it's just a single unintentional bounce?
What if it's a new Marker supplied from a given supplier at the event. On numerous occasions guns have come from a certain manufacturer stacking shots causing players to get DQ'd or banned. These were brand new.
How do we prove the impartiality of any Marshalling?

To levy a 500 buck fine, then they have to prove volitional intent to cheat, which is going to be exceptionally difficult (like open up the marker and "Whoaaah, Advantage PB chip, 500 bucks thank you very much"). Any fiscal penalty system I've been "done" by has had an appeals / mitigation process.

Also where is the player protection body. We've talked for yonks about an EPA (European Players Association), to ensure players are protected from unscrupulous organisers / events / marshals, where is the player protection in this scheme. I wouldn't trust any of the tournament bodies to implement such a scheme, fair and impartially (especially when the event organisers are far from impartial).

You may also need to consider the fiscal inequalities to the European player. What if the first event catches too many kids with accidentally bouncing stacking guns? A lot of these people are paying entrance fees, paint, kit etc out of there own pocket. Their just going to tip the NPPL's b*llocks and never bother playing it again. 40 players got DQ'd at Toulouse, that's a lot of players and a lot of teams playing short. This will hit the less experienced much harder, they may not know how to set their guns up properly (ok not much excuse for that but it happens), can we assume that the NPPL or manufacturers are going to provide enough Robots and time to set-up all games legal? Europe has not had the experience or chance to catch up with such stringent enforcement and has yet to see a robot, we need some time to adjust. Catching too many players is extremely counterproductive. I worked for a company that ran a widespread drug testing program. Anyone testing positive would be disciplined, so many people tested positive that, that policy went out the window.

Also where do the fines go to? The NPPL's benevolent player fund or PP's Pockets? How about funding a decent Player Organisation? I'd want to see transparency of accounting. Toulouse would have been 20 G's in fines, that needs to be put to GOOD use.

I back the idea in principle, unfortunately this is not something you can just implement on a whim it needs A LOT of thought. There is no excuse for gun cheats, but it's an aggressive and risky approach. Paintballers have an amazing capability to be inept, let alone live in the real world when thinking about rule interpretation and implementation.

G

 

[JtJ]

This is a private organization. They are not required to provide an appeals process. Ordinarily I'd agree that one was necessary for due process, but the adminstration of such will create more of a problem than it would solve.

The NPPL/PP does not have to prove "volitional intent to cheat". As a private organization, they are legally entitled to invite people not to come back. That's all they have to do. As for intent to cheat, ignorance is not a defense for breaking the law.

I see it as really simple, "Your gun was illegal. Pay $xxx or don't come back." Maybe the player(s) would have a case against the manufacturer, but not against the league.

As for transparency of accounting, again, this is a private organization, not required to answer fiscal questions of that nature.

 

[paintballma]

You seem a bit cynical. First, I am not sure as I said, if the rules apply to Euro events, this is a NPPL rule. If they apply it, it would mean that the robot will be there. How is it any less fair for the Euro teams than it was for us this year? We had no access to it prior the the first event. I believe only 5 teams all year were caught. It did worry a lot of players, but in the end it was not a huge issue, unless of course you were one of the teams caught.

To me as a team manager, it is far better to lose one player who decides to go against my team rules (and I know for a fact that in at least 2 of the instances the rest of the team was unaware of the illegal marker being used) than for my whole team to be DQed, which would cost 10x as much in expenses.

 

[stongle]

I'm not against the rule or the principle. Yes it is far better to lose a player than the whole team. I also agree an appeals process would be difficult to enforce or administer, but the system is open to abuse.

I've not seen an official ruling, only what's been posted here, but does this also include Hot guns? There is no excuse for poor equipment maintenance, but your going to catch and punish and a lot of Rookies for a sloppy set-up the same as intentional cheats. Not really the same order of magnitude, and these are the bread & butter paying customers of the league (private or not).

We've all been on the winning and losing end of suspect marshalling, some of it costing us Millennium Sunday Clubs. Sloppy pre-game chrono procedures (that are subjective at the best of times) are going to open a whole very nasty can of worms. Are the NPPL going to guarantee "wunderfinger-kid" at field Chrono stations?

The get tough policy at Toulouse yielded 40+ Player DQ's (I even heard their was abit of joke DQ Chip Leader board for the Judges), you spring this on teams and players with little information or preventative measures, it's going to alienate those you seek to protect.

I agree with the rule, but want the maximum player protection implemented with it i.e.

The chrono procedures examined, with time to adjust
NPPL to support or sponsor the Manufacturers with pre-teching arrangements for all players not just pro
Escalation to head judge
Proof or Robot Calibration
etc etc

Prevention of the cheat before it gets to the field is far better than the cure.

Oh Paintballma,

I do think the NPPL ruleset will and has to be standardised for the 4 Euro Legs, don't see how it can't be. And as to cynical, well I played 4 millennium X Ball events this year, cynicism come gratis.

 

[shwoomie]

how would this be enforced?

i.e at the pregame chronoing if my gun bounces do i have time to fix it or is it automaticly $500 and thanks for coming the door is that way!

and if i pass the pregame chrono and have not touched the settings on my gun and a ref thinks that my fingers cant be moving that fast and checks my gun after the game and finds it to be bouncy does that mean that the chrono guy is to blame for letting my gun on the field?

and if my gun is found to be bouncing after the game by a different judge am i able to get the chrono judge to test it again to make the point that he didnt find it to be bouncing and am i allowed to try to make it bounce (of course this comes as a final and very heavily suspected option)? or is it just "hey it bounced $500 thanks" ?

but what im tryin to say is that if 2 different judges say the opposite things and there is no robot to be found and i cant make the gun bounce am i still going to pay?