Originally posted by Intheno
1. strongle, The NPPL is not the Millennium series. You said it, and yet still wish to use toulouse in your argument. I have no problem with your math, it just doesn't make any sense to use the Millennium as a benchmark when discussing the NPPL. The instances you refer to were last year. The NPPL and the Millennium may be working together rule-wise next year, But this year they did not. Futile argument in my opinion.
2. The 'shock-horror' overkill you use goes right over my head. Is this something you jhave against me personally or does it have a bearing on the discussion. I have no wish to be a martyr, but I do have a wish to put accross a veiw that is not purely from a playing perspective. Is this shocking to you?
3. Am I hinting at a quality control gap? Without question, and I am not hinting, I am prepared to state that there is one there, for sure. An organisation with 4-6 decision-makers and few full-time employee's is not as manouverable or reactive as an organisation with a solid HQ and infrastructure (don't mean to knock the staff of any organisations, as it is not thier fault).
4. As for the rest, paintball is not free. Yes, I too wish it was, but how much people have to save up is not my problem, or the NPPL's. They charge what they charge. It is up to the players/teams to decide whether or not they get value for what is charged. If enough teams think they are getting vaue from the NPPL then they will succeed, if not they will fail. If they charge less than they need, they will fail. It is simple business and only becomes complicated when you start saying 'its the players league' etc. Yes, I believe it is the 'players league', but that does not mean it should not be run as a business. I am wary of being continually alarmist, but if the league(s) do not get supported they will cease to exist. At that stage you, and others like you, will start bleating that there is no decent league (again). The leagues are doing what they can to please thier 'customers' and the league that offers the best all-round package will be the most successful. This year it was the NPPL without doubt.
5. Finally on the 'players league', if a player is not a member of such league, do you believe they should be able to criticise the NPPL for not looking after thier interests? Do you think the NPPL is a body that should be looking out for all paintballers worldwide, or just its members? There's a big difference. Your squeals seem to be generally about european teams and players. Do these players, most of which have never played an NPPL event and many of which are not NPPL members, think that the league owes them something for the Millenniums shortfalls?
Apologies for Baca-esque numbering of points, but makes the response easy.
Caveats:
A. Agree with the spirit of the rule, never said otherwise
B. Coming at this from a Euro standpoint only, the two geographic units are at different stage of Paintball development and some concepts are mutually exclusive.
1. Cheeky, it's Stongle not Strongle (long story it just kinda stuck). That was not the point at all, and I think you know it. My issue is with the way this ruling "may" be implemented with little or enough thought. the parallel to Toulouse was what happens when rules are introduced that are not well enough defined or somewhat subjective. All we've heard thus far is $500 dollar fine if a gun fails the Robot, well the problem is a cheater board is likely going to be deactivated before it hits the robot. No definitions of Cheater Boards or what is and isn't excessive bounce (which was one of the 2004 issues I believe). Without the definitions of bounce, excessive bounce, cheaty FA boards Ramping etc, all you're going to catch is Rookies with Bounce at the Robot. Any one with any nouse is going to switch off the cheat board before it gets to the Robot. Above posts indicate I'm not the only one concerned.
Helping those without Tech support and clear definitions of rulings will prevent those who will likely suffer the most from falling fail of this rule. I'm using Toulouse as an example (not an argument), not because NPPL is the MS or whatever, but of the impact of a "Well meaning and good policy" being implemented with little forewarning and publicity. It only started to become clear that wide scale DQ's were being handed out through talking to the headrefs socially. I'm not asking for a rule change, just better definition of how and what players can fall fail off. I've watched finals games and guns were failing pre-game chrono, and the team were going to play short of guns, I had to tell them to get replacement guns chrono'd. Why did the team think they had to go out short? because the rules were not explained fully and implemented unilaterally. Again maybe not a NPPL issue with the advances in organisational quality, but it does / can happen.
Take a reality check for a second will you, paintball in Europe is NOT a sport, nor is it approached as one by the majority of players, even those playing the MS or NPPL when it comes to town (cos you and I both know that it's the only show in Euroland next year). Yes they talk the talk (mainly the BS on here), but they don't really have a comprehension of the commitment they need to all areas of the game to truly be sportspeople. Most of their kit gets thrown in a bag and neglected, many know nothing about gun settings. Shwoomie made a valid example of how a player can fall fail of this new rule if a gun pass a subjective pre-game test by a Chrono marshal later found to fail the robot? What then?. Ignorance is not an excuse, but it is a reality. The NPPL is trying to bring the SPORT of paintball to the masses, "Brilliant", prop's to you; but not everyone's ready for that without HELP.
2. No axe to grind with you at all, why would you think so? A well connected Secret Squirrel maybe. My arguments are based on value for money for the players. The NPPL has an effective Monopoly on the Euro Tournaments for next year, and as someone whose on the record saying that the NPPL would need X number of teams to support and put on a Euro event, are they not somewhat concerned with representing good value to their paying customers? (especially the Euro teams who can't pop over to the States for the Captains meetings). There would be no Super 18 pro league without the little teams, and that's what generates the carnival atmosphere that benefits the Pro's "supposed televisual popularity". Paintball is a participation sport and still a very very dull one to watch, even for the initiated. I and others expect the best for our bucks, fair enough you stand by your product.
3. Don't disagree, good to see no fence sitting (not that I'd accuse you of that)
4 & 5. Not criticising the need to charge at all. I understand the need to run the NPPL as a business. Running it on an economic and monetary basis is vital and provides a solid infrastructure. The NPPL is business savvy, past actions and the 2005 season are indicative of this. There is obviously a European appetite for this, but I'm reading an air of complacency, some of which appears driven by a defacto Monopoly position. There are a lot of sycophants in paintball, and a lot of people will "tell you what you" want to hear or kneel down and worship those they wish to curry favour with the most. But there's also a sizable portion of rational people, maybe a bit apathetic or jaded who want to see something substantial. I'm talking to a lot of people whose feeling is that maybe the 05 season isn't worth it who just can't be bothered any longer, or have said well we'll play it cos it's the only event in town. I think the strategy relies on the static domestic market for each event not encouraging Euro's to play a full season.
As mentioned your on the record as saying X number of teams is required, well shouldn't you make sure you have these first? where's the razzmatazz, the pre-marketing, how about getting us some proper details with substantial time to prepare? the company line here is, if your not "in" take your opinion and piss off, good way to treat "potential" customers. Again you have the static market, very few teams travel. I'd have thought if your trying to build a Sport (especially over multiple locations), you'd be encouraging multiple event participation? You'll need the people with money to do this and make them believe in the superiority of your product (as you do).
Paintball is governed like anything else by economics, but why come across as complacent and alienate people?. Straws eventually break donkeys backs, and what happens if you alienate a demographic that actually fuels the (Euro) paintball economy. A group that constitutes some of the biggest demand for new products and the biggest re-seller at huge discount to the kids coming into the game? Here's a hint take a look in classifieds from time to time, makes telling reading. This argument is probably as valid as the TV wealth pipedream.
These "squeals" as you put it, are actually the collie green linguini's that keep every company involved in paintball in business. I'm not gonna squeal, bleat or complain if the NPPL don't run a decent league, cos what you should realise and something that seems lost in all the PSP, NXL and NPPL bumming, is that you ain't just competing against each other, but wife's, girlfriends, new Range Rovers, extensions and fire places etc. How do you like them apples?
I think that the attitudes a bit off, especially as this could have been diffused easily with clear statements, definitions and procedures around a contentious ruling. Maybe I represent a small minority, that isn't easy silenced with quick off the cuff rulings. I have to deal with the expedient versus the morally and legally correct on a daily basis (actually scrub moral, I sleep quite well at night), so apologies if you think I'm being too hard on you. But you've already won anyway so why change, I suppose.
G
P.S. This debate was really about the implementation of previously said rule. we have wandered off on a bit of a tangent so apologies.
)
