Welcome To P8ntballer.com
The Home Of European Paintball
Sign Up & Join In

Sideline coaching and signalling.

alt01

New Member
Aug 16, 2002
59
0
0
California
Visit site
If you're going to legalize sideline and spectator coaching you may as well make the bunkers transparent.

Think about it, any team who had a majority of supporters at any tournament would have a massive crowd pinpointing where the other team was and screaming as soon as a move was made. The Dynasty example was a very good one, I could image any tournaments held in Cali would have the other teams shouted right off the field.
Right now as we see it who is benefiting from sideline coaching the most? Assassins because they have Bob Long doing the same thing he always did but now he can see behind everyone's bunker and All Americans with the big money and hired trainer. Many, in fact I'd say most, teams can barely afford to get themselves to tournaments, much less bring a coach and spectator "supporters".

Regardless of the fact that it also makes the game far less interesting and challenging for the players themselves, sideline coaching is simply not fair and spectator coaching should be completely eliminated, which hopefully the netting being moved will help with.
 

yatesy

kiss my face
you could adopt a tennis style of silence from the spectators whilst play is taking place, this works t all levels of ability in tennis.
as crowds are becoming bigger it would be harder to do this unless it is intergrated early into the sport, question is would it take away the atmosphere, personally i dont think it would as shouting from the spectators during play is in retrospec of how long paintballs been going on quite a new trend
 
R

raehl

Guest
I call BS.

Look, either all you need is a lot of spectators, OR the Assassins are good because they've practiced coaching - you can't have it both ways.

The truth is, effective coaching is the same as anything else - it comes with PRACTICE. It has nothing to do with money or resources, beyond the same problems teams already have with practice costing money.

Does coaching change the game? You bet. Does it ruin the game? No way. Communicating information takes time, effort, and concentration. Some people will do it better than others, but even when done perfectly, it has it's limits.

Even when I'm playing straight-up 5-man, where I'm usually playing front and center, I spend 20-50% of my game doing nothing other than communicating (on my team, that's my job). And when I'm seriously communicating with my team, I'm doing a lot less of shooting. That doesn't change with X Ball - when you're taking time to communicate, you're taking time away from other tasks. And communication has a delay - I don't care how good of coaching you have, it's simply not possible to communicate which side of your bunker the mugger is coming to get you from faster than the mugger can switch sides.

Yeah, so you don't have games anymore where there's that last player on the field and no one knows where he is. You don't have guys who sneak up a bunker and sit there for two minutes unnoticed. So what? Now you have guys who sneak up somewhere unnoticed, and better stinking do something about it in the next 15 seconds before the opposing team figures it out. you have games where you can't just go mug someone by yourself - your whole team better be on the same page, and they better be shooting exactly the bunkers they need to be shooting for you to complete your mugging without getting shot to pieces.

Coaching means it's much more difficult to get away with shoddy communication. It means you're much less likely to get a lucky win walking on the field with no plan. It means you gotta play clean, tight-ass ball, and everyone has to do their job all the time, because if you lapse for a second, the other team is going to eat you up, because they ARE watching.

Different, yes, but still better. The arguements against sideline coaching really aren't much different than the arguements against concept fields and leaving the woods. Yes, certain parts of the "old" game are lost, but it's worth it.


- Chris
 
R

raehl

Guest
My point is..

I don't see how money has anything to do with using coaches in a professional manner. You've got to practice, right? What's the difference between practicing, and practicing with a coach? Coach doesn't even shoot any paint.

The only financial difference is travel costs for ONE additional person. I find it somewhat hard to believe that teams are not travelling with that additional personel already anyway, or that on the off chance they aren't, that makes or breaks them financially.


- Chris
 

Collier

Arsed?
Jan 2, 2002
6,193
28
123
Macclesfield
Visit site
Originally posted by raehl
My point is..

I don't see how money has anything to do with using coaches in a professional manner. You've got to practice, right? What's the difference between practicing, and practicing with a coach? Coach doesn't even shoot any paint.

The only financial difference is travel costs for ONE additional person. I find it somewhat hard to believe that teams are not travelling with that additional personel already anyway, or that on the off chance they aren't, that makes or breaks them financially.


- Chris
Chris that extra person DOES make a differance financially. 1 extra mouth to feed, 1 place in a car, 1 extra hotel room.
Many teams do take an extra player but many others struggle to get and pay for 7, let alona an 8th.

Paul
:)
 
R

raehl

Guest
Extra hotel room?

No wonder, you guys travel in luxary! That'd just be two people in the bathtub and one extra in the trunk plus some extra sandwich stuff and cereal from the store on my team. ;)

If you're a team that travels with no alternates and no one other than the bare miniumum number of players for the roster, then yes, I can see a slight increase i the costs of participation (about 10-15% if you're talking 7-man). But I also think that's the small minority of cases.

Beyond taking a survery of each team's travel entourage though I think we may have to just agree to disagree on this one.

- Chris