The 2005 Penalty Point versus 1:4:1 debate.

[stongle]

Judge Death and the Dark Judges would be better.

Death would pwn Dread fo'sho if it weren't for Anderson (although I'd tap it).

Anyway, rather than giving the Refs guns, why not have a Sniper type arrangement ala Salm equipped with a Barrat .50 or something in the tree line / tower. Try playing on with an exit wound the size of a melon in your chest.

The refs could then radio in an offending player to be off'ed by the Sniper.

Ref: "Chunky Munky behind the right coke can looks a bit tired"
Sniper: BLAMMMMM!

 

[Chuck]

A Sniper would work well for poor gun skilz too,

"Sierra 1 this is zero, back left can trigger fanning with bottle on shoulder. You have weapons free"

"Sierra 1 roger that" BAAAAM!

I might try that at training, but use Reball @300fps instead.

Chuck

 

[Gyroscope]

"You have weapons free"

I am going to be saying that all the time now.

 

[stongle]

Originally posted by Chuck
A Sniper would work well for poor gun skilz too,

"Sierra 1 this is zero, back left can trigger fanning with bottle on shoulder. You have weapons free"

"Sierra 1 roger that" BAAAAM!

I might try that at training, but use Reball @300fps instead.

Chuck

You've been talking to Piper? The incident where he snipered me from under the netting in the groin with a hot gat and field paint? Hurt like a mofo, I'll never wipe again (negative reinforcement bruise lasted 3 weeks)

 

[Tom Tom]

OK I'll be honest I haven't read all of this post, just the other thread which turned into a Chelsea thread,

Any way, my view,

I like the way the PA have tried to do it but do see a few flaws, Penatly points, if some one runs through wins the game but then gets 25 for the hit, the winning team only lose 25 from a total of say 100 but the losing team dont get that 25 where they may have had more so in the overall standings dont get as much out of it.

As for 1-4-1 its a nice idea and agree from a spectators stand, but having marshalled (and yes badly) Dartford last year when people get 1-4-1'd the marshall ends up having a huge argument with players for the infringement and the game can't then be marshalled fluidly. With penalty points its the same.

I had an idea for Ice Hockey type idea. the 2 min box, it carries over games...? I know its a bit crap but just throwing ideas around

 

[Chicago]

I always laugh...

When people see that penalties are not working, and then decide that the rules need to be changed to fix it.

The rules are not the problem. The reffing is the problem.

A one-for-one is a just solution. The logic is that if a player is playing on, tha team had the unfair of advantage of more players on the field than they should have had, and this advantage was only agains the team they are playing. The 1-for-1 compensates the opposing team by "returning the favor', as it were.

the one-for-one should be called whenever a player plays on. If a player plays on and causes the erroneous elimination of an opponent, an additional one-for-one should be pulled. And if a team does this enough times that their last player is pulled by a penalty, then the opposing team should get the win. And if there are no players left to pull, then you should start taking points.

This is pretty much what the rules say now. It would be very effective, if the right call was made even 80% of the time. But it's not. Training, training, training.

 

[stongle]

Originally posted by Tom Tom

I had an idea for Ice Hockey type idea. the 2 min box, it carries over games...? I know its a bit crap but just throwing ideas around

Err, a bit like X ball then?

 

[MrPink]

Originally posted by Tom Tom


As for 1-4-1 its a nice idea and agree from a spectators stand, but having marshalled (and yes badly) Dartford last year when people get 1-4-1'd the marshall ends up having a huge argument with players for the infringement and the game can't then be marshalled fluidly. With penalty points its the same.

Tom, if the player argues the call, then the Ref doesn't shout back but merely removes another player off the field. I find that most teams calm down very quickly if they lose two or three players for a single infrigment

 

[Tom Tom]

Originally posted by stongle
Err, a bit like X ball then?

Its just so radical it just might work, I'll get my coat

Originally posted by MrPinkTom, if the player argues the call, then the Ref doesn't shout back but merely removes another player off the field. I find that most teams calm down very quickly if they lose two or three players for a single infrigment

I guess this is where training in the marshalls comes in.
With the PA i think that the idea of the exam to test the knowledge, but maybe you also need (like in teaching) external moderators judging your performance.

If you dont meet the grade you dont do the job.

My only critism (from last year) with the PA marshalls was that they were too static. They all sit on the side lines and never get right in there to check every angle.

I am not saying that they are "bad" marshalls and things have a way of working out. It was just that sometimes you need people to be "overall" but you also need to get in there.

I think the PA is a great concept and this is just an observation.

 

[Cro]

Originally posted by Tom Tom
but maybe you also need (like in teaching) external moderators judging your performance.

I stand to be corrected but I believe that this is happening this year in the PA, there was one marshall pulled from one of the fields in the first leg for not being up to scratch so I understand, but like I say this is just what I've heard.

IMHO, if your stupid enough to get caught wiping then you should be 1-4-1'd and have penalty points deducted, if your insulting etc the marshalls then you should be sosta'd as well, except be made to sit the rest of that tourney so your team has to play one man down for the remaining games.