The conclusion of the Amsterdam Inccident...

[goose]

After much investigation & discussion, the Millennium Series disciplinary committee would like to make public our decision in regards to the events that occurred in between Pete Robinson and Shane Edgell during this years Dutch Masters.

We have arrived at the conclusion that, while Pete Robinson did enter the field of play in an unsafe manner (without a mask) looking to confront Shane Edgell, and did engage in minor physical contact - he did so only after being provoked by Shane, who was serving a one year term of probation stemming from the hotel incident at this years Maxs Masters.

We have therefore decided that both parties shall serve a one tournament suspension in effect for this years Joy Masters. This was done in the name of fairness, as both teams have been preparing to play Toulouse with these players, and suspension on such short notice would be an unnecessary extra punishment. Both players are welcome to attend the tournament to support their teams, but they will not be allowed to play.

Due to the fact that the rules on player discipline are being discussed, this decision is to be interpreted as a "one off", and shall not be used as precedent setting punishment.

With the continuing success and growth of the millennium series events it is inevitable that the events are and will continue to attract larger amounts of media coverage. The sport is still in its early stages and remains a subject for moral discussion by many government departments as to its future role in the sports industry, with this in mind it is imperative that EVERY player take it opon themselves to behave in such a manor as not to result in bad publicity for the sport, because of this the displinary committee has been formed and will be taking a hard line on any player acting in anyway that it feels damaging to the reputation of the millennium series or paintball itself.

On behalf of the Millennium Series Disciplinary Committee

goose

 

[Buddha 3]

Goose,

Technical question. This probation, how does it work?
Usually a penalty is attached to a probation, so that when a person violates the terms of his probation, the penalty will be enforced. I'm not asking what the attached penalty is (since it ain't any of my damn business), but I'd like to know if there is an attached penalty at all, because I can't find anything about that in your post. Seems to me that a probation without an attached penalty would be a bit pointless. Also, given the fact that one of the people involved was under probation, and has now been penalised a second time, does this mean his probation has been violated?

Please note that I'm not trying to stir up trouble for anyone, Im just really curious. Personally I'd say that this affair has been dealt with in a fair manner, and that it's good that these rulings are made public.

 

[TJ Lambini]

If I was cynical I might read

"Due to the fact that the rules on player discipline are being discussed, this decision is to be interpreted as a "one off", and shall not be used as precedent setting punishment. "

As meaning:

"Because it was Robo we had to do something, but we'll let other people off for similar incidents if they don't attract much attention."

Good job I ain't cynical, eh...

peace

 

[Mr Big]

Whatever you think, it DOES set a precedent, as any punishment less severe than this - for this type of incident - from now on, will be seen as unfair, inconsistent and actioned at the whim of the committee. Why should this be a one-off anyway? Surely you could have agreed on a rulebook punishment by now?

 

[Al Woods]

hear hear

I agree, there are so many dodgy rules and regulations regarding such small things in the Millennium series I think it's about time a solid set of behaviour expectations and consequent punishments are put together, otherwise dudes will get away with all kinds of ****, as seen at a lot of the yank tournaments recently.

 

[Robbo]

Well, since this has been made public, here are my views :-

We all are well aware that sometimes tempers get frayed when playing, we all, are also well aware of many incidents where players have indulged themselves in shouting at each other and pushing, it has happened many times in the Millennium.

But only once has any player been punished and guess who gets it ?
Me !!!
Now, the Millennium disciplinary board fully acknowledge that Edghill incited my response by shouting abuse at me from the field.
This is obvious or they would not have banned him as well !!
This being the case, and also considering, Edghill is on probation because of the damage done in a hotel in Bittburgh, I don't particularly agree with my punishment being the same as his.

In my opinion, some of the things Edghill has said in his statement are downright lies and proved to be by various other statements made by independent witnesses.
So to sum up, here we have a guy with a big mouth who incites spectators by verbally abusing them, can't back it up, lies to his back teeth in trying to hang me and save his own ass, and then to top it all, he gets the same punishment as me.
And it was his team who had the audacity to make an official complaint to the Millennium to try and get my ass hung out to dry.

I went onto that field with no goggles and had an altercation with some dick who was hurling abuse at me in front of everybody.
I shouldn't have gone on the field I know but I have always told the truth about what happened, I never clumped the guy or threatened him, I accepted what I did was wrong , held my hands up and said, 'No probs, give me what I deserve'.
I already knew that were they to treat me as any other paintballer, I was home dry because no other paintballer in the history of the Millennium had ever been punished for such a thing so if the law of precedent was anything to go by, they couldn't do anything to me.
Now, the millennium disciplinary board had a problem because if they did ban me, then I could easily say I was being picked on because of who I am and not what I did.
We already had one well known Millennium organiser telling people I should be banned for a year with absolutely no mention of Edghill's actions......Hmmmmmmm......Still, that's the French for you !!!
But after I had talked to some of the guys on the board and to some of the Millennium, I agreed it might be a good thing if something were to be done about it, so as to send out a message to all the paintballers in the Millennium.
On that basis, I didn't particularly mind being the sacrificial lamb...that was as long as Edghill was treated with the same severity in accordance with his particular infractions.

So what we had in the end here was some of the guys on the disciplinary board like Goose trying to do the right thing in an impossible situation and no mater which way he turned was going to attract criticism.
I have no problem with Goose, have the utmost respect for him and respect his input to proceedings.


Oh and Edghill, you said to Ant that you were gonna ‘get me’ and if the board didn’t do it, you would get your wife, who apparently is a solicitor, to do something about it….my knees are knocking mate, go get her Edghill coz it’s a sorry day when a ‘man’ has to run to his wife to sort things out…..you sap !!!!!!
Robbo

 

[Buddha 3]

Which is all why I was enquiring whether Shane would be considered as having broken his parole. In which case he should at least get penalised extra.
That's something I'd really like to know.

PS Hey Pete, I thought you had 'settled' the matters with Shockwave...

 

[goose]

To answer everyone....

Buddha....

The original "probation" was in regards to all the B.S. that occured at Maxs. It can be considered a warning if you like - instead of probation. This is also the reason why Shanes suspension matches Robbo's. At the end of the day if Pete had just kept on the correct side of the fence and let us deal with it Shane would be the only one sitting a tournament.

TJ

You might be surprised at what we have in mind. If you think that we are targeting Robbo - think again. Pardon me but I am gonna lose my cool here for a second - and it is not so much aimed at you but anyone who thinks the same. We don't give a rat's a$$ who it is - we looked at this being Pete Robinson "first time offender" not Robbo "with all his baggage". --- end of being bitchy.

If someone pulls the same crap, we catch wind of it and can investigate it - they will be punished. It does us no good if what we hear is through 6 people we need 1st hand accounts. Maybe you could also look at it as - due to the fact that this in occured in front of so many people who could give an acurate description of the events, Pete actually got a lot less than what some of the organizers where calling for BECAUSE we could see it wasn't all his doing.

Mr Big....
Yes, in a way it does set a precedent - however as far as I am concerned that as long as we are still in the process of defining what the "crime & punishments" should be in the MS that one incident should not been seen as the final decision on future events. But I feel I can assure you that any similar events will be hit equally if not harder - because by that time people will be warned "do this - and you get that" and there will be no excuse.

As far as agreeing on a rulebook for punishment by now - if you know what we have to deal with then you can talk, but until then please keep it to yourself. It has taken us forever to just get acknowledged by the promoters and other MS executives - up until Amsterdam we where actually working on just Niall's say-so.

Al...
We are working on it as we speak - we are trying to get at least some sort of guidelines (if not an actual written book) by Toulouse. But let me assure you - the yank tournaments and their punishment ARE NOT what we will be basing things on.


Everyone...
I apologize for the somewhat bitchy tone every now & then - but it is a hell of lot easier for people to second guess what we are doing, than actually doing anything themselves BUT keep it coming - we actually appreciate all the "devil's advocates" in here, it makes sure that we stay on our toes when it comes to doing the job.

goose

 

[TJ Lambini]

No problem here Goose

I look forward to seeing what penalties are doled out in the future...

 

[goose]

TJ - so do I - I think

Actually our hope - okay BIG DREAM - is that we don't have to deal with this kinda stuff to much longer because all of the Millennium players act like good human beings. I know - BIG DREAM - but I also want to win a lottery.

goose

P.S. You going to Toulouse??