The conclusion of the Amsterdam Inccident...

[goose]

Drunk on a park bench - sounds good to me - I might join him.

Just keep the damn pigeons away.

goose

P.S. It wasn't just me who handed this down - so I hope it's a long bench and there is enough beer to go around.

 

[TJ Lambini]

Ummm...

What spoof?

I have like no idea what you're talkling about dude...it wasn't me.

Musta bin Dave Jarvis or J-Lo or something.

I am innocent. Free tha Lambini One.

 

[Sid]

?

Couldn't think of another header.

Can I ask why my name and only my name is being mentioned here?

I'm not about to get into a justification conversation on the bulletin boards and I think, the way this has been responded to is pretty shocking. We have been asked to provide the Millennium Series with a board that people become answerable to for their actions, do you think this is a bad thing??

The decision on the two players involved was made by the board, not me, the board. I hope everyone understands this as I refuse to have my name dragged through the mud simply because a decision goes against someone.

As for the leak, do you think this is the FBI, come on, we are a new board, we are here to try and make thing better for us all in the long run, don't knock us down before we have the chance to get up. Wherever this has come from will be looked into.

Now, moderators, I think I am possibly an innocent party here and would appreciate if this thread be taken out, before more people form an opinion on something, and possibly someone they know nothing about.


Sid

 

[TJ Lambini]

Sid

I don't understand your complaint...I don't see any mud-dragging of your name, unless I'm missing something here?

Also, no-one is knocking the board per se, people are just discussing what's happened...after all, the board chose to announce their decision on a discussion forum, so they shouldn't be surprised if people discuss the results.

I see nothing shocking about any of the discussion here - just a lot of people expressing opinions and views - and see no reason to remove this thread.

However, if I am missing something please drop me a line and explain and my view may change.

 

[rancid]

Sid, I ain't having a pop at you, and yes the board is new but that doesn't mean it's 'untouchable'.

From where I'm sat, it looks like the procedures weren't in place....and, I don't think there's an excuse for that. If those guidlines aren't there from day one then by definition you have to make it up as you go along.

And yeah it's new, but I mean it's not like your sitting to decide what colour the inflatables are.

So Sid, in my opinion, you can't have summat as important as the board being above criticism or even investigation. You police the tourny scene, but who polices you... and wiping off discussions like this, well c'mon... you know that could sound dodgy.

If I was on the board, my approach to all this would be 'no comment', and I'd make sure any problems were sorted before next time.


Pete, this ain't about you and Sid, that's a separate issue... so having a chat over the phone ain't going to make this go away.

 

[Robbo]

Rancid, I don't really give two ****s at this moment about the wider implications; I'm more concerned with myself and Sid.

On that note, I have just got off the phone from Sid and if you remember what you said to me earlier on the phone that perhaps Sid was just playing things straight down the line and no matter who it was, he would taken the same stance, I think you were correct.

So, I think perhaps that somebody may have misinterpreted Sid's line as being biased against me (which was then relayed to me) when in fact, he would have taken the exact same hard line against anybody...which I have absolutely no problem with.

This is partly my fault as I should have called Sid up and tried to sort it out as soon as I heard but you know what things go like sometimes !!!
So, my apologies to Sid !
Sid and I had always got on with each other and once we had both clarified how we felt and the reasons surrounding what we had done, both of us are more than satisfied there is no problem between us and never was.

Regards and peace
Pete

 

[Sid]

Peace all round, thanks Robbo for the chat.

See you in the Bowling Centre in a week for a beer and a game of pool, oh and I promise, no naked Scottish Guys in lifts this year

Rancid, yup.....no comment

But thanks for the feedback.

Sid

 

[TJ Lambini]

THAT'S PERSONAL STUFF ASIDE THEN...

So what's the upshot Goose? Will written protocols be in place for Toulouse, cos I gotta admit I share some of Rancid's concerns. After all, the way tha game is now, imagine if you decide to ban Lasoya, or Hendsch for a tournament.

Upshot could be:
JT drops Lanche/Dynasty - major $$$$$$ loss for teams
Those teams never come back to Millennium - major promoter headache
The Yanks decide tha Euros are against them and none of en come over - see above

So you need this formalised ahead of time, cos I will bet my last cent that if it isn't and you try to levy a punishment on a top US Pro as you just did on Robo and Edgehill, you'll walk into a ****storm of unholy proportions.

Top ball is big business now and players are valuable commodities - you need structure now, not in two events time.

peace

 

[Robbo]

I wanna know something, paintball, as far as these boards are concerned, involves literally thousands of players.....why is it, I seem to be the only dickhead who gets into trouble ?
I mean, I'm forty 'frikkin' eight years old for God's sake, isn't all this trouble **** supposed to be in the domain of the young ?

Hmmmmmmmmmm.........

Robbo (feelin the strain)...

 

[Baca Loco]

If I may. . .

throw my two cents in (and I may cus I is a registered participant of this here site) here's a view from outside all of the related events and preceedings--
On the big issues: until procedures and policy are in place and penalties published so the players know generally what to expect for various infractions the disciplinary committee should expect and welcome a level of scrutiny that assures all of the interested parties that the committee is acting above board and in the best interests of paintball. Is that a potential hassle? Sure it is but that's how it ought to be handled as such a course will assure everyone from Day 1 that they can expect equitable and impartial treatment.

This thread actually begins to demonstrate the potential such sites and discussions have to serve the whole paintball community and is, in my estimation, far from inciting any readers or contributors. insted, it's filling in the details, offering differing opinions and making available to a wide audience information and ideas they most likely wouldn't otherwise get.

On the lesser issues specific to this incident: I don't see any way that this incident makes any sort of splash at all if Robo isn't involved. Not to say that something shouldn't be done but I don't think, however much they may have had it in mind, that the committee could avoid taking Robo's profile and history into account. By the same token I think they were in a difficult position trying to avoid the appearance of favoritism. The whole thing simply confirms the need for a settled policy to be in place and a committee to enforce the rules.
I also think Robo has made a concerted effort to take this in his stride in the hope it will ultimately serve the greater good of the sport when he might easily have done otherwise. (Dammit, said something nice about Robo. Arghhh)
I also think this whole probation/warning thing needs to be reconsidered--as Bud and others have mentioned--because it seems, at present, to be meaningless.