D
Ton Tons @ CC
- Thread starter Bolter
- Start date
Judges, Its all about the Judges.....
Robbos solution, as he himself says, is only a stop-gap until a more viable alternative presents itself but and its a big BUT is the Judges whom we empower. They need to apply any new ruling fairly across the board.
I'll never forget the sight in Amsterdam when the Ton Tons played Shock U.K. Shock were handed the 2nd game of 3 due to the French players markers being hot. 3rd Game all of Shock are shot out leaving 2 Ton Tons on the field. Rather than hang the flag and be chronied they run the time down winning the match on head count. Now any one of the judges could have tested their markers at any time, its in the rules and anybody who was watching knew the French were running their markers hot but none of the judges had the nads to do what was required!
This is what I mean when I say its all about the Judges.
Robbos solution, as he himself says, is only a stop-gap until a more viable alternative presents itself but and its a big BUT is the Judges whom we empower. They need to apply any new ruling fairly across the board.
I'll never forget the sight in Amsterdam when the Ton Tons played Shock U.K. Shock were handed the 2nd game of 3 due to the French players markers being hot. 3rd Game all of Shock are shot out leaving 2 Ton Tons on the field. Rather than hang the flag and be chronied they run the time down winning the match on head count. Now any one of the judges could have tested their markers at any time, its in the rules and anybody who was watching knew the French were running their markers hot but none of the judges had the nads to do what was required!
This is what I mean when I say its all about the Judges.
It's been many months since I've seen such a poor choice of words, go so fantasticly with a screen name.
Nick
Pete:
Buddy - you've got to understand that I'm completely in agreement with your sentiment (and I'm staying far away from comments about me "being with ANYONE" in this thread).
It's just the solution I do not like.
For the sake of argument - imagine this:
Put a rule in effect that (if I understand you correctly) gives refs the right to ban a player/team for a prolonged period of time, on suspicion of gun cheating.
Now put Joy and Nexus on field - with your good buddy Steve as head ref.
- Do you still like your suggestion?
The problem is this:
If you want to guard against biased refs having great negative impact, you'd have to make the penalties mild - and thereby ineffective.
If you want the rule to be effective - by the penalties being harsh - you run a great risk of ONE bad ref screwing over one or more teams.
I know it would be for the greater good - but to me your suggestion is a little like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The solution I suggested is workable, cheap and effective - all it takes if for the MS to decide to do it - and the problem is solved.
You'll need a knowledgable gun scrutineer
a lap top
1 of every board that wants to be legal in the Series (supplied by the manufacturer)
Wiring adaptors for every board on the market (supplied by the manufacturers)
A "code comparison programme"
My guess is the entire solution would cost the MS no more than €2,000
As for how it would work, you really only needed a clever little programme, which any half decent programmer could write, that rapidly compared the stored code on a standard board, with the one being checked.
Any mismatch, even a zero being in the wrong place, and the gun would be deemed illegal.
It would mean that any company supplying boards for high end guns, would be required to deliver a standard board to the MS and then submit the new code, every time a change was made to it.... but if they want their boards to be tournament legal, they would do so without much protest.... and if not, too bad - their guns would no longer be used at events governed by the MS rules.
The gun scrutineer would have to be someone able to read the code, so that standard code was checked before being accepted as valid and legal (which would obviously mean code would have to be submitted some time ahead of an event - something like 1 month would suffice).
Nick
Buddy - you've got to understand that I'm completely in agreement with your sentiment (and I'm staying far away from comments about me "being with ANYONE" in this thread
).It's just the solution I do not like.
For the sake of argument - imagine this:
Put a rule in effect that (if I understand you correctly) gives refs the right to ban a player/team for a prolonged period of time, on suspicion of gun cheating.
Now put Joy and Nexus on field - with your good buddy Steve as head ref.
- Do you still like your suggestion?
The problem is this:
If you want to guard against biased refs having great negative impact, you'd have to make the penalties mild - and thereby ineffective.
If you want the rule to be effective - by the penalties being harsh - you run a great risk of ONE bad ref screwing over one or more teams.
I know it would be for the greater good - but to me your suggestion is a little like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The solution I suggested is workable, cheap and effective - all it takes if for the MS to decide to do it - and the problem is solved.
You'll need a knowledgable gun scrutineer
a lap top
1 of every board that wants to be legal in the Series (supplied by the manufacturer)
Wiring adaptors for every board on the market (supplied by the manufacturers)
A "code comparison programme"
My guess is the entire solution would cost the MS no more than €2,000
As for how it would work, you really only needed a clever little programme, which any half decent programmer could write, that rapidly compared the stored code on a standard board, with the one being checked.
Any mismatch, even a zero being in the wrong place, and the gun would be deemed illegal.
It would mean that any company supplying boards for high end guns, would be required to deliver a standard board to the MS and then submit the new code, every time a change was made to it.... but if they want their boards to be tournament legal, they would do so without much protest.... and if not, too bad - their guns would no longer be used at events governed by the MS rules.
The gun scrutineer would have to be someone able to read the code, so that standard code was checked before being accepted as valid and legal (which would obviously mean code would have to be submitted some time ahead of an event - something like 1 month would suffice).
Nick
what happens if ALL the gun manufactureres tell you to f-off? No series then?
Or what if only half agree to play ball, does that mean you ban the other half? Cause that means a LOT of people will not come to your event!
Or what if only half agree to play ball, does that mean you ban the other half? Cause that means a LOT of people will not come to your event!
Nick, I think me and you are both on the same page mate, it's just that our opinions differ on the implementation of my stop gap measure.
I would LOVE your idea to be made mandatory and for the Millennium to sack up and do it; in fact, Scutty is the man to get the Millennium ball rolling on this but it will take much more than any resolve Scutty might harbour to get this into the rule book.
As Colin (Red Merkin) insightfully suggests, it would need the compliance of all the big players within the industry and if some say 'Naff off', the house of cards all falls down and makes a mockery of it all.
It's a pity we couldn't then name and shame them but I'm afraid there is little shame in this industry when it comes to money..
As for adolf morriss, he ain't gonna be judging no more in the Millennium I'm afraid, (my heart bleeds) so that point is academic but even if he were, you cannot ever have rules determined by rogue judging otherwise we would never have any laws if we follow that rationale because of sometimes inept policing.
I'm afraid for all the reasonable and learned talk we might see here on this site, it may well take somebody to get seriously injured for something to be done.......you know it, I know it and the people who will eventually be stung into action also know it but will they pre-empt that injury?
Will they fcuk !!!!
Still stranger things have happened, I live in hope....or is it La La Land !
I would LOVE your idea to be made mandatory and for the Millennium to sack up and do it; in fact, Scutty is the man to get the Millennium ball rolling on this but it will take much more than any resolve Scutty might harbour to get this into the rule book.
As Colin (Red Merkin) insightfully suggests, it would need the compliance of all the big players within the industry and if some say 'Naff off', the house of cards all falls down and makes a mockery of it all.
It's a pity we couldn't then name and shame them but I'm afraid there is little shame in this industry when it comes to money..
As for adolf morriss, he ain't gonna be judging no more in the Millennium I'm afraid, (my heart bleeds) so that point is academic but even if he were, you cannot ever have rules determined by rogue judging otherwise we would never have any laws if we follow that rationale because of sometimes inept policing.
I'm afraid for all the reasonable and learned talk we might see here on this site, it may well take somebody to get seriously injured for something to be done.......you know it, I know it and the people who will eventually be stung into action also know it but will they pre-empt that injury?
Will they fcuk !!!!
Still stranger things have happened, I live in hope....or is it La La Land !
You play with mechanical pneumatic guns - but it won't happen, because manufacturers are just as interested in getting rid of gun cheats - supposedly.
Then the other half will see their sales drop like a stone in Europe.
You might just as well have asked "What if paintball manufacturers refuse to limit their guns to 15 BPS - when that rule was introduced.
Nick
Ehm... not nice to kick a guy who is already down buddy.
I used that example because I know how you and Magued feel towards him - not because I personally think he would intentionally be biassed..... it was just to illustrate my point.
And YES - the rules HAVE to reflect the reality - otherwise it would be like having the 300 FPS cap without the chronograph ever being invented.... completely arbitrary and extremely difficult for any ref to enforce fairly.
Nick
Nick, that ain't no kickin mate, I could show you what a real metaphorical kicking is if you like when it comes to morriss but I will resist my natural urges and ask you to remember the extents morriss went to in attacking myself and Magued across the forums of the paintball world.
I have been extremely lenient with him Nick considering what he has said about me.
As for your take on how the industry think and possibly act.....a tad niaive maybes.
I think several sections of the industry have a lip service approach to cheating in that official lines may well follow anit-cheat standpoints but in reality, they do nothing to back this up and in my book, it's what people actually do that counts, not what they say.
Nick, why do you hate refs so much? You give them 0 respect, actually you give them -10 respect. Respect for the refs is vital if ANY rules are going to work out - even the crap ones that you come up with....
Remember its not the refs that are cheating. So therefore the refs are not the source of the problem. Hate the players that cheat if you like. Hate the board programmers who help them, but hating on the refs, continually calling them incompetent and basically taking every opportunity to berate them, is simply not just. There are good refs out there. They are doing a good job. Like many players, you blame the cheating on them, you won't entertain any idea's that allow the refs the latitude to enforce the rules, you are only interested in 100% proof of cheating, which co-incidentally is what all the cheating teams want too, as it buys them time to cheat a few more wins. Thats bull**** Nick, and it actually makes YOU part of the problem. Don't you see that?
In football, the refs make bad calls. They are irrevocable. If the ref awards a penalty then thats it, right or wrong. The idea that managers have is that this will even out over a season. The same applies to paintball. Where humans are involved there will be human error.
Anyway, without wishing to be insensitive, whatever solution is put in place will not be influenced or affected by you, thats for sure, so you can go on talking drivel as long as you want.
Pete, if you are on the same page as Nick then you must have got there by mistake. I ain't even on the same BOOK. Give me a bell. I'm in Blighty.
Remember its not the refs that are cheating. So therefore the refs are not the source of the problem. Hate the players that cheat if you like. Hate the board programmers who help them, but hating on the refs, continually calling them incompetent and basically taking every opportunity to berate them, is simply not just. There are good refs out there. They are doing a good job. Like many players, you blame the cheating on them, you won't entertain any idea's that allow the refs the latitude to enforce the rules, you are only interested in 100% proof of cheating, which co-incidentally is what all the cheating teams want too, as it buys them time to cheat a few more wins. Thats bull**** Nick, and it actually makes YOU part of the problem. Don't you see that?
In football, the refs make bad calls. They are irrevocable. If the ref awards a penalty then thats it, right or wrong. The idea that managers have is that this will even out over a season. The same applies to paintball. Where humans are involved there will be human error.
Anyway, without wishing to be insensitive, whatever solution is put in place will not be influenced or affected by you, thats for sure, so you can go on talking drivel as long as you want.
Pete, if you are on the same page as Nick then you must have got there by mistake. I ain't even on the same BOOK. Give me a bell. I'm in Blighty.