COLLEGE NATIONALS REPORT: ILL State takes 2nd!! [VERY LONG]

[demonguy8]

Alright "quick" (alright its not really that quick)overview for those that missed it, but wanna hear the stories...

TOP 4 teams

1st PLACE winning both the Nationals AND the SEASON trophies.. University of Illinois ORANGE... Not quite flawless play, but about as close as you can get.. they basically just tore everyone they played apart... good job guys, well earned.

2nd place ILL STATE black... GREAT SHOWING from my school tho unfortunatly this wasnt the squad I was on, soo I cant really take any credit for the whole second at nationals thing

3rd PLACE PURDUE GOLD: Great competition from them as usual.. They actually tied ISU on points in finals for second place, but since ISU won their game vs them during finals ISU was declared second and Purdue third..

4th place Purdues "E" squad (or was it D??) All sorts of craziness when the FIFTH string team makes finals, Kudos to them


Now for my squad/ take on the tourny on ISU RED...

Alright for the maggers here, I never got a chance to see Cphil's X-mag sorry.

Anywho Day started a bit late (its the NCPA, you almost plan on it now) beutiful weather, GREAT REFFING,I know AGD pride and psycho circus reffed, I dont know who else did tho.. but they all deserve credit as that was the best Reffed NCPA event Ive ever been too. As far as vendors there was AKA, National Paintball Supply, Brass Eagle, and PMI/ EVIL (i get the feeling im soo missing somone...)

Highlights of the day where watching the army guys do not one but TWO deadmans walks on teams... A guy who broke his loaderkneck sliding into a bunker, who then proceded to hold a half open pod over his marker with one hand and feed one at a time, AND THEN WENT TO BUNKER SOMONE LIKE THAT! (he ended up being called out before he got there tho for leaving his rev behind).. And the Greatest thing I saw all day was a guy was opening a pod to reload, then sees another guy coming up on him to bunker him so he throws ALL the paint from the pod in the guys face as he comes around! AWSOME (if not desperate move, too bad it didnt work)

As for my squad (ISU RED) Our squad had an enormous amount of talent we just had some problems with never practicing together and people being rusty since they hadnt played in like 6 months!.. We had a great start maxing our first game dropping only one guy... OUR second game was CANCELLED since WMU didnt show up =/ .. third game was against Iowa state B and they rolled us hard and we got a playing on penalty for 25 pnts from pretty bogus rule about paintchecks that I wont go into here... Our last prelim game was against none other than UofI orange and we actually had pretty good game going until about the 3 min mark when a stupid move by yours truly didnt quite make it to a key bunker of field that we needed to push on and they moppped us bad after that..

After that we where in the losers bracket playing for fun/ place... One of our 5 had to leave at this time since he had a TON of homework and we didnt really mind since we werent in semis... 1st game we DESTROYED the team we played in 1min 30 sec, (mind you thats down a man also). 2nd game took a good 3-4 minutes and we ended up basically rolling them too (still a man down). Last game of the day was played on the obscenely small field, we dropped 1 of our 4 on the brake, another about a minute in, the 3rd at about the 2:30 mark, and finally I went down VERY soon after that... (managed to take at least one with me tho =D)

Cant really ask for too much more in a day of paintball.. hopefully Raehl or someone can get the whole official team list/ placing posted when it becomes available.. Im positive a BUNCH of people will have some pics. And anyone else who has any stories they want to share knock yourselves out.

[cphilip]

Well I did hear our guys stunk it up this time and didn't do very well but I do not know the entire story. And I did hear a lot of folks shot my X mag. Sorry you didn't get an opportunity too. You will some other day. Congrats on your finish. I heard the competition was very good.

[spantol]

cphilip -

Every time I saw your X-Mag, some guy in orange had a deathgrip on it. It was very well taken care of.

[PsychoBaller]

Lol, first off.... sorry Phil for putting a few shots on your Xmag Counter, I was comparing your Trigger Job to mine. While I considered mine better, your Gun was still prettier, due to the fact that its new and your ano job is just about flawless... while my SFL got massively beat up at the tourny (playing on fields of gravel/pebbles.

-Many teams lost respect for the ARMY Squads, pulling those sneaky Dead Man Walk manuevers. One of the teams they pulled it against was mine - Rutgers B squad. Even some of the refs thought it was cheap as well, even if it was legal. Arm Bands would have prevented such deviousness.

Both of our Rutgers squads made it past Pre-Lims and Semis, but then after that, massive amts of teams were dropping out. Even though we lost a bunch of our afternoon games, lots of Penalty Points were given to our opposing teams for Playing on with Obvious Hits. We were so pissed when a game was over, and the 3 players on the opposing team had hits on them - 2 of them Obvious, and another with a feed neck shot....

In anycase... we still had fun overall. After our tourny games were over for the day, We (Rutgers) and Drexel (close buddies) teamed up for a couple of Ten Man Games against Penn State. Crowed loved this stuff, crazy moves and tons of paint in the air, was best part of the day, lol.

~da baller

[cphilip]

No problemo! Glad you got a few shots into it. It needs breaking in.

Glad to hear you "mostly" had a good time. Sounds like it.

The guy clutching it was most likely Rob Long aka ezrunner here on AO. I just hope he will bring it back and it does not become like my Cocker he has! He'll know what I mean about that. It should have been sporting a brand new Smoke Halo B on it when you shot it?

[Scooter/Cootie]

I must say that this was probably the easiest event to ref for us, and that's only because the teams made it that way. Those teams that play in the NCPA, or at least the one's that played on the JT field where we reffed, we're polite, didn't argue, and listened to instructions. Kudo's to everyone for making our job that much easier.

Like I said before, AGD Pride reffed on the JT field. We then reffed the finals along with another team from Wisconsin on the South airball field. Besides having the Illinois player running through a bunker to shoot a player, I believe that everything ran very smoothly.


Thanks to Raehl for inviting us to Ref and thanks to all the players that helped to make it an enjoyable experience.

[Spaceman613]

Was that penalty the one we gave you (both teams same game) on the hyper field? I hated doing it, but we were going by the rules. Id actually like to talk to Chris about that aspect of the rules. I saw a couple things that could make the games MUCH better, and the scoring much more appropriate.

BUT, I will say ALL of the teams were great. I only had one problem all day, and that was just a fluke.

Great bunch of guys all around

[PsychoBaller]

Phil. Your trigger could be made a bit lighter, unless you like it like that. I was so tempted to do a trigger job on it, lol. Did you have a Roller Trig. Kit on their? as I saw the 2 holes drilled through the trigger for the pieces to fit on it.

-The reffing throughout the day was great. I can't think of a time when my squad had a discrepency with a call. Props to AGD Pride. I saw some o them, and thanked Timmy L. and thanked him for his sweet trigger. TL63 Trigger just rocks on my SFL Emag.

-Chilled with EzRunner for a bit; Xmag is a bit lighter than my SFL.... (only by those 3oz that the Xvalve takes off from normal Valve........cough, jealous I dont have an Xvalve yet, cough.....)

-Lol, Wished I had asked if Pride would help me fix my backup Emag during Lunch Break though as a Teammate needed a gun later in the day... ah well..

~da baller

[cphilip]

Well I do not much care for a real light trigger because I play with gloves on and do not like suprises when I shoot. And that one is lighter than I normaly do mine to tell you the truth! It was set light for the Roller Trigger which I took off to send up there cause some of the guys did not have time to learn it and they didn't want to have to use it if it was actualy needed for a back up. So yes I have one but I took it off to send it up there. That X mag is now at 1 magnet up top at this point I think. It might be one magnet and one oring I cannot recall. JJ set it up for me that way when the roller was put on it cause that thing needs it to be lighter. I usualy go with two magnets and no spacer o rings myself. Its all preference I guess but its certainly adjustable thats for sure. But I have not touched it as I have only had it two weeks now and only played one time with it and even then I loaned it out all day. So I not realy sure its where I want it until I get some more time with it.

[demonguy8]

EDIT: The playing on call rule argument has been clarified and dealt with I dont wish to take the thread any more off topic and am deleteing all my offtopic posts after this one, as the debate ended up solving itself..

As far as the thing scooter/cootie mentioned.. It was game one of finals.. ISU VS UofI... It got down too a 4on2 or so and a UofI player ran between two bunkers that where directly touching each other to bunker the remaining 2 ISU players.. In EVERY other league Ive ever seen, Doing so is considered manipulating the field and would be an automatic elimination of the player, and then playing on for shooting the two ISU guys after being eliminated for running thru the bunkers. So right after this, there was a BIG argument on the field, started by the last two ISU players. Aparently the being able to run thru bunkers question was asked during the captains meeting and deemed LEGAL for some unknown reason. Personally I have no idea why such a thing would be legal, but I guess it was, and the call on the field stood (and rightly so if it was deemed legal). Apologies to AGD Pride, and the UofI guys for the drama.

[raehl]

I just got home, and I'm kinda in the mood to do anything OTHER than paintball for a little bit (spent the car ride writing up an article on the event...) so I'll keep this short. (But be honored that I came to AO first. Well, after the NCPA forums of course. )

- Thanks to everyone for doing the work to show up.

- Thanks to the refs for doing a great job and the players for making it easy.

- Thanks to Brass Eagle, National Paintball Supply, and PMI for supporting the event and letting us put on a great show while keeping the costs to the player minimal while providing a nice paint selection.

- There was a lot of discussion about the playing-on rule at the President's Meeting turned Player's Party (Or was it player's party turned President's meeting?), there will probably be some revision of that rule over the summer, although it will probably stay written to put the onus on the player to check themselves. I know a lot of people who play elsewhere have issues with the rule, but then again elsewhere is where all the playing on and other grey-area BS happens because the rules are written to encourage people to hide their hits as long as possible.

Ok, maybe that last bit wasn't so quick.

I should have the final rankings up - if I'm in a good mood - later tonight.

- Chris

[cphilip]

Well if you were referencing NPPL rules a player cannot call paintcheck for an obvious hit that he can verify. He can only call for it when he takes a hit he cannot verify and he is NOT neutral unless the ref has to call him neutral to verify. And in my opinion if he feels the hit enough to call paintcheck and therefore suspect its a hit it IS NOT and "unobvious" hit. It is just a hit that is hard to verify so it falls into the "Obvious hit" rules. And therefore that player should assume its one until he is checked or he risks a "playing on" penalty. It's that players or his teammates responsiblility to verify if that hit is an "out" or not before he plays on. It is not a penalty to play on with an "unobvious" hit. But the very fact that you called paintcheck means it IS NOT an unobvious hit. It is a hit that is difficult to verify. And if you continue to play while awaiting help to verify then you are indeed playing on. No question about it. But many times not enforced but should be. It is the rule.

[cphilip]

Oh hey Chris!

I agree that it sounds like the way you interpreted and used the playing on call in paintchecks is the correct one. It matters not if they have not been used to correctly called on that. Your interpretation is correct. IMHO.

However that bunker moving is a whole nother matter!

[cphilip]

Originally posted by demonguy8
The problem with this was the situation was a 3 on 1 and if you cant fire the moment you call paintcheck, theres nothing stopping the other team from running up on you, since you cant shoot back without a playing on penalty..

There is something in that situation the Ref has and can and should do. If its the one person left he should make the call quickly or call the player neutral and check. It is against the rules to advance on a neutral player. However it should be done quick so the flow of the game is not interupted. And if a advancing player does not respect the neutral call and advances he can be penalized....


Also if a player takes an obvious hit that is easily self verified and calls paintcheck HE Can be penalized. Especially if he plays on!

[Oddball]

I was there playing on the SIU A team. We didn't do as good as we had hoped but considering we had never played together as a team before and for 3 of us it was our first toury ever, we didn't do too bad. Only got one hang in the 4 games of the prelims but did great in the remaining games in the losers bracket getting a hang in each of our 3 games.

The game that Demonguy8 talked about earlier, their first game on the losers bracket, must have been against our B team. They lost to a team that played a man down with out getting even one elimination. That doubled their overall score to 8 since they only got one actually kill in the whole toury, and that was on the break of a game. It was all their first tounry and for 2 guys, the first time playing paintball.

Overall I had a great time. The paint shot great, we got Inferno, and was a really good deal. A few guys got paint to bring back to school since it was cheap.

As for what was said at the captains meeting in the morning, the question was asked if they could shoot thru the bunkers, not run though them. The question was asked, I assume, because of the hyperball fields and the holes in the bunkers.

Since I only got one semster left, this was most likely my first and last college nationals, but look out for SIU next year. I will have all Fall semster to form a good tourny team from the club.

[SeeK]

I'm surprised that it took you this long to form a team down there but the longer term goal of graduating is more important.

Sorry I missed watching more games. I just happened to be at CPX to play with some guys from work. The early games were different from the normal tourneys since the players I saw called themselves out. That's the really nice thing about the college teams.

If you ever get the chance to watch them play do it. This is the way it should be done.

[demonguy8]

Originally posted by Oddball
I was there playing on the SIU A team. We didn't do as good as we had hoped but considering we had never played together as a team before and for 3 of us it was our first toury ever, we didn't do too bad. Only got one hang in the 4 games of the prelims but did great in the remaining games in the losers bracket getting a hang in each of our 3 games.

The game that Demonguy8 talked about earlier, their first game on the losers bracket, must have been against our B team. They lost to a team that played a man down with out getting even one elimination. That doubled their overall score to 8 since they only got one actually kill in the whole toury, and that was on the break of a game. It was all their first tounry and for 2 guys, the first time playing paintball.

Overall I had a great time. The paint shot great, we got Inferno, and was a really good deal. A few guys got paint to bring back to school since it was cheap.

As for what was said at the captains meeting in the morning, the question was asked if they could shoot thru the bunkers, not run though them. The question was asked, I assume, because of the hyperball fields and the holes in the bunkers.

Since I only got one semster left, this was most likely my first and last college nationals, but look out for SIU next year. I will have all Fall semster to form a good tourny team from the club.

I actually dont think the game was against your school, since I dont remember playing ANY siu teams.. but the game description sounds right so maybe? I THINK it was against JHU or something (unless we played them earlier in the day in whichcase it was probably SIUB)... I know the second game was vs Northern(or NIU for those that like intials)

At any rate.. I hope your guys had a good time/experience, it being their first day/tourney and all. And ITS AWSOME that our state has 5 college teams now! (ISU, UofI, Northern, Southern, and Weslyan). How cool would it be to have 5 IL teams take the top 5 national spots hehe (ISU taking 1st of course )? I look forward to seeing you guys get bigger and becoming another powerhouse IL team in the future as you get some of the newers guys more experienced. Maybe we can even practice/scrimmage our teams some time?

[cphilip]

Originally posted by demonguy8
With the current rules/way the NCPA has the paintcheck rule setup,I dont see why a person would ever want to call a paintcheck for an unobvious hit when its the same 25 point penalty for playing on as if he did call paintcheck and then fired, especially when the reff wont come running over if he doesnt call paintcheck.. its rediculus to punish a player so severly for trying to play "honest" and to encourage shady play such as this..

1st: I believe the reff is doing or has done their job wrong to warrent a nuetral call. Admitably thought, noones perfect and can see every angle at every second so I understand why there is such a call in the sport.

OK I went and checked the current NPPL rules and if you were using them then you are correct to some degree but your putting the entire responsibility to check such hits on the Ref and it is not so. But I have no idea what NCPA is using. Under NPPL The Ref is not responsible for checking...Your team mates are. I will quote both of them and you will see were the grey area is. So I see where you get your argument from and it is a valid one to a big degree. Niether side is totaly correct and my argument is not either. But lets look at it. By the way your assumptions are fairly common ones and in a lot of cases it is indeed played the way you say. But the rules allow for what went on there. Let me explain....

Here is the current ruling on that and its under "Obvious hits" as I thought but it does allow playing on IF he calls for paint check IMMEDIATELY and his teamates check him (or if a ref does).. It is the teamates responsibility under this rule to check. Not the ref. If you end up calling a Ref and he does perform that for you it is supposedly after a teamate is not available. But its up to the ref. He could call it either way. And in your situation up top there was no other teamate.

10.06. Players with obvious hits in areas which are not easily verifiable, such as the back, may continue
to play, but must immediately call on a teammate who can easily verify whether or not the paintball broke to indicate whether or not such player was eliminated. The teammate must respond immediately, and if the hit player was eliminated, he must cease play, signal his elimination and exit the field pursuant to the provisions of this Section 10.0. Failure to call on such teammate for verification or failure of such teammate to respond immediately constitutes playing on by the hit player. If no such teammate is available for verification, such player may continue to play, but must immediately call for a paint check by a field judge. Failure to call for such a paint check immediately will constitute playing on by such
player.


Now right there is the strength of the argument in your situation that you described. Very valid complaint for sure as it seems the intent was to allow you to play on! but!

...it should be noted that a Ref does not have to perform a paintcheck when called for. It's your teamates responsibility to do it if its hard to verify. So it entirely depends on what went on during the paint check. It could go either way. If you have a hit and call paintcheck and your teamates do not verify and the Ref finds a hit he can indeed consider it playing on. Or he could consider it a non verifiable. Here is the "Paint Check" rules:

PAINT CHECKS
9.0 WHEN PERFORMED
9.01. Paint checks are performed by judges for the purpose of determining if a paintball has broken on and marked a player.
9.02. Paint checks are performed by a judge when the judge has observed a player taking fire, when fire is directed into an area occupied by a player that the judge cannot directly observe, when the physical location on which a paintball may have broken is not visible to the judge, or when the judge is directed to do so by another judge.
9.03. Judges may, but are under no obligation to, make a paint check after a player has requested one.

So you are more apt to get the playing on call if you are being checked by the ref as he may be responding to what he saw and not your call for paintcheck. Just because you holler it out does not mean he is not about to come look anyway after he saw something hit you. And you could just call paintcheck to cover your behind after you felt a hit and saw him coming and not realy make an effort to look. The ref must make a judgement. But you see he could call it either way?


Now as to the neutral call... No it is not him not doing his job...UNLESS he does not follow the rules. And they say he should make every effort NOT to call a player neutral. But sometimes its unavoidable. But its not something you want to do. Here is the neutrality rules:

9.1 NEUTRALITY
9.11. Judges will make every effort to perform a paint check without calling a player neutral. However,
a judge, at his discretion, may declare a player neutral.
9.12. No flag carrier will ever be stopped and declared neutral for the purposes of performing a paint
check.
9.13. A judge calling a player neutral will indicate the same to all players on the field by standing over
the player, shouting, "Neutral" and holding his arms above his head or waving his arms.
9.14. A player declared neutral cannot be eliminated from the game or moved on, either by opposing
team members or his own teammates, while in the state of neutrality.
9.15. A judge may move a neutral player's equipment and or request that such player expose additional
areas for examination.
9.16. Players not declared neutral may be eliminated while being checked.

Not realy clear cut... except for these specifics: that a Ref does not have to paintcheck you just because you call for one. It's your or your teamates responsibility to paintcheck "Obvious Hits" that are " Self unverifiable" and you can play on according to the rules as its not automatic but you risk a judgement of the ref one way or the other if you do. And he can indeed consider that you were playing on if he feels you could have verified it. Or that your call for paintcheck was late or diversionary.

Not sure that was what happened at all but it is a correct interpretation to call playing on if the situation warrants it. It would not be if it did not. Interesting?

[cphilip]

Well seems the NCPA's rules are somewhat different although similarly based...

NCPA:

12.1 Playing On
„h 12.1.1 Playing on entails continuing to act as a player in the game after receiving an obvious hit, declaring oneself eliminated, or being eliminated by a judge. Playing on includes, but is not limited to, continuing to fire or otherwise engage the opposition; continuing to move except with respect to exiting the field by the most direct route or at the direction of a judge; talking, signaling or otherwise communicating, either to a judge, opposing players or teammates, except that a player may say "I'm hit" or, "out", or something to that effect once; impeding the progress of opposition players or a judge; hampering a judge in making a paint check or a call; discharging or degassing the marker or providing teammates with paintballs or equipment.

And

10.0 Elimination - Obvious Hit
„h 10.0.1 Obvious hits are any mark from a paintball fired by a live player which strikes a player in a manner that the receiving player should see or feel, or any mark resembling such a hit. A judge shall assume a hit is from a paintball fired by a live player unless he has specific reason to believe otherwise. A judge shall remove any marks that are not from valid hits.

„h 10.0.2 Players with an obvious hit are eliminated.

„h 10.0.3 Players who are hit in self-verifiable places may not call for a paint check, and players who do so will be assessed a one-for-one penalty. Players may attempt to verify a hit they cannot see by touching it, but must immediately declare themselves eliminated if they do so.

„h 10.0.4 Any player with an obvious hit who continues to play, either by shooting, advancing on other players, communicating with teammates or officials, or otherwise continuing to do anything other than remove their armbands, give them to the nearest judge, install their barrel blocking device and proceed by the most direct route or under direction of a judge to the dead box will be assessed a one-for-one penalty for playing on.

10.1 Elimination - Unobvious hit
„h 10.1.1 Unobvious hits are any mark on a player from a paintball fired by a live player, or any mark resembling such a hit, which is not an obvious hit. A judge shall assume a hit is from a paintball fired by a live player unless he has specific reason to believe otherwise. A judge shall remove any marks that are not from valid hits.

Interesting!!!! So a hit that makes you call paintcheck is an "Obvious Hit" (because he felt it and so called paintcheck) but prehaps might be unverifiable by that player and no real specific terminology to address that (well there is the feeling for it thing) other than 10.0.4 which says he is playing on here! No judgement call by the ref and no responsibility to the Team mates either for verification.... Hmmmm.... Needs some work eh?

You can find them here

[cphilip]

Again I fully agree. And under all rules it seems if you know you were hit you should assume it broke until proven otherwise and so taking cover and ceasing fire and calling paintcheck would be preferable to playing one while waiting on paintcheck. If you take the chance then you pay the piper if your wrong. It makes sense to me.

Good thing to bring this out too as this is something that is commonly ignored and should be evenly decided and enforced. In all versions of the rules. Thats my opinion.

[ezrunner]

Yeah, this was Clemson's first strike at nationals.

We had a long ride both ways but it was a lot of phun.

Meeting psychoballer was cool, wish we had more time to party and it woula been nice if an industry giant had brought out some hotties for pics

I mean we have some in the leauge (Illinois )

Yeah, we didn't bring our A game, that being said, we did show up. Some things could have been done differently but hey, all considered we got all the cars back to SC in one piece and we had $60.00 left from the event so the guys didn't have to spend like they did at world cup.

Props to the good teams, and gr33t5 to all.

We had a great time and pulled some sillyness w/ LSU (Go Tigers!) We share a mascot w/ our breathren from the bayou.

I shot my race merlin all day (AKA Gun, it rocks) and i finally tested my speed w/ the gun. On a chrono I pull a consistent 11bps w/ my finger and if you setup trigger bounce it runs wide open which is 13 now because of the settings I'm using.

I did not field the Xmag mainly because if I broke it I would have cried

If it had been my gun I would have been playing it all day. I did not want to scractch it on the field. The field surface was a fine pebble spread.

-rob

[IMP55]

All I have to say is that I had an awesome time at Nationals. I play for UW-Whitewater. I think we played some really great teams and all of our games went really smooth. The reffing was some of the better reffing I've had. Props to AGD Pride and props to all the great teams! I have one question though. What was with that tiny airball field on the other side of the hyperball? I'm not saying I didn't like it, as a matter of fact we won the one game we played on it. It just seemed like it was way too small for a 5 man. On the other hand, the paint was good, Whitewater used Big Balls all day and it worked great! I had a blast and will definately do it again. also I can't wait to see all of the final results and updated rankings.

[raehl]

Ok, so the original game plan had been to get an airball field from one of the manufacturers. Unfortunately due to other events in the Midwest this past weekend, none were available, and I found this out on Wednesday I think. I had already decided that we definitely needed 5 fields, and not having a 3rd airball field would mean we'd be playing mounds - which we had made a point of telling people we would due do in light of some negative feedback last year.

So I started calling everyone I knew who had an airball field. I had two lined up in about 20 minutes, one in MN and one in IL from Sudden Impact near Bloomington, who also was sending two of the reffing teams (Orbital and Psycho Circus). The caveat was they only had 15 bunkers, but CPX had 4 more to make 19, which is typical 5-man size.

Saturday morning it turned out that mice had eaten through CPX's 4 bunkers, so we had to set up the field with 15. It was definitely a small field, but watching a few games on it the feeling I got was that if you walked the field right, you had a good shot at winning your games. You just had to get out there and make the right stuff happen. If you didn't walk the field right and just tried to play it you'd definitely get eaten up by a team who walked onto the field with a solid game plan.


- Chris

[XR4]

Michigan Tech made an appearance too. For the record, we still had snow on our field when we left so none of us had played since November. That said, we only missed the first cut by 3 points.

A few of you saw my Ghetto e-mag. Thanks to Timmy for the one right side e-mag grip so I could remove a peice of duct tape from my gun. All 5 of our e-mags sported his sexy TL-63 trigger.

We had a great time, Stibbo invented a new drinking game, Edward 40-hands. General told a cop we was staying at the hilton while doing his best to stand up straight, and Hills (ah137 on AO) had some personals exit the hotel window.

This was the smoothest run nationals by far, although we still need more people running the event off the field.

I'll have pics in a few days. I hope the rest of you also have more intersting stories of the past weekend. I know I'll remember other things than the rules.

Out,
XR

[ah137]

Yeah, the funny thing is I didn't even know it happened. I was just told. But nonetheless a lot of my clothing was wet, who knows why? We might have made finals if general (the only one on the team with a cocker) hadn't gotten a hot gun penalty. All and all I had a great time, and we did kick GVSU butt, ha ha ha fuzzy!! And the local bars where entertaining.

~Later Hills


p.s. cphilip, I did see your X-mag, not impressed at all!! j/k

[spantol]

Oh, hell, a little tangent never hurt anyone.

demonguy: That's called gamesmanship, and, aside from being just wretched form, seems entirely contrary to the NCPA's ideals (as I understand them, anyway). Such an action might not be explicitly prohibited, but I can't imagine that you'd argue it to be an ethically valid course of action--or can you?

In an ideal world, there'd only need to be two rules:

1 - Don't be a jerk
2 - Have fun.

It's the "competitive" spirit outlined in previous posts makes necessary anything more.

[cphilip]

Well I think Deamon guy has a very valid point. It is not so clear cut how to play on or how to call that. I would opt more like NPPL states theirs where the ref can judge the intent of the playing on and the inablility to verify and the timing of the paintcheck call. At least for moment he can consider it. As the NCPA rules are now its very unclear if he ever CAN consider the circumstance where it may indeed not be a penalty.

[cphilip]

Hmmm...I think NPPL rules work. It's the judges and refs not knowing them or enforcing them that seems to be their problems. And I know that NCPA rules work pretty darn well but I see a few gaps in them. For instance there is no onus on the team to make and be responsible for paintchecks in those situations. Its all left to the refs. That inclusion I think is worthy. And there is no clear allowance for the Ref to not honor a paintcheck. That could be clearer. I wouldn't call the NCPA rules I just read a grand departure from NPPL rules. On the contrary. They appear to me to be a loser set of NPPL rules in a more simplistic lay out. I do not see where you conclude they are radicaly superior at all. I think NCPA works because of the good people involved...not the rules.

[cphilip]

YeP! thats the way it is and one things for sure they were all playing under that same rules so they were all under that same obligation. So its fair for all if thems is the rules!

One thing that was left off is your NCPA rules of "Obvious hits" vs "Non Obvious". And I posted them earlier.

[cphilip]

Well as I see it there is no way to not leave it to a judgement. It looks like the NCPA made it as clear cut "always" is for that reason. And perhaps for the reason in that when things are judged they can often be judged differently and unfairly even. The NPPL seems to have followed that for the most part but left it a little more lee way to determine what was "Playing on Deliberately" and "Playing on accidently and without devious intent". As I said earlier there should be an onus on the player and there is in both sets of rules. More so on the team in the NPPL but same thing realy. Now mind you those are hard things to judge and can be dangerous to not call close. And thats Chris's point. Why not take that inconsistency out of the game? And thats a good argument. But your point is that there are a few (mind you very few) situations where playing on is inadvertant and should be an out but not a penalty automaticaly acessed. The problem is there is no way to write that rule so as to give clear guidance to the ref as to when to make that judgement and so human error will be inclusive of that call. Subject to the ultimate refs ok. Thats what Chris is saying. And I fear I have not seen it any better written than NPPL does. But yet we know that still is not perfect. So as much as I can see BOTH of your points I do not realy have an answer for you. I think Chris will tell you that is why they did it that way. So it was clear cut and no interpretations could lead to unfairness and inconsistencies between officiating crews. Seems the safest thing to do is to tuck in and wait for a check. But I do not know how it could be written so as to allow a single player to wait on check without involving the refing crew in some judgement calls. That would be the only alternative. This is one of them Dammed if you do and Dammed if you don't things I am afraid....