Please Explain This Behaviour/Rule

[SlartyBartFast]

Bart,
In MSPA, we always played it, if you have any hit after checked, the flag goes back to the point it was picked up from. The marked player gets eliminated, if it's an obvious hit a 1 for 1 is called. If the team that pulled the flag has no one left. The other team gets the pull and hang.

Ok. But why not 2-4-1 for a flag hang with an obvious hit?

[manike]

Ok. But why not 2-4-1 for a flag hang with an obvious hit?

Because that's not in the rules.

The rule is being enforced as it stands. If you call yourself out (yes even if you were playing on) then there is no penalty if a judge doesn't assess you as playing on.

If you hang with a hit (any hit) you are penalised.

Therefore it makes good sense to play within the rules.

It seems like you don't like the rules. Which is a different thing to argue about.

I agree if someone is found with a hit on them in an obvious place (even if the hit is found by one of their own team) that the said player should be penalised and a 1-4-1 be implemented. If the judge catches it... which again comes down to the judges and the players. Why did the player play on in the first place and why didn't the judge catch it in the first place.

Argueing about why people play to the rules is a little strange though isn't it?

[SlartyBartFast]

Because that's not in the rules.

Really?

All quotes from NPPL rules.

Running with the flag after being hit with an obvious hit isn't materially influencing the game?!? Seeing as the player has failed their requirement to check obvious hits, the hit and elimination may have occurred before the flag was pulled. Can't get more "materially effecting the game" than that.

Saying you are hit after running or just before the end of the game is playing on by rule 28.02 and 34.01. It may not be enforced or interpreted that way but it is fairly clear that "by the book" means if the player doesn't "immediately" call hit, it's playing on.

The rule is being enforced as it stands. If you call yourself out (yes even if you were playing on) then there is no penalty if a judge doesn't assess you as playing on.

No. The rule is not being enforced and the players like it that way and the judging officials don't want to ruffle feathers. They're too scared to enforce a rule, and even you say it's playing on. It's the same as speeding. Just because you didn't get caught or the officer let's you off the hook doesn't mean you weren't breaking the rules.

And if the officiating is so lax on rule interpretation such as that, is it any wonder the pushing of the rules (de-)evolved to the levels it has?

But my favorite unenforced rule is this one:

28.05 Players who are in motion while hit in obvious locations, which are easily verifiable, will immediately turn their motion away from the opposition, and stop.

Got :squid: all worked up into a lather last time I brought that one up.

A "by-the-book" interpretation could easily say that running from the break, getting an obvious hit, continuing to your position, then calling yourself out, is playing on.

A "by-the-book" interpretation could easily be said to say that if a ref sees a paintball make an obvious hit and the player makes no attempt to verify it immediately, they can be called for breaking the rule 28.05. But it's not clear what the penalty is if the obvious hit didn't break.

"By-the-book" and "spirit of the rules" interpretations also lead to the conclusion that any time a judge has to call an elimination due to an obvious hit is in fact playing on as the player has failed their requirements for verifying the hit and calling themselves out and continued to play after being eliminated.

If the game is only going to be play till called out by a ref, why aren't the rules correctly written?

28.03 actually has no business being where it is as it is the required action after being eliminated and belongs only in perhaps section 25. But then that underscores part of the bad design of these rules. If written in true legal form, each item in the book would have a definition, required actions, and penalties for failure to perform said action. Section 25 eliminations should have a description: "player is removed from playing field...." a required action (28.03) and a penalty (playing on).

The "assessment of penalties" section 38 should be eliminated. It could easily be replaced with a quick reference card for the referees organised by penalty quoting the correct rule and infraction.

The penalties section should just be definitions of each type of penalty (one of which is simple elimination).

Debates involving PB rules a fun. How the rules are enforced is certainly one thing. And all the tourny players get riled up when you question the interpretations. But the rules are so badly written and so much of the enforcement and interpretation by officials is more about how they want to play the game or path of least resistance that it becomes difficult to justify the play against the rule book or the rule book against the play.

Actually Manike, I think you questioned my ability as a writer in a thread you deleted.....

[SlartyBartFast]

It seems like you don't like the rules.

Neither here nor there. What I don't like is hypocricy of a set of written rules not matching the enforced rules. Enforce the rules as written or rewrite them to reflect the reality of enforcement.

Argueing about why people play to the rules is a little strange though isn't it?

People play to the enforcement. Not to the rules.

Speeding here is anything over 100kph. Police don't give out tickets till 120kph, so I set my cruise control at 115-119kph.

If your argument is that that's the way the rules are enforced, that's valid. But I have to question the validity of having the rules written the way they are. The players and teams in the leagues should also question the rules as they are.

So I don't find this discussion strange.

I'd rewrite the rules myself, but no-one is ever interested. I'll be the first to abmit that I don't have the tournament experience required to totally reorganise the rules. And, I'm not going to do volunteer work for industry or established tournamnets unless tehre's some other benefit.

As Tyger pointed out in my other thread paintball is the sport that embraces technology and fears change.

[Evil Bob]

The rule of thumb we used is once we had eliminated the other team, before the flag pull, we'd do a quick check to see if there was anything that would constitute a hit, if it was questionable, we'd get a ref in on it. We've been burned by unobvious hits on the pull and hang before, so we got in the habit of checking prior to pulling to prevent such infractions.

Just a quick spin in front of the flag station was usually sufficient.

-Evil Bob

[manike]

People play to the enforcement. Not to the rules.

Absolutely. Same with most sports as far as I have noticed. Unfortunately that's why we have judges and refs.

Do you actually play tournaments?

If you play them then you should step up and write some rules. Someone who is used to writing may do a decent job of it.

I've been part of the group that write rules and it really isn't easy.

It's tough to make a good rule, which is fair, simple to understand and simple to implement.

I wish it were easier so we didn't have the messes we often do.

[manike]

In all seriousness, if YOU or ANYONE could re-write the rules to make them clear, concise and enforceable then I would support them and make sure they were pushed to the correct people.

Having been asked for advice from both the Millennium series, and the PSP on rules I know they would greatly appreciate any help they can get.

[SlartyBartFast]

In all seriousness, if YOU or ANYONE could re-write the rules to make them clear, concise and enforceable then I would support them and make sure they were pushed to the correct people.

Having been asked for advice from both the Millennium series, and the PSP on rules I know they would greatly appreciate any help they can get.

If that's a serious proposal I might just take you up on it.

Are any of the series willing to pay or otherwise reward writing contributions?

You understand the effort involved is not negligable. And if was to even release draft copies to the wrong people my effort is given away...

[SlartyBartFast]

Absolutely. Same with most sports as far as I have noticed. Unfortunately that's why we have judges and refs.

Unfortunately, in the case of Paintball the judges and refs seem to have as little understanding of the rules as the players do.

Do you actually play tournaments?

If you play them then you should step up and write some rules. Someone who is used to writing may do a decent job of it.

I think I might like to play competitively. But I have a hard time finding people I would enjoy playing with.

My skills and interests would probably lean more towards organising and running events than playing at a top level.

But perhaps, like the discussion on a governing committee, the ideal rules should be written by someone who has no direct stake in the enforcement or following of the rules.

I've been part of the group that write rules and it really isn't easy.

It's tough to make a good rule, which is fair, simple to understand and simple to implement.

I wish it were easier so we didn't have the messes we often do.

Well, the current rules certainly fail in many places on easy to understand. And any writing involving complex ideas isn't easy.

The first thing that should be done with any rule book is to eliminate any rules that have been unenforced or that can't be enforced. Then a good round of re-organising wouldn't hurt.

[SlartyBartFast]

Please read/discuss this rule:http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166231

[manike]

If that's a serious proposal I might just take you up on it.

Are any of the series willing to pay or otherwise reward writing contributions?

You understand the effort involved is not negligable. And if was to even release draft copies to the wrong people my effort is given away...

I doubt any of them are willing to pay.

Every time I've helped with the rules it's been off my own back and for free. I did it to try and help the sport for everyone and to make it a better game to play. I realise not everyone can, or wants to do this.

Lots of the people that try to make the game better put a huge amount of time and work in off their own backs.

I used to report on events out of my own pocket, and help promote events and what was going on purely to try and see things get better. I don't know if it made any true difference, but getting out and actually doing something made me feel better about being involved.

Unfortunately it's not easy to get paid to be involved in this sport. I 'worked' in this sport for nearly 11 years before I actually made any money out of it.

[manike]

Unfortunately, in the case of Paintball the judges and refs seem to have as little understanding of the rules as the players do.

Absolutely. Because the judges and refs ARE the players from the week before. The only place a true judging staff exists is in the NXL, and they are awesome. They don't take any abuse or rule bending from the NXL pro players.

I think I might like to play competitively. But I have a hard time finding people I would enjoy playing with.

That's part of why I'm not playing seriously (whatever level we would be) Paintball right now. I loved the guys at Texas Storm but it's not easy playing for a competitive team, and now I've moved away to NJ anyway. It's always hard finding and being part of a team.

My skills and interests would probably lean more towards organising and running events than playing at a top level.

But perhaps, like the discussion on a governing committee, the ideal rules should be written by someone who has no direct stake in the enforcement or following of the rules.

You sound like a guy called Steve 'Wadidiz' Morris. He's a player but cares more about making sure the events and games are run well. He works his behind off for very little reward other than the gratitude (or hate) of players. Tough job. Very few people want to do it. But he does, and he cares about it. We need more people like him involved.

Well, the current rules certainly fail in many places on easy to understand. And any writing involving complex ideas isn't easy.

Which also goes back to point 1, if you don't keep the rules simple and easy to read, understand and implement without bias, then the players won't know them. And the players are the refs for 99.9% of the time. Vicious circle.

The first thing that should be done with any rule book is to eliminate any rules that have been unenforced or that can't be enforced. Then a good round of re-organising wouldn't hurt.

That tends to happen and get abused.

The Millennium removed the rule about orange being a protected colour for a season. Not sure who did it or was responsible, we got the impression it was a mistake during a re-shuffle, next season a pro team turned up with a shirt that faded from a little yellow, to a little red... via hellfire orange. Perfectly allowed within that seasons rules.

Your point is also why this crappy 'ramping guns to 15bps' is coming in. Because they can't enforce the current gun rules effectively.

[SlartyBartFast]

Which also goes back to point 1, if you don't keep the rules simple and easy to read, understand and implement without bias, then the players won't know them. And the players are the refs for 99.9% of the time. Vicious circle.

The rules read like the description fom rabidchiuaua about IAL. Written by a lawyer with a self-interest to leave loopholes and take advantage of the league with their factory team.

Your point is also why this crappy 'ramping guns to 15bps' is coming in. Because they can't enforce the current gun rules effectively.

Hmm. But the evidence is yet to come in that they even try on some of the most basic rules.

Enforce overshooting, calling yourself out, and a few other basic easy to enforce rules and cheater boards wouldn't give all that much advantage.

[manike]

They definitely try to enforce what they can. At least at major events. Your local events may be different and at the local level there are so many more problems with friendships/bias, lack of knowlede, experience, lazyness etc.

All of the top series try, but it's a tough battle and by no means an easy job.

I spent 3 years where I couldn't afford to play so I judged instead. I learnt a lot about how to play but really got to understand how damn tough it is to judge the game.

Try judging a local event, I bet they would love the help. You probably won't get paid enough to make it worthwhile for the money, but the experience is invaluable. I think everyone that plays should try it. You get a whole new understanding of the other side of things.

Part of the problem is that the judges are enforcing rules on paying customers. You want your customers to be happy... and follow the rules so others are happy. It's a very tough line to follow.

If/once it gets to a level where the players aren't direct customers then it gets better. A la the NXL. The NXL judges have no problem enforcing the rules strongly.

[KRAKMT]

Try judging a local event, I bet they would love the help. You probably won't get paid enough to make it worthwhile for the money, but the experience is invaluable. I think everyone that plays should try it. You get a whole new understanding of the other side of things.

Amen!

Refs spend all day trying to enforce the rules- many teams spend all day trying to skirt them. I am a lowly NPPL ref/not on the pro squad but I have experience and for every permutation you can come up with teams have done it. The NPPL last year made the comment that they were going to hire a group of sports lawyers to rewrite the rules- maybe they will.

As for the flag hang question- If you hang it with an unobvious hit you are out and the flag is reset at the other end. That is why the end ref carries his own- he gets the signal that the flag carrier was eleminated and to rehang the flag. Another team member has to sprint to the other end get the flag and do it again.

The issue is what if it was an obvious hit- it is a little more difficult. And should never happen because that player with an obvious hit just ran past 8 refs. Occassionally it happens and calls have to be made- if I remember right 1for1s are called and the flag is rehung. It is usually not a 2for1 because that means that player materially alter the course of the game and then hung the flag-they are very tough calls.

It sounds like you really need to ref some. Just like you remember every dumb thing you do while playing I relive every call I have made with as much addrenaline as if I was playing. Sometimes it makes you feel good knowing you made the right call sometimes it makes you cringe and tell yourself calls have to be made and thats your job.