Interpret this Rule

[SlartyBartFast]

the truth is that alot of players know that they can get a few more shots in without a call of playing on. they are exploiting the fact that refs dont see an impact sometimes, and therefore the ref may look at them when they shoot again, and think they got shot just then, hopefully by that time the player has eliminated an opposing player.

But that's what I think is in desperate need of fixing. There's ABSOLUTELY no need to have "interpretation" here. Especially on a rule like this.

The reason I find this rule very dangerous is that is clearly opens the door to favoritism withou making the refs responsible. A ref can let a player get away with a few shots, while quickly pullling another. Is he doing his job badly? Not by the rules...

A clarification of these simple rules wouldn't amke enforcement perfect, but it would make complaints and oversight of enforcement simple and put pressure towards standardised enforcement criteria.

[hitech]

Unobvious hits are for the most part, nonexistant.

[hitech]

How can a player justify the current status-quo of enforcement?

How can a promoter, judge, or ref justify the current status-quo of enforcement?

What makes anyone think that tournaments follow the rules? They claim to follow the rules, and make excuses or claim you are whinning and need to suck it up when you complain. What they say and what they do does NOT have to match. And it doesn't.

[White_Noise]

But that's what I think is in desperate need of fixing. There's ABSOLUTELY no need to have "interpretation" here. Especially on a rule like this.

The reason I find this rule very dangerous is that is clearly opens the door to favoritism withou making the refs responsible. A ref can let a player get away with a few shots, while quickly pullling another. Is he doing his job badly? Not by the rules...

A clarification of these simple rules wouldn't amke enforcement perfect, but it would make complaints and oversight of enforcement simple and put pressure towards standardised enforcement criteria.

any rule, law, etc is subject to interpretation. our governement is based on the different interpretations of the constitution. for example: conservatives argue for a stricter interpretation of the constitution, whereas liberals are for a looser interpretation.

any sport has favoritism. refs can let players foul someone in basketball, step out of bounds in football, not call a hockey player for high sticking, etc and if he doesnt do the same for every player, it is favoritism.

[Lohman446]

Any rules that leave ANY room for interpertation are going to be poorly used by some people, poorly applied, and flat out abused by others. I was playing a tournament with a Shocker recently with SEVERE first shot drop off. I walked to the field and was told I had to AVERAGE my first three shots over the chrono at 285. The first one rolled out of the barrel - I was like... lets see 10 feet per second.. the next two can be pretty hot by the stated rules.

[Alpha]

I hate technicalities. Right up there with cliches.

Thats why I stick to recball, where me and my mag belong.

[SlartyBartFast]

any rule, law, etc is subject to interpretation. our governement is based on the different interpretations of the constitution.

Paintball is a little less complicated than the constitution.

Certainly, SOME rules will ALWAYS be open to interpretation. It's almost imposible to write an allencompassing rule book that will never need interpretations.

BUT: in this case, the rule book CLEARLY states something different than what is being enforced and it would be SIMPLE to rewrite the rules to be clear, concise, an absolute.

Someone should try bringing a tournament promoter to court for failing to enforce the rules and improperly attributing prize money and prizes.

[SlartyBartFast]

Any rules that leave ANY room for interpertation are going to be poorly used by some people, poorly applied, and flat out abused by others.

Hell, if only this was a case of differing interpretations. It a blatant case of not caring what the rule book says and enforcing whatever takes the referee's fancy.

[White_Noise]

Paintball is a little less complicated than the constitution.

Certainly, SOME rules will ALWAYS be open to interpretation. It's almost imposible to write an allencompassing rule book that will never need interpretations.

BUT: in this case, the rule book CLEARLY states something different than what is being enforced and it would be SIMPLE to rewrite the rules to be clear, concise, an absolute.

Someone should try bringing a tournament promoter to court for failing to enforce the rules and improperly attributing prize money and prizes.

paintball still has a set of rules(constitution) and a governing body that wrote those rules.

just a little about rules that arent enforced. jaywalking: ive seen crowds of people cross roads infront of traffic, forcing them to stop, when not in a crosswalk, and cops dont do anything. law states it is to be enforced, is it? no.

another unenforced law. in Kenosha, WI, it is illegal for any male to be in public in an "excited" state. is this law enforced? nope.


like i said before: every single law or rule in any lawbook, constitution, or sports rule book is subject to interpretation. it is those who have power that get to use their interpretations(majority in government body, refs and promoters in paintball) want the rule changed or its interpretation? dont complain about it on a forum. either write or talk to the local promoter, owner, refs. or write nppl.

[SlartyBartFast]

like i said before: every single law or rule in any lawbook, constitution, or sports rule book is subject to interpretation. it is those who have power that get to use their interpretations(majority in government body, refs and promoters in paintball) want the rule changed or its interpretation? dont complain about it on a forum. either write or talk to the local promoter, owner, refs. or write nppl.

What's your point? I shouldn't try to understand the rules before playing and then have a reasonable expectation that they'll be at least followed in spirit?

I'm not complaining here. I genuinely want to take the pulse of players so that I can decide what to write into the draft document I'm making.

[hitech]

I genuinely want to take the pulse of players so that I can decide what to write into the draft document I'm making.

I think that players should be responsible for calling themselves out REGARDLESS of where they are hit. They should be penalized if they continue to play with a hit. The penalty would be much larger for an "obvious" hit.

This is not a groundbreaking idea. This was the rule in the last Lively tournament I played in. And it was being enforced. That was 1991...

[teufelhunden]

..and any contact in basketball on a shooter is a foul, right?

As a basketball ref, I can tell you that if this was the case, your average 32 minutes [of play] game would take hours upon hours.

There's the way the rule is written, the spirit of the rule, and the implementation of the rule. All three are different from eachother.

[SlartyBartFast]

I think that players should be responsible for calling themselves out REGARDLESS of where they are hit. They should be penalized if they continue to play with a hit. The penalty would be much larger for an "obvious" hit.

This is not a groundbreaking idea. This was the rule in the last Lively tournament I played in. And it was being enforced. That was 1991...

I'm leaning towards clearing up the player responsibilities and leaving the refs in charge of calling 1-for-1s only.

(Actually, I've already made the unilateral decision to clarify the penalty names. Elimination, Double Elimination (1-4-1), Triple Elimination (2-4-1), and Quad Elimination (3-4-1))

I'm also working on how to make rules optional/configurable. Each tournament organiser can then make informed choices about the rules configuration and the difficulties and requirements in enforcing them.

Then, custom player, judge, referee, and organiser (as well as complete) rules books could be created as POD.

[SlartyBartFast]

There's the way the rule is written, the spirit of the rule, and the implementation of the rule. All three are different from eachother.

I understand that. But, fouls are at least called for the most part. When was the last time you saw these rules applied in Paintball?

And there is a line that you cross that changes 'interpretation' from "for the better of the game" to "couldn't care less".

[hitech]

..and any contact in basketball on a shooter is a foul, right?

Should we include "TV calls" in paintball also? I think the enforcement of many of the rules in pro basketball is laughable...