Interpret this Rule

[teufelhunden]

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

I'm not talking about professional basketball. I'm talking about high school and younger. Nearly all contact should be called a foul.. but for sake of the game keeping a pace above grass growing, paint drying, and baseball, it's not.


I feel that more strictly enforcing the playing on rule to the point you have described would be detrimental to the game. I'm sure nobody has ever actually studied it, but how much paint bounces vs. how much breaks? From my experience, a lot of paint bounces.. I mean, people already complain that all tourney ball has become is dump as much paint as possible without worrying about moving.. so now you want us to sit and examine our bodies for a hit every time we feel one?

The intention is good, but the results would not be.

[hitech]

I'm not talking about professional basketball. I'm talking about high school and younger. Nearly all contact should be called a foul..

I'm not even sure what the foul rules are. However, whatever they are they should be enforced. I remember in my stepson's games most contact was called a foul.

I feel that more strictly enforcing the playing on rule to the point you have described would be detrimental to the game....but how much paint bounces vs. how much breaks? So now you want us to sit and examine our bodies for a hit every time we feel one?

Yes. It's worked before, albeit there was less paint in the air. However, I doubt players where hit less often. It doesn't take that long to look. Besides, you were HIT. And everyone would be playing by the same rules. And if the rule against baggy clothing were enforced there would be far fewer bounces.

[KRAKMT]

Once again, if the rule is play until the ref calls you out, why aren't the rules writtne that way?

This is not the rule in NPPL.
A player is obligated to make the call- not the ref. If the ref makes the call as has been said there is discression. As for blatent favortism- maybe but as a peon reffing a major nppl event last year I could not have cared less who won. Every ref is different just as every person is different and politics play a role. There are pressures to let the game be won or lost on the field not because of reffing. I never wanted a game to be decided by my call but it happens and happens fast. Memorable was a 1for1 call on a hit to a guys hopper. We know hopper hits are sometimes hard to tell- rule says it is obvious. I called the 1for1 because when it hit he flinched and kept firing. I took the heat but I believe it was a correct call. Any forward progress, firing or advancing is playing on. There is no playing until a ref calls you out- not in the NPPL.

[Enemy]

ok realize though that rules should be written to be tighter than what they would be enforced at!! take the very rule you quoted in its current state it isnt being enforced majorly but if the reff feels that the hit is obvious ie guy flinches he has the right to pull the player and a teammate with out arguement of oh no he didnt flinch! now if in that same instance the player genuinly didnt feel it and you pull a 1-4-1 then you took away from someone who would have left the second he realized he is hit! leave the rule the same its nice knowing that there is leway but in the same stroke if the ref is in a bad mood he can make you pay for it!!

also you need to focus more on other rules as well like jerseys should be tightly tucked into the pants and are not to cover the harness or pods! or the padding on the new dye jerseys if the current rules cant even be enforced when it comes to clothing do really expect bigger gains in other departments!!

[SlartyBartFast]

This is not the rule in NPPL.

You have the NPPL experience, so I'll take your word for it. I'm happy to hear that they are enforcing it as written.

I'm only seen local tournaments that purported to use NPPL or PSP rules and who obviously didn't follow them to the letter. I've also come to think that most local play is the same considering the vitriol the couple of other times I've brought up the same subject on-line.

[Raven001]

As I recall from my limited NPPL experience, compliance with the rules depended on the integrity of the player and the competence of the referee. Some players would push the boundries and some refs acted like they were legally blind.

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.

remind me to bypass WI

[KRAKMT]

ok realize though that rules should be written to be tighter than what they would be enforced at!! take the very rule you quoted in its current state it isnt being enforced majorly but if the reff feels that the hit is obvious ie guy flinches he has the right to pull the player and a teammate with out arguement of oh no he didnt flinch! now if in that same instance the player genuinly didnt feel it and you pull a 1-4-1 then you took away from someone who would have left the second he realized he is hit!

The discression really isn't whether it is obvious, in reality everything is an obvious hit seldom do you get pack hits, the discression is whether the person was playing on after he was hit. It takes everyone a second to react when you are hit- that is understandable but at the point you react and then continue to play that is the 1for1. And as for the honest player that would have called himself if he had known- that is the gray you are concerned with. Keep in mind some pro teams are reputed to practice not flinching by randomly shooting each other during practice breaks- like the old two for fliching when we were kids they shoot and then give you two more if you flinch.

Local tourneys are always modified rules and with refs of differing experience. We work really had to maintain a great reffing reputation at the local level. We have ten NPPL refs trained by Dan Perez himself- I have reffed an NPPL major. Our first local tourney last year we had 13 refs on the field. We have a solid reputation of great reffing- hard to get away with stuff with that many eyers.

If you want enforcement of the rules you have to step up be the guy to make it better.

[SlartyBartFast]

ok realize though that rules should be written to be tighter than what they would be enforced at!! take the very rule you quoted in its current state it isnt being enforced majorly but if the reff feels that the hit is obvious ie guy flinches he has the right to pull the player and a teammate with out arguement of oh no he didnt flinch!

Then it's not a rule change that's required, but an enforcement clarification.

The only non-obvious hits are on harnesses.

Therefor, remove flinching/reacting and other subjective opinions from the equation.

Make the rules the refs have to follow VERY clear.

"After observing a player receiving an obvious hit and the player is marked, wait for a two count and if the player does not eliminate themselves or call for a paintcheck:
(i) if the hit was easily verifiable, the referee shall call player for playing-on.
(ii) if hit was not easily verifiable, the referee shall call player for failing to call paintcheck (playing-on)."

Both offenses, by the way, seem to be one-for-ones as penalties.

For non-obvious hits:

"After observing a player receiving a non-obvious hit and the player is marked, the referee shall immediately eliminate the player."

For when the referee can't see if the paint marked or not:

"After obsering a player receiving hits, but unable to confirm marks, wait for a two count. If the player does not call themselves eliminated, obviously check themselves, or request a paintceheck, the referee shall perform a paintcheck and:
(i) if marked by an obvious hit, call the player for playing-on.
(ii) if marked by a non-obvious hit, eliminate the player."

And of course a paintcheck call for an easily verifiable obvious hit is a playing-on call.

Then, instead of practicing not to flinch, players would have to practice checking themselves and making it visible or calling for paintchecks from teammates or refs quickly.

And the ref would have the advantage of a clear action/decision path.

[SlartyBartFast]

And when it comes to discussing specifics all comments dry up....


No opinions?

[Lohman446]

And when it comes to discussing specifics all comments dry up....


No opinions?

I'll get into it more tonight... but do you know how much paint can be removed in a two count... or how well a single hit can be, even if it looks like someone is looking for a hit?

[elpimpo]

Continuing discussion from another thread to focus on one particular rule.


So, if you're hit anywhere but on your harness (the only unobvious hit)



The referee should not eliminate you but should instead call a one-for-one. The reality is that refs call eliminations for obvious and unobvious hits and players do not call themselves out.

Once again, if the rule is play until the ref calls you out, why aren't the rules writtne that way?

I've only watched local tournaments, is it the same a big tournaments?

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?

(and don't try to say that the rule only applies to playing-on after the ref calls you eliminated, because by the book it's not the ref's responsibility to eliminate players for obvious hits.)

i guess id probly the best the best source to enlighten you here. i reffed denver las vegas and san diego and im headed to hb in march. its playing on if u have a hit thats obvious(anything but the back of the pack) it does not matter if a ref calls u out, if the hits there u r to call your self out. if you fire even one ball after you are marked out in an obvious spot it is a 1 for 1 penalty. now if you make a game altering move, say you shoot another player, then that is justified by a 2 for 1 penalty and the player you shot is to be cleaned off.

heres one that will throw you a little. if you are marked in an easily checkable spot like if u get goged and you stay in and ask for a paint check that is a 1 for 1 playing on penalty.

now if a ref pulls you and you shoot thats a 3 for 1 penalty, so yeah thats bad.

[SlartyBartFast]

I'll get into it more tonight... but do you know how much paint can be removed in a two count... or how well a single hit can be, even if it looks like someone is looking for a hit?

True. But then do you remove the responsibility of the player to check themselves?

Or leave it but have refs ALWAYS paintcheck immediately?

But, the player could still check and wipe before the paintcheck...

I think the ultimate goal should be pushing the players to calling themselves out more often than they shoul dand not leaving the burden on th erefs to call them out.

[SlartyBartFast]

its playing on if u have a hit thats obvious(anything but the back of the pack) it does not matter if a ref calls u out, if the hits there u r to call your self out.

if you fire even one ball after you are marked out in an obvious spot it is a 1 for 1 penalty. now if you make a game altering move, say you shoot another player, then that is justified by a 2 for 1 penalty and the player you shot is to be cleaned off.

heres one that will throw you a little. if you are marked in an easily checkable spot like if u get goged and you stay in and ask for a paint check that is a 1 for 1 playing on penalty.

now if a ref pulls you and you shoot thats a 3 for 1 penalty, so yeah thats bad.

NPPL 38.06 is quite clear.

[elpimpo]

i see a paintcheck called every game. yes i call out all hits that i see, even if its obvious cause refs are supposed to call hits... the reason players are to call them selves out is because refs cant watch 7 people at a time, we have to do scans frequently and call what we see but its impossible to see everythign

[SlartyBartFast]

even if its obvious cause refs are supposed to call hits...

But, why are refs supposed to call hits? Certainly by the rule book they don't have to (except in the case of paintchecks).

the reason players are to call them selves out is because refs cant watch 7 people at a time, we have to do scans frequently and call what we see but its impossible to see everythign

So what pushes a player to call themselves out instead of playing until a ref eliminates them?

If refs never called eliminations but only 1 for 1's you'd be certan that players would call themselves out.

Refs calling eliminations only opens the door to subjective calls and favoritism and players complaining that every hit happened instantly before the ref saw it.