My point of view on cheating.

[Thordic]

Yeah, I think there is a difference, Kev.

If you think you might be hit, but you aren't sure and continue to play on until a ref calls you out, then ok.

If you run and slide hard off the break to try to clean any possible hits, then ok.

But if you feel yourself get hit, see yourself get hit, and 100% know you got hit, and you conciously move to wipe it, thats a different story.

Theres a difference between playing the grey and cheating.

Giving the 2nd baseman a little bump as you come into second is ok.

Doing what A-Rod did and slapping the ball out of the guys glove is cheating.

[MarkM]

you kinda took what I meant out of context. I said that I shoot wipers. I didnt say that I assume that all ppl are cheaters, so I light everyone up. I dont overshoot. PPl that wipe where I play are well known. If you play against someone all day and they are wiping, then that is grounds to make sure they cant by putting more paint on them. That is why I said 'wipers' get enough paint that they cant wipe. Besides overshooting IMO is putting like 5-6 more balls on someone who has clearly signalled they are out. Just hitting someone w/ 5-6 balls is not overshooting. PPl that dont wipe, there is no need to keep painting them.

I hope you understand that now by re-reading my post and taking the nouns and verbs for what they really are, hence the noun 'wipers'. There was no implication that everyone gets light up. THanks for calling me a cheater though. I really appreciate that.

Nothing was taken out of context since I quoted the entire post and then took the parts I didn't agree with. As for calling you a cheater, yes I did and immediately explained why. There is no conflict involved here just simply a reading of the rules as written...some leeway is always applied as with the example of sliding into a barricade before checking yourself for a hit but then that is down to the particular judge who is watching as technically it is a breech of the rules and a penalty is applicable..when a penalty is applied it means you as a player went against the rules IE you cheated. This is the correct context under which this statement was made and you are the one who took a comment out on context.

[yakitori]

Nothing was taken out of context since I quoted the entire post and then took the parts I din't agree with. As for calling you a cheater, yes I did and immediately explained why. There is no conflict involved here just simply a reading of the rules as written...some leeway is always applied as with the example of sliding into a barricade before checking yourself for a hit but then that is down to the particular judge who is watching as technically it is a breech of the rules and a penalty is applicable..when a penalty is applied it means you as a player went against the rules IE you cheated. This is the correct context under which this statement was made and you are the one who took a comment out on context.

I didnt say that I overshoot wipers. I said that I hit them w/ enough paint so that they cannot wipe. As I explained the meaning of overshooting/bonus balling as continuing to shoot someone after they have signalled that they are eliminated. Shooting someone 5 times is not cheating. It doesnt become a cheat until the player has signaled they are out.

I didnt take anything out of context. Maybe you and I just have a different idea of what overshooting is. And I am not a cheater for the record. Youve never even played w/ or against me, so you have no right to make such a statement. And you did take my post out of context. You just proved it by admitting that you called me a cheater and the reason why you did was not what you describe here. Thats a different scenario. Cheating is conciously going against the rule. Its not as bad to take a hit in the pack and not know it, and continue to play. Sometimes you cannot feel those kinds of hits. The ref, spots it and calls you out. It happens in a fast paced game.


Its not against the rules to get into your bunker before you check for hits. Its playing on that is cheating. I dont know if thats against the rules in england, but it sint here. Playing on is prolly cheating both here and england.

[SlartyBartFast]

Its not against the rules to get into your bunker before you check for hits.

Really?

Search for some of my discussions about the unenforced (and some unenforceable) rules and the penalties for them.

[MarkM]

Re-read my original post and look at the explainations as to what is cheating with the context of the reasoning. If you light someone up and continue to do so that is against the rules...no arguement If the guy is wiping and you do it unless the ref sees the guy wiping you will be penalised as breaking the rules. Breaking the rules means cheating..albeit a minor enfraction on a list of penalties but a penalty all the same.
I am writing this from the standpoint of being a judge (not wanting to be or having only done it a couple of times but from a judging career? of in excess 15 years...local events up to PSP, NPPL and Millenium)

[Army]

Cheaters are liars. Liars suck. Cheaters suck.

There is NO gray area. You are hit, you are out. To wipe means that you KNOW that you are hit, you KNOW you are out, but you lie about it.

Liars are cheaters. Cheaters suck. Liars suck.


If you wipe, you suck hard. If you cheat, you suck hard. If you think lieing and cheating are acceptable at any level of the game....


.....you just suck.

[SlartyBartFast]

There is NO gray area.

There is a grey area. But it's not about whether cheating is bad or not. It the difference between cheating and an infraction for breaking a rule.

Like Yaki's position on overshooting. A couple of extra hits for insurance, may or may not be an infraction. Deliberately seeking retribution, or deliberately wiping are both cheating. One begets the other.

THe other contentious area is how to determine levels of infraction and how to determine deliberate versus unintentional/heat of the momnet affairs.

[Lohman446]

Cheaters are liars. Liars suck. Cheaters suck.

There is NO gray area. You are hit, you are out. To wipe means that you KNOW that you are hit, you KNOW you are out, but you lie about it.

So, youre on the way to the snake, its muddy, your going to dive for it anyways, and you feel a hit as you are two steps from the dive, you never look but you dive and remove anything that may have broken. The rules stated this was not technically right. Have you cheated? Are you a liar? Do you suck? You broke the rule... but was it cheating?

[yakitori]

Thanks slarty. That was what I was trying to say. I dont think mark understood the differnce between overshooting and making sure a couple shots get there for assurance. I guess maybe I wasnt being all that clear about my point. But, you hit the nail on the head. Thats what I was referring to.

And yes. There is a difference between infringing on a rule and cheating. For example. I was in the snake last weekend. I shot a guy in the elbow who was at my mirror in the other end of the snake. He wiped, the ref checked him and called him clean. Meanwhile I jump over the frontside of the snake, and run toward his place. He is trying to peak back out the backside of the snake down the tape. Meanwhile Im coming up on the frontside of the snake and I stabbed him over a small juicebox in his section of the snake. I kinda slipped when I did, and I leaned over the bunker a bit much and moved the juicebox slightly. According to the rule, I am not supposed to move the bunker, but did I cheat? IMO no. To mean cheating is more of a conscious effort to blatantly break a rule to gain yourself an advantage.

As for getting to the bunker you are going to before checking for hits. Its fine. Sliding in a manner to remove a hit is closer to cheating. If for instance you are running to the snake, you take one in the chest, and slide head first to remove it conciously. Thats cheating. If you are running and get hit on the way in the back of the leg or the side of the mask, and slide headfirst to give yourself cover before checking. Then upon your finding the break on your mask calling yourself out, Thats not cheating.

so, there are non cheating ways to get to your bunker before checking for hits. What if it bounced? Are you supposed to stop out in the open and call time out and check for a hit in the open? no. You always get behind cover before checking for a hit. If you dont, ppl will have no mercy on you cause you stopped to check for a possible bounce. Doing that will get you lit up and eliminated for certain. There is a difference between the two.

[Lohman446]

As for getting to the bunker you are going to before checking for hits. Its fine. Sliding in a manner to remove a hit is closer to cheating. .

But is it cheating? I took a hit at a tournament recently to the left side of my back, and I slid on my left side. I have no clue if the ball broke or not, and the ref could not come up with a clue. Did I cheat? I took a hit to the back of my left shoulder blade as I dove for the snake in wet clay, and skidded to a stop. The ref thought it hit my chest and i had supermanned to take it off. The ball had bounced... did I cheat? Not at all... what if the hit had been to the chest and I had slid - if it had broke did I cheat? There is indeed a grey area in cheating, its just where exactly is it? Some rules say distinctly when hit it is your responsibility to see if the ball broke or not before continuing to play, and you may not act in a way that would remove that hit... some say you don't even get to go to your bunker, you must stop at the closest bunker to check. There is a gray area. Is it consciously wiping off a hit when your in your bunker - no, thats pretty obvious, but there is a gray area between obvious cheating and playing.

[SlartyBartFast]

But is it cheating? I took a hit at a tournament recently to the left side of my back, and I slid on my left side. I have no clue if the ball broke or not, and the ref could not come up with a clue. Did I cheat?

Time for the rulebook quote:

http://www.nppl.tv/2005-Rules-final-3-1-05.pdf

From 17.01, on page 19

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.

Like it or not that's what is says. If the game is played differently, the rules need changing because otherwise it's cheating.

The rule book doesn't say that you're to continue doing what you were going to do and check at the earliest convenience. It says YOU, not the ref, check IMMEDIATELY. The only excusable behaviour would be to get behind the closest cover as stopping in a lane would eb stupid. But slides or wiping your out-held hand on a bunker seem a little difficult to justify.seem

[Lohman446]

Time for the rulebook quote:

http://www.nppl.tv/2005-Rules-final-3-1-05.pdf

From 17.01, on page 19



Like it or not that's what is says. If the game is played differently, the rules need changing because otherwise it's cheating.

I agree with you, I was thinking of that rule, or something like it, but didn't have it in front of me. So, according to the idea that not following the rules is cheating and you suck and are a liar if you do cheat... well a lot of us are now in that boat that thought we (umm.. thats we wtihout including me somehow) were perfect. Haha, you've failed to follow the rules too, so you are cheater, a liar, and worthless just like those you say are. <--- made of illustrative effect only, I don't mean it.

Theres a grey area.. at least if we are playing under the written rules but playing by the enforced rules.

[yakitori]

Time for the rulebook quote:

http://www.nppl.tv/2005-Rules-final-3-1-05.pdf

From 17.01, on page 19



Like it or not that's what is says. If the game is played differently, the rules need changing because otherwise it's cheating.

Well, stoping and turning around in the wide open clear will get you lit up in the back. Then youre out for stopping to check if it broke in the open. What if that ball bounced? Then you stopped and checked in the open only to get yourself eliminated. It could be wordsmithed about what 'exactly' does stop your acceleration toward the other team. Could that mean go to the nearest bunker to see if its a break, or stop out in the open. It doesnt specify. Its too broad of a definition w/o a finite action that should be taken when a hit is felt.

I agree, the nearest bunker is the best place to check. The only problem w/ that is that usually when you are getting shot, you are making a move, and almost to the bunker you are going to. Seldomly is it when you get shot halfway to your bunker and so you just pull over to the nearest one to check. In most cases, the nearest bunker is the one you were running for.

For you own safety its better to check for hits in the nearest bunker, than to stop

[SlartyBartFast]

For you own safety its better to check for hits in the nearest bunker, than to stop

But that's not what it says is it?

If you now conciously break that rule, knowing that it's there, and knowing that it won't be enforced and gives you a huge advantage, you are undeniably, without question, cheating.

Unless the event organiser of head judge wishes to offer you a clarification.

[Lohman446]

Well, stoping and turning around in the wide open clear will get you lit up in the back. Then youre out for stopping to check if it broke in the open. What if that ball bounced? Then you stopped and checked in the open only to get yourself eliminated. It could be wordsmithed about what 'exactly' does stop your acceleration toward the other team. Could that mean go to the nearest bunker to see if its a break, or stop out in the open. It doesnt specify. Its too broad of a definition w/o a finite action that should be taken when a hit is felt.


For you own safety its better to check for hits in the nearest bunker, than to stop

No... its not that hard to understand what it means

"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"

This allows lateral movement to the closest bunker, but not towards an opponent before checking. Now we can try to make the rule more grey by picking at it, or we can just admit that our behavior is very grey. Is the rule good? No I do not like it at all and it should be changed to be more in line with what actually happens and what is allowed. But do we ignore it when we play - yes we do. Isn't ignoring a rule cheating, even if everyone does it and the refs allow it? Isn't justify any other behavior, other than following the rule as it is written, justifying cheating?