Avalanche Cheating?

[TJ Lambini]

Richard

In agreeing with lil ol moi you agreed with Rancid, I think that's what's caused him to break down and start gibbering on tha floor...

peace

 

[Richard Kirke (DUPS Rocket) UK]

He didn't do that anyways?

Richard (there's no flag up my arse!)

 

[Tyger]

Video evidence

Ok, it's like this.

If you go to many events, team have 1-2 cameras on the floor, taping games ANYWAY. The equipment is THERE. A digital camera only costs $250 at the cheapest.

The incentive is for teams to film the OPPONENTS. Would you cheat, knowing your opponents have an unblinking eye on you and they're just WAITING for you to wipe a hit?

The second step is to make video evidence so damaging that it would be encouraged. Teams found blatantely cheaitng in video evidence forfit the game and take all negative points, for example. Massive beating, yes, but it would work.

If the motivation is to catch and punish cheaters, and swing points to your team in the process, you'd be amazed how many teams would suddenly find the $250 to buy a camera...

-Tyger

 

[rancid]

awww c'mon Tyger, you cannot be serious mate.

True you can capture someone wiping.... but that's it. You cannot capture playing on with only one camera.... you can't hear the ref say play on to a geezer despite him being hit cos of other circumstances. What you end up with is a kangaroo court...

I can't get over how many people are seeing these things as the death of paintball... it's part and parcel.

I'll repeat myself, if you ban players for playing on, you imasculate paintball.

Has King Canute got a team these days, cos I suggest if he has you join up.

 

[Richard Kirke (DUPS Rocket) UK]

Tyger

that's sick and twisted! And not really what I was thinking. An independent body would be better.

Rancid, I have to say that banning players wouldn't immansculate paintball but stop it from being full of cheats.

To establish that a player played on all you need is one camera filming a move with a broken paintball on them... what's so hard about that. But I too fear kangaroo courts!

Richard

 

[Tyger]

Tyger

Originally posted by Richard Kirke (DUPS Rocket) UK
that's sick and twisted! And not really what I was thinking. An independent body would be better.

Yes, but until that time does anyone else have answers? No? Thought not.

And Rancid : I'm not saying we shuold set up kangaroo court here, as much fun as that would be, but that's what post-game analasis is for. "Ok guys, what happened?" "Oh, ref told that guy to stay in".

I should have mentioned the other thought with this, See I actually have it all thought out elsewhere. But the other part of hte video replay rule is that if your video evidence isn't 110% conclusive, and you bring it to the ref's attention, your team is penalised for wasting hte time of the referees. It's similiar to losing a time-out in american football for video reviewing the play, but it's formatted diffrently.

I' not saying ban players, just get players used to playing under the one-eyed stare.

-Tyger

 

[Richard Kirke (DUPS Rocket) UK]

Banning players

Well maybe bannign players is goign too far (though I am not convinced); but some actual panalty outside dockage of points will give it whole lot more bite.

Tyger your ideas do seem to be making more sense, but kangaroo courts is still somehting that I am a bit afraid of, that would be terrible!

Richard

 

[rancid]

Tyger

Originally posted by Richard Kirke (DUPS Rocket) UK


Rancid, I have to say that banning players wouldn't immansculate paintball but stop it from being full of cheats.

To establish that a player played on all you need is one camera filming a move with a broken paintball on them... what's so hard about that. But I too fear kangaroo courts!

Richard

Imasculate... ie would it deter players from making a move cos of fear of being banned/labelled (see below)... after all we're dealing with split seconds here.

2nd point, you still can't tell where that hit came from. What if it had already been discounted by the ref; what if it in turn was the result of someone else playing on; what if it was a smudge off a barricade; what if it was dribble from a squeegie... it's just not conclusive.

Ref sorts it out in my opinion.

Basically, Rich, it boils down to me accepting it as an occ hazard and you feeling it's the work of Satan. I don't think we'll agree on this one mate. But, hey, that's what it's all about. See you around. .

Tyger, thing is we wouldn't hear the ref's take... it will become legend. Just like....Lasoya or whoever - 40 bunkers a tournament. How many of the 40 coming off that field would say 'I shot him first'? 20 perhaps? What do you read into that. Lasoya's a cheat... or, he's a bleedin genius and these guys can't take it.

We used to have a kangaroo court over here.. it was called Nam Wreckin Crew. If you beat them with a hint of a cheat they'd strangle you. Come to think of it, if you beat them fair and square they'd strangle you. Which brings us round to Robbo being banned. urk!

 

[Richard Kirke (DUPS Rocket) UK]

Re: Tyger

Originally posted by rancid


2nd point, you still can't tell where that hit came from. What if it had already been discounted by the ref; what if it in turn was the result of someone else playing on; what if it was a smudge off a barricade; what if it was dribble from a squeegie... it's just not conclusive.

Um... well that is why you ask the ref. Anyways you are right, we have slightly differing viewpoints, see ya round

Richard

 

[CROOKED-POPO]

I like Tyger's idea of teams filming teams, and I think it can be done with one camera. I also agree with Rancid that this is more about dollars than sense. I just don't see a budget for some of the solutions posted here without charging the players outrageous amounts to play. Maybe posting all the cheating caught on the web here and at other major sites would shame some into stopping or cutting down on there outlaw style of play.