Enforcing the rules and unsportsmanlike conduct

[Wadidiz]

Doh! Fingers activated before engaging mind. I stand corrected.

The problem goes back to what you, I and the others have said many times: the playing-on players are not getting caught, not getting penalized and wrongly shot-out players are not getting wiped.

I sometimes suspect that judges don't want to bother with it: it's too much hassle, too chaotic, especially in the final seconds of a game.

But even if I wrote too quickly without thinking it through, I suspect that a lot of players that should have been wiped didn't at Nations' Cup. Thus there may be some truth to what I was suggesting. (I wish someone would publish some videos so those of us who weren't there could see what happened!)

 

[raehl]

Well, here's some things we do i the college league...

Frist, you ahve to separate "foul" type penalties from "misconduct" type penalties. Fouls are players doing something that isn't allowed, but acting within the mechanics of the game. You're not supposed to interfere with passes, but you've got two guys running along both trying to get to the football, so sometimes pass interference happens - and the offender gets the penalty. The penalty is there to establish a balance between agressive play and TOO agressive play - the players are going to try hard ot receive/block passes, but also to not pick up the pass interference call. Same thing with offsides - no one wants to be offsides because it just costs you 5 yards, but sometimes it happens.

Misconduct is more things outside of the way the game is supposed to work. Wheras with pass interference you've just gone over the edge o fpass blocking, which is your job, things like fighting, or ntentionally deflating the football, or in our case, wiping, are conscious acts outside the context of the game.

So the goal is to have penalties for fouls that make players careful not to commit them but understand that it's a game and they're going to happen sometimes anyway, and penalties for misconduct that are so harsh people nearly never do that at all. Basically, it's quite possible that you could be honestly playing paintball and pick up a playing on penalty, but you're neer going to accidentally take your hand and wipe that hit off the front of your hopper.


In our new set of rules, we split things into minor, major and gross violations. Minors are things like swearing, or not having your barrel plug in, etc. Majors are things like playing on, talking when you're dead, calling a paintcheck for an obvious hit, etc. Grosses are wiping, throwing equipment, hostile confrontations, etc. Minors and Majors are points - so you definitely want to avoid them, grosses accumulate - the fist one is 50 points, the second one (per team) is 100 points and if committed by the same player a player ejection (team plays short) and the third one (per team) and the whole team is gone. Gross violations don't happen by accident, so if you're going to bring players who are going to commit THREE of them in the same tourament, we don't need your team there at all. Being able to behave like an adult and actually play paintball (i.e. not run around wiping) are a prerequisite to being able to play at all.


Things like throwing equipment will land you a yearlong suspension, and right now, fighting is lifetime (I wouldn't advocate that for a regular league, but for a college league where a lifetime is 4 years, keeping that player around isn't worth it to us.)


Suffice it to say, we don't have a whole lot of problems with gross penalties - we've called one per year for the past 2 years.

Fouls we call a lot. As I explain in captain's meetings, if you have an obvious hit, and you keep playing, (advance, shoot, etc) that's a penalty. It doesn't matter if you can't see it, it doesn't matter if you're in the middle of a bunker run - when you feel that hit, you have a choice: Stop and call yourself out, stop and get a paintcheck (if you're behind cover), or hope it bounced and keep playing - but if you're wrong, you'll cost your team 25 points. (On the other hand, if you bunker the guy and he spins on you, he gets the penalty.)


The end result is that in most cases, you'll be damned sure to get the paint check, but if it's the last game of the day and you need the flag hang to advance/win and you're the last guy on your team bunkering their last guy, you're not going to stop until a ref calls you out even if you do feel a hit and take the 25 point penalty if it broke - and there's nothing wrong with that. It's not cheating, it's risking the 25 point penalty because you need the 50 from the hang.



And as others have already point out, this all obviously works much better when you have practiced refs who know what they're doing. Keep in mind that in football/baseball/basketball, refs/umpires sometimes make over $100,000 a year. Paintball pays our refs about the same as we pay refs for the 10-12 year old age group in the local Jaycee's league. You do get what you pay for. Not much we can do about it though - when the player is footing the bill, you don' exactly have $100k/year lying around to pay refs.


- Chris

 

[kim1]

Now we're talking...

Originally posted by Wadidiz


The point is: we need to all be singing from the same sheet of music. What will it take to get us there?

Steve

This is a main point in all debates of judging. Steve throws in a lot of real play examples, so will I, in fact two;

I was at this 10-man tourney with a national pro team judging.

1) incident; I had my ass in towards a T-bunker and got pulled for a "hit" on my shoe. The bunker was full of paint in the grass. If my feet are in the safe zone inside the T one can imagine from where the paint has come from... I'd say most judges would wipe it off but there are they who pull you...

2) incident; I've empty my Dye Attack Pack and I can feel the sensation of some one coming at me, trying to mug me. I line up and fill the guy with paint. He runs past and continues toward my team mate at the next bunker behind me - I "secure" him with additional paint in the back. In the process he managed to get a hit in my empty pack. I get a one-for-one for playing on... I demanded an explanation from the judge from whom I got 1-4-1:ed! he answered something like "you should have known it". I even threw the pack at his feet after the game and asked how the f**k I could have felt that hit. The head judge who was on field next to this judge thought that it was a correct decision... All of the pro players watching this were stunned - as was I.

The rules should never be (even a lawyer's) nightmare. But still this diversity seen on field is giving us players grey hair - what is the judge next to you up to next...!

 

[raehl]

Bah...

It WAS the right call. You hit the guy, shooting him in the back was just sheer stupidity on your part - especially since he would have almost certainly marked you on the way by you should have had a ref call you clean before you mindlessly shot more for no purpose other than being a dick. Even if you didn't get the one-for-one for the playing on, you should have gotten one for the overshooting. Don't you even know how to be bunkerred? Shoot the mobber, then turn the opposite side of your body to him. If he's hit and you're just hit on the opposite side it's obvious you got him first. (I'll admit you need a ref who knows what he's doing to pick up on this.)

And you should have been one for oned for talking when you were elminated. Get your ass in the deadbox and talk about it after the game - no ref is ever going to go "oh, alright, I guess we'll just put the players back in since you don't think it was a good call."

And you should have been tossed from the event for throwing your pack at the ref, or even the feet of the ref.

You got off easy. Pull your head out of your ass and realize YOU are the problem.


- Chris

 

[Wadidiz]

Re: Now we're talking...

Originally posted by kim1


This is a main point in all debates of judging. Steve throws in a lot of real play examples, so will I, in fact two;

I was at this 10-man tourney with a national pro team judging.

1) incident; I had my ass in towards a T-bunker and got pulled for a "hit" on my shoe. The bunker was full of paint in the grass. If my feet are in the safe zone inside the T one can imagine from where the paint has come from... I'd say most judges would wipe it off but there are they who pull you...

2) incident; I've empty my Dye Attack Pack and I can feel the sensation of some one coming at me, trying to mug me. I line up and fill the guy with paint. He runs past and continues toward my team mate at the next bunker behind me - I "secure" him with additional paint in the back. In the process he managed to get a hit in my empty pack. I get a one-for-one for playing on... I demanded an explanation from the judge from whom I got 1-4-1:ed! he answered something like "you should have known it". I even threw the pack at his feet after the game and asked how the f**k I could have felt that hit. The head judge who was on field next to this judge thought that it was a correct decision... All of the pro players watching this were stunned - as was I.

The rules should never be (even a lawyer's) nightmare. But still this diversity seen on field is giving us players grey hair - what is the judge next to you up to next...!

You bring up some real good points with the incidents you describe. Only well-trained and very experienced judges would not be likely to make the mistakes you name here.

Your first incident reminds me of a 10-player final game I reffed at the World Cup. A well-known top-level pro player was playing one hellava game and I was right behind him. He had a lot of paint around his bunker and had some paint marks on his shins from kneeling on paintballs. When I can, I do my duty and wipe off non-hits. An opponent of his managed to wrap around a center bunker and get a snap-shot off and hit him close to the knee. I saw a ball fly in and break on him. He never even saw where it came from and obviously didn't even know the opponent was there. He tried to tell me that it wasn't a hit and that it was paint he kneeled on. Since there was a lot going on I didn't have time for a discussion, so I told him, "It is a hit. Talk to me later." I suspect he told his teammates, maybe others, that I was an incompetent dick. And he may have wondered who the hell I was since I was an independent without a team at the time. And maybe he didn't feel it because of a knee-pad. Sushi happens.

He didn't know that I have for years been able to clearly see the difference between kneeled-on paint and a real hit (in 98% of cases.) A real hit splatters out more and drips more. More like a star. A kneeled-on mark looks compressed and doesn't run as much. More circular.

I'm not saying your first case is similar to this one, but sometimes players get hit from directions they never find out about. Sometimes players shoot themselves (saw that at the same Cup) and sometimes get shot by their own players.

About the second incident, I ran up to a player who was playing with a hit on his mask exactly on his ear. I still wonder if I was a dick, because I decided that the guy must have heard and, perhaps, felt that a ball hit him there. I think he should've called for a paintcheck according to Millennium/NPPL rule 10.06. So I pulled a 1-4-1.

In your case I think it is theoretically possible to be hit on a pack on some places that would clearly be felt. I can't imagine that I would have assumed you would have felt it, unless it was obvious you knew there was a strong possibility that you had been hit. In which case it was your obligation to call for a paintcheck. Many players take a chance that they have not been hit under such circumstances, but if they're wrong they have to pay the price. I've done it.

Long spiel with the point that even the best, most experienced refs are going to screw up, sometimes resulting in teams missing the opportunity to move up. Sometimes resulting in the loss of first place.

If I were responsible for training refs or holding a pre-tournament briefing, I would talk about some of these issues and a handful of others just to make sure everyone becomes more alert and aware of some of the things you're talking about. I might even visually demonstrate to the judges the difference in appearance of real hits and bunker smear or kneeled-on paint, at the risk of insulting the more experienced judges.

Steve

 

[kim1]

Bah...

Originally posted by raehl
It WAS the right call. You hit the guy, shooting him in the back was just sheer stupidity on your part - especially since he would have almost certainly marked you on the way by you should have had a ref call you clean before you mindlessly shot more for no purpose other than being a dick. Even if you didn't get the one-for-one for the playing on, you should have gotten one for the overshooting. Don't you even know how to be bunkerred? Shoot the mobber, then turn the opposite side of your body to him. If he's hit and you're just hit on the opposite side it's obvious you got him first. (I'll admit you need a ref who knows what he's doing to pick up on this.)

And you should have been one for oned for talking when you were elminated. Get your ass in the deadbox and talk about it after the game - no ref is ever going to go "oh, alright, I guess we'll just put the players back in since you don't think it was a good call."

And you should have been tossed from the event for throwing your pack at the ref, or even the feet of the ref.

You got off easy. Pull your head out of your ass and realize YOU are the problem.


- Chris

Dude! Do you want to pick up a fight or haven't you got laid for a looong loooong time???

This is exactly my point! I'm not whining, actually I don't care what happened and I'm not getting provoced by YOU! The point is that we percieve stuff differently. Name the rule WHERE you get 1-4-1 for a hit in the pack!

And no - it's not selfevident that he would have hit me. I tucked in at the tea bag and was lined up for him. It is very probable that the hit I got came actually from our own back guy trying to hit him too (which he also did before he even came to my bunker!). This guy was "going til the end" and he was locked into that as he run passed and was still going for the guy behind me with several clear hits! So - my choise was between just letting him run or add some balls for the judges to look at.

AND, the talking happened after the game, and showing the pack and hit by throwing it in front of him is no act of intimidation. I just asked how he thought that I should have felt the hit with that amount of padding...!? And of course you can't turn such a call over and put a player back in the game.

But my point is this - these examples are hypothetical - that rules are implemented so differently.

Let me explain; according to Chris and the judge I should have asked for a paint check because I got mugged. Because I did not I was 1-4-1. According to some others, me myself included, a back-back is not self-check-zone... so what do the rules say? what is the on field practice? out of ten judges how many deem 1-4-1 and how many only rips your armband? how do we get 10 out of 10 to make the same decision??? get my drift here??? And those were ONLY examples!

 

[Wadidiz]

Bah...

Originally posted by raehl
It WAS the right call.

- Chris

I was afraid I was being set up. It just shows, you have to know what you're doing and be there. There are just too many variables.

 

[raehl]

My problem with the original post is I'm sick of players blaming everyone else but totally ignoring how their own behavior contributes to the situation.

I'm not saying you should have been one for oned for a hit on the pack. I'm saying that by shooting a player who was already obviously eliminated your behavior made getting the penalty possible - and even if you shouldn't have been one-for-oned for the pack hit, you should have been for shooting the eliminated player. Those extra shots did nothing to help your team win the game, but did end up costing you - your fault, not the refs, even if the ref assessed the right penalty for the wrong reason. You made a bad decision, plain and simple.

Now, the player you shot definitely should have been one-for-oned as well, but its the refs job to asses that penalty, not your job to do it by lighting him up in the back.

As for the talking, the way you wrote it made it seem like you were talking during the game because you didn't move the timeframe until after the game until when you were throwing your pack. My bad for reading that the wrong way - but still - don't throw stuff anywhere near refs, or direct the F word at them. Again, your behavior contributing to the problem.


I realize that what you did and what the other guy did appear totally normal to a lot of people who read these boards, but that perspective needs to be changed. There's unfortunately years of "paintball culture" that's been built up that's just bad news. It's not surprising that it's been allowed to get this far since the vast majority of people were concerned merely about winning whatever event they were playing, but its totally counterproductive if you're thinking about pulling hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in avertising and ticket sales.

Refs need to be better and more consistent, but players have to start playing a little more paintball and doing a little less of the vendetta and "I'm a bigger man than you are" BS too.


- Chris

 

[Wadidiz]

Rules are made for people, not people for the rules.

In my example about the guy getting hit on his mask, over his ear, I assumed that the guy should've suspected he might be hit. In which case it was his obligation according to rule 10.06 (concerning obvious hits that can't be self-checked) to call for a paintcheck. That rule does allow a player to continue playing after calling for a paintcheck and waiting to be checked. I made a judgment call that he should have felt it.

Another judgment-call area is hoppers. If I judge that a player should have suspected she/he is hit on the front of the hopper, I consider it to be an obvious hit. Example: spray on goggle, among other things. In some cases, the player may not have known. If I don't witness the event, or see clear spray on the googles, I don't call a 1-4-1 or 2-4-1.

This takes training, knowing the rules, consistency of the reffing corps and mostly experience.

Steve

 

[kim1]

Re: Re: Now we're talking...

Originally posted by Wadidiz


.

A real hit splatters out more and drips more. More like a star. A kneeled-on mark looks compressed and doesn't run as much. More circular.

Steve

So true, top players usually recognize how a "real" hit looks. And I'm sure 98% you're right too. Going further with this example I'd like to mention that the "hit" had some splatter strings from it - just like "real" hits have. Which means it was either a real hit which I had recieved earlier or a ball from the grass that had spruited a little =) ...according to the rules a paint mark should be a certain size if the judge didn't see it hit you, right!? And the size of the "hit" was quite small - accordingly - if it was an earlier hit it was now too small to justify an elimination alternatively if it was from the ground it would still not be a justified hit. And Steve, you're totally right - sometimes you get a hit that players don't get where it came from - I woun't argue that it could have happened to me there and then! =)