NSPL 19.03.06 - The STUPID new 141 Rule
- Thread starter Nick G
- Start date
oh sorry, i thought you meant he complained about the rule in general.
finding enough people who will work hard enough/fair enough and not cost an absolute fortune is always going to be a problem in the UK paintball scene. The scenes not exactly huge and given the choice of playing at a tournament or reffing it the majority would prefer to play. Looking further affield for marshals then means more transport costs come into play pushing the prices up further etc etc
I dont envy the job of a marshall and I doubt that I will ever volunteer to ref a tourney. But at the same time, I won't get annoyed with a marshall for doing their job, bad calls will happen we all know that. Theres nothing you can do about it and as long as the ref is making the decision that they honestly think is right at the time, then that's all you can really expect.
finding enough people who will work hard enough/fair enough and not cost an absolute fortune is always going to be a problem in the UK paintball scene. The scenes not exactly huge and given the choice of playing at a tournament or reffing it the majority would prefer to play. Looking further affield for marshals then means more transport costs come into play pushing the prices up further etc etc
I dont envy the job of a marshall and I doubt that I will ever volunteer to ref a tourney. But at the same time, I won't get annoyed with a marshall for doing their job, bad calls will happen we all know that. Theres nothing you can do about it and as long as the ref is making the decision that they honestly think is right at the time, then that's all you can really expect.
The problem is that regardless of how many marshalls you have players can still get clipped on the back of the hopper, for example, and not relise it. They may then shoot nothing but thin air until a marshall gets to them to say they're eliminated, and then eliminates another one of you team for no other reason than the player could not know they were already taken out.
The fundamental issue with the 1-4-1 rule is that discretion should still be made by the marshalls as to whether the player has been cheating, in which case 1-4-1, or tell them that they're out 'cos they havent relised and don't 1-4-1 unnecessarily.
We just need mashalls to implement the right rule at the right time. Maybe more marshalls could help, or for the current level of marshalling to position themselves correctly so they can observe and react fast enough to prevent punishing teams for a player not realising they've been eliminated.
It's the harshness of implementing the rule at the wrong time that I find hard to stomach.
If the 1-4-1 rule is not goverened correctly then it could encourage teams to cheat to compensate for unfairness. I for one won't be, that's just the way I am, but if the opposing team has had bad 1-4-1 calls all-day then I wonder how much they could endure before resulting to ignoring the rules altogether.
The fundamental issue with the 1-4-1 rule is that discretion should still be made by the marshalls as to whether the player has been cheating, in which case 1-4-1, or tell them that they're out 'cos they havent relised and don't 1-4-1 unnecessarily.
We just need mashalls to implement the right rule at the right time. Maybe more marshalls could help, or for the current level of marshalling to position themselves correctly so they can observe and react fast enough to prevent punishing teams for a player not realising they've been eliminated.
It's the harshness of implementing the rule at the wrong time that I find hard to stomach.
If the 1-4-1 rule is not goverened correctly then it could encourage teams to cheat to compensate for unfairness. I for one won't be, that's just the way I am, but if the opposing team has had bad 1-4-1 calls all-day then I wonder how much they could endure before resulting to ignoring the rules altogether.
the rule is played at the marshalls discretion. if a player has a clip on the hopper then i its down to the ref to make his decision. refs are no doubtedly players and know what it is like in most cases when you are hit and know if it is obvious or not. a hit in the pod pack is the least blatent one which is why the player should get the advantage, but a hopper shot can normally be heard which in that case, if youre not sure, get a ref. that is the idea of the rule. to stop people from just playing on without being punished at the end.
That's simply not true. My understanding is the tourney ult gave very explicit instructions, that if it was a hit, and if the player was still shooting, it must be a 141. He didn't say "Use your discretion"..?
The rule is NOT at the ref's discretion and the point of it is a hit is a hit, and playing on is playing on, and will result in a 141. That's it, end of... And that's the way it should be. The whole point of it is getting away from the 'oh, I didn't know it was there, it's not fair to penalise me'.
Try saying that to the cops when you jump a red light - 'sorry, mate - I didn't know it was there... I couldn't have reasonably known it was there...'
It's still an infringement and should still be punished
The rule is NOT at the ref's discretion and the point of it is a hit is a hit, and playing on is playing on, and will result in a 141. That's it, end of... And that's the way it should be. The whole point of it is getting away from the 'oh, I didn't know it was there, it's not fair to penalise me'.
Try saying that to the cops when you jump a red light - 'sorry, mate - I didn't know it was there... I couldn't have reasonably known it was there...'
It's still an infringement and should still be punished
garf you right this rule is not at the marshals discretion. " If there is a hit on any part of you and you are playing on there you will have a 1 4 1 "
For this rule to work then we need to have continuity with the marshals, im for this rule as i think the cheating was starting to get out of hand with some players, if there was no cheating then we would not need this rule.
For this rule to work then we need to have continuity with the marshals, im for this rule as i think the cheating was starting to get out of hand with some players, if there was no cheating then we would not need this rule.
you jump a red light, it's in fron tof you when you ignore it. Yo uget clipped on yur pck, you don't notice it. it's not a fair comparison imo.
bulldog2k said:
Dude that is quite a ban analogy.
Surly the comparrison should be like, if a mate puts drugs in your car without your knowledge should you get prosocuted?
Or if a male/female sleeps with a person of the oppostie sex that is under the legal age but the person assures you of there age and you meet them in a place which has strict rules with regards to the age of the person who is admitted entry (a nightclub for example), should that person then get charged and put on the sex offenders list?
Serious this argument could go on forever, people have vented their views, and people have defended their actions, i am voting this nows goes to bed?
And for all the judgemental people with their self-righteous comments, chill this is all peoples opinions and views, not personal and not of ill intent.
Me