WORLD CUP news! Avalanche caught cheating!

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by Robbo

One is dealing with cheating which will take a long time, involve players embracing different ideals and a whole host of other probelsm attached to it.

The other can be done in a heartbeat, it's common sense, it's allocating some of that huge wad of money that was made, it's quick, it's courteous and it was ignored !!!!

Sorry, Pete, but wrong-O
X-Ball even with refs not well prepared to ref it demonstrated a vastly improved quality of total "game play" without any change at all in player attitudes or intentions. On the smaller field with sufficient numbers of trained refs it ain't gonna matter what the players do.

And while I agree with ya on the variety of current problems that need fixing it's a matter of priorities really which puts improved reffing at the top of the list because--
1) You gotta have a bona fide sport before you can attract fans beyond the hardcore circle of competitors. That's plainly what X is all about. And the designation "sport" demands an institutional committment to equity regardless of what goes on on the field of play.
2) In the circumstances where players are paying to compete the promoters have an obligation to provide their customers with the opportunity to compete equitably because that is ultimately what everybody is paying for. Even ideally mistakes will be made but clearly at this stage there is no serious committment to providing the players the best opportunity possible.

The rest of the stuff you mentioned relates to quality of the total experience and certainly is important but first things first.

 

[Wadidiz]

Originally posted by Robbo
...One is dealing with cheating which will take a long time, involve players embracing different ideals and a whole host of other probelsm attached to it.

I respectfully disagree. With the right leadership, new determination, better training and an improved set of rules (among many other things I've already delineated), I don't see why it has to take more than the first tournament.

As soon as the first "big boy" gets kicked for continually playing on or for arguing with the refs then respect will be established. I don't for a minute think that cheating will disappear but I sincerely believe we can substantially turn this thing around.

Steve

 

[raehl]

The way I see it is...

You don't really need to stop cheating. You just need to be able to handle it, and right now, we can't. Wiping is never going to go away, but if you wipe and there's a 90% chance an official catches it in the game and a 98% chance it gets caught after the game and the penalties are much more severe than any possible benefit of wiping, it'll go away.


Problem is we currently don't have those resources in most cases, so we need the players to step up and help out. We don't have any more refs in college ball than NPPL does, and they're not trained any better, but we also don't have the cheating problem because the players decided they didn't want a cheating problem.

Unfortunately, seems the proam leagues are past the point where that can just be a decision, and it's now going to take a lot of money (read: more expensive events) to hire and train enough officials to force a change that most certainly can be elective.


- Chris

 

[Wadidiz]

The way I see it is...

Originally posted by raehl
You don't really need to stop cheating. You just need to be able to handle it, and right now, we can't. Wiping is never going to go away, but if you wipe and there's a 90% chance an official catches it in the game and a 98% chance it gets caught after the game and the penalties are much more severe than any possible benefit of wiping, it'll go away.


Problem is we currently don't have those resources in most cases, so we need the players to step up and help out. We don't have any more refs in college ball than NPPL does, and they're not trained any better, but we also don't have the cheating problem because the players decided they didn't want a cheating problem.

Unfortunately, seems the proam leagues are past the point where that can just be a decision, and it's now going to take a lot of money (read: more expensive events) to hire and train enough officials to force a change that most certainly can be elective.


- Chris

Chris,

You keep repeating the same thing: a change won't come without a lot of money.

I keep disagreeing and I keep telling you why. And I'll do it again:
____________________________
The suggestions CAN work and here's how:

1. A cornerstone of the plan is to require pro and amateur teams to ref one tournament in the series in order to qualify for series points. Since all teams competing for series points are subject to the same conditions then I don't see how it would screw up the rankings. A point of speculation is: will that bring enough or perhaps too many reffing teams?

2. Accountability. Supervise and hold the reffing teams accountable for their work at risk of losing points. Not an all-or-nothing system, but devise a system that has some teeth. Pay independent head-field judges to ensure a good job is done. Yep, refs reffing refs who are also reffed by refs. Kinda like police who are subject to laws, an internal review board, politicians and an electorate. Make it clear from the git-go that competency, fairness, enforcement and excellency will be demanded.

3. Institute the new, tougher rules against cheating and unsportsmanlike conduct (3-strikes-you're out, etc.) and communicate very clearly that a new order has come.

4. Be very strict about the training sessions, briefings, etc. Consistently give penalty points to any teams whose refs don't attend or who show up late, etc. People will push the rules. Expect it and deal with extreme prejudice.

Again, all of this is a question of a new determination, good communication, good teaching skills (notice I didn't say pedagogics!) and proper organization.

Someone convince me with LOGIC why this wouldn't work with the backing of clear rules and the determination to enforce them. Please don't just say "it'll never work." Tell me why.

And yes, it will cost somewhat more. But will be worth it.
____________________________________

I can visualize this working or otherwise I wouldn't insist on it so much. Someone besides Chris tell us: is this a bunch of fantasy or what? I don't understand what is so hard or so costly about what I'm suggesting.

And yo, Chris, you're certainly free to keep coming back with the "it just won't happen" thing. And I'll keep coming back with how it can. Until it is shown how it can't. I'm open to being wrong.

Steve

 

[raehl]

Re: The way I see it is...

That's because I don't agree with some of the assumptions you use in your determination that it won't cost more money.

Originally posted by Wadidiz


1. A cornerstone of the plan is to require pro and amateur teams to ref one tournament in the series in order to qualify for series points. Since all teams competing for series points are subject to the same conditions then I don't see how it would screw up the rankings. A point of speculation is: will that bring enough or perhaps too many reffing teams?

You can't do this. Even if everyone is perfectly fair and honest while reffing (which I think in itself is an unreasonable assumption), observers will perceive bias even wheneverit LOOKS like it might be there, whether there is any there or not. I'm sure in your reffing experience you've been in one of those situations whe

2. Accountability. Supervise and hold the reffing teams accountable for their work at risk of losing points. Not an all-or-nothing system, but devise a system that has some teeth. Pay independent head-field judges to ensure a good job is done. Yep, refs reffing refs who are also reffed by refs. Kinda like police who are subject to laws, an internal review board, politicians and an electorate. Make it clear from the git-go that competency, fairness, enforcement and excellency will be demanded.

Wouldn't paying independent head field judges involve more money?

3. Institute the new, tougher rules against cheating and unsportsmanlike conduct (3-strikes-you're out, etc.) and communicate very clearly that a new order has come.

Who is going to do all the paperwork? I've already determined this is a pain to do in the college league (where we have plaeyr suspensions and an appeal process), and we don't have any penalties. I can't imagine doing this with the penalty traffic you'd generate in regular events.

4. Be very strict about the training sessions, briefings, etc. Consistently give penalty points to any teams whose refs don't attend or who show up late, etc. People will push the rules. Expect it and deal with extreme prejudice.

Again, all of this is a question of a new determination, good communication, good teaching skills (notice I didn't say pedagogics!) and proper organization.

Someone convince me with LOGIC why this wouldn't work with the backing of clear rules and the determination to enforce them. Please don't just say "it'll never work." Tell me why.

And yes, it will costs somewhat more. But will be worth it.

Wasn't the whole point you were trying to make was that it WOULDN'T cost more?

Anyway, the #1 reason it won't happen is that you're not dealing with a league where the players are paid. If you try and force them to do stuff they don't want to do, they'll tell you to screw off and take their money elsewhere.


- Chris

 

[Wadidiz]

Re: Re: The way I see it is...

Thanks for looking a little closer.

Originally posted by raehl (with my rebuttals in italics)
That's because I don't agree with some of the assumptions you use in your determination that it won't cost more money.
__________________________
Look even closer at what you wrote and then at my responses. You indicated that the only thing that would work would be all pro refs and/or a lot more money. I said my ideas wouldn't cost all that much more. Pay head-field judges more, add one or two more personnel to each big tournament to supervise and administrate.
_________________________

You can't do this. Even if everyone is perfectly fair and honest while reffing (which I think in itself is an unreasonable assumption), observers will perceive bias even wheneverit LOOKS like it might be there, whether there is any there or not. I'm sure in your reffing experience you've been in one of those situations whe
__________________________
That's why we should have independent head-field judges and more hands-on supervision. Maybe the reffing teams could also be split up. And yes, I know biased reffing exists but I have never seen it happen myself. I've seen and participated in nothing but excellent team-player reffing at several NPPLs and several Millenniums. So player-judging can work, we just have to improve it and make it consistent and arm the judges with a better structure and better rules.
__________________________


Wouldn't paying independent head field judges involve more money?
__________________________
Ditto above. I've said all along, not so much more than today. I'm talking about additional costs for a large Millennium tournament of between $3000-6000. If a marginal increase in entries is warranted, so be it.
__________________________


Who is going to do all the paperwork? I've already determined this is a pain to do in the college league (where we have plaeyr suspensions and an appeal process), and we don't have any penalties. I can't imagine doing this with the penalty traffic you'd generate in regular events.
__________________________
The administration doesn't have to be all that complex. The player ID cards, for one, could be marked with the penalties. The score-sheets would need a couple of extra lines. Fortunately we have modern conveniences such as computers and the Internet. Piece of cake.
__________________________

Wasn't the whole point you were trying to make was that it WOULDN'T cost more?
__________________________
No, you seem to have sped-read what I have written on all the posts. I'm talking about not much more in relation to your totally unworkable suggestion (for the time being in the standard NPPL and Millennium leagues) of having much higher paid pro refs. I'll repeat my "whole point" again:3-strikes-you're out, required reffing, required training, independent head-field-judges, new commitment to enforcement without respect to who the player/team is, in other words...behavior modification, get caught = you'll pay.
___________________________

Anyway, the #1 reason it won't happen is that you're not dealing with a league where the players are paid. If you try and force them to do stuff they don't want to do, they'll tell you to screw off and take their money elsewhere.
___________________________
Disagree. If NPPL is still the main league in the US and Millennium in Europe, both with X-Ball on the side, then the teams will still go for series points. They will, mostly gladly, ref for series points. Make it a term of getting awarded their points and it will be just part of the package. I believe the teams would rather ref one tournament per season than pay 2 or 3 times today's entry fees.
_________________________


- Chris

(again, with my rebuttals in italics)

So I guess we have to agree to disagree, Chris.

But I'm right!

Steve

PS. There is actually know way of knowing if the suggestions I've been talking about will work or not, until they are tried. And by tried I mean the full monty. It has to be a whole new regime for it to work.

SM

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Baca Loco

Sorry, Pete, but wrong-O
X-Ball even with refs not well prepared to ref it demonstrated a vastly improved quality of total "game play" without any change at all in player attitudes or intentions. On the smaller field with sufficient numbers of trained refs it ain't gonna matter what the players do.

And while I agree with ya on the variety of current problems that need fixing it's a matter of priorities really which puts improved reffing at the top of the list because--
1) You gotta have a bona fide sport before you can attract fans beyond the hardcore circle of competitors. That's plainly what X is all about. And the designation "sport" demands an institutional committment to equity regardless of what goes on on the field of play.
2) In the circumstances where players are paying to compete the promoters have an obligation to provide their customers with the opportunity to compete equitably because that is ultimately what everybody is paying for. Even ideally mistakes will be made but clearly at this stage there is no serious committment to providing the players the best opportunity possible.

The rest of the stuff you mentioned relates to quality of the total experience and certainly is important but first things first.

Hey Baca, your first line, 'Sorry Pete, but wrong-o' , would be better and certainly more accurately re-written as,' I think you are mistaken', anyway, enough of the objective / subjective divide that opened your post
I don't think I quite understand the point you are trying to make, if you are saying that an improvement was made to the game because of a large number of refs, albeit, the teams were still cheating, then you are not refuting my point at all. And as for your other two points, they look good on paper mate but come the time you or your wife need a restroom, I know what that paper is gonna be used for.
Nah, Paul, I think you are wrong, the more indelible impression is gonna be made not by poor judging but by poor facilities.
Just my opinion you understand....oh and my wife's
Pete

 

[Furby]

Behind every good man there's a great woman, eh Robbo?

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Furby
Behind every good man there's a great woman, eh Robbo?

True enough mate but I hope u ain't talking about in the restrooms !!!!

Robbo

 

[Furby]

I made a point of taking care of that business BEFORE going to the field! I truely felt sorry for the people forced to use the so-called facilities on site.