This is the third, and last, scenario I'm gonna ask you to evaluate. (Yes, I know, it's dragging out but things happen. The good stuff is coming.)
Player X is tucked into an Aztec attempting to control a lane. An aggressive cross field move puts an opponent into a position to shoot Player X in the pack. One paintball breaks on a pod still in Player X's pack. Player X doesn't indicate in any way knowledge that he's been hit and continues to play--which includes periodic bursts of fire.
What does the ref do? A) signal the player eliminated. B) signal the player eliminated, throw the yellow flag, and assess a minor penalty. C) signal the player eliminated, throw the red flag, and assess a major penalty.
Next time I visit these scenarios I'm going to break each one down and use some of your contributions in the collective comments to illustrate the points I want to make about rules & officiating.
The game is not in service to the rules. Read that again. Too often rules are designed (and/or enforced) to address some specific "problem." The process confined to consider narrow issues or effect convenient changes. The potential problem with those practices is that the rules define the game as it is played but that isn't the game. (Stay with me.) Competitive paintball didn't begin as a set of rules. It began as a concept, an idea, like every other game and sport. And the rules are written, first and foremost, in order to construct a playable version of the concept. The game is not in service to the rules, the rules are (or should be) in service of the game.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
15 comments:
I say it depends on when the hit was seen.
If the ref didn't see the hit and noticed it later it would probably be a major. If the ref noticed it immediately and signaled the player out then that would be all.
A
Are you saying, Crusty, that it doesn't matter when the hit occurred? How does the ref know it didn't just happen?
I'm saying if he didn't see the original break then the ref would consider it a long playing on hit. I'm going to go with A, but no more than B as a penaly.
If the ref sees the hit, he should just immediately pull the player, no penalty (A). In this case there's been minimal impact on the game and a penalty doesn't redress anything nor encourage the player to behave better.
If the hit is found at some point after it occurred, then (B) is the correct choice, to balance the time the hit player's team gets to play with an extra player.
B)
A.
B.
Wow, are the rules in tournament paintball that vague that with every scenario there are so many different opinions? Way too much gray area obviously and too much left to the ref's discretion.
What's particularly amusing about your comment, Reiner, is that Raehl has written (and re-written) the rule book intent on striking as much subjectivity out of it as possible. And if you read the rule book you'll think he's probably done a pretty good job of it but my three little scenarios demonstrate quite nicely that in ractice it's not so cut and dry. It demonstrates, I think, a couple other things as well that will be covered in upcoming posts.
Reiner:
No, the rules are not vague at all in the circumstances raised by Baca. The issue is that most players (and thus most people responding to Baca's blog) have never actually read the rules.
It would be a mistake to confuse disagreement amongst people who have not read the rules as to what the rule is for any ambiguity in the rules themselves.
(That's not to say the rules are perfect - just like any other sport, they are constantly updated to reflect new information/experience. But random posters on the internet not knowing the answer doesn't mean there isn't one correct answer any more than random people on the street not knowing who the Vice President is means it is not clear who the Vice President is.)
Did Chris just compare Baca to Jay Leno?
Things are not as clear cut as the rule book would have you believe. When you add the human element then the game changes.
A pro ref will penalize differently from a divisional. Ref A will penalize differently or at different time than Ref B in the same situation.
We have all witnessed it: Dorito side Ref, who was standing right next to the said player, threw a yellow flag, but snake side ref that is on the other side threw a red flag on the same player.
Yes our answers vary, but we have varying experiences to the table. I have seen a ref pull a 3 for 1 on a player with a pack hit on the pod farthest from that players body who showed no signs of knowing about it.
There is plenty of free reign from the refs. Sure the rule book is there as a guideline, but every decision refs make is a judgement call so we will always see varying answers.
Whether the refs are properly enforcing the rules are not is a separate issue. Reffing is definitely getting better, but there is still work to be done.
But a ref calling a 3-for-1 on a pack hit for example has nothing to do with clarity of the rules; it's just a case of the ref making an error. And two different refs calling two different penalties doesn't show anything either, other than that people in two different places don't always see the same thing.
Post a Comment