Saturday, July 13, 2013

Hammer Time (Again!)

Can't touch this. Just after PSP Chicago--and the parade of red flags (no, I don't have the numbers of penalty calls breakdown yet) you should recall a little post titled, Hammer Time, wherein I posited that a current area of weakness in the officiating process was a strong tendency by most (if not all) referees to view themselves as the police and all the players scampering around as criminals--and when the flags fly as something like justice being done.
This time around I'ma double down and suggest the next thing to consider is the penalties themselves. Where did they come from? And what makes the current penalties right (or most effective, etc.?) Since when have the rules enforced pulling players other than those responsible for the rules infraction? Since always except of course it hasn't been always. At least not in the case of Xball, Lite & Race To. But before that bodies were pulled for various infractions.
The rationale for pulling bodies is to a) sufficiently punish a team to send a message and deter another infraction, or b) to level the playing field of any advantage the team that broke the rules might have gained in the process. Or both.
How long ago were the 1-4-1, 2-4-1 and 3-4-1 penalties devised? In paintball years a long time ago. How many players did each team field? At least 10 and it may go back to the days of 15 players or even 20 players. (Before my time.) Let me now suggest there's a substantial difference in pulling 3 bodies when there are only 5 players on the field compared to 10 players. In essence we continue to use penalties designed for a different era and a different game that as a consequence have a much greater impact--dare I suggest far more punitive?--today than when first conceived. The same was true of the penalty box as well. Originally a major penalty was 5 minutes but a full match was 50 minutes. As the game time was reduced the penalty times weren't reduced commensurately--until some individuals who shall remain nameless began to suggest it was a necessary change.
The point is the game has carried along various conventions since its inception not necessarily because the original way was the best but because nobody gave much thought to accompanying changes until the need became obvious (to the peeps with the means to effect change.) And I think it's time to reevaluate the penalty system and consider bringing it into the 21st century.
While you're giving that some thought try this one on too. What other sport removes "innocent" players from the game for infractions committed by teammates? Or that have penalties so ill-defined that three different refs can make three different calls on the same play?
Okay, let's return to the rationale for pulling bodies in the first place. Deterrence to whatever degree it exists, exists only within the range of penalty call consistency. If there is no consistency there is no deterrence. And the idea that it's somehow "fair" to remove from the field of play 20 to 40% of a side's players without any real consideration for an actual advantage gained is preposterous. It's the easy excuse of someone unwilling to really consider what's good for the game and its players.
The basic game is pretty simple. Once you're willing to begin with the premise that the refs are there to simply enforce the rules and oversee a balanced game you may be ready to move to the next consideration. What sort of rules will best serve that purpose?
Cogitate on that for a while and next time I'll offer a few ideas on how the penalty structure could and should be changed.

UPDATE: Aight, kids. Maybe I was less than clear--or maybe you simply disagree. Part of the process of rethinking penalties is to first let go of the notion players must be punished. The rules define the limitations of the game and when those limits are exceeded players receive penalties. We're playing a game. Consider penalties in other sports and the way leagues, officials, players and spectators view playing their game. A player who fouls out of a basketball game isn't denounced as a cheater. Nor is a football lineman who risks a penalty by holding an opponent in order to protect his quarterback. And when penalties are dished out in hockey--the inspiration for elements of Xball--the player and only the player committing the penalty end up in the box. Can we get past the crime and punishment nonsense, please?  


Anonymous said...

Genius to question the premise of penalties as conceived now.

B the flips side is pro players play some pretty clean ball compared to divisional and scenario players. Pro psp players that is... Top ranked ones that is.

Now consider old school pros. A bunch of cheating mofos whose actions still stain the pro division today even though the game div/scenario players are worse.

Here's a suggestion. Event bans, game bans, half game bans. Dish the those three levels of penalties at the offender.

But other sports have a way of stopping the game and the clock. Can we realistically have a ref blow a whistle freeze the game, and remove the offender, insert if necessary the un-eliminated player and restart game play.

I'd actually be curious to see that done in a trial practice. I think the selling point is that over time you'd end up needing less refs. Like basketball etc they may miss some calls at the margins if there are less refs, but if Thomas Taylor is sitting out the next game if he gets caught he probably won't push so hard. And eventually a team runs out of star players if they keep getting sidelined. Would be interesting to see.

But the current removal of players is mostly done to keep the the pace of the game since we can't stop thinking or won't consider stopping the clock.

Anonymous said...

I think the penalty system can be improved in the Pro division.

If you watch the finals game in Dallas for 2013 Keith Brown gets a minor penalty (around 28:00 mark) and then comes out of the box and has a chance to win a one on one vs Yosh Rau.

Why is the rule like that?

You can have a someone start the point, get a penalty and come back in the game for the same point? It's like having two lives.

What's the point of a penalty if it helps the team?

MikeM said...

@ Anon 2:31, because it's structured like hockey. He served a minute in that box, he has to come out some day.

@Anon 11:27 I like your idea. Though perhaps not a full game ban. Perhaps, Player A commits infraction and gets a 2 point (game) ban. So say the score is 1-1, penalty occurs and he sits until score is say 3-1 or 2-2. This is more individually punitive and would disrupt their line calls. But not be punitive to the extent of these current majors costing team 1, 2, or even 3 points in a row.

Perhaps they need to just lock down specificity on certain calls. For ex. as long as player is still 'clean' within two steps of an opposing player in a run thru they can't get a penalty. Or a hit on the pack is never a major penalty. Specify further areas...

While some may consider this an opportunity for "abuse" by the players I think it's this is more greatly outdone by specifying the rules.

I also believe the "Ultimate" ref should be on the sideline or in a "lifeguard" tower. These calls are so apparent from the sideline when you can watch the whole game at the same time. All it takes is for the on-field ref to point at the head ref in the tower, then they give a hand signal for "mutual", "major" , "minor" and signal the team side. This exchange shouldn't take longer than 3 seconds.

With the webcast as a mainstay. They should also incorporate instant replay in end-game finishes. Such as flag hangs or end-of-point or matches. Perhaps just in the semi-finals and finals.

Baca Loco said...

Excellent so far but this isn't just about pro paintball. This is about competitive paintball. Don't forget divisional. It needn't be lockstep the same top to bottom but the conceptual basis for change has to be consistent.

Bruce said...

This feels like you are trying to polish a turd. Yes, myth-busters proved that you can indeed do this, but it takes some doing.

The real problem with this game is that the paintballs aren't visible those of us watching the webcast or from the sidelines.

Increase the visibility of the flying paint and perhaps this penalty issue solves itself.

Imagine trying to watch any other sport where the ball is basically invisible.

This is just a version of tag where there are lots of balls flying through the air. Turn the lights on, and these nebulous problems suddenly become crystal clear.

Anonymous said...

Paintball with laser beams coming out in front the seams! Let's just invent some other nonexistent technology that I solve our problems.... That's quite frankly the same kind of a that assumes longer fields will be back the glory days, slower guns will increase sales (actually the evidence is it does just the opposite) etc. When you have a problem attack it. Solve it. Don't play postmodern architect let looking for a deeper meaning trying to solve the unstated problem as proxy for what's really happening.

NewPro said...

It still has to live by "punishment fits the crime"

Unobvious: 1- 3 min depending on div(the games way of correcting itself whereby the penalty wasn't intentional but the resulting action of the offending player could/did impede the other team)

Obvious: The players action were deliberate and instantly changed the dynamic of the game: wipe, Bps etc(Automatic point awarded), See how long that player remains playing after a couple of insta-points

Major (physical contact, blatant overshoot, attempt to injure =ejection)Team plays remainder of match man down.

Bottom line, like any other sport, if the punishment/deterrent is not enough, it will be ignored. Take Wake, talented player but constantly tries to put the R in retard (see using new deadbox as live bunker circa chicago). A benching alone is obv not gonna solve this players issue. Hammer down

pgeon said...

The best way to fix this is to just pull the player who commits the penalty and then subjecting the team to a diminished breakout on the subsequent point. Have them serve their time as they already do according to current rules about penalty release, but don't start the timer until the next point begins. Minors still would lead to a 4-man breakout, though if it's a quick loss the penalty would be released. If a player commits multiple minor penalties, they can either be served concurrently (and the team breaks out down 2 players) or the first minor becomes non-releasable. Major penalties would have to be served consecutively, and any combination of majors and minors would require the majors be served first.

You really want to make penalties stick? Make players who commit major penalties stay in the penalty box between points without access to air, paint, or coaching. Give them water, sure, but it'll make guys think twice about playing on when they know that they'll be stuck with the single pod on their back once they're released. Don't even let them load a pod into their loader. If they were down to five balls, then they have to serve their penalty before they can dump a pod. Don't even let them talk - throw in a minor each time they talk or somebody talks to them.

Grant said...

The penalty box system doesn't make much sense when you're allowing a 'hit' player to re-enter the field in the same point he was penalized in.

My 2 cents worth - yellow flagged player gets sent to penalty box, if team wins player starts 5% of total game time after the next points starts, if team loses, penalty is cleared.

Red flag player sent to penalty box. No additional player pulled. Player must start next point 10% of total game time after the next point starts. Penalty clock continues for no more than 2 additional points (after which penalty is cleared).

3 red flags by same player in one game (2 for shorter overall game times) results in that player being excluded from the entire match. Substitute must replace them in the penalty box for the next point.

Anonymous said...

"Obvious: The players action were deliberate and instantly changed the dynamic of the game"

One of the chief complaints is that the calls are supposedly not consistent enough.

And you want to replace a rule that says "Is hit in an obvious location and continues to play" and replace it with "Is hit in an obvious location and immediately affects the dynamic of the game" ??

What is immediate? What constitutes affecting the dynamic of the game? Which ref(s) decide(s) if the dynamic of the game has been affected? How long do they have to decide? How can any ref possibly make such a decision given the limited view they have over the entire field? It's not like if the ref knows whether a paintball that just flew 125 feet to the other side of the field hit anything and broke or not.

Anonymous said...


Too complicated.

Mustache Trick said...

some ideas i had to toss in,

when a player gets a penalty major or minor, he should not be aloud to reinsert, one of the other players pulled for the penalty should re-insert. Bc he did not commit the crime. only if the game the penalty time expires during the same point. otherwise treat as normal for next point.

also another idea is, if a player pulls some true unsportman-like conduct or BS, to FINE them have levels of it $50,$75 $100. this should all reviewed by the ref staff as all whole and before next event or at registration of next event play your fee. ppl will definitely stop if they truely have to pay for it.

these are rough ideas but they may help out

NewPro said...

@ anon- Substitute the obvious location with deliberate action (i.e wiping) i agree, too much room for interpretation/disagreement when its a blob of paint, however witnessing a removal of said blob, no interpretation needed.

again, this is just conversation/ideas, if you have some that are "better", share, only retards refuse to acknowledge good advice....See NPPL 2013

Anonymous said...


You can't acknowledge good advice if none is provided.

Saving big penalties for seeing people remove hits would lead to chaos. Most of the issues are players who know they're hit and then run down the field to cause as much damage/chaos as they can since, already being dead, they have nothing to lose.

The penalties are in place to make that a losing proposition.

NTran said...

In our league we run, when a player gets a penalty, we start the clock the next point. It makes it easier to officiate and they don't get an extra life.

DarkJosh said...

Ok so this is only presently relevant to pro ball but hear me out:

More cameras, not for the sake of viewers at home but for the refs. Off field refs could be placed in a booth, responsible for those key lanes (obviously some will be similar between layouts, but some would need to be scouted and disovered on the fly--go pros could do the trick)

From here we can give coaches a limited number (one or two sounds about right) of play-disputes in which there is an added minute to the time out that a coach or team "lawyer" can find proof of an error, missed call or wrong call.

Thus far the debate has been about the severity of called penalties. I propose that missed calls are just as bad and play review is the only logical step forward

Anonymous said...

What if there was only one kind of penalty? That would be obvious intention to cheat. That penalty would cause the immediate loss of the point.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, there's no way professional paintball players might get good at cheating without looking like they're obviously intending to.

Anonymous said...

In hockey there are several scenarios when an innocent team mate is sent to the penalty box. Ever seen a goalie in penalty box?

But paintball is unlike any other sport.

I would change the minor and major penalties this way: violating player is sent to the penalty box and stays there until the point has been finished. If offending team loses, penalty ends. If offending team wins, the 1 or 2 minute penalty starts with the next point.