|
Post by brianvanmeter on Oct 5, 2011 1:13:35 GMT -6
It seems like there are three basic arguments, one for the 0-3-4-3-0 live ball, one 0-3-4-3-0 bring back, and then the last one 0-0-10-0-0 rule.
1.) 0-3-4-3-0 Live Ball. I think that the biggest problem for some people is that it can be too game changing, you can get people out with in the first 10 seconds of a match. But on the other hand if you try to get someone out but completely botch it, then the other team has an extra ball. That is taking into consideration that everyone can run at the same speed which we know isn't true haha. If you're going for a ball in the opening rush and the person on the opposite end of you is a second or two faster than you, suddenly you're standing with your pants down a good two seconds from getting a ball, ready to take one to the noggen. So the new 0-3-4-3-0 rush could be too much of a game changer early on is what people are saying.
2.) 0-0-10-0-0 Old Way. We can't really go back to the old way (0-10-0) because lets be honest, last year a lot of people (including myself) just lowered their shoulder and took someone out in order to get the ball. This is what causes injuries, people will keep doing it anyway.
3.) 0-3-4-3-0 Bring Back. Which leaves the 3-4-3 bring back, which will inevitably turn into people just lowering their shoulders and plowing into each other to get the 4 balls on the mid-line instead.
I think that there could be different options that we could explore. We could even think about doing a 3-0-4-0-3 rush. Where all balls start live, but it wont just be a mad dash in the start for a ball, and there won't be just instant early game changers. If both teams start with three balls, then there is an entire mess of different tactics of getting the 4 balls at half court. I mean this pretty much solves the main arguments, opening rush injuries of collisions, early game changers of getting pelted right off the bat, and it would still hold the "rush" feeling. Both teams having to out-maneuver the other team for the 4 live balls on center court, but this would have to be done in a very quick and timely manner. I mean there is no reason we have to settle on either a variation of 0-3-4-3-0 rule or the old rule.
|
|
|
Post by stokesj on Oct 5, 2011 2:19:19 GMT -6
Bravo! I'm glad I'm not the only one singing this tune.
|
|
|
Post by sweeter9 on Oct 5, 2011 11:39:25 GMT -6
Havent been on here much lately but from what i have caught up on, i agree with Stein. I cant remember a time where Central had to stop a game (practice included) due to injury during the opening rush. Use good judgement when it comes to competing for a ball. If you dont think you will beat the opposing player, dont try for it. Risking your body for a ball is not worth it, especially when the chance of getting someone out with that ball is <5%. For those who havent seen the picture on FB, Dom Carruthers messed up his finger pretty bad on a ball thrown at him. The ball can do a lot of damage and I feel bad for the first person to experience Bryce Corrion's throw from close range due to the new rule.
|
|
|
Post by hiller 87 on Oct 5, 2011 12:08:53 GMT -6
Regarding the safety stuff on the old opening rush...
I've seen way more injuries (and way worse injuries) via headshots than I have the old opening rush. Yet one of our league's mottoes is "Headshots Encouraged!" I've personally been concussed, I've seen Ian concuss a kid from WIU, our old captain was almost blinded by a headshot, yet nobody talks about getting rid of headshots. Now I don't want to get rid of headshots, they're my personal favorite part of playing dodgeball, but people can't say "SAFETY" and then overlook other dangerous things from dodgeball. Personally I think that referees giving out cards for dangerous rushes in the old way would fix the problem, no warnings, just cards. Start off with a yellow and then if they do it again then give them a red.
If we have a revote, then I will likely vote for whatever my team wants me to vote for. We're going to practice the various rushes that people are suggesting tomorrow at practice, the 3-0-4-0-3, the old opening rush, and whatever else people suggest. I'm still not a fan of a revote during the season, but if it's what all the captains/presidents/people in charge of the teams want then I'm down.
Also regarding Dom's finger...it's nasty. But it's not a result of the opening rush. It was mid game. But still, pretty nasty.
Also also, if we're going to do this revote then I say we do it in the next week or so, that way it's ready for the BGSU tournament.
|
|
|
Post by sweeter9 on Oct 5, 2011 12:42:41 GMT -6
I was getting at the point that the dodgeballs can be just as dangerous as the opening rush with the Dom comment. I too have seen more injuries through headshots and close range hits. This new policy encourages close range hits and headshots for the sake of saving 1/100 persons' knee or shoulder from collision.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Oct 5, 2011 15:05:06 GMT -6
So because we have a bunch of not a very nice persons in this league who lower their shoulder going into the opening rush we should just scrap it? No I think we need to get the number of those guys who are doing dumbass moves like lowering their shoulder and toss them out of the game. I've been playing for 4 years and I was one of the fastest guys on my team if not the fastest. I have never been hurt in an opening rush and will never get hurt in an opening rush.
There is no point to the 3-4-3 bring back rule. There is still balls in the middle and people are still going to be going for those because there is no chance of them getting out.
3-4-3 is a horrible idea because I'm not taking a ball to the face from Jordan Elliot, Pat Fisher, Eric Sweet, Bryce Corrion, or anyone else who can throw a dodgeball 65+ MPH. I'll get hurt worse that way.
0-10-0 is the best possible scenario. If we stop having these dumb not a very nice persons lowering their shoulder for a ball and backing off when they know for a fact they got smoked we won't have these problems. If people stop putting a full head of steam into the other player when they know it's going to be close no one is going to get hurt.
BUMPS AND BRUISES are NOT injuries. So now lets rethink how many people have actually been hurt on an opening rush.... 3 maybe in the last 10 years?
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Oct 5, 2011 15:30:07 GMT -6
FROM A DODGEBALL
|
|
cg
Full Member
Posts: 194
|
Post by cg on Oct 5, 2011 15:48:59 GMT -6
3-4-3 is a horrible idea because I'm not taking a ball to the face from Jordan Elliot, Pat Fisher, Eric Sweet, Bryce Corrion, or anyone else who can throw a dodgeball 65+ MPH. I'll get hurt worse that way. Something about this struck me as off. Took me a second or two to figure out what it was. From April: Dude, your arguing with the wrong person. hahaha I WANT the opening rush to stay the way it is. But at the captains meeting it was changed to 5-0-5 rule where you still have to take it back to the baseline. So Jimmy Stokes cam up with a great idea to make it 3-4-3 with the balls instantly live. Which I thought was awesome, so i figured we would ask people and try to get it changed to the 3-4-3 rule and have balls live instantly.(bold emphasized by editor) The way this 3-4-3 also gets rid of people running into each other is because you have a guy less than 30 feet away from you with a dodgeball and you are not going to run straight at him with no ball, trying to get one of the 4 along center court. So using the exact same rationale you've argued in favor of and against the 0-3-4-3-0 BL setup, one which you were pushing for when they did this whole revote thing. Have you considered a career in politics?
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Oct 5, 2011 15:56:22 GMT -6
That was all before I was able to actually try it out in a game format. We did that over the summer on a couple separate occasions and if you ask some of the guys who did that with me they will tell it was horrible.
What I was saying before though was if we are going to change it we might as well make it the best it can possibly be. Now that we have so many people that hate it, which I did then and do now, I want to change it back.
HAPPY BOMIS!?!? lol
|
|
cg
Full Member
Posts: 194
|
Post by cg on Oct 5, 2011 16:16:28 GMT -6
No, since I don't think 5-10 is "so many," but I could play this game all day. It's your kids' game, do what you think is best.
|
|
|
Post by brianvanmeter on Oct 5, 2011 16:34:48 GMT -6
There's three parts of your argument that I want to point out. You used a word in there that I want to reiterate, fastest. You are the fastest members on your team, as you say. Additionally you said people should recognized when they get "smoked" meaning when they just get beat on the opening rush. Finally you said "If people stop putting a full head of steam into the other player when they know it's going to be close".
1.) You said you are the fastest member on your team, "if not the fastest", and that you never got hurt on the opening rush and you never will get hurt on the opening rush. You never get hurt and never will get hurt on the opening rush because you are fast, you will get a ball before the person across from you almost every time before they can even get there. That is only 1/10 balls on the center court. In my experience there is hardly ever that clear cut of one person getting a ball over the opposing person they are rushing against. Both people, almost ALWAYS get there at the same time. So yes, you don't get hurt because you are the fastest and usually beat out other people, but this hardly ever happens for the majority of the other balls in the opening rush.
2.) You said people should recognized when they get "smoked" on the opening rush, aka when they get beat. A clear cut distinction of people getting beat in the opening rush, going back to my first point, is someone getting to the ball first and just simply picking it up clearly before the other person even gets close. That is getting "smoked" or beat at the rush. This, once again, hardly ever happens so clearly and easily like this. If someone of equal speed of me gets and touches a ball .5 seconds before I get there, does this mean I am "smoked" and I should just instantly give up and stop running for the ball? No it doesn't, I would say almost everyone would still go for the ball before the other person because they have a very high chance of getting it. No one is ever going to just think, "bawww he beat me to the ball a quarter of a second before I got there, I give up." There for people can't just recognize a clear, I lost/I won decision they're still going to go in for the ball.
3.)This goes back to my second point, if it is going to be close, why would people stop giving a full head of steam. As soon as a person stops giving a full head of steam they've lost because then they choose to go slower then the person they're competing with for a ball. By saying this is seems you're asking people to stop trying to get the ball because they are going to get to the ball at the same time as the other person.
Another point I would like to stress, I ask you to stand up and just take two steps and reach for a ball as if you're going for a dodgeball that is on the ground in the opening rush. Look at the position you take while you're doing this, your body is most likely squatted down, with your shoulder (probably right one if you're right handed left if you're left handed) sticking out and leading. This is lowering your shoulder, so in order for you to "toss" the "not a very nice persons" out of the game who are lowering their shoulder, you would effectively kick out everyone who ran for a ball in the opening rush. So yes, very fast people will not get hurt on the opening rush because they get to a ball before their opponent gets even close, but the majority of both teams who are all getting to balls at the same time will risk that chance of colliding with the other person and causing injuries. Lastly, though those pictures of injuries from a dodgeball are impressive, they are completely irrelevant to the point that we are arguing. There have been plenty of injuries, (black eyes, bone bruises, twisted ankles, broken fingers), on account of the 0-0-10-0-0 opening rush, not to mention everyone's heads are one of the leading body parts besides from shoulders in a opening rush, this is just begging for major neck and head injuries which have happened. Additionally, there have been a lot more than 3 injuries in the last 10 years as cause of the opening rush, there were around 5 injuries at nationals alone last year on account of the rush.
Also I'm not sure by you using the phrases "dumbass" and "dumb people who are lowering their shoulders" you are meaning to indirectly calling me a dumbass, but if this is the case I would like to remind you we are college students and we should, at the very least, try to debate as such.
|
|
|
Post by Zigmister on Oct 5, 2011 17:37:42 GMT -6
Here is my case for the 0-4-2-4-0 setup. I'll make the case for both balls live and bring back. - Less collisions
- Less tripping hazards
- Even but variable basis to start the point
- Keeps the excitement of running to the middle
- The 4-2-4 limits collisions to the two center balls: this allows less chance of head/shoulder collisions, greater visibility for an Official to throw a card for unnecessary roughness. - Balls can split up more evenly, for the purpose of avoiding the tripping hazards the attack line balls may represent. The two balls could be placed a fathom apart in the center circle, or placed near each sideline. - As each team is likely to get four balls, it starts the game off with a decently fair basis. I like this because it could be very likely that a team would never even have the ball advantage if they were stuck with a wall behind their baseline, where each throw rolls back to the other side. They at least start somewhat even, and lessens the possibility that a team is always the downtrodden punching bags throughout the match duration. The battle for the two halfcourt balls is less of a game decider, less people may get out right off the bat. Because less people are going for the two, there's less of a chance people can be injured from a thown dodgeball as they are bending over. - For balls live: If a team doesn't rush for the center two, a small battle starts for those two. I think this will keep the Rush movement, but since balls are live, there will be less full steam old opening rush style collisions. I think this is because of a high chance of getting out when fighting for the center two. If you want the halfcourt balls, you have to defend by blocking, dodging, catching, or being suicidal. I like this because its less complicated to explain. - For bring back: Keeps the running, keeps that kind of excitement beyond just giving teams the balls. It allows for throwbacks and their resulting variables, and separates the collisions. Players would be more likely to rush for the halfcourt balls with intensity though, because the throwbacks take less time to complete. I'd think it would be too chaotic for the two halfcourt balls.
|
|
|
Post by brettricewku on Oct 5, 2011 17:43:01 GMT -6
Crazy research by bomis and that finger is gross!! Its almost as bad as that lineman for the colts leg shattering.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer Jardine - SVSU on Oct 5, 2011 19:05:42 GMT -6
3-0-4-0-3 is in my opinion the best way to eliminate any opening rush injuries. 1. No one is going to run head long to the middle if they know Fisher or me already have a ball in hand 2. The excitement of the opening rush is still there as teams have mini gladiator battles for the last 4 balls. 3. Teams will be rewarded for having a decent opening rush strategy.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Oct 5, 2011 20:05:20 GMT -6
Alright I consider leading with your shoulder or throwing a shoulder when you run straight at someone and just try to level them. Not when they are reaching for a ball. I consider those people not a very nice persons or dumbasses. I was not calling you a dumbass Brian.
|
|