|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Apr 22, 2015 5:48:36 GMT -6
Per Aleks Bomis:
3.1.3 Scoring – Points are scored when one team completely eliminates the opposing team from the field of play and at the end of each half. Points are scored equal to the number of active players remaining on the field.
Rationale and Explanation: Sweep a team completely? 15 points to you. Squeak out a 1 v 1? A single point for you. This change offers significant improvements as follows: Less anti-dodgeball behavior, Impact of officials is minimized, Stress regarding officiating is minimized, Each player’s impact increases.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zigmister on Apr 23, 2015 21:26:37 GMT -6
Let's see if we can get Bomis in on the convo when we have it. I think this is a very interesting concept.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesmondoux on May 11, 2015 9:13:31 GMT -6
I'm not a fan of the point change. I feel it will result in play in which the star players will be the only ones participating while everyone else hides towards the end of a point. it would just be annoying. especially for newer teams who only have one or two good players who keep them in tougher match ups. If we want to expand, and grow young teams, this will make it harder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spencer Jardine - SVSU on May 11, 2015 13:03:08 GMT -6
Ooooo thats an interesting one. I do think it would kill newer teams though, on top of that really prevent teams from playing people on their roster who don't normally play. Say SVSU wants to put in 5 players from their bench to get them game experience while they had the lead. The team they are playing keeps in their starters and kills SVSU to take back the lead. No one would want to play bench players in fear of having their leads taken away.
|
|
cg
Full Member
Posts: 194
|
Post by cg on May 11, 2015 20:12:37 GMT -6
I'm not a fan of the point change. I feel it will result in play in which the star players will be the only ones participating while everyone else hides towards the end of a point. it would just be annoying. especially for newer teams who only have one or two good players who keep them in tougher match ups. If we want to expand, and grow young teams, this will make it harder. My counterargument to that is that "everyone else hides towards the end" is exactly what happens now. Annoying anti-dodgeball tactics like trying to avoid everything for 5-10 minutes happens now, timid players holding back happebs now, and it primarily happens because everyone's too afraid to be the guy to give up the all-important point. Diminishing the impacting of scoring a point, or more accurately making every player on a team equally responsible for scoring or defending, should increase actual play. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmondoux on May 12, 2015 8:15:33 GMT -6
Honestly, my first inclination was to say it was an awesome idea. But when I thought about how I would want to change my team's tactics (with winning being the only goal, and that's how most captains would look at it) I came to the conclusion that the game would become like basketball where its all about the stars and how much they can do on their own while the rest of the team is like a pit crew, feeding them the ball. On the other hand I see what you're saying; it would take some time to see which way the teams would adapt to the change, and there are more minds at work than yours and mine. Something entirely new and awesome could come out of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zigmister on May 12, 2015 13:46:05 GMT -6
Here is the original proposal, it is very fleshed out and should be read: Google Doc |
|
|
|
Post by ssmith19 on May 17, 2015 18:46:05 GMT -6
Please don't do this to us as a league. Towson plays in a tournament every December that has "players left" as a possible tie breaker. This is a 6 v. 6 tournament so players left is slightly easier to track, but you're saying you want to have 3 to 4 officials track the numbers of players left.
What happens when its a close point and one side wins and their bench explodes onto the court? You're going to penaloze that team for potentially messing up the count? Or just guestimate how many were left? At the point the scoring becomes inaccurate and unuseful.
I get why this is being brought up by like I said, please don't do this to us
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Hillebrand on May 18, 2015 8:16:30 GMT -6
Please don't do this to us as a league. Towson plays in a tournament every December that has "players left" as a possible tie breaker. This is a 6 v. 6 tournament so players left is slightly easier to track, but you're saying you want to have 3 to 4 officials track the numbers of players left. What happens when its a close point and one side wins and their bench explodes onto the court? You're going to penaloze that team for potentially messing up the count? Or just guestimate how many were left? At the point the scoring becomes inaccurate and unuseful. I get why this is being brought up by like I said, please don't do this to us Referees should theoretically already be keeping track of how many and which players are in for both teams right now anyways to make sure that teams aren't cheating by sneaking players in from their jail or bench. I think in reality, this probably isn't happening all the time because of how difficult it is for refereeing crews to keep track of every aspect of a game involving 30 people and 10 balls, especially when games often only have 3 or 4 refs. But however impractical it may seem, referees should already be aware of how many players are in the game for each team at all times to prevent cheating. I think you are addressing a major issue here Sean. But I don't think this proposed rule change is the actual problem. I think the real issue is that we are already often asking 3 or 4 people to do a job that would still be very difficult for 6 people to do. Full disclosure, I'm not totally sure how I feel about the rule itself. I tend to like it for the reasons stated in the proposal, but wonder if perhaps there could be a way to make it less dramatic of a change. Maybe the winning team automatically gets some sort of "point won bonus" of a set number of points + a point for player left on the court. This would make for more of a compromise between what we have now and Bomis's proposal. Just a few thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by Zigmister on May 18, 2015 18:32:20 GMT -6
From Bomis:
I originally was worried about officiating this at first glance. But the end of the game is fairly easy to count the number of people on the court or in the Jail.
Officiating this is not a problem.
|
|
