Thread: Scenario Reffing : Boundaries

Scenario Reffing : Boundaries


DRAFT


A scenario field must be well defined - either by flagging tape, rope, man mans structures (like a road, building, fence line, netting), or natural structures (like a clearing, tree line, stream, lake) - The important thing here is that the players understand exactly what the boundaries are.

In oldschool tournament ball, a player sticking his foot across a boundary rope could get him eliminated. Scenario ball is much more entertainment focused - and there is no money for 1st place. Consequently the refs job is to keep the players on the playing field and be johnny on the spot to clarify any boundary disputes.

If a player is clearly out of bounds, anything he does while out of bounds should not count. If intentional, direct him to the producer for a chat. If unintentional, simply bring the player in-bounds in a way to not disrupt the game.

I personally like to see a boundary clearly marked with rope all the way around the whole field. If the field is going to remain roped for scenario play for multiple years, and multiple events it makes sense to do this right.

Properly roping a field:

• run the rope straight where it doesnt touch any trees and tie it off at corners - pulling it tight.
  
• avoid inward bends that would allow a shot to pass from in-bounds, across out of bounds and then back in-bounds. (i.e., a dog leg)
  
• use shorter lengths of rope to elevate the main rope - pulling it loosely up, but floating free.
  
• ideally the main rope should always run around waist high, never above the head or below the knees.
  
• use a bright color - orange, yellow, red - and stick with one color all the way around.

Sample boundary situations:

Night play - a player low crawls out of bounds and is shooting at live players on the field:

Players have taken props off field to their cars to turn in later:

Players off field are running scanners and reporting to live players on the field:

Players are taking props off field and burying them for retrieval later:

A player is shooting across a dog leg:

A player is shooting across a taped off field hazard on the field (ex, trash dump, sink hole, producers shack):

A player off field is passing game information about spawning enemy players via radio to his XO on the field:

A player off field is passing dinner arrangements via radio to his teammates on the field:

A player is standing in the flap of netting at a the spawn point :

Players on on-field camping the spawn to hammer enemy players as they insert, but paint is flying out of bounds:

Players are intentionally shooting at targets out of bounds:

A player is shooting across a dog leg:

A player is shooting across a taped off field hazard on the field (ex, trash dump, sink hole, producers shack):

A player off field is passing dinner arrangements via radio to his teammates on the field:

Curious as to why these are problems ?

It is the same as shooting out of bounds, a boundry is a boundry rather be shooting, crawling in the day light/dark, running like hell or what have ya.

I've seen fields with designated outer boundaries and internal field boundaries which were for safety. Depending on the game you could shoot across one but not the other, both or none.

I think of the internally roped off areas similar to a destroyed bunker; I can't cross it, use it or otherwise interact with it, but I can shoot over it. But the ultimately, it comes down to the game rules.

Boundaries are very closely aligned with field rules, and as such should be clearly defined PRIOR to game on. So long as all players know the rules, any chance of confusion is should be reduced.

Anyone producing a game at an unknown field should pay special attention to walking the tape lines to determine how they will rule on them and what impact they could have on the game.

The issue of game intelligence (radio traffic, verbal, hand-n-arm signals, etc) is a very interesting point. While it can be ruled against some of those communication methods are tough to control. Radio traffic is near impossible to regulate. I would consider communicating game intelligence over boundaries as a violation of the 'Dead men don't talk' except in those rare games where the producer extends the role playing outside of the field boundaries.

I think of the internally roped off areas similar to a destroyed bunker; I can't cross it, use it or otherwise interact with it, but I can shoot over it. But the ultimately, it comes down to the game rules

Kind of my thinking too.

Originally Posted by Kurb

Curious as to why these are problems ?

good question :

they arent - but imagine a cry baby seeing a enemy player chatting on the radio about dinner as he walks off the field. conceptually nothing wrong with it, except for the cry baby looking for something to cry about.

a ref may wish to listen to the context of the conversation before saying anything.

with that list I was thinking of answering each one w/ a reffing solution. just got tired of thinking.

Originally Posted by thumper

good question :

they arent - but imagine a cry baby seeing a enemy player chatting on the radio about dinner as he walks off the field. conceptually nothing wrong with it, except for the cry baby looking for something to cry about.

a ref may wish to listen to the context of the conversation before saying anything.

with that list I was thinking of answering each one w/ a reffing solution. just got tired of thinking.

If they're against the rules, then it's a problem. But this begs the point of SHOULD they be against the rules. Producers and owners need to look at rules like this and decide if they create safety or gameplay problems. If they do, then make them against the rules. If they don't then don't bother. Pick your battles carefully.

But also make rules that are as simple and consistent as possible. For example, don't make dogleg A legal to shoot across, but dogleg B illegal to shoot across. Either allow all or none.