Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I don't play tournaments so you can ignore what I say but if this were pro sports the crowds always shout advice to the team from the stands its up to the players to be professional enough to ignore it.

Pointing out an explicit rules violation....I agree that it is fine. ANY form of coaching...I have an issue with. I even had a judge coaching my opponent at Wargamescon. "Hey, you forgot to move them..."

On the flip side of the discussion here, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE that if you open your mouth to point out a rule being broken, that you are 100% certain about it. I have a lot of spectators during some of my games, and spectators interjecting with incorrect beliefs about rules is a major cause of slow-down in games. More often than not it ends up with a rulebook having to be opened, and now we've lost 3-5 minutes of our gametime in a timed environment because of a spectator.

In a high-stress environment with time ticking down on a tourney table...I've bitten some peoples' heads off verbally for interjecting themselves in our game. In the future, I'm also going to start asking spectators to back away from the table, because of the difficulty of having to go around the crowd AND around the table to get to the other side to move my models.

Its akin to reminding people about minor law violations imo.. I imagine most would get irritated if someone followed them around saying "Its illegal to jaywalk.. Hey you parked more than 12" from the curb.. Did you know that you have to have your car behind the line, you are 3.5 centimeters over"

Let the police or the judge enforce the law but by all means if its actually cheating TELL SOMEONE dont just sit there and pout. To a limited degree I agree with Dash tho also, if its very blatant and the person is bullying a person into accepting a wrong rule then I can support someone interjecting. However the above applies, get a judge still because inevitably it will come to that. What if the person doesnt give a damn what you say? Well you need a judge who has authority to change things

Also, yes make sure you're correct too if you gotta jump in. Even as a judge I dont got time to focus on every little thing people may or may not be doing wrong. For grievous rule errors yes, but for minor things.. thats more up to the players to know their game.

Ok, as this happened to me, I will share this:

I was at a tournament, and round 1 I was up against a newer player. There was never any threat from this guy, but we were having a good, fun game until some SCHMUCK came up and butted in.
"Your Incubi don't have grenades, so they go last" he told me as I cahrged my opponents unit that was in cover.
"Phantasm grenade launcher on the arcon" I replied, and continued to move.

Well, the tool went on a rant saying that sure, my arcon has grenades, but the Incubi do not! I told him he was wrong, where he told my opponent I was cheating.

Now remember, this was a fun, enjoyable game up to this point. I got out the codex and went to hand it to my opponent to show him where I was right, but this tool took it out of my hand!


Ok, there I drew the line!
"Um, put that codex down and dont touch my stuff!"
He replied "So you can cheat some more?"

At this point, i started to walk around the table to throttle the life out of this guy, who saw the look in my eyes, dropped the codex and walked away.
I showed the guy where I was right, and we continued. But know what? the game was no longer fun. He questioned every move I made, asked other people around to verify, and pretty much did not trust me because of 1 idiot.

After the game, i cornered him and told him if he ever interrupted a game of mine again, i would beat him down.

Afterwards, he did have the courtesy to apologise and admit he was wrong, but the whole day was ruined for me, all because someone couldn't mind thier own business.

So NO, i do not allow people to chime in durning my games. I tell them to shut the hell up and walk away.
And if you EVER butt into someone elses game, make sure that you are right!


On the other hand, there are times it is hard to bite your lip and walk away, but I would rather do that than have what happened to me happen to someone else. besides, it is rude... the game is between two players, not two players and a couple obnoxious spectators!

The rules are what the players agree upon.

You do NOT EVER interrupt a game, not for minor and not for major mistakes.
Why? If any one side is so unskilled not to notice, or even both, then it's their loss in a competetive event.

Me personally, I'll ask my opponent twice wether he's sure of wich weapon to destroy, or remind him twice of my deepstrikers. I do not say "you should do X because it's more advantageous"
From a rules point, if an opponent cheats himself out of some benefit, then there's 2 possibilities:
a) the opponent is skilled but makes a bad move. His loss, he should know better.
b) (usually with a noob being paired to me in game1) A noob. I will ask him wether he wants me to remind him of rules. I will help him, since I'll win anyways.



In any instance, outsiders intervening aggravates me. The game is played between 2 consenting adults - what they agree upon is what is fine. The game is also supervised by judges, YOU should consult THEM, and NOT intervene in a game.


Any intervention runs the risk of undermining trust, of endangering the good mood in a game. Do NOT ruin someone elses game.


My 4 year old nephew will speak without thinking of consequences. Adults should know that in doubt: You keep your mouth shut.

archont wrote:The rules are what the players agree upon.

You do NOT EVER interrupt a game, not for minor and not for major mistakes.
Why? If any one side is so unskilled not to notice, or even both, then it's their loss in a competetive event.

Me personally, I'll ask my opponent twice wether he's sure of wich weapon to destroy, or remind him twice of my deepstrikers. I do not say "you should do X because it's more advantageous"
From a rules point, if an opponent cheats himself out of some benefit, then there's 2 possibilities:
a) the opponent is skilled but makes a bad move. His loss, he should know better.
b) (usually with a noob being paired to me in game1) A noob. I will ask him wether he wants me to remind him of rules. I will help him, since I'll win anyways.



In any instance, outsiders intervening aggravates me. The game is played between 2 consenting adults - what they agree upon is what is fine. The game is also supervised by judges, YOU should consult THEM, and NOT intervene in a game.


Any intervention runs the risk of undermining trust, of endangering the good mood in a game. Do NOT ruin someone elses game.


My 4 year old nephew will speak without thinking of consequences. Adults should know that in doubt: You keep your mouth shut.

Wow - lot of different thoughts on this. Think I am as much in the dark of the answer to the million dollar question as I was when the thread title caught my eye!

You are not.

Take note that most of the people saying they would butt in do not appear to be tournament goers.

From tournament goers the response was an almost universal "Do not interfere"

However, the casuals are not at fault: They do & say as they feel is right, what they feel is right is directly influenced by their gaming environment.

In a casual game, where you do not have competition, no time restraint etc etc - people can butt in, if they deem so necessary

nkelsch wrote:The issue is there IS a difference between the following:

*Both players unfamiliar with the rules and playing it wrong.
*One player unfamiliar with the rules and the other player letting them play it wrong for personal advantage.
*One player unfamiliar with the rules and the other player playing their rules wrong for personal advantage.
*Two players who know the rules who are disagreeing over a rule.

The issue is there is a fine line between people being unfamiliar with rules and someone purposely cheating. And there is also a line between coaching and fixing rule disputes.

I agree with this quote... just not your conclusions from it.

I also agree with Dash and Kirasu's points of view above. Imo, this more accurately represents real players' views. Some might not want you to say anything, some might not mind if you're 100% certain- but all of them (that I've met) would have no problem with a spectator who sees a clear rules violation getting a judge.

As Kirasu says- if you see something clearly wrong happening, and you feel like something should be done about it- don't wait until afterwards. If you don't know the folks / aren't 100% sure / don't feel comfortable speaking up- just get a judge, and have them take care of it.

I would also like to point out, nkelsch, that while I agree about the fine line of being unfamiliar with rules and purposely cheating- your point #3 above is clearly cheating. And whether it is intentional or not, if one player is unfamiliar with a rule (particularly an army specific one) and the other player is using it wrongly to their own advantage, I think a spectator is obligated to "notify the authorities" as it were... or for those who feel comfortable doing so, a simple, polite comment can do the same job.

Tournament games aren't black boxes, and if you're not comfortable having your game watched, I'd say you shouldn't be playing in a tournament. Dash clearly experiences this a lot, and takes your position in a sense (that people who aren't 100% sure about a rules violation shouldn't say anything) but also says pointing out a clear rules violation is fine.

In my opinion, that's clearly the common ground. And from what I've seen, this isn't nearly so polarizing in real life. If someone has an obvious rule wrong, and it gets pointed out, everybody's grateful for it- even the person doing it wrong usually, as now they know how to do it correctly, and aren't getting an unfair advantage from playing it incorrectly.

On the table / in tournies... this is not going to be so black and white, as has been pointed out many times. It's just on the internet. If you have a rule wrong, I politely point it out, and you have a problem with that? In my opinion, you shouldn't be playing in a tournament... and more than that, how can you be offended if you actually had the rule wrong in the first place?

To say it's a "contract between two players"... well, that contract also involves playing by the rules. And to the comment that "The rules are what the players agree that they are?" I disagree... the rules are as they are written, and the players interpret them, but only up to a point. Some things are clearly right and wrong by the rules, and must be reasonably played as such in a tournament environment.

But if you're unsure of the rule, for heaven's sake, don't say anything and let them figure it out on their own.

RiTides wrote:

I agree with this quote... just not your conclusions from it.

I also agree with Dash and Kirasu's points of view above. Imo, this more accurately represents real players' views. Some might not want you to say anything, some might not mind if you're 100% certain- but all of them (that I've met) would have no problem with a spectator who sees a clear rules violation getting a judge.

I agree. Get a judge. Don't intervene. The judge can intervene. If you let the judge intervene, then that solves most of the issues:

*If you are wrong, you don't waste people's time and the judge prevents you from getting involved
*If your interpretation conflicts with the event FAQ , you don't waste people's time and the judge prevents you from getting involved
*You don't have an external person with no authority poisoning a game by calling people cheaters. A judge can handle it.

We are talking about people who sit there and just chime in and try to officiate the game.

As Kirasu says- if you see something clearly wrong happening, and you feel like something should be done about it- don't wait until afterwards. If you don't know the folks / aren't 100% sure / don't feel comfortable speaking up- just get a
judge, and have them take care of it.

TOTALLY AGREE. Get a judge. Don't intervene. Any interventions in a tourney need to come from official organizers... especially so the TO and judges have the ability to filter the wide array of nonsense that spectators bring in the form of coaching and totally wrong interpretations.

I would also like to point out, nkelsch, that while I agree about the fine line of being unfamiliar with rules and purposely cheating- your point #3 above is clearly cheating. And whether it is intentional or not, if one player is unfamiliar with a rule (particularly an army specific one) and the other player is using it wrongly to their own advantage, I think a spectator is obligated to "notify the authorities" as it were... or for those who feel comfortable doing so, a simple, polite comment can do the same job.

It is clearly cheating. But letting someone make a big mistake because they don't know your rules technically isn't... and while it may not be sporting to some to go 'Ah HA! you just activated my trap card!!! This rule makes all your models kill themselves... you should have known better!' it is not the place of a spectator to chime in and say "you do know your plan to Do X won't work because X doesn't work that way right?"

When clarifying a rule in advance changes the tactical decisions of a player, it is coaching. Sometimes you have to let the people make mistakes. If someone moved 12" in the movement phase with the expectation of shooting all his weapons and you say during the movement phase: "You can't shoot if you move over 6" even though the vehicle can shoot if it moves 12" "... That is coaching. You say the exact same thing during the shooting phase when the person has already made his tactical failure, then that is correcting a rule. This is such a grey area as it is a fine line between helping fix rules played wrong and coaching!!!

Personally, I give my opponents heads up when I see them about to play a rule wrong... but it is *MY* game and I am involved in it. I have the right to 'coach' my opponent if he wants the input or not. Spectators do not.

Tournament games aren't black boxes, and if you're not comfortable having your game watched, I'd say you shouldn't be playing in a tournament. Dash clearly experiences this a lot, and takes your position in a sense (that people who aren't 100% sure about a rules violation shouldn't say anything) but also says pointing out a clear rules violation is fine.

It is rude to eavesdrop. It is rude to interject into other people's conversations and it is rude to invade people's personal space and be in the way. Some people lack social skills and don't realize when they stand pressed up against your table edge with a big gulp and cheetos, eating over your table while you are trying to play that they are not welcome. (true story)

Now you are going to tell us how to play? No... please if you have a problem get a judge.

In my opinion, that's clearly the common ground. And from what I've seen, this isn't nearly so polarizing in real life. If someone has an obvious rule wrong, and it gets pointed out, everybody's grateful for it- even the person doing it wrong usually, as now they know how to do it correctly, and aren't getting an unfair advantage from playing it incorrectly.

On the table / in tournies... this is not going to be so black and white, as has been pointed out many times. It's just on the internet. If you have a rule wrong, I politely point it out, and you have a problem with that? In my opinion, you shouldn't be playing in a tournament... and more than that, how can you be offended if you actually had the rule wrong in the first place?

To say it's a "contract between two players"... well, that contract also involves playing by the rules. And to the comment that "The rules are what the players agree that they are?" I disagree... the rules are as they are written, and the players interpret them, but only up to a point. Some things are clearly right and wrong by the rules, and must be reasonably played as such in a tournament environment.

But if you're unsure of the rule, for heaven's sake, don't say anything and let them figure it out on their own.

At some point, you have to accept people play stuff wrong and spectators who want to help should volunteer to be judges, even if it is only for part of the day. Since spectators show terrible judgement more often than not, then I think the only reasonable position is for everyone, even the smartest, most rules-aware socially atuned spectator to still go through a judge.

No one wants to cheat, but no one wants a 3rd party person crapping up their game. So I would rather everyone butt out to protect us from the bad spectators and the good spectators can go get judges.

They key is to excercise appropriate courtesy, discretion, and basic adult social skills.

Don't be rude or accusatory. Don't be hostile or loud. Don't give tactical advice. Be conscious of the environment and the clock if they're running short on time. Be courteous, and be prepared to shut up if the players at the table ask you to butt out. And ff you are not 100%, it's better to be silent or check the book before speaking. Even if you ARE 100% certain, it is still best to use a polite, inquisitive tone leaving room for you possibly being in error yourself.

But I maintain that it absolutely is appropriate to correct a clearly broken rule.

archont wrote:Take note that most of the people saying they would butt in do not appear to be tournament goers.

From tournament goers the response was an almost universal "Do not interfere"

You don't think Dash or me are tournament players? I think you're exaggerating the universality of your preference.

Nice post, nkelsch- and in thinking about it, I actually tend to agree. As Dash said... spectators are often wrong, and cause more trouble than they help solve. I think we only disagree in that I believe someone knowledgeable and courteous could speak up directly, if done in the right way (as Mannahnin describes above).

I also want to clarify that my "cheating" comment was referring to the situation you'd laid out where someone plays their own rules wrong (perhaps even intentionally), and their opponent (ignorant of those rules) doesn't know that they're doing it... in that case I think getting a judge would be even more appropriate, as if it's intentional, the infringing player could then be dealt with however severely the judge deems appropriate.

I was also going to point out about Mannahnin's and Dash's views in this thread... clearly, they're prolific tournament players, so to the poster who pointed to people disagreeing with them as being non-tournament players... that's simply not the case.

Not having attended a tournement I have a question. If you see someone making an intentional/unintentional mistake and you go to get a judge. If, by the time the judge gets there other actions have occurred what happens then?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:Not having attended a tournement I have a question. If you see someone making an intentional/unintentional mistake and you go to get a judge. If, by the time the judge gets there other actions have occurred what happens then?

At that point the purpose of informing the judge is to have an official keep an eye on the table because there are/were perceived rules problems.

If the players have moved on to other actions, then it's because they've come to an agreement on resolution of the rules dispute.

I think that ANY time you see a rule being played wrong or violated you should point it out. Just my .02$

Mannahnin: I apologise, I did say "almost" - this was my impression, I did not intend to say "every tourneygoer!"

On a sidenote, I dare say that Dashs comment was critical of intervention in general

archont wrote:You are not.

Take note that most of the people saying they would butt in do not appear to be tournament goers.

From tournament goers the response was an almost universal "Do not interfere"

I think most people that play in tournaments are fairly split on the matter, but most players will agree that you don't bring up controversial rules issues and for the most part you point out simple things that may just be slips of the mind or subtle cheating.

The rules violations described in the OP are egregious and an observer would be obligated to intervene.

My general rules for observing tournaments games over the years...

1.) Never interrupt the game unless you know the person(s) playing and then it's to say hello and how's it going when nothing is happening gamewise.

2.) If you see something being played wrong, go inform a judge and let them sort it out

It's a general fact that most people will get rules wrong, either through not reading the books, not remembering things, or getting confused (due to it being a difficult game, they aren't feeling well or are hungover). If they get the rules wrong it's not up to you as an observer to jump in and point out

sennacherib wrote:I think that ANY time you see a rule being played wrong or violated you should point it out. Just my .02$

What if they tell you to Go away and stop bothering them ? !



Let's be careful with language and terms that could easily be misconstrued. Thanks

reds8n

I have to love how some of the Internet Warhammer Community gets all puffy chested and potentially physically violent when any sort of conflict seems to arise. Makes you wonder why they don't just install boxing rings in all FLGS to settle arguements.

Personally, I would rather spectators butt out. And if you do feel that you need to interject, that you are willing to stand beside that table for the rest of the game because you just nominated yourself as judge. I absolutely hate when a spectator only seems to be around the table when it is his buddy's turn to provide his absolute rule's knowledge.

Certainly if I saw some issues that I will speak up with the player post game, but most certainly at a tournament it is both player's responsibilities to know the rules, or at least have the forsight to simply ask to read the opposing players codex on rules that seem shady.

I have to love how some of the Internet Warhammer Community gets all puffy chested and potentially physically violent when any sort of conflict seems to arise. Makes you wonder why they don't just install boxing rings in all FLGS to settle arguements.

We have a stage at Legions.. Not sure people wanna see a bunch of warhammer geeks in a boxing match. Plus, no ring girls so whats the point really?

nkelsch wrote:

lixulana wrote:

I personally was at the GT a few years ago with a friend who was new to the game, and i watched the end of 3 of his games. in all 3 of the games i could tell a more experienced player was taking advantage of him and i sat and made sure the rules were followed. so it both worked at teaching my friend the rules, and kept the other player from steam rolling him. like "forgotten" psychic tests, "forgotten" morale test and the list goes on. but i also made sure he was following the rules also so i pointed out his mostakes also.

allowing obvious rules "violations" (differing from rules disputes) to go at the very least not pointed out is a problem, because either one person is cheating, or both people dont know the rules and should be given the opportunity to learn them.

coaching is also different than the above, and should never occur in a tournament. why dony you use this, move here shoot that...

This is exactly coaching. If you squatted on his game and basically helped him play his army for him, you coached him. Being someone to tell him how the rules of the game worked so he could make decisions off your information is coaching. Not to mention if you are only there to coach one side of a table and are not even attempting to be impartial. A tourney is not an appropriate place to be 'learning' the rules. If you are telling him rules, during a tourney, he is 'learning' and that is 'coaching'. What you should have done is *YOU* enter the event... *YOU* play the games and let him watch. He can then learn while he watches you play. THAT is the correct way of handling this situation. Not unfairly coaching him through his games.

And you guys say 'obvious' but the examples in this thread are rule disputes that have often been grey areas. What is obvious to you, the arrogant nosey interloper who knows the rules better than the person who wrote it may not be as obvious or as clear to interpret as threads in YMTC show.

In this example, you should have told a judge about your friends inexperience. And the judge could either watch over his games or let him get eaten by the meatgrinder. It was on him to save himself by asking for rule verification, not for you to loom over his game and play half of it for him.

This shows the lack of poor judgement by observers and how they are basically trying to justify their unfair interference. For every person who could possibly give unbiased fair advice to clear up obvious disputes, there are dozens of uninformed, rude, coaching interlopers who may not even be giving correct information and are totally overstepping their bounds. The only valid way to protect games from the bad spectators is to ban all spectators from interfering.

apparently you didnt take the time to read the whole post where i pointed out both sides, Also you assumed i coached him by telling how and where to move, I let him make his own choices, i just pointed out that the rules require you to do or not do "this" action.

in my opinion, if there are rules violations they need to be pointed out. to let people just keep going is either allowing someone to cheat, or allowing people to be ignorant of the correct rules.

lixulana wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

lixulana wrote:

I personally was at the GT a few years ago with a friend who was new to the game, and i watched the end of 3 of his games. in all 3 of the games i could tell a more experienced player was taking advantage of him and i sat and made sure the rules were followed. so it both worked at teaching my friend the rules, and kept the other player from steam rolling him. like "forgotten" psychic tests, "forgotten" morale test and the list goes on. but i also made sure he was following the rules also so i pointed out his mostakes also.

allowing obvious rules "violations" (differing from rules disputes) to go at the very least not pointed out is a problem, because either one person is cheating, or both people dont know the rules and should be given the opportunity to learn them.

coaching is also different than the above, and should never occur in a tournament. why dony you use this, move here shoot that...

This is exactly coaching. If you squatted on his game and basically helped him play his army for him, you coached him. Being someone to tell him how the rules of the game worked so he could make decisions off your information is coaching. Not to mention if you are only there to coach one side of a table and are not even attempting to be impartial. A tourney is not an appropriate place to be 'learning' the rules. If you are telling him rules, during a tourney, he is 'learning' and that is 'coaching'. What you should have done is *YOU* enter the event... *YOU* play the games and let him watch. He can then learn while he watches you play. THAT is the correct way of handling this situation. Not unfairly coaching him through his games.

And you guys say 'obvious' but the examples in this thread are rule disputes that have often been grey areas. What is obvious to you, the arrogant nosey interloper who knows the rules better than the person who wrote it may not be as obvious or as clear to interpret as threads in YMTC show.

In this example, you should have told a judge about your friends inexperience. And the judge could either watch over his games or let him get eaten by the meatgrinder. It was on him to save himself by asking for rule verification, not for you to loom over his game and play half of it for him.

This shows the lack of poor judgement by observers and how they are basically trying to justify their unfair interference. For every person who could possibly give unbiased fair advice to clear up obvious disputes, there are dozens of uninformed, rude, coaching interlopers who may not even be giving correct information and are totally overstepping their bounds. The only valid way to protect games from the bad spectators is to ban all spectators from interfering.

apparently you didnt take the time to read the whole post where i pointed out both sides, Also you assumed i coached him by telling how and where to move, I let him make his own choices, i just pointed out that the rules require you to do or not do "this" action.

in my opinion, if there are rules violations they need to be pointed out. to let people just keep going is either allowing someone to cheat, or allowing people to be ignorant of the correct rules.

I'm sure your illumination of their ignorance will go over well.

Why wouldn't it if it ensured a smooth flowing game that adfhered to the rule and was impartial?

I forgot to roll a psychic test in a recent local tournament match and a spectator pointed it out. I was pleased he did (even though the test failed...). He was very pleasant, just said 'Hey, you forgot to roll for Holocaust just now'). No need for aggravation there that I can see.

Certainly I don't think anyone wants someone butting in with half-remembered rules that are a conglommeration of 3rd/4th and 5th ed, or whatever. But a simple 'You forgot that compulsory action' if delivered in a timely and pleasant manner should in my view be welcome. And if you don't welcome such, a simple 'Thanks but we'd prefer to catch our own mistakes' would seem sufficient. wild threats of physical violence and swearing seem just a trifle over the top to me. But I'm very old-fashioned.

OT, slightly, but I was at a tournament a few weeks ago. After finishing my game I was watching a hard-fought battle between Blood Angels and Space Wolves. The game ended and the players were unsure if a BA marine was close enough to contest an objective. The two players measured a few times and it was really close. They turned to me and said, "Here you measure it." I said, "Not a fething chance am I going to measure that!" and got a judge.

You have to wonder why someone would have a problem with being called on __flagrant__ rules "oversight" by an observer. As I've said before, the appropriate response to this should be, "Why thank you. My mistake," followed by an apology to his opponent.

Artemo wrote:Why wouldn't it if it ensured a smooth flowing game that adfhered to the rule and was impartial?

I forgot to roll a psychic test in a recent local tournament match and a spectator pointed it out. I was pleased he did (even though the test failed...). He was very pleasant, just said 'Hey, you forgot to roll for Holocaust just now'). No need for aggravation there that I can see.

Certainly I don't think anyone wants someone butting in with half-remembered rules that are a conglommeration of 3rd/4th and 5th ed, or whatever. But a simple 'You forgot that compulsory action' if delivered in a timely and pleasant manner should in my view be welcome. And if you don't welcome such, a simple 'Thanks but we'd prefer to catch our own mistakes' would seem sufficient. wild threats of physical violence and swearing seem just a trifle over the top to me. But I'm very old-fashioned.

yes but I prefer wild over the top threats of physical violence. It helps me cope with people who butt into my business.

olympia wrote:OT, slightly, but I was at a tournament a few weeks ago. After finishing my game I was watching a hard-fought battle between Blood Angels and Space Wolves. The game ended and the players were unsure if a BA marine was close enough to contest an objective. The two players measured a few times and it was really close. They turned to me and said, "Here you measure it." I said, "Not a fething chance am I going to measure that!" and got a judge.

You have to wonder why someone would have a problem with being called on __flagrant__ rules "oversight" by an observer. As I've said before, the appropriate response to this should be, "Why thank you. My mistake," followed by an apology to his opponent.

The problem is when the observer calls a player on a _flagrant_ rules "oversight" and the observer was flat out wrong. See the post on this page from Anglacon to see how an observer who jumped into a rules dispute and was wrong destroyed the rapport of two players in the game.

lixulana wrote:

apparently you didnt take the time to read the whole post where i pointed out both sides, Also you assumed i coached him by telling how and where to move, I let him make his own choices, i just pointed out that the rules require you to do or not do "this" action.

in my opinion, if there are rules violations they need to be pointed out. to let people just keep going is either allowing someone to cheat, or allowing people to be ignorant of the correct rules.

I disagree with your opinion of what coaching is. Correcting rules farther in advance gives people chances to compensate. Sometimes making bad tactical decisions is part of the game. If you tell them in the movement phase that they can't shoot if they move over 6" then you have coached that player into moving less than 6". If you tell them while in the shooting phase after they have assaulted that they can't shoot because they moved too far then you might have less of an issue. Just because you don't think you are coaching, doesn't mean you are not coaching. Again, another reason why spectators should butt out. Many can't tell they are wrong with the rules and many can;t tell the difference between coaching or not.

The problem is you guys who are like, "yeah, i know there are a ton of problems that could happen, i am talking about 'OBVIOUS' rule disputes that I am clearly smart enough to officiate on."

All those people who are wrong and coaching and causing issues also think that the rule was "OBVIOUS" and that they were also smart enough to officiate on... And they were wrong. Which is why you should VET all interactions via an official judge, even if it is supposedly obvious and you are supposedly smart.

A few people seem to be of the opinion that cheating is fine as long as you don't get caught... a rather surprising stance considering the stink the tourney crowd throws up every year after "Ard Boyz. But of course nobody is man enough to call out the cheaters there, instead they film them and shame them on Youtube later from safe anonymity...

Yes, I will point out significant rules errors and I will certainly point out blatant cheating. Rules are rules.