"New" ruling on Illegal Procedure

[roysorlie]

I don't know if this has been polled before, but I'l just go ahead anyway.

Most people dislike Illegal Procedure.
Most people think that instead of turnover, it should award a reroll to the coach calling illegal procedure.

So, as you please, vote.

[jaylazer]

I voted to change IP.

I think the idea of making sure the turn marker is moved is good and there needs to be an incentive to insure it happens.

I just think a turnover is too far. I know in my younger days, I won a few games because of an IP. Thinking back on them, they are a little empty.

Jay

[DoubleSkulls]

The whole point of the IP rule is to ensure that coaches don't forget to move their turn marker. IMO the current rule does this better than the proposed one.

Maybe a better rule is opponent choice - either you lose a TRR or they gain one. You'll still get hurt - but wont suffer a turnover for forgetting when you haven't got any left.

[roysorlie]

I have a rookie playing in my league now. He is 3 matches old, and has problems with the IP.

At first, we reminded him.

But there is only one real way to remember to move the turnmarker.
The hard way.

While I actually belive people learn faster, having to lose their turn every time, I think it's a bit rough. Having to give your opponent a reroll is punishment enough.

Or maybe a choice between losing a reroll, or giving the opponent one.

[Longshot]

i dont think that it is tha way.
People have to change their mind.
But it depends in which league or tournament you are playing.

[roysorlie]

I don't really mind the rule as it is. I hardly ever forget, except under moments of immense stress and a possible TD in my favor.

Still.. I wouldn't mind the change either. Rerolls are not easily come by playing Elves, like I do.

(oh, and how come every time I actually reroll something, I usually end up getting the excact same result???)

Must be an improbability field somewhere in the vincity, (affecting only me apparently)

[Zombie]

I think that's a horrible idea. Most of the time, you don't need anymore rerolls for the half than you already have (if you do, it means you didn't buy enough when you started your team so it's your own fault). Changing it the way you said removes all incentive to move the turn marker.

The way it is now, what's bad isn't losing a reroll for the half (you should have plenty to spare), it's losing your reroll for the turn. Why change what ain't broke?

[Rozman]

The way it is now, what's bad isn't losing a reroll for the half (you should have plenty to spare), it's losing your reroll for the turn. Why change what ain't broke?

What's bad isn't a RR at all. What's bad is the TO when you're out of RR's:

After slogging through most of the game trailing 0-1, you've now got the ball, and your opponent has failed to get to you. You've blown through all of your RR's to get there, but you can now walk it in with no rolling required.

For the first time all game you walk him into the endzone without moving the turn marker. Game over.

"Wait just a second, that's an Illegal Procedure!"

You have now lost because of a game mechanic that was irrelevent to the game you just played. Nobody had any doubt about what turn it was. You gained absolutely no advantage by not moving the turn marker. You did not irritate or confuse your opponent by routinely failing to move your turn marker.

"Well, now you'll know better."

Erm, I already knew better. One of those crazy, blame-it-on-the-moon, I thought the game was over moments of craziness came over me and I failed to move the turn marker. That's going to have sooo much impact on my ability to remember to move the turn marker every turn I take in the future.

Gaining a RR would do my opponent no good either, since he doesn't have any turns left. There's got to be some strong incentive to move the turn marker along that can't be used like a club. It's not even a good way to train learned behavior (ask any psych major.)



How is a TO a balanced punishment for forgetting to move the turn marker? The game above would be decided not by good/poor strategy, nor by good/poor die rolling. It would be decided by the disincentive attached to a game mechanic, and that game mechanic had no impact on gameplay.

I've actually started a poll along these lines to discuss other options, and to see if people generally prefer it the way it is instead of simply assuming "I think most people house rule it."

[Grumbledook]

You missed the point, some people can not move the turn marker and get matches longer that they are meant to. If you don't like the turnover just tell your opponent and carry on without giving up a reroll, thats what a lot of us do.

Given the choice i would rather my opponent lost a reroll than i gained one. I normally manage to have enough (somtimes) but its more of an advantage if your opponent has to do plays without backup.

[McSnaga]

In the last tournament I played I checked this openly with the Commissioner before it started. He said he wanted TO's for IP's (assuming you are out of RRs). However, during a few games our cameraderie got the better of us and if someone committed an IP and was out of RRs, I offerred my opponent the choice of giving me a RR (3rd down, 2nd half) or having a TO. Twice this happened; one opponent chose the TO and the other chose to give me a RR (which I did end up having to use).

As I see it I like the rule. Maybe because I very rarely forget to move my turn marker. I think it can be seen as a fun part of the game. Just don't sit so that you don't easily see the dugout box when you look at the board. That helps a lot !

[roysorlie]

In my league, if we call someone for an illegal procedure, they can either accept the turnover, or use a reroll. That reroll counts as that teams reroll that turn.

If the opponents doesn't have a reroll, it's a forced turnover.

[franck_le_grand]

In my league, if we call someone for an illegal procedure, they can either accept the turnover, or use a reroll. That reroll counts as that teams reroll that turn.

If the opponents doesn't have a reroll, it's a forced turnover.

That's the official ruling, so it's not just in your league

[Kraff]

If you don't like the way IP works, you can always just not use it at all in your leagues. I know a few guys who relish in calling IP and all the hardships it brings you. I do have to say that it is an official rule but that doesn't stop us from changing the rules either.
I personally don't like even the option of giving the other team a re-roll. That doesn't penalize you directly and may not even matter in the game anyway. I often have a re-roll left at the end of a half and having an extra beyond that is useless while my opponent gets out of burning his re-rolls or suffering a TO.

[Munkey]

I voted yes as we have recently voted that this rule be changed in our league, as no one ever called it when it meant a turnover.

As to whether it should be officially changed though... i'm not so sure, I think most players will play sportingly however the rule is written and if you play many that don't you won't forget to move the turn marker in a hurry.

I think I would support a version where the caller chooses either to gain a re-roll or force the opponent to use his turns re-roll. The loss of a re-roll is a reasonable penalty, it's the TO that we consider a little strong.

One final note, I do not consider it within the rules to 'forget' to move the marker and gain extra turns, whatever else you play once you notice the turn marker has not been moved it must be moved to it's correct position.

[Mojoshenpo]

... we get in the habit of moving it when the other player is turning his figures forward at the end of his turn....