Forums Menu

User: 
Pass:  

Curling Scores

M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 6 -- Mon, Mar 18 -- 7:00pm AT
Gagn/Mori Final
Rees/Ches (EE)
Sand/Crai Final
Gamb/Kalt (8)
Arms/Grif Final
Pete/Gall (7) Watch Live Curling!
Zhen/Piet Final
Gion/Desj (7)
Wasy/Koni Final
Jone/Lain (EE)
Wise/Smit 12  Final
Weag/Eppi (6)
Lott/Lott 12  Final
Bouc/Char (7)
Krev/Math Final
Whit/Whit (6)
M: Aberdeen International Curling Championship
Aberdeen, SCO
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 2:45pm GMT
Mouat Final
Shuster (7)
W: Biktrix Saskatchewan Senior Women's Curling Championship
Martensville, SK
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 3:00pm MT
Foster Final
Streifel (8) Watch Live Curling!
W: CCAA / Curling Canada College Championships
Sudbury, ON
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sat, Mar 16 -- 2:30pm AT
Southern Alberta IoT Final
Concordia U (10)
UofA - Augustana Final
Humber College (10)
D: WCT Slovakia Mixed Doubles Cup II
Bratislava, SVK
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 12:00pm CET
Han/Zou Final
Paul/Paul (7)
Cihl/Mace Final
Yang/Tian 10  (6)
: NWTCA Mixed
Yellowknife, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 4 -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 10:00am MT
Delorey Final
Koe (5)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

CurlingZone : Powered by vBulletin>
<smallfont><b><a href=CurlingZone > Chat Forums > General Curling Chat > Rock Talk > Hardline Comes Out Swinging...

Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.
Page 2 of 5 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
05-06-16 01:39PM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

Critical difference.

I personally don't believe the "problem" (honestly, I'm not even sure it *is* a problem) requires a change in the sweeping rules.

Do I think the various reversals, midstream changes, and decisions made on the basis of poor science were good? No, no I don't.

But I think that it is still possible that an intelligent materials rule could be created, after thorough and impartial testing (preferably with all manufacturers given equal seats at the table) which would create the limit that could then be enforced via inspection and certification before the game even begins.

I don't see a massive, unfixable, problem in sweepers being able to have a higher degree of input in the result of a shot. If anything, that increases the level of skill that both the skip (in order to know what to call), and the sweepers (to use proper technique to perform what is called) must display...and the shooter still has to be close for it to work.

I saw almost as many shots messed up by poorly applied directional sweeping as I did shots that couldn't have been made without it enabled by directional sweeping. For every stone made to cut 2 feet in the last 10 feet of travel, enabling a hit behind a perfect guard, there was another stone left too short because only one sweeper was working the stone, or another stone that missed wide because the "straight" sweeper did his job too well.

Dugless, on the other hand, is *certain* that a rule is necessary and would fix the problem. hence, the request for "okay, write it".

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 01:49PM
ngm is offline Click Here to See the Profile for ngm Click here to Send ngm a Private Message Find more posts by ngm Add ngm to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
ngm
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272

I reject the contention that an critical requirement of a new sweeping rule be that a neutral official be able to easily detect a violation, as though enforcing this rule (and this rule alone among all others aside from hog line violations) will be left to officials.

Most rule violations even at the top levels of the game are easily avoided and/or admitted to by the players involved, and are called out pretty quickly if they don't. There will be a significant amount of pressure on players themselves to abide by sweeping technique rules.

Most of the enforcement will be self-enforcement. If top level players don't wont officials interfering in their games it is easily avoidable by self-enforcing culture.

The same culture that prevents players from distracting their opponents during their shots, causes everyone to admit to burned rocks, etc.

I would say it is more important that players easily understand the rule for self-enforcement than it is for officials to easily enforce it.

Anyway, I've already written the rule.

"Every part of the surface of the brush must cross the entire running surface of the stone with each stroke."

So you can feel free to sweep at an angle, but the closer you get to the same direction as the stone, the longer the stroke is going to have to be.

Players can go back to the approx. 45 degree angle that was determined to be the most efficient. Whatever effect a single sweeper will have at that angle would be the effect we learn to live with.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 02:30PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

This is the very rare case where alanmacneil and I agree on something. Everyone says it is easy to enforce a rule on sweeping angle, but yet, very few people can actually do it. And when they write something, and you question something about it, they tell you that they are wrong.

The best solution to is to write a rule to limit sweeping technique AND make rules about equipment.

The easiest rule to write is about equipment.

The hardest rule to write is about technique (angle & side-to-side).

The easiest rule to enforce is about equipment.

The hardest rule to enforce is technique (angle & side-to-side).

The easiest rule to get correct 100% of the time is about equipment.

The hardest rule to get correct 100% of the time is about technique (angle & side-to-side).

So while having a rule about technique is probably the best rule in my mind, I think it will be terrible in practice, and as such, efforts should be focused only one equipment, and the parts of technique that are super easy to enforce, like no passing brooms from right to left to allow a carving broom and a speed broom.

TO focus strictly on technique issues that can be easily enforced like broom switching, and not addressing the equipment would be a mistake, because the 1 year moratorium will expire, and outside of that, if left unchecked, people will end up with super aggressive brooms, such as a blackhead, and the whole pattern will repeat.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 02:38PM
SPMFromPCC is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SPMFromPCC Click here to Send SPMFromPCC a Private Message Find more posts by SPMFromPCC Add SPMFromPCC to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SPMFromPCC
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Jun 2007
Location:
Posts: 440

The thought that curlers will no longer self-police themselves as they did in the past is disturbing, to say the least.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 07:35PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by AlanMacNeill
Welcome to being a Professional/Olympic Sport.

When nothing was on the line other than a trophy and some fame, how you won was at least as important as if you won, and 2nd place wasn't too much of a problem, you still did well, mate.

Now, there are Olympic Medals at stake, or Ranking points leading to tournaments with significant chunks of change on the line. For many nations, if their top team doesn't qualify for the Olympics, it is a DISASTER, as the OC will cut funding and down the drain goes the program, and thereby the sport.

Regretfully, that changes the game, at the top level at least. It's not that folks will *want* to cheat, necessarily, but that they are going to push the line as far as it can go, and a neutral arbitrator is going to have to enforce just where that line is.

Sad? Yep. The nature of the beast? Also...yep...



Could you kindly make up your mind?

First you demand someone writes a rule. But not one where you, a supposed official-as you claim-might not have to work to enforce. Next you're lecturing that with olympic status we have to-quite correctly-be more vigilant. But decide what you want. You can't sit on your butt at the end of the sheet all game moving little rocks on a magnetic board.

What? If you're sitting in a sky box or viewing an overhead video feed you're incapable of determining a regulated angle of brush stroke or its length? Are you kidding? And, excuse me, you can't walk down the side of a sheet without tripping?

Good lord man. This is the slow sport of curling. You're not being asked to skate for 60 minutes or make decisions in high speed situations like calls at first base or pass interference.

But I'll write your rule for you-just like I've done 3 other times:

"The sweeping stroke must cross the entire running surface of the stone and must cross the path of the shot at an angle between 60-90 degrees perpendicular to the stone."

Penalties: 1st offense: player receives a written warning-red card.
2nd offense (same game/player): stone removed from play
3rd offense (same game/player): athlete and their two stones are ejected for the remainder of that game with no replacement.

I would also make red cards cumulative during the course of an event. Get two red cards, you sit out the next game-preliminary or playoff. It doesn't matter. Can't play by the rules then you sit. But I would allow a substitute in that situation.

And for everyone who still wants self-policing, it's still possible. It's called: play by the rules and respect the code of the game. Do that and guys like Alan can sit at the end of the sheet and relax.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 05-06-16 at 07:51PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 07:50PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

jamcam, where are these overhead videos coming from? Perhaps available at the worlds and canadian nationals on most sheets, but outside of that, rarely available. Even at US nationals only overhead on perhaps 2 or three sheets. SO how do youdo this when there are no cameras, or when there are no officials.

And then for enforcement, for a takeout thrown with 12 second or less time, you are now asking an official watching video to see a violation (one that might take place at near the opposite hogline) and then somehow inform people on the ice, so that the rock can be pulled (like a burned rock). These 2 aspects you have yet to address.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 07:51PM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

All I'm doing is pointing out the difficulties inherent in making the first rule the officials would have to move during a shot to judge.

As someone else said, the only other thing officials call independently is hog line (and that's even eliminated at high level stuff by sensors, 99% of the time). Everything else, we are only supposed to be resources on the rules when a player brings something up.

Well, guess what...any proposed sweeping rule will, eventually, result in a dispute...and as opposed to the "self called" infractions, which are easy for the player to detect and call on themselves for accidentally performing ("Hey, I bumped the stone" "Oh, cool, thanks for your honesty, hey, Mr Official, what do we do here?")...no sweeper is ever going to fess up to "Hey, I applied a directional sweeping technique on that stone in violation", because it's something they would have to set out to deliberately do...and if you're going to deliberately do something in violation of the rules...you're not going to then call yourself on it...that's ridiculous.

So, the only way it would ever be able to be called is for an official to call it...which requires an unambiguous rule which can be detected and enforced from the most likely location an official is going to be, which is at the end board at the house end.

So, again, I challenge all those of you who think you've got the solution....what's the language of your proposed rule?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 07:56PM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
[B]

"The sweeping stroke must cross the entire running surface of the stone and must cross the path of the shot at an angle between 60-90 degrees perpendicular to the stone."

Penalties: 1st offense: player receives a written warning-red card.
2nd offense (same game/player): stone removed from play
3rd offense (same game/player): athlete and their two stones are ejected for the remainder of that game with no replacement.



Hmm...let's see...

"Hey, Jim...you don't have any red cards yet this game, right? Great, it's the hammer in the 10th end, I need you to make sure this stone cuts so we can get that hit....yeah, the official will card you, who cares, we'll win!"

"Oh, come on, it's bloody obvious from the overhead cameras that shot was swept at a 45 degree angle, not 60 degrees...how in the hell did that official not see it?"

Fails easy to judge remotely and having effective penalties...try again.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 08:04PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

A rule that is effective to police the worst of directional sweeping is easy, the most effective directional sweeping is when you are sweeping in an almost north-south direction on the inside corner or outside corner of the rock ( depending on if you want the rock to curl more or run straighter). A rule stating a players feet can not be in the path of the rock ( just like the putting line in golf the line extends back behind the rock) while their broom is in contact with the ice. This is easy to police from either end at a distance. if you can't see their feet from the skip's end or the entire rock from the delivering end its a rule violation.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 09:27PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
A rule that is effective to police the worst of directional sweeping is easy, the most effective directional sweeping is when you are sweeping in an almost north-south direction on the inside corner or outside corner of the rock ( depending on if you want the rock to curl more or run straighter). A rule stating a players feet can not be in the path of the rock ( just like the putting line in golf the line extends back behind the rock) while their broom is in contact with the ice. This is easy to police from either end at a distance. if you can't see their feet from the skip's end or the entire rock from the delivering end its a rule violation.


This would be true, if sweepers swept only in an open position. If you don't know what that is, face your skip while you sweep, and put your hand closer to the centerline at the bottom of the broom near the head. In that position, your foot will be in the path. If you sweep in a closed stance, then your feet will not be in the path. So unless you ban closed stance sweeping, your idea does not hold water.

For the record, I used to think that your ideas was awesome, and if you go back and read through this forum, I suggested it myself. But after being told this about open/closed concept, I tried it on the ice, and now I have changed my mind after practical personal testing.

Last edited by curlky on 05-06-16 at 09:33PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 09:40PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

the closed stance, which I've known about for quite a while is fine if the feet are kept outside the path of the rock. I have no problem with people sweeping across the face of the rock at a 45 degree angle, we have been doing that for many years. It is the north-south sweeping that is less than 45 degrees in a snowplow fashion that is the main culprit. It is pretty much impossible to sweep in a north-south fashion on the inside or outside edge of the rock without placing your feet behind the rock.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 09:45PM
Itsjustagame is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itsjustagame Find more posts by Itsjustagame Add Itsjustagame to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itsjustagame
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Aug 2014
Location:
Posts: 106

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan


Could you kindly make up your mind?

First you demand someone writes a rule. But not one where you, a supposed official-as you claim-might not have to work to enforce. Next you're lecturing that with olympic status we have to-quite correctly-be more vigilant. But decide what you want. You can't sit on your butt at the end of the sheet all game moving little rocks on a magnetic board.

What? If you're sitting in a sky box or viewing an overhead video feed you're incapable of determining a regulated angle of brush stroke or its length? Are you kidding? And, excuse me, you can't walk down the side of a sheet without tripping?

Good lord man. This is the slow sport of curling. You're not being asked to skate for 60 minutes or make decisions in high speed situations like calls at first base or pass interference.

.....

And for everyone who still wants self-policing, it's still possible. It's called: play by the rules and respect the code of the game. Do that and guys like Alan can sit at the end of the sheet and relax.



Well said !

Alan : if you cannot use common sense and judgemnent, please do not officiate anymore.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 11:08PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
the closed stance, which I've known about for quite a while is fine if the feet are kept outside the path of the rock. I have no problem with people sweeping across the face of the rock at a 45 degree angle, we have been doing that for many years. It is the north-south sweeping that is less than 45 degrees in a snowplow fashion that is the main culprit. It is pretty much impossible to sweep in a north-south fashion on the inside or outside edge of the rock without placing your feet behind the rock.


Go on the ice, sweep a rock in a closed stance. If zero degrees would be exactly in the path the stone travels, and 90 degrees woudl be perpendicular to the path, without any effort you can sweep at a 10-15 degree angle in a closed stance. Once you practice, you can get to probably 5 degrees without being in the path. Not a pure snow plow, but can be done. SO your foot idea will not solve the problem. I wish it would, but it will not.

If you would like ot see video evidence of how yoru rule will not work, please watch this shot:

https://youtu.be/fm2S_GCpn1o?t=517

If you watch the sweeper on your left, Nichols I think, he is almost a snow plow, and he is not in the path of the rock with his feet. And this technique is without a rule that prohibits. If he as a professional worked on it, he could easily get his feet not even close to behind the path.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-06-16 11:15PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:
Originally posted by Itsjustagame


Well said !

Alan : if you cannot use common sense and judgemnent, please do not officiate anymore.



Common sense and judgement rather than clear indisputable rules leads to situations like the USA-Jap men's game with the infamous shuster's decision rock. I think everyone would agree that these types of situations are not good for the sport, and a difficult to judge call will lead to this, like they argue ball's strikes in baseball, pass interference in football, etc.

Its not that an official is unwilling to make the difficult to judge call, it would just be better for all if a better method is developed.

You ever call a a hog line violation in a big club match. It is an awkward moment in a competitive game and at times leads to a contentious moment that we would all like to avoid.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 05:01AM
OldBrunswick is offline Click Here to See the Profile for OldBrunswick Click here to Send OldBrunswick a Private Message Find more posts by OldBrunswick Add OldBrunswick to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
OldBrunswick
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: Feb 2016
Location:
Posts: 3

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
A rule that is effective to police the worst of directional sweeping is easy, the most effective directional sweeping is when you are sweeping in an almost north-south direction on the inside corner or outside corner of the rock ( depending on if you want the rock to curl more or run straighter). A rule stating a players feet can not be in the path of the rock ( just like the putting line in golf the line extends back behind the rock) while their broom is in contact with the ice. This is easy to police from either end at a distance. if you can't see their feet from the skip's end or the entire rock from the delivering end its a rule violation.


This is exactly what I would propose.

And what about combining it this idea: Only one sweeper can sweep the rock for any shot, and must remain on one side. After the shot is called, but before delivery of the stone begins, the throwing team selects a sweeper. This sweeper can trade brooms with his teammate, and players are not bound to be on side for the duration of the game. But for any one shot, they can only sweep on one side, meaning no crossing over the path of the rock. This means that the team commits to either using the brushing to hold the line, or to make it curl more; but not both. It adds an interesting element of strategy and reduces the thrower's margin of error. The only downside is that some shots may end up with no seeping at all, which isn't the best for tv. Overall, I think the benefits outway the consequences.

Thoughts?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 05:23AM
On The Nose is offline Click Here to See the Profile for On The Nose Find more posts by On The Nose Add On The Nose to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
On The Nose
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608

quote:
Originally posted by curlky
This is the very rare case where alanmacneil and I agree on something. Everyone says it is easy to enforce a rule on sweeping angle, but yet, very few people can actually do it. And when they write something, and you question something about it, they tell you that they are wrong.

The best solution to is to write a rule to limit sweeping technique AND make rules about equipment.

The easiest rule to write is about equipment.

The hardest rule to write is about technique (angle & side-to-side).

The easiest rule to enforce is about equipment.

The hardest rule to enforce is technique (angle & side-to-side).

The easiest rule to get correct 100% of the time is about equipment.

The hardest rule to get correct 100% of the time is about technique (angle & side-to-side).

So while having a rule about technique is probably the best rule in my mind, I think it will be terrible in practice, and as such, efforts should be focused only one equipment, and the parts of technique that are super easy to enforce, like no passing brooms from right to left to allow a carving broom and a speed broom.


And yet, it was working fine that way for decades prior to this past season. And that was while sweepers were using hair brooms.

All we need do is return to that time. Whether the players / the game will allow that now is what is up for debate - because there is more on the line now, and these elite level curlers who claim to care so much about the integrity of the game have actually displayed rather clearly through their actions this past season (with the brush pads they chose to use, as well as the sweeping techniques they chose to employ) that they don't give a damn about the integrity of the game - all they care about is winning. They showed that to them, the ends justify the means.

quote:
Originally posted by curlky
TO focus strictly on technique issues that can be easily enforced like broom switching, and not addressing the equipment would be a mistake, because the 1 year moratorium will expire, and outside of that, if left unchecked, people will end up with super aggressive brooms, such as a blackhead, and the whole pattern will repeat.

^ Yes - because they don't truly care about the integrity of the game, as they claim to. It's good PR to claim to care about the integrity of the game - but it's also full of dung. Actions speak much louder than words.
All season, the elite level curlers have complained about the brush pad material - and, at the same time, have used virtually every brush pad that they have complained about - after and while complaining about them - often even using pads from companies which are in direct competition with their own broom/brush pad sponsors, always desperately seeking the brush pad with the most legally abrasive material so that they could do to the rocks exactly what they were complaining about. And they complained about sweeping techniques - all the while using the very sweeping techniques that they were complaining so much about.
I see clear hypocrisy in these actions - but I certainly don't see any integrity.

The ONLY reason that brush pad material and sweeping techniques were such huge issues this year - effectively changing the game significantly - is because the elite level players employed the brush pads and sweeping techniques that so significantly affected the game (while they hypocritically complained about them at the same time). Without the complicity of the elite level players, there would have been no controversy, and no change in the way the game is played.
You can't voluntarily do something - and then complain that it was done, and that it is ruining the game - and then STILL continue to do it. That makes no sense at all. But that is exactly what the elite level players did this past season, over and over.

Addressing both the sweeping technique AND the brush pad material needs to be done, with clear guidelines and parameters for each. And these rules would need to be enforced - yes, even if it leads to 'uncomfortable' and 'awkward' situations and arguments. Hell, judgment calls and disagreements and arguments are part of every other sport (including during the Olympics). And, generally speaking, no-one goes home crying, or contemplating suicide... There is more than enough 'politically correct' BS governing various elements of this culture, we don't need it to govern sport.

This is all the result of the elite level players having proven this past season that they cannot police themselves, cannot control themselves, and will take every and all advantages available wherever and whenever they can.
How's that for 'integrity', huh?

quote:
Originally posted by
SPMFromPCC

The thought that curlers will no longer self-police themselves as they did in the past is disturbing, to say the least.


^ Indeed.

__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Last edited by On The Nose on 05-07-16 at 09:30PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 11:00AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by curlky
jamcam, where are these overhead videos coming from? Perhaps available at the worlds and canadian nationals on most sheets, but outside of that, rarely available. Even at US nationals only overhead on perhaps 2 or three sheets. SO how do youdo this when there are no cameras, or when there are no officials.

And then for enforcement, for a takeout thrown with 12 second or less time, you are now asking an official watching video to see a violation (one that might take place at near the opposite hogline) and then somehow inform people on the ice, so that the rock can be pulled (like a burned rock). These 2 aspects you have yet to address.



Well, another same series of questions asked that were answered on another thread.

Do you live under a stone curlky? Officials at events have used radios for decades. I'm sure they still suffice as communication devices.

As for overhead cameras at big events, I guess the WCT and WCF will just have to dust off their wallets and spend some of that Olympic TV money on officiating.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 11:08AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by AlanMacNeill


Hmm...let's see...

"Hey, Jim...you don't have any red cards yet this game, right? Great, it's the hammer in the 10th end, I need you to make sure this stone cuts so we can get that hit....yeah, the official will card you, who cares, we'll win!"

"Oh, come on, it's bloody obvious from the overhead cameras that shot was swept at a 45 degree angle, not 60 degrees...how in the hell did that official not see it?"

Fails easy to judge remotely and having effective penalties...try again.



Actually not a fail of the rule, only the enforcement. Which can easily be remedied to no red card, just immediate stone removal then followed by ejection for a repeated offense.

Perhaps you have a better suggestion? I doubt it includes anything but the material. And, yes officials make mistakes. They're human.

How many mistakes are made on human called hogline violations? Now we have faulty electronic rocks as well so they're not perfect either.

If athletes would adhere, perfectly, to the rules we wouldn't need officials in ANY sports, would we? But that's not the case, is it? So you're just going to have to work a little harder as an official and have the balls to call directional sweeping on some jerk who decides to cheat on the last shot of a game.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 12:14PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

Curlky, this is what I would consider a violation, what Kennedy does sweeping brent's rock at about 9:50 on the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4WiQ5uccfE

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 12:25PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
Curlky, this is what I would consider a violation, what Kennedy does sweeping brent's rock at about 9:50 on the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4WiQ5uccfE



Actually, Laing's motion on Heberts second stone of the end is clearly a North-South motion well beyond even a 45 degree angle. Probably a 10-20 degree motion at best.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 12:42PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

It sure is, and the proposed rule would easily catch that.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 03:09PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
Curlky, this is what I would consider a violation, what Kennedy does sweeping brent's rock at about 9:50 on the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4WiQ5uccfE



I understand that your section shows what you would call a foot violation. BUT if you watch the video I sent, there was almost the same sweeping angle, maybe the exact same, and the foot wasn't close at all. so the point is that if your rule is to eliminate snow plow sweeping, it does not because it can be done with different footwork.

So your rule would not prevent the Nichols snow plow. So in my opinion, that is a rule proposal fail.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 03:12PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

I didnt consider nichols as snowplowing, its about 45 degrees. the very next shot in that sequence shows you snowplowing with north-south sweeping and the feet in the rock path, totally different

Last edited by dugless_zone 13 on 05-07-16 at 03:20PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 03:19PM
curlky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for curlky Click here to Send curlky a Private Message Find more posts by curlky Add curlky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
curlky
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan


Well, another same series of questions asked that were answered on another thread.

Do you live under a stone curlky? Officials at events have used radios for decades. I'm sure they still suffice as communication devices.

As for overhead cameras at big events, I guess the WCT and WCF will just have to dust off their wallets and spend some of that Olympic TV money on officiating.



If you throw draw weight, and the violation occurs shortly after throwing, radios will work great to stop the rock before it crosses the hogline and makes rocks in play move. I 100% agree with that ASSUMING A CALL COULD BE MADE (which I doubt).

But even with radios, at hit speed, just before crossing the hogline to get into play, no communication in any form will prevent the collisions of rocks in play, and now you are asking to replace exactly multiple rocks due to the sweeping burn..

Your view on overhead cameras is a likely pipedream. Very few events or countries could afford this. Even the ones that could, would not be able to afford it for all levels of playdowns, and events that would earn point. You are asking for thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of dollars spent at hundreds, or even thousands of curling centers across the world. There just does not exist enough money for this.

And even if this can happen at the biggest of events, you have never addressed how to handle this at a club or spiel level. I assume that you just think that people will never violate the rule, and that no dispute will ever happen, people will follow the rules, and it will all be find, just have faith.

And I have been disagreeable with you, but civil. You have now made personal attacks on me with questioning my knowledge of curling and asking if I live under a rock. I am happy to see that your technique to strengthen your argument is to take into name calling. It is that advanced mental prowess that makes me feel like the situation is under control.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

05-07-16 03:53PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

Oh please curlky. Spare us all the wounded poster routine. You have asked the same questions on multiple threads and ignore any reasonable response. You're question regarding how officials would relay information shows a blissful ignorance of the communication system already well in place. So asking if you reside under a stone was not name calling. It was a witty, sport related pun and jibe at your lack of knowledge.

And yes, I do firmly believe that in Bonspiel and club play 99.9% of rec curlers will be honourable and play by the spirit and intent of the rules-as they do now. I'm pretty certain your house league expects the same conduct from its members. But if you do have a bad apple who won't play fair then I guess you have two choices: deal with it or ignore it and let a cheater win.

So what if the infraction is not stopped before a stone comes in contact with others? We replace stones now, we simply do it again. That's why we have guys like Alan Macneil sitting at each end with their magnetic boards.

I get that your one, continous argument is that you can't have the same officiating in a club spiel that you have at a provincial, national, world or olympic event. Again, so what? It's been done this way for over a century and the sport hasn't suffered. And, FYI, I don't see PGA officials lining the fairways when I tee off on men's night.

So your expectations of the same officiating arrangements as the Brier to be at your local men's spiel is not only unreasonable but, frankly, ridiculous. It also torpedoes your argument.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 05-07-16 at 04:04PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 2 of 5 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to thisThread

Forum Jump:
Rate This Thread:

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

Curling Scores

M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 6 -- Mon, Mar 18 -- 7:00pm AT
Gagn/Mori Final
Rees/Ches (EE)
Sand/Crai Final
Gamb/Kalt (8)
Arms/Grif Final
Pete/Gall (7) Watch Live Curling!
Zhen/Piet Final
Gion/Desj (7)
Wasy/Koni Final
Jone/Lain (EE)
Wise/Smit 12  Final
Weag/Eppi (6)
Lott/Lott 12  Final
Bouc/Char (7)
Krev/Math Final
Whit/Whit (6)
M: Aberdeen International Curling Championship
Aberdeen, SCO
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 2:45pm GMT
Mouat Final
Shuster (7)
D: WCT Slovakia Mixed Doubles Cup II
Bratislava, SVK
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 12:00pm CET
Han/Zou Final
Paul/Paul (7)
Cihl/Mace Final
Yang/Tian 10  (6)
: NWTCA Mixed
Yellowknife, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 4 -- Sun, Mar 17 -- 10:00am MT
Delorey Final
Koe (5)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Recent News

Recent
Canadian mixed doubles championship starts in Fredericton on Sunday

Canadian mixed doubles championship starts in Fredericton on Sunday

Marlee Powers and Luke Saunders of Halifax, Nova Scotia won 6-5 over Papley/van Amsterdam in the opening draw streamed on Curling Canada's Plus platform.

Curling Photos

Recent

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

Twitter Feed

To top ↑