ATTENTION Captains, Members & Sandbaggers Non-Rated players
This info was recently posted on the NAGVA Facebook page and thought we would share.
The NAGVA Membership votes on proposed rule changes each season at Championships (May). Please be specifically aware of a new rule that impacts non-rated players and their team.
Section 2.04.B.1 of the NAGVA Rules & Regulations was amended to allow for modification of a player's initial rating during a tournament weekend based on observed play. The intent of this rule was to garner fair and even play throughout the entirety of each tournament. As such, if an unrated player is rated to a division higher than the one he/she is competing in at ANY time during a tournament (including during elimination rounds/day 2), that player will be immediately ineligible to compete any further with their team in that tournament (following the conclusion of the match they are currently playing in). As a team representative, please understand that it is your responsibility to know the level of any unrated players on your team, and to ensure that your teammates are competing at their full potential. We are always available and willing to help explain the difference between skills required in each division/rating. We are putting together resources for team captains to help them gather information from non-rated players and to estimate the player's NAGVA rating. Please let us know if you have any questions (in person, or email secretary@nagva.org) and good luck in future tournaments this season!
So, that explains what happened in Aloha Ball? (no direct source...just stalking people's Facebook page. Lol) according to the story, a non-rated was rated BB on pool play (team was playing BB) and thought that was it. On tournament play, the player was re-rated to A and to everyone's surprise she wasn't able to play the final match with his team. SUCKS! I think their team ended up getting 2nd place and struggled since she was the only setter in the team.
Do you think what happened was fair? Does this eliminate "sandbagging" which we know is very popular in NAGVA?
U B D Judge!
7 comments:
I think the issue was more that they waited until FINALS to "re-rate" the person. The person consistently all weekend displayed the same skill set as a setter, and then right before finals it was determined he was suddenly A and he would be uprated and ineligible to play.
The issue wasn't him sandbagging and suddenly opening a can of whoopass, it was the timing in the NAGVA reps deciding when to uprate. Honestly, moments before FINALS are being played to remove a key player from a team will devastate the team mentally!
While I agree this is a very good preventative measure for sandbagging, it doesnt make any sense to implement it right before the final match of the tournament. The outcome will be obvious in that situation.
In the end we still took them to three in the gold medal match. Had we had ample time to adjust and practice some with our new line-up we very well could have won. The timing of pulling the setter at the gold medal match instead of early enough in the day to allow our team to make a readjustment was the primary inconvenience.
I totally agree with the timing. If the decision was made that a player is a higher rating than the previous day and is about to play a finals or maybe enyerig semi-finals, maybe it should be considered that they let that player finish the tournament in consideration.
It really depends on the situation as well. Most especially If a person showed a higher level of play. Don't we all boost our game higher for tourney play anyways. Whatever division we are.
That's NAGVA for you...it's all politics! Everyone should be used to it by now.
It's also unusual how some people that were recently downrated are getting all-star awards in their new, (lower) division. Skecthy McScketcherson!
Bottomline, as we all know, NAGVA's rating system is flawed and we just have to live with it and play to the best of our abilities!
Making the captain in charge of making sure his unrated player is playing the right level is a ridiculous demand!!!
We all view players and playing styles differently. What if I honestly believe my unrated player is BB and the raters rate him A?
What if an unrated A player is a very solid player, playing with a super solid team, consequently beating the RCs team? The RC then proceeds to re-rate this player to AA. Is this fair? I don't think so! I've seen this happen many times! It's especially difficult when the "cliques" (you know who you are) start ganging up on people and up-rating them for no apparent reason or maybe to break up a team that's threatening to them.
Let's face it. Ratings are extremely subjective.
I do agree with the timing though. That's completely unnecessary. They let him play all the way up to that point already. I'm sure he already contributed significantly to them making it to the finals. They either should have done it sooner (playoffs at the latest) or let him play the finals. Removing him from the team for the finals just lopsided the match towards the other team's favour. That too is unfair. If it was blatantly obvious that he sandbagged his skills specifically and saved it for the semis, when he all of a sudden displayed an entirely new skill set, still let him play, but fine and suspend the damn team captain/rep, or disqualify them entirely from the tourney and strip them
of any medals. But keep in mind that that too is entirely subjective and purely a judgement call. So I think it should be at least 3 team CAPTAINS of the same current rating (obviously of teams already knocked out and will not get a medal if that team was stripped of theirs) or 2 higher rates PLAYERS (not necessarily captains) that should be asked to observe and make this call given how crucial it's nature is.
Another thing, a BB player should not be allowed to re-rate another BB to A. It should be A players assessing a current BB player to A, and so on and so forth. REASON 1 : It's an easy way to eliminate your competition by unfairly sending them to a higher division. REASON 2: How does one rate another player to BB when their own skill set is only B? Perspective can precipitate bias and subjectivity. A lower range BB player will judge any player than him as A, even though the reality is that they really are just high BB players. :)
- CC -
Can someone also explain how a setter consistently wins the MVP award in A/AA tourneys and still hasn't been uprated? Is it because this "setter" is from SOCAL and is protected by friends?
Let's ask ourselves this question:
Is it the rating system that sucks? Or is it the people rating the players?
Post a Comment