[Paper_or_Plastic]

I was just brushing up on the PSP rulebook. One thing I didn't find was the clarification on what actually gets you penalized for un obvious hits. I didn't see anywhere that defined what you get penalized for playing on with a non obvious hit or if you even should get penalized. For example

6.8.9.1. A player determined by a referee to be “inactive” due to an unobvious hit not observed by the
referee will be eliminated. [77]


[77] If a referee observes a player receive an unobvious hit, the referee should eliminate that player
immediately without penalty. If a referee finds an unobvious hit on a player, the referee should simply
eliminate that player.

[75] If it hits the hopper and sprays on your goggles, it's obvious. If it smacks into your ear flap, it's
obvious. If it hits your facemask and sprays on your face, it's obvious. If it hits your elbow pad and that
pad is 2” thick and you don't feel it, it's still obvious – players should not wear padding so thick that
they cannot feel hits. If it grazes off the side of your hopper where you can't see the hit or it's in your
pack then it may not be obvious if the referee does not have any reason to believe you should know a
paintball hit you there.

Ok so obviously this rule has a ton of interpretation to it. My question is why do so many 1 for 1's and minors get thrown for this. For example this weekend I saw a player get hit right on his feedneck off the break while running to his bunker. He then got in his bunker and shot 4-5 shots and then I pulled him out. (people thought it should have been a penalty for playing on) I did not assess a penalty because this did not seem to be an obvious hit. I also assessed a minor for a player shooting across his body on the outermost pod (shooting left handed across his body leaning out the left side of his bunker, on the left outside pod) . He saw paint coming in and did not feel a hit and the hit could have been possibly verified considering the orientation of his body. Is this just all literally up to interpretation? I feel like a ton of minor's get called at the pro level. The way I interpret the rule is that if you receive an un obvious hit, hypothetically back of the pack diving into your bunker you should be eliminated as soon as the hit is found and if possible don't eliminate any players he might immediately shoot. I just don't see the rule that says if you play on with an unobvious hit you should be penalized. Is every-time I see a minor thrown in the PSP (usually obvious/non obvious) a player hypothetically didn't see the hit but the referee didn't believe them and assessed the penalty? The referee made the snap judgement that the player did know about the hit but tried to play stupid? This is confusing me for some reason. Its a simple answer I'm sure. A lot of hits go un noticed on the loader and I don't think its people trying to cheat 100% of the time.

Edit: Hypothetical situation. This would be in a PSP match. Player somehow has a hit on his pack that is universally deemed unobvious (or nearly universally) and plays most of the match with the hit. Its a two on one situation and a ref looks at this player closely and sees the unobvious hit near the end of the point. He should eliminate him from the game and not pull a penalty correct? It seems like with the same scenario but replace pack with hopper and it gets called for a one for one almost universally. I can understand playing on with not easily verifiable hit warrants a one for one because you should ask for a check. This elusive non obvious comes up a lot though. Pack hits aren't felt 100% of the time.

Edit 2: Is getting shot in the feedneck and then continuing to play on a non obvious hit. The player did not react any way towards the hit and it square in the front causing minimal splatter to come off. To me I made the right call. If you don't see a reaction and it is in a difficult spot like that then it should just be an elimination.

[Liam92]

I know this is a bit of an older thread, hopefully you found an answer. but what you should follow is that rather than judging if that individual actually noticed the hit, is apply a minor penalty for pack or hopper hits, and majors for everything else pretty much. This is the current psp practise.
The rule of thumb is its an objective test rather than subjective i.e. should that player 'ought to have known he was hit' is the question you ask. so obviously if he gets clipped on the outside of a loader, we wouldnt expect someone to notice this, but we would certainly expect someone to feel hits anywhere on their person.

Although rather interestingly, over here in euroland we practise that a hit anywhere including hopper and pack incurs the same penalty as a hit straight in the lense. interesting how us foreigners are able to feel pack hits so much better than americans

[simple_condolences]

Generally speaking, the practice is to ***** minor's for pack hits that we do not see happen or can not reasonably say when the hit was obtained. Also, it should be on the pods or one of the sleeves rather than the belt. The belt is considered obvious.