Upcoming Rules Changes at PT: Origins

[LinkCelestrial]

IMO it's nothing to get frustrated or complain about. What's the problem here? Rules are going to be enforced better in some games? Is that really something to complain about? It doesn't make sense to me to point out that it's unfair for un-recorded games. Sure, technically it isn't fair, but as far as I'm concerned the less cheating, unsportsmanlike conduct, ect there is the better.

Perspective, pro sports. There are instant replays reviewed by a team of refs every time a call gets sketchy. My sister has made it to Provincials soccer multiple without that luxury. There have been hand balls, thinly veiled punches to the face, tripping, and enough bad calls that the crowd threatened to riot. After multiple bad calls, a player got hit in the face with a ball, went down (obviously hurt) and the ref called a /hand ball/ on the girl who didn't  even bring her hands up to /protect her face/. Now imagine if there were cameras so they could challenge the call. But there aren't, the simple fact is the resources aren't there. If every game was recorded would it be okay to view replays? My point is it's a step forward, they can't just record everyone. Players that get recorded shouldn't bitch about it because they should have nothing to hide. (Which is the same point I make about cops.)

At the end of the day I agree that it's not really fair to un recorded players. But at the end of the day there simply isn't enough resources to do so 99% of the time so I can't really complain.

[Mattao19]

So ppl are upset by having feature matches judged properly seems odd lol I mean sure the pros are usually in them but if their opponent screws up the replay is there for them too.

Being opposed to video review is being opposed to determining a fair winner ... Patrick Chapin won that game the whole mtg community knows it but he got a game loss that is not fair to him at all. With this new rule the correct player would've won that match.

As for the fact that you have to be in a feature match to benefit from it. So? It's not like those players will abuse that benefit. They only benefit if they accidentally screw up like Chapin if they cheat or miss a trigger then they're still screwed.

[Mr_Fahrenheit]

The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.

[Mattao19]

I think the "outrage" for video is that all the players everywhere else who have played a game and their opponent did something "questionable" and by the time the judge came over there was no way to prove what had just happened.

I guess but the thing is that it's not like your opponent gains an edge and it's not like the pros in the feature matches gain an advantage being there

[LinkCelestrial]

I think the "outrage" for video is that all the players everywhere else who have played a game and their opponent did something "questionable" and by the time the judge came over there was no way to prove what had just happened.

As I already stated that's completely irrational.

[particle]

The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.

Only because they want to test it at the higher level. If they like it I can guarantee it'll apply to all filmed matches.

[Mattao19]

The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.

Only because they want to test it at the higher level. If they like it I can guarantee it'll apply to all filmed matches.

Which is great! Why should the wrong person win bc of a minor accident like Chapin? That's not fair.

[Kaylesh]

The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.

Only because they want to test it at the higher level. If they like it I can guarantee it'll apply to all filmed matches.

Which is great! Why should the wrong person win bc of a minor accident like Chapin? That's not fair.

As I understand it, the rules as written still apply. As it stands, Chapin failed to reveal.
Yeah, we could see in the video what card it was, but that shouldn't change the fact a grv was made.
If the replay is used to correct such grv's, IMHO it starts getting in a grey area, because grv's would be penalized less in the feature matches.

[Mattao19]

So you want the true winner to lose? How is that fair? It was obvious to everybody that Chapin placed the card on top of his hand him failing to reveal but the without moving his hand at all he flips the top card. He does this clearly without moving any cards so how is it fair to him that we give him a game loss?

[Mattao19]

Matteo, my thought on this would be is not everyone is as honest as he was about it, think about how many people are gifted with sleight of hand when it comes to cards? (the Humphries shuffle anyone?)

The camera would (hopefully) assist in moments like this...

Ya aren't we both arguing the same thing? I like the video review. Sure {Sleight of Hand} ppl will try it but they will get caught if they do and now there's video replay to call them on in during the game

[particle]

But this is not fair to all the people not on camera. They don't get the benefit of going back and fixing it.

[Kaylesh]

In the case of cheating, intent was already proven by camera feeds.
Yes, the winner should win, but it's a slippery slope if you start allowing sloppiness, it creates space for the true cheaters.
I don't doubt for a second Chapin's errors were genuine errors. Could he have won the game? Yeah, unless he made another error in judging his attack for example. Don't recall if there was a scenario in which his opponent could have won tbh, but it's beside the point.
Rules are there for a reason.

[Mattao19]

It's not fair to the non feature matches? What's different? They play the same game as they always do. It's not preventing them from any strategic advantage or disadvantage.

It doesn't promote sloppiness I'm sure they will set rules for it that prevent sloppiness being "rewarded"

[particle]

It's not fair to the non feature matches? What's different? They play the same game as they always do. It's not preventing them from any strategic advantage or disadvantage.

It doesn't promote sloppiness I'm sure they will set rules for it that prevent sloppiness being "rewarded"

It's not providing everyone with the same opportunity. It's not "disadvantagous" to me per se. While I want the rules to be enforced correctly at all times, what I want more, is an even playing field where everyone gets dealt the same hand (figuratively). If at any point it becomes possible where all competive matches can be reviewed, I'm all for it. But until then...

[LinkCelestrial]

It's not fair to the non feature matches? What's different? They play the same game as they always do. It's not preventing them from any strategic advantage or disadvantage.

It doesn't promote sloppiness I'm sure they will set rules for it that prevent sloppiness being "rewarded"

It's not providing everyone with the same opportunity. It's not "disadvantagous" to me per se. While I want the rules to be enforced correctly at all times, what I want more, is an even playing field where everyone gets dealt the same hand (figuratively). If at any point it becomes possible where all competive matches can be reviewed, I'm all for it. But until then...

I've already explained why this doesn't make sense to me and I'm not particularly interested in repeating myself.