Just a nobody from nowhere here so this post may not hold much clout... My family hasn't even got to play the game for almost a year. I've read this whole thing from an outsiders point of view. Good Judge/Bad Judge Poke Parent or not... Why aren't the Judges in General getting any praise for giving their time so you people and your family can enjoy the game of Pokemon? Even if they don't know a darn thing about the game -- they are still there, at least pitching in helping the Organizers. Without someone stepping in and tossing their hat in the ring... You don't play! I understand the big business, the worlds trips, yadda-yadda-yadda... But look at this card game for what it is - a good time for family and friends.
Take the NFL out of here --- and insert the teenage umpire doing his/her thing at your kids little league game... The umpire is out there in 90+ degree heat with all the gear on, and yes alot of calls they might make can be described as BRUTAL... There always has to be one Parent in the crowd who is constantly showing his rear and yelling about every little call, especially when it's against their own.... admit it... You want to pop him in the chops! Instead of giving the kid the props for sweating buckets so his/her kid can play a game... they got to ruin the show....
Bottom line.... Show repect or pony up and volunteer yourself.... Think about it...
I think you missed something. There is plenty of props given to the staff. By your logic, it would be perfectly acceptable for Pokemon to market their product like this: "Come buy our cards! We do have organized play...and, well, there are rules, but we don't necessarily have to follow them, do we? Just remember, this IS a family game (for kids), so don't take your time or money (that you give us) seriously!" I mean, really, you completely ignore about half of the player base by saying "I dunerstand the big business, the worlds trips, yadda-yadda." Call me crazy, but if THOSE players that DO care about that stuff didn't play, I doubt there would be any kind of support because there would be NO pressure for it, everyone would be content to "play for fun." I have a two year old. I play with him for fun. When I want a good competition, I play pokemon. Some of us thrive on that competition. For you to imply that we should not be allowed to have it because "its a game?" I find THAT insulting.
I'll say again, players don't play so judges can judge, judges judge so players can play. If a judge doesn't know the rules, then the players aren't getting to play (farily). If there is a HORRIBLE ump, yes, something SHOULD be done about it. Bringing the NFL back into it, I remember watching a game a few years ago where the game was stopped for like 20 minutes while the officials consulted the "official rules committee" or whatever. The gist of it was that the refs didn't know what to do, they got clarification, then proceeded. That is all rokman is asking. Similarly, lets look at a couple of horrible calls we have seen in the NFL and think about how negatively they affected the game:
The tuck rule. Only cost Oakland the AFC championship, no big deal, right? The Raiders and Raider fans should be thankful they had a reffing staff, right? Oh, and they should remember, its just a game. So, what was the consequences of that? Did they just say "be happy you had refs, we stand by them?" Of course not. They went back and clearly redefined the rules as to try and ensure it never happened again.
The botched coin between Detroit and Pittsburgh on thanksgiving. Jerome Bettis: "Heads." Ref:"You call tails, its heads, Detroit, what do you want to do?" So, its no big deal, right? Its just a game, be thankful they had refs, right?
So, if Pokemon let instances of that caliber go unchecked, it should be ok, right? A judge is defined as: a person who is appointed to determine the result of contests or competitions. So, are we, the players, supposed to believe that it is OK to have the judges, the people determining the outcome, have no clue about the rules or the cards in the game? That's like the equivalent of say "It doesn't matter if the ref knows what a first down is" or "Well, the ump doesn't have to know where the strike zone is" or "It doesn't matter the ball came out of his hand after the buzzer, the ref didn't know that he had to shoot before the buzzer." That premise is ridiculous!
Another common theme I see in here is implying that the players are "bad" or that they don't know the rules. Fair enough. But, when is the last time we asked a judge this: "JUDGE!!! Hey, so, I'm obviously playing the mirror. He's collectored for two Garchomps and a Dragonite. As you can see, I have a pretty bad hand, what should my strategy be?" THAT is what the player is worried about. The judges have the luxury of not having to deal with the thought process of playing the game. As such, I think it is 100% the judges responsibility to know the rules...and yes, the players SHOULD, though I don't think it is a necessity, just like I think judges SHOULD understand strategy, but shouldn't it is a necessity.
I think its obvious that Rokman isn't attacking all judges, yet most seemed to be offended. Judges, remember this: its the PLAYERS experiences that determine how well you judge, not YOUR opinion of how well you THINK you did. If you feel like you've been attacked, its probably warranted. If you have received nothing but praise and its OBVIOUS he isn't talking to you, quit acting like there aren't bad judges out there. We all know there are and we all know its part of the game. Just as much as ya'll have to right to blindly defend them, he has the right to complain about them.
And, for what its worth (and yes, it does ALWAYS happen), go read some reports coming from States, there are a lot of disgruntled players. Like I said, THAT is how players perceive judges, regardless of how judges feel about themselves.
