Remix.run Logo
ungreased0675 3 days ago

This study is about the NHL, hardly applicable to other contexts.

nickpeterson a day ago | parent | next [-]

Next time you get too many story points assigned on a sprint, cross-check your manager.

Spooky23 a day ago | parent | next [-]

I’ve kinda done this at different points. Sometimes people need a good stern talking to out of band.

crscrosaplsauc a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Spending some time in the box for 'snowing that hot-headed coworker' doesn't sound so bad.

doubled112 a day ago | parent [-]

Four minutes for roughing after you punch somebody in the face? Sign me up!

rufus_foreman a day ago | parent [-]

>> Four minutes for roughing

I've never seen a double minor for roughing. 2 minute minor or 5 minute major.

4 minute double minor is typically when someone is high sticked and they're bleeding because of it.

So yeah, give a co-worker a hand to the face and if the manager catches it you're sitting out of the sprint planning meeting for either 2 or 5 minutes depending.

bluefirebrand 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I've never seen a double minor for roughing. 2 minute minor or 5 minute major

I've seen a double minor for roughing when both players involved get the roughing minor but one player gets the double for instigating

9rx 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> if the manager catches it you're sitting out of the sprint planning meeting for either 2 or 5 minutes depending.

Going to be a lot of sore faces when this rule comes into effect.

rufus_foreman 20 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean those guys are allowed to fight back, too, it's fun to watch.

crscrosaplsauc a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How so? The study is about leadership, decision making, and risk vs reward. Is there not demonstrable (and multiple levels of) leadership within sports teams?

I'm genuinely curious if you've participated in collegiate above sports - or at maybe even High School level. I would be very surprised if someone who played or participated seriously in sports said they didn't take away lessons about leadership and decision making.

Carrok a day ago | parent [-]

I’m sure they did take away lessons. Are those lessons applicable to the real world is the salient question.

pixl97 a day ago | parent [-]

"Sports does not occur in the real world"

That's a new one for me today.

bee_rider a day ago | parent | next [-]

Rule breaking is part of the game in sports. Players will, for example, take a penalty if it is worth it. Hockey has fights, basketball has fouls as a resource that gets expended over the course of the game.

dilyevsky a day ago | parent [-]

Are you saying irl people don’t break the law or go against other conventions when they think it’s worth it?

bee_rider a day ago | parent [-]

It’s just a game, so there’s no real moral component and the stakes are much lower generally.

dilyevsky a day ago | parent [-]

I can easily make a case that professional sports at the highest level (NHL, NBA, PL, etc) are much higher stakes than most peoples' jobs at least in $ dimension

empath75 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure, but the pretense is that the game is a self contained reality and once the game is over, everyone has a life they can go on living. Tripping someone on the way to scoring a goal is _unfair_, and there is a defined penalty for it, but when the game is over, that's the end of the consequences for it.

There are, though, lots of penalties in hockey that are about not hurting or maiming (or even killing) people, and those sorts of penalties are very much not rewarded or encouraged by coaches or players.

pixl97 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean, it just seems like a false or unrealistic pretense to me.

For example while a hockey game is a 'game' what about a person making a bet on that game that now loses a bet because of the penalty actions? Or a team loses that would have won because of said penalty and does not go to the world championship. So yea, saying there is no consequences is like rejecting the premise of causality as the game doesn't live in a closed system.

empath75 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> Or a team loses that would have won because of said penalty and does not go to the world championship.

What if they lost the bet because they missed a goal because they slipped on the ice? What if they missed the goal because they blocked it? Taking a strategic penalty isn't _cheating_, it's acting within the rules of the game. The rules are _if_ you take such an action, _then_ the following consequence occurs.

It's sort of dependent on the game and the penalty, though, what the norms are. In soccer, basketball, hockey and football, strategic fouls/penalties happen all the time to prevent scoring opportunities -- holding, etc. That's not considered cheating, it's just part of the game, you trade a sure goal for a penalty.

There _are_ some actions that are considered cheating though -- think inflategate in the NFL, or stealing signs with cameras in baseball. Stuff that isn't generally caught and penalized in the game -- that's the kind of thing that most players won't do, even at the top level.

Carrok 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That's certainly one way to misinterpret what I said.

empath75 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This whole thing is based on a serious misunderstanding on the role of penalties and fouls in sports. One can take a penalty strategically, for example to stop an almost sure goal, with the consequence of whatever the penalty is. That's just part of the game, and elite (ie: NHL) players are really smart about how they do it, and _should_ be rewarded for it.

Then there are "dumb" penalties, and worse -- things that aren't penalties at all, that break "unwritten rules", and there's a whole bunch of them, like showboating, dirty shots, etc, and those won't get you the support of the team.

And then there are you, know, team rules -- if you're out there not listening to the coach, you'll absolutely get benched.