From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Thu Oct 31 11:35:34 1996 Received: from thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk by clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP id JAA05007; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 09:33:46 GMT Received: by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk id LAA27625; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:06:44 GMT Received: from amsta.leeds.ac.uk by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk with SMTP id LAA27590; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:06:01 GMT Received: from newton.leeds.amsta (newton.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.36.64]) by amsta.leeds.ac.uk (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA23343 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:07:27 GMT Received: by newton.leeds.amsta (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA01224; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:09:42 GMT Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:09:42 GMT From: amtsjh@amsta.leeds.ac.uk (S J Hill) Message-Id: <199610301109.LAA01224@newton.leeds.amsta> To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Subject: last word X-Sun-Charset: ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Status: RO Rather than get really annoyed about this I will try to explain patiently and sympathetically... and then can I suggest that Wayne might explain the financial bit a little and then we can all go back to the constructive job of working out how to organise things for 1997... Briefly on the schedule thing: did anyone notice that the top 5 teams all had at least 13 players? Do the "fatties" at Shotgun need all those subs due to lack of fitness? I did a bleep test with one of them last year. He is "several" years older than me - he kicked my arse. Even after losing 3 players on Sunday we still had more subs than our oppenents. With all this talk of geo-teams, can I also suggest that teams start to build up in size so that we can SAFELY schedule games of a proper length. I would like to genuinely apologize to people who felt it was a bit steep. As I explained before I thought it would be OK - I was obviously wrong and will be more careful in the future. Right. 85 GBP: > > For What? Did anyone notice the rather convenient big tent that was left lying around outside the sports hall at the weekend? It was possible to go inside and purchase confectionaries, and hot drinks; and shelter from Hurricane Lily. > > No party on Saturday night... That would truly have been a materpiece of organisation. Can you enlighten me as to *how* this might have been achieved. In late October very few people want to camp... we couldn't really afford the B&B for 28 people and so stayed with one of our team's parents. They were extremely kind and generous - but I fear that asking them to put up the other 15 teams would have been going too far. > > Also why should we pay £85 for no Saturday Breakfast? > > Take > > out £10 for the BUF tax, and that leaves £75 per team, from 16 teams. A > > quick > > bit of arithmetic reveals that this is £1200. Where did it all go? You > > can't > > tell me that pitch hire and prizes cost that much? 12 GBP BUF tax. Some subsidy of the SE Regionals in a (possibly unfair on the finalists) attempt to make the Regionals more accessible to the new teams in that region. Have you seen my phone bill? Can I also point out that you were in the cheapest regional? Also - we made the (apparently foolish) assumption that people would turn up to Nationals with relatively big squads - of the order of 14 - so that 85 quid wouldn't actually turn out to be that much. Finally, I think you may get something back from this. With all the *last minute WORK* involved in the womens tourney we were able to bring in some extra money... this can hence be used to offset the cost of the Open tourney a little. > >I know that £85 is not > > alot > > to some people, but for a bunch of students, 2 tournaments in 2 week-ends > > is > > not only a lot of time, but a lot of money as well. I don't mind if we are > > paying that much money for some worthy cause to promote all British > > Ultimate, > > but if that is the case, what is it? Sorry - but I'm going to lose my rag now. The whole bloody reason regionals and finals happen at this time of year is so that students can go and feel part of the whole thing. I am a student - and so are many of the members of my team. We enter all the outdoor tournaments. We appreciate how much it costs to put on a tournament - esp. outside the cushy world of student-ville where so many things come for free. (Eg Soton Outdoors where pitches do not to be paid for/ Exeter where pitches do not need to paid for.) After bending over backwards on behalf of the student population to have this thrown back I find a little hard to swallow. I suspect that this will also encite rage from Wayne who will probably let everyone in on the secret of finances... and then you may discover that the profit made by LayoutDreams as they ran SE and Finals was ALMOST CERTAINLY LESS THAN THAT MADE BY a) the lovely DOUBLE LOCKS TOURNEY (SW REG) b) the very charming CHEVRON/CATCH joint-effort (N&M REG) .... I will ignore the bit about spirit - its been gone over before. > > Oh yeah, I love to run around a pitch marked out by 4 walls made of > > re-inforced > > concrete... Long may outdoors rule our lives... > > Hope you are all recovering nicely, I know I'm not, Finally you talk some sense. Sorry for getting annoyed - I know I shouldn't - but PLEASE before slagging people so openly on BritDisc try to do three things 1. think. 2. talk to them privately. 3. try to write your criticisms in a more constructive manner. (I have just broken all 3 of these rules - but will try not to in the future.) I am looking for people interested in running INDOOR NATIONALS. Have a nice day - I'm going to switch off my email for a bit. Si