From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Thu Jul 16 12:02:37 1998 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) id LAA26035 for britdisc-outgoing; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 11:48:20 +0100 (BST) Received: from amsta.leeds.ac.uk (amsta.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.36.1]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA26026 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 11:48:18 +0100 (BST) Received: from newton.leeds.amsta (newton.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.36.64]) by amsta.leeds.ac.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA09150 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 11:49:07 +0100 (BST) Received: by newton.leeds.amsta (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA09106; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 11:49:07 +0100 Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 11:49:07 +0100 From: amtsjh@amsta.leeds.ac.uk (S J Hill) Message-Id: <199807161049.LAA09106@newton.leeds.amsta> To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Subject: I love a good argument, er discussion... X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk I was only away from the computer a few hours, and then this happens.... Anyway, a couple points: 1) the 'geo'-team, as an 'official' term came along with the tour. The idea was to add some rules that would provide an incentive to be 'geo' - without unduly penalising non-geo teams. As far as I'm concerned there will never be any regulation to prevent non-geo/telephone/tart/whatever teams playing as long as I'm involved... (but then I just resigned, so thats not much help). 2) both Catch and UTI are fully seized of the need to be geo. And we continue to make efforts in that direction. I suspect that we still practiced more than many teams this winter (altho not enough). If you were wondering where we were when you were throwing hammers into the sports hall wall, we were outside in the winter sunshine. 3) This sort of discussion always throws up a point that often doesn't get noticed. Because there are very few ultimate players in Europe it is often necessary for the competition to include two different groups of players: the 'serious' ones, playing in teams like UTI and Catch; and the 'less serious' ones, playing for various other teams. (There are some players who can't make up their mind whether they are 'serious' or not...) [NB - I use the word 'serious' in a vague sense - and I'm certainly not critisising anyone.] Thing is (and I've been struggling with this point for the last couple of years whilst trying to make the tour work for everyone) - that these different groups of players have very different aspirations. I have no doubt that many 'less serious' players are not particularly impressed my some of the on-field antics of Catch/UTI/etc players. While the players involved accept what goes on as part of the game; even part of the fun. And we already know that the 'serious' players are often quick to deride those people who don't want to train 4 times a week (esp in the wind) and sleep with a disc under their pillow :) One of the largest problems facing us is how to keep everyone happy whilst at the same time providing opportunities for top players to get better; ambitious players to catch them up; and 'for-fun' players to have fun. And failing to address this issue properly will retard the sustainable growth of the number of players. I think the Tour as it stands has started solving some of the issues that used to bug players... esp. near the top. The challenges (on the competition front) for the next few years are a bit like this (I think): [Of course there are other issues, eg coaching, and these are also continually being looked at by various people.] 1. continue to adapt the Tour so that it works for the changing depth of strength nationwide, and helps with point (2) below, at the same time as continuing to strengthen the top-ish level. 2. improve the competition structure AROUND/OUTSIDE the tour, esp. from the perspective of teams that want to play in a more recreational manner (but will provide the players that move to a more serious level). 3. provide seperate women's competition for those women that want it, WITHOUT making the women that want to play 'Open' feel they can't anymore. I firmly believe that if we get these 3 things right then we will attract and retain more players, and the actual growth of ultiamte will take care of itself. But *more importantly*, people who like ultimate will be happy about how and where and with whom they play. After all, surely that is much more important than the slightly more abstract concepts of 'growth of the sport', and 'public awareness' which we often seem to get hung up talking about as if they are a magic cure-all for anything that didn't seem quite right at the last tourney. Ooh - I've wandered miles away from the point of the discussion - and I don't think I've been very coherent. But I did try... and I didn't flame anyone, and I didn't even make a joke at Colin's expense. I'd better do some work. Si