From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue Oct 6 14:13:45 1998 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) id NAA28441 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 13:55:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from postcard.KSCL.COM (postcard.kscl.com [194.159.98.2]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA28424 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 13:55:43 +0100 (BST) Received: by POSTCARD.kscl.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) id <TNC43ANQ>; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 13:57:07 +0100 Message-ID: <B1CB12627F4DD2119A6F0001FA7E1EB495B6@POSTCARD.kscl.com> From: Fraser Macrae <fraser.macrae@kscl.com> To: "'britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk'" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Tour 99 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 13:57:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Sounds like a good idea, maybe with divisions/tournaments of 12 so we don't get tournaments being canceled due teams dropping out or not being able to make it. Then if some teams can't make their respective tournaments, then they'll just score less points and get relegated into a more suitable division. The same goes for the up coming teams who are keen to play to gain experience are then more likely to move up. Not all divisions would have to be the same size though, but whatever happens we will still need more tournaments.... Chris, are you taking bids for tours yet? Fraser Sneeeky's ---------- From: Wigsy [SMTP:mfix6can@fs1.art.man.ac.uk] <mailto:[SMTP:mfix6can@fs1.art.man.ac.uk]> Sent: 06 October 1998 13:00 To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk <mailto:britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Tour 99 Chri Hughes wrote: > The suggestion that was put forward that the tour was reduced to 16 teams > was suggested as part of a splitting the tour into an A and B division; with > each section having their own events. > we need to be able to cope with at least 32 teams at every event, >This then requires venues to have at least 10 pitches > and ideally twelve or more. As there is a limit to the number of sites we > can get with this number of pitches we may be forced to continue as we are > and exclude teams from the entry list of each tour or split the tour into > two halves utilising smaller venues so allowing all teams to play. Why can we not go a step further and divide ultimate into four division of eight, with promotion and relegation at the end of each season, with an open ended division at the bottom, for the teams that are getting started. Each division could have it's own co-ordinator and tournaments which would mean a greater variety of venues would be looked for, including more in the north of the country. This would concentrate ultimate playing and give teams more of a incentive to strive for. I realise at the same time that there are going to be teams would go up and down like Bolton but hopefully the chance to play in a higher division would encourage them to practise more often and with greater seriousness. Fair enough that some of the new teams might not learn as much because they aren't watching some of the best teams play but then we make sure that there are more non-tour tournaments where they can get experience. And the top teams and players would attend because after a hard fought tour I know, for example, Catch certainly enjoyed going to Ross. If people don't think that this is viable, fair enough, it is only a suggestion, but I do think that ultimate needs to take more of definite direction. Please reply asap Christian 22, JTM, Dad and Bouffant