From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Mon Oct 26 23:02:06 1998
Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA10638
	for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:50:01 GMT
Received: from epunix.biols.susx.ac.uk (root@epunix.biols.susx.ac.uk [139.184.162.2])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA10630
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:49:59 GMT
Received: from localhost (1457 bytes) by epunix.biols.susx.ac.uk
	via sendmail with P:stdio/R:acukbind/T:smtp
	(sender: <kevinbr>) (ident <kevinbr> using unix)
	id <m0zXvSY-000A7xC@epunix.biols.susx.ac.uk>
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:49:58 +0000 (GMT)
	(Smail-3.2.0.101 1997-Dec-17 #10 built 1998-Feb-1)
Message-Id: <m0zXvSY-000A7xC@epunix.biols.susx.ac.uk>
From: kevinbr@biols.susx.ac.uk (Kevin Brooks)
Subject: Hold yer horses, Lockster!
To: Wayne_Retter@watsonwyatt.co.uk
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:49:57 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
In-Reply-To: <000216C7.CE21337@watsonwyatt.co.uk> from "Wayne_Retter@watsonwyatt.co.uk" at Oct 26, 98 05:09:18 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk


BD,

Sorry for continuing to fill up your mail boxes with this shite, but
it's just been pointed out to me that my argument rests on a very dodgy
assumption: that the Scotish allocation of WUCC'99 places could be
redistributed anywhere within BUF jurisdiction. Of course, this is not
at all certain (see Scott's original message, 20/10/98). If it is not
the case, i.e. if my assumption is incorrect, then I would hate to see  
Scottish teams denied the right to play. I was certainly not advocating that
Scotland (and hence Britain) lose places allocated to them per se. The
fact that Scotland has been granted *additional* places should really be
looked at as a bonus. It's good for Scottish Ultimate. And if it's good for
Scottish Ultimate, then it's good for British Ultimate.

I suggest the best thing to do is to let it lie until we know for sure,
and I'll avoid constructing arguments based on invalid assumptions. 

So there's no need to send the boys with the Claymores round just yet,
OK? 

Locks