From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Fri Mar 12 12:14:08 1999 Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA22881 for britdisc-outgoing; Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:13:02 GMT Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daffodil [137.205.192.30]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA22851 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:12:58 GMT Received: from exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk (exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk [194.66.194.6]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA01150 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:12:57 GMT Received: by exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) id <GXBKAQS4>; Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:12:37 -0000 Message-ID: <8102C4585310D211858D0060B01A41337ED343@exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk> From: "HUGHES, Chris" <CHughes@chelt.ac.uk> To: "'Dave Neilson'" <D.P.Neilson@warwick.ac.uk>, britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Cc: "'Me'" <IMCEAMS-Parklan_PARKEXCH_CHughes@chelt.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Fw: drop the pull Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:12:32 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk My feeling is with Sam's - that this pushes the balance of power further to the receiving team without giving the team that pulls any pay back. I appreciate the sentiments behind the whole concept; try and prevent that dead space between the time of the pull and a receiver ambling to the disc allowing the offensive team to set up its play. But I think the turnover rule as suggested by Sam is a bit harsh. I preferred the 'rumoured' rule that was going to be enforced; that if the pull landed in, and stayed in the pitch / endzone - then it had to be played from where it landed / caught, and could not be walked forward to the endzone line. This would encourage teams to put good pulls that land inbounds, and stay inbounds - i.e. did not roll out. Whilst encouraging teams to catch the disc and play. One assumes that if you make a mess of a catch and drop it, then a good defence would be on you by the time you pick it up! Chris Hughes (expressing his opinions as an individual) -----Original Message----- From: Dave Neilson [SMTP:D.P.Neilson@warwick.ac.uk] Sent: 12 March 1999 09:36 To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Subject: Re: Fw: drop the pull I think it is another watering down of what the more mature players know as REAL Ultimate - just to pander to the weaker new players who cannot catch (let alone throw). Some history... Have you ever noticed the chorus of "TWO HANDS!" when someone drops? This is a throwback to when they first weakened the rules to allow players to catch with both hands - up until then, you HAD TO catch with ONE hand and the habit was hard to break. When they changed the rules, teams adopted the strategy of verbal reinforcement whenever the disc was in the air and heaven help any player who didn't heed the reminder ... the tradition continues! Going back to the 'pull' rules - they ought to insist that if the disc lands in the receiving team's endzone, then they immediately lose possession, thus forcing that team to make the catch. Pulls short of the endzone can be left to land without penalty. This would properly reward decent pulls and add excitement to the start of every point! Just some Friday morning thoughts ... Cheers, Sam. Tammo writes: >Still, as someone who has gone through the humiliating experience before, >I'd miss the thrill that comes with every pull heading my way... >I can only agree with Si, the old rule should stay, not just for the comedy >value of seeing someone else screw up. > >After all, mistakes must be punished. and Si Hill wrote: >>2. I would like to formally (how do I do that?) ask the BUF to go back to >>the WFDF Ultimate committee to re-instate the dropped-pull rule. This is a >>brilliant rule. And I speak as a player who is usually on the wrong-end of >>it!