From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Mon Jun 26 12:24:39 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e5QBNAd11961 for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:23:10 +0100 (BST) Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e5QBN8w11953 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:23:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from web4303.mail.yahoo.com (web4303.mail.yahoo.com [216.115.104.195]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with SMTP id e5QBMwY06714 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:23:03 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <20000626112251.14838.qmail@web4303.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [193.131.191.2] by web4303.mail.yahoo.com; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:22:51 BST Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:22:51 +0100 (BST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?M=20J?= <mj_ultimate@yahoo.co.uk> Subject: RE: Tour III - nanny state rule and its exploitation To: tammo@freeuk.com, britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Tammo, BAF lost 9 points to Soup the year before for exactly the same reason. maybe that answers your questions about mindset. your other questions are perhaps valid and should probably be considered. mj --- Suzanne.Penfold@astrazeneca.com wrote: > In support of the BAF open team (and this is my own > opinion and not because > I am part of BAF mixed) I agree with their decision > not to play unless a > full opposing team was fielded. > There is a big difference between playing against a > team of 6 players if > they only started out with 8 and have 2 injuries, > and therefore being > spirited, and playing against a team of 6 players > because one of them didn't > get up in time (or whatever - was there actually a > more serious reason? If > so then maybe this should have been mentioned). > Its about time a team stood up and started taking > the rules seriously > (assuming that a team has the right to refuse to > play unless a full > opposition is fielded). Surely if you are in the top > 12 teams of the tour > then every game counts and this should be reflected > by the teams showing > full commitment to each and every one. Ultimate will > never be taken > seriously by outsiders if it is not taken seriously > by the players. > Imagine if a team in Euro 2000 wanted to start with > 10 men because not > enough people turned up on time? The whole thing > would be a mockery. > I think that is about all. > > Suze > BAF mixed > > -----Original Message----- > From: er2de2 [mailto:tammo@freeuk.com] > Sent: 26 June 2000 00:10 > To: BRITDISC > Subject: Tour III - nanny state rule and its > exploitation > > > Because some Deep South Mentality players were late > for their Sunday morning > game, DSM could at first field only six players. > Their opponents Blue Arse > Flies refused to start the game, citing some obscure > rule that allegedly > applied to this tournament. This allowed BAF to take > five points off DSM > before play eventually started, DSM finally having a > seventh player. Oh yes, > BAF did proceed to win the game... > > Questions: > > Where is it written that thou shalt have your full > contingent of seven > players on the line at the start of a game? And more > importantly, WHY is a > rule required? > > Is it health reasons? For World Clubs there is a > minimum squad size of 12, > given the exceptional physical demands on the > players during a six-day > tournament. Over-regulation, if you ask me, but at > least you can see the > it's-for-your-own-good nanny state reason behind it. > Southampton is a > two-day tournament, however. DSM were going to be > short of a player for > what, 10 minutes? Half an hour? Even a full game? > Shock, horror, call the > ambulance! Also, following the logic of protecting > players' health: Does > this mean Iron Man tournaments are henceforth > outlawed? And what happens if > a squad of eight loses two players due to injury? Do > they have to forfeit > their remaining games? > > Is this rule required to run the tournament > smoothly, to prevent late starts > of games, penalise teams not showing up, etc. ? Not > applicable here, after > all DSM were ready to play, on time. It's their > problem if they had to play > 6 vs. 7. > > MOST IMPORTANTLY: What kind of mindset makes Blue > Arse Flies refuse to play > an opponent, knowing that this way they can get > points for free? BAF > players, I hope you'll be thinking about your > decision, and I hope you'll > feel sorry. This was lame and un-spirited, Chris > Hughes, where were you in > all this? Yes, maybe you would have won anyway- why > didn't you >play< the > game to find out? > > > Comments welcome. > > Tammo > Playing for Chevron Action Flash > Speaking for myself > > > P.S. Yes, I know the world doesn't end because of > this episode. > > > ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie