From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Mon Jun 26 14:08:20 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e5QD7cX10503
for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:07:38 +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 e5QD7Yw10491
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:07:34 +0100 (BST)
Received: from congo.cherwell.com (mailhost.cherwell.com [193.82.249.202])
by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e5QD7JY25615
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:07:20 +0100 (BST)
Received: from mann ([193.82.249.243]) by congo.cherwell.com
(Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-61953U100L100S0V35)
with SMTP id com for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>;
Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:07:06 +0100
Message-ID: <046001bfdf6f$6e1c1000$f3f952c1@cherwell.com>
Reply-To: "Paul Meaney" <p.meaney@familygenetix.com>
From: "Paul Meaney" <p.meaney@cherwell.com>
To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
References: <20000626112251.14838.qmail@web4303.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Tour III - nanny state rule and its exploitation
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:07:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
> BAF lost 9 points to Soup the year before for exactly
> the same reason. maybe that answers your questions
> about mindset.
> > 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
Britdisc and all,
As vice captain of SOUP at the time the BAF incident occurred , it
was my call and my decision to invoke the no show/ take points rule (which
WAS written down somewhere, as both myself and Chris Hughes were aware of
it). This was done with full consent of the SOUP captain. The matter was
discussed with Chris Hughes and here is what happened (I'm sure Chris will
either support or refute this: )
At tour III in Edinburgh, the sunday morning game was a vital (for SOUP)
cross over game against BAF. After a poor performance on the saturday, SOUP
were warmed up, on the line and ready to play the 9:00 am game. BAF could
not field the required number of players and could offer no valid reason (eg
injury) why their team was not present on time.
It was felt that BAF were not offering consideration to their opponents
in such an important game. In speaking with Chris Huges he offered to play
sixes. Given the importance and nature of the crossover game we were
playing, it was felt that BAF had an obligation to field a full team, so the
offer was declined. BAF conceded to this and after an agreement on the time,
BAF proceeded to use up all their available time outs. When this was
finished a second time agreement was reached and SOUP proceeded to take a
point a minute. When all was said and done, I think we went into the game
either 9 or 10 nil up, and proceeded to trade for the remainder of the game.
If both teams had been there in their entirety from the beginning it would
have been a cracking game, and one that all players there agreed was
resolved in an unfortunate manner.
Can I say for the record that BAF accepted the points penalty with
spirit and it's fair to say they got their own back on SOUP in later
tournaments. But all games against BAF were belters!
re: Arams point,
I have seen this done before - in a standard pool game between Village
People and French Connection at Rotterdam about five years ago. I have a
feeling I have seen it also in the UK, but I cannot remember the specifics.
> > feel sorry. This was lame and un-spirited, Chris
> > Hughes, where were you in
On the contrary, I feel it is unspirited if a team shows with less than
the required number of players. IMHO it shows a lack of respect and spirit
towards your opponents and the nature of the Tour. Ultimate is a seven a
side game after all, and the Tour is meant to be the flagship tournament
where top teams get proper competition played to the full understanding of
the latest WFDF rules? Or am I putting the event on a bit of a pedestal?
Paul
speaking from a getting-hazier-by-the-minute memory
--- ---
Dr Paul Meaney | e-mail: p.meaney@familygenetix.com
Software Engineer | Phone: +44 (0)1865 784800 ext. 4839
FamilyGenetix Ltd | Fax: +44 (0)1865 784801
Oxford OX4 4GA, UK | URL: http://www.cherwell.com
--- ---