From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Sat Jul  1 05:58:34 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e614vcM19667
	for britdisc-outgoing; Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:57:38 +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 e614vbe19660
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:57:37 +0100 (BST)
Received: from finch-post-12.mail.demon.net (finch-post-12.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.41])
	by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e614vbY20733
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:57:37 +0100 (BST)
Received: from cloe.demon.co.uk ([194.222.139.162])
	by finch-post-12.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
	id 138FLT-000Kc0-0C
	for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Sat, 1 Jul 2000 04:57:36 +0000
Message-ID: <R9vviBAhnXX5Ew0y@cloe.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:56:01 +0100
To: "'Britdisc'" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
From: David Whitehead <whitehead@cloe.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Catch and Nationals
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 U <S$gbUU14q3DXG3oWTriWltCzA4>
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

One easy solution to this problem that has not been mentioned is to give
Catch points for the place they really earned at Tour 2 by showing up to
the tournament.  Suppose that instead of simply refusing to play on the
given pitches, they had just attended each of their games and walked
every point.  They would have lost six straight games and would have
finished 12th, gaining 130 points for the Tour.  With this and their
usual top-4 finish at Tour 4, they would finish the Tour in the top-4
where they belong.

Don't you think it's a bit harsh to give them zero points when they
would get 130 by losing every time?  If they hadn't bothered to come to
the tournament at all, that would be another story.


I think that it would be a complete farce if Catch were not allowed to
compete for first place at Nationals.  *Everybody* knows they are one of
the top four teams, and very few people think they deserve to be
effectively disqualified for their actions.  Since we are in accord on
both of these important points, let's find a way to do the right thing.

If I had my choice, I would give them points for Tour 2 equal to those
of their lowest finish in another Tour (probably 4th place), so that
they could get seeded properly among their true peers.  But I'm sure
many of you would object to this solution, so I'm suggesting the one
above which is more in line with the rules as laid out at the start of
the year.

Dave Whitehead