From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Sun Dec 10 21:07:00 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id eBAL3vO27646
	for britdisc-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 21:03:57 GMT
Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id eBAL3t827635
	for <britdisc-real@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 21:03:55 GMT
Received: from bodum.sout.netline.net.uk (bodum.sout.netline.net.uk [213.40.2.23])
	by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id eBAL3sY00116
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 21:03:54 GMT
Received: from [213.40.9.115] (helo=desai)
	by bodum.sout.netline.net.uk with smtp (Exim 3.13 #2)
	id 145DdA-0000rj-00; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 21:03:36 +0000
Message-ID: <003501c06330$75e81d20$730928d5@desai>
Reply-To: "rjdesai" <theraj@supaman.com>
From: "rjdesai" <theraj@supaman.com>
To: <student-ultimate@egroups.com>, <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: Midland's Student Qualifier: GBH Decision
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 21:08:47 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0032_01C062ED.632F7680"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C062ED.632F7680
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi All,
As Captain of GBH - I'd like to get the first word in on the decision =
not to allow GBH to qualify for nationals.
The decision was made just prior to the final (GBH v. Ow! 1) due to one =
(of nine) of my players being classified as not sufficiently 'full time' =
a student to be elligible to take part thus disqualifying the entire =
team from nationals.
This we feel is a totally unfair decision for numerous reasons.
Firstly, the player in question is a beginner of this academic term and =
played (in our key games) a maximum of a couple of points . He therefore =
made no difference what so ever to us qualifying.
Secondly,  this issue was raised only once we had displaced Bears 1 =
(Sunday morning), thereby preventing them from qualifying, and beaten =
Mwnci See 1, for a place in the final, if it had been raised earlier we =
would of course have removed our "part time" student (which would have =
made no difference to the result) immediately  and we would have been =
elligible to qualify. We felt the issue was raised not on grounds of =
fairness, as any team playing us would have seen the player in question =
was there more to watch then to play, but because we displaced a team =
which was expected to win.=20
We attended the tournament with the best of intentions and I can testify =
my players played with a lot of enthusiam and spirit. This decision goes =
no way to reciprocating this.
I understand the need to have a fixed rule but I can see no =
justification, in a specific case as this, for a decision to go against =
what is clearly the right and fair thing to do.=20
This is GBH s first and probably last year of student Ultimate. We =
trained hard and that paid of in Loughborough but unreasonable decisions =
such as this are what demoralise new teams and in no way help the =
development of the sport.=20
I think further discussion of this issue is in order before a decision =
is made.=20
Also, in future when new teams such as our own enter clarification =
should be given on such points and should not have to be especially =
sought since as shown here; how were we supposed to know a part time =
student is not a student in the eyes of student ulitimate? - the onus =
should be on those in the game to help new sides not for them to =
disqualify them on an obscure technicality as here.
I hope the decision will be reversed in light of this.
Yours,

Raj
GBH / GB Junior

------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C062ED.632F7680
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Hi All,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">As Captain of GBH - I'd like to get =
the first=20
word in on the decision not to allow GBH to qualify for=20
nationals.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">The decision was made just prior to =
the final=20
(GBH v. Ow! 1) due to one (of nine) of my players being classified =
as not=20
sufficiently 'full time' a student to be elligible to take part=20
thus disqualifying the entire team from nationals.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">This we feel is a totally unfair =
decision for=20
numerous reasons.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Firstly, the player in question is a =
beginner=20
of this academic term and played (in our key games) a maximum of a =
couple=20
of points . He therefore made no difference what so ever to us=20
qualifying.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Secondly,  this issue was =
raised only=20
once we had displaced Bears 1 (Sunday morning), thereby preventing them =
from=20
qualifying, and beaten Mwnci See 1, for a place in the final, if it had =
been=20
raised earlier we would of course have removed our "part time" student =
(which=20
would have made no difference to the result) immediately  and =
we would=20
have been elligible to qualify. We felt the issue was raised not on =
grounds of=20
fairness, as any team playing us would have seen the player in =
question was=20
there more to watch then to play, but because we displaced a team =
which was=20
expected to win. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">We attended the tournament with the =
best of=20
intentions and I can testify my players played with a lot of =
enthusiam and=20
spirit. This decision goes no way to reciprocating this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">I understand the need to have a =
fixed=20
rule but I can see no justification, in a specific case as this, for a =
decision=20
to go against what is clearly the right and fair thing to =
do</FONT><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman">. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">This is GBH s first and probably =
last year of=20
student Ultimate. We trained hard and that paid of in=20
Loughborough but unreasonable decisions such as this are what =
demoralise=20
new teams and in no way help the development of the =
sport. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">I think further discussion =
of this=20
issue is in order before a decision is made. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Also, in future when new teams such =
as our=20
own</FONT> <FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">enter =
clarification should be=20
given on such points and should not have to be especially =
sought since=20
as shown here; how were we supposed to know a part time student is not a =
student=20
in the eyes of student ulitimate? - the onus should be on those in the =
game to=20
help new sides not for them to disqualify them on an obscure =
technicality as=20
here.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">I hope the decision will be =
reversed in=20
light of this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Yours,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Raj</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">GBH / GB =
Junior</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C062ED.632F7680--