From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Mon Feb 26 16:27:08 2001 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id f1QGOXF17684 for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:24:33 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 f1QGOWh17672 for <britdisc-real@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:24:32 GMT Received: from judy.ic.ac.uk (judy.ic.ac.uk [155.198.5.28]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f1QGOUF04288 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:24:31 GMT Received: from juliet.ic.ac.uk ([155.198.5.4]) by judy.ic.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 14XQRg-00010K-00 for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:24:20 +0000 Received: from icex6.cc.ic.ac.uk ([155.198.3.6]) by juliet.ic.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 14XQRx-0000BS-00 for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:24:37 +0000 Received: from peter (dialup-10-5.net.ic.ac.uk [155.198.8.149]) by icex6.cc.ic.ac.uk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id CGZR6LHK; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:24:19 -0000 Message-ID: <010101c0a00f$e2173820$9408c69b@peter> From: "Jonathan Palmer" <jonathan.palmer@ic.ac.uk> To: "BritDisc" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> References: <E14VwYk-0002TU-00@virgo.cus.cam.ac.uk> <011101c09ce0$21d098e0$9e08c69b@peter> <002501c09d26$bbf3a980$510c883e@ben> Subject: Re: Students & the Tour (was Tour Dates etc.) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:43:37 -0000 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 Ben, > One of the options with Chris Hughes' plan for dividing the Tour (which we > shelved due to lack of attendees at the AGM) is to vary the prices across > the divisions. This would mean that the generally non-student top division > would pay more for a 'superior experience' and the lower divisions > (*generally* where *most* of the student teams fit) would get the usual > bargain events we're all used to. Please spare me the "how well the > University of Central Studentshire did" rant - yes there are some great > student outdoor teams around but they will *never* threaten the top eight > teams just as there are no uni soccer teams in the premiership (bad analogy > but you get the point) If you are talking about individual uni teams then I agree with *never*, but if you look at teams that are student teams then I disagree. Look at teams like DSM, the SE student All stars more than held their own against Hammerage a few weeks ago etc. Surely as ultimate grows and more and more people learn to play at a junior level more and more students will be able to cut it at the top level. The idea of following the American system and splitting of the student players I think is a bad one. To force the top players into a 3/4 year probationary system before being allowed to play (dare is say it) Serious ultimate would be very bad for British ultimate. The top student players need the experience of the tour/European-World Clubs/GB to improve their game. We need a system were they can do that whilst continuing to support their student teams. Cheers Jon