From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Fri Apr  6 15:25:45 2001
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f36EKKZ00719
	for britdisc-outgoing; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:20:20 +0100 (BST)
Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f36EKGT00711
	for <britdisc-real@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:20:17 +0100 (BST)
Received: from mailgw.chelt.ac.uk (mailgw.chelt.ac.uk [194.81.184.203])
	by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f36EKGW01651
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:20:16 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exchange.chelt.ac.uk (unverified) by mailgw.chelt.ac.uk
 (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id <Tc251b8cb52c0930c5f@mailgw.chelt.ac.uk>;
 Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:16:20 +0100
Received: by exchange.chelt.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
	id <2H2BT5CH>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:15:36 +0100
Message-ID: <E8E2FD6D7B77D411A768009027E01DB301E191D9@exchange.chelt.ac.uk>
From: "HUGHES, Chris" <CHughes@chelt.ac.uk>
To: "'rob.mitchell@man.ac.uk'" <rob.mitchell@man.ac.uk>,
   "BritDisc (E-mail)" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Rescheduling of Tour 1
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:15:28 +0100 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

Rob (and I'm sure others)

Later in the year was considered, but was discounted for a number of reasons
at this stage - yes there is a number of free weekends later in the year,
but this is why we are not using them - yet.
1. Adam has an opportunity to proceed with two weeks time - we were aware
that this may clash with people not returning from Rimini in time, however
it is a lot easier, and less costly to attempt to organise the event quickly
while we still have a window of opportunity.
2. The reason behind attempting such a rapid turnaround was partially to do
with the fact that there is no guarantee that this event will take place in
two weekends time, and then we will have to reschedule in the summer.
3. Why keep the summer free? - since the F&M crisis is continuing I fully
expect that we may need some of the later summer weekends to recover other
tour events. All the other events are on the edge of large tracts of
farmland, and are equally susceptible as Bristol to being called off and
postponed, unless of course the government comes up with a more successful
plan than killing everything in sight with more than 3 legs.

My apologies but unless the F&M crisis is brought to bear, then we are
likely to face a very unpredictable year. May I suggest that all players
check the britdisc archives, the buf website, or the TD for each event to
ensure that play is taking place before you travel.

Chris

DoC

-----Original Message-----
From: rob.mitchell@man.ac.uk [mailto:rob.mitchell@man.ac.uk]
Sent: 06 April 2001 10:25
To: BritDisc (E-mail)
Subject: Rescheduling of Tour 1


Thanks to Adam, Matt and Chris for keeping us informed and for reacting
quickly and sensibly regarding arrangements for this weekend.

However, Chevron would like to ask, in humble, non-accusatory tones, why the
need to reschedule the event to the 21st/22nd April? Chris rightly places
importance on scheduling events as far in advance as possible, but this
rescheduling gives us 2 weeks' notice of one of the key tournaments of the
year. I'm sure this will affect many teams. Chevron, for example, work and
train hard as a squad and were well prepared for this weekend, when we would
have fielded 15 or 16 players. For 21st/22nd April it looks like we'll
manage 7 or 8.

There is a danger of devaluing the tournament and, for some teams, affecting
their final placing in the Tour. Meanwhile as I look at the BUF Diary, there
is a very large August and September-shaped hole. I understand that
decisions were (rightly) made very quickly yesterday, but was any
consideration given to rescheduling the event to later in the year?

Rob
Chevron