From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue Jun 26 16:00:24 2001 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f5QEtbF04570 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 15:55:37 +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 f5QEtZ904522 for <britdisc-real@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 15:55:35 +0100 (BST) Received: from hotmail.com (f19.law7.hotmail.com [216.33.237.19]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f5QEtYr28918 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 15:55:34 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 07:55:28 -0700 Received: from 212.47.76.11 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:55:27 GMT X-Originating-IP: [212.47.76.11] From: "Diana Worman" <dianaworman@hotmail.com> To: hannah.easter@philips.com, britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Cc: beccahumphries@hotmail.com Subject: Womens Tour Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 15:55:27 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F19DBJWcNjOuk8cobC300016e5a@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jun 2001 14:55:28.0302 (UTC) FILETIME=[09E204E0:01C0FE50] Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Hi all, Just to echo thanks to Maria for organising the women's tour at Southampton. The participation of so many women and teams does an enormous amount to further the development of the women's game at a higher level. I have a few points which I'd like to make. These are personal and do not reflect my team, and are not intended in any way as criticism to the tournament director - who I thought put on a fantastic tournament. 1 - It was a shame that the women's games were relegated to the furthest pitches. I appreciate there may be scheduling problems, but it doesn't really promote a marganalised area of Ultimate. At the same time I'm sure you could ask why lower ranked teams are almost always consistently on the far pitches. It certainly can't be an arguement of standard of pitch because EVERY team that competes is entitled to the same quality of ground. 2 - It was in my view a real shame that the women's final was scheduled to start during the men's final. The fact we had to play on far fields was perhaps an unfortunate conflict of scheduling, but facts remain that a) very few women saw the women's final b) very few other players saw the final - (apart from a very well represented Chevvy). 3 - I'm not asking for a sympathy vote with women's ultimate. I'm saying we need to promote the sport by raising our profile and this involves encouraging both women's and co-ed games. I recently spent a year in Australia where it is standard on the Saturday evening to have a display game of womens and/or co-ed. The standard of support (from ALL players) out there is extremely high, and the game is well supported and very competitive. People actually sit down with beers to watch and cheer on! - I don't expect many players at Tour 3 could even name 4 or more of the women's teams competing. 4 - The development of the Tour is fantastic for open ultimate, but hasn't done much for women's as yet, and I think it is crucial that the women's game completes its integration into this event and gets recognition and support from all players, just the same as co-ed and juniors continue to grow. In recent years women players have done a fantastic amount to promote the sport - Tara Jewell, Laura Pearce, Mavis organisers, student women...the list goes on..and if I haven't named you - sorry!!! 5 - And my last bit of crapping on - The final, since nothing was really mentioned of it. A hotly contested game between Mavis and Bliss, with some players from both teams going to Prague. Some fantastic play, hard running, with Bliss narrowly winning. Many thanks to Mavis for a great game. Diana Bliss _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.