From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Fri Apr  4 15:02:49 1997
Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk
	id OAA16673; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 14:32:19 +0100 (BST)
Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id OAA16359; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 14:30:50 +0100 (BST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.7.6/8.7.3) id OAA04315; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 14:30:48 +0100
Received: from pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daemon@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk [137.205.192.19]) 
	by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA28630
	for <t.green@zetnet.co.uk>; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 00:56:06 +0100
Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk
	id AAA05976; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 00:29:09 +0100 (BST)
Received: from easynet.co.uk by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk with SMTP
	id AAA05966; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 00:29:02 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 28665 invoked from network); 1 Apr 1997 14:29:29 -0000
Received: from larry.texcel.co.uk (HELO texcel.no) (195.40.103.11)
  by kiwi.easynet.co.uk with SMTP; 1 Apr 1997 14:29:29 -0000
Received: from andrea by texcel.no (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id PAA08014; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 15:25:45 +0100
Received: from konishi by andrea (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id PAA00489; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 15:23:04 +0100
Message-ID: <33411A47.60C@texcel.no>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 15:23:03 +0100
From: Neil Travers <neil@texcel.no>
Organization: Texcel (UK) Ltd.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4m)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject: Re: rules question
References: <m0wC3Sd-000028C@wol.ra.phy.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO
Sender: owner-britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

David J.C. MacKay wrote:
> UNLESS the pick call was irrelevant to the play (e.g., the pass
>     went to *another* offensive player in another direction), in which case the
>     completed pass stands, and play resumes with a check.

I think I agreed with the rest of you mail, but I must disagree with
this.  The WFDF rules do NOT say anything about whether the pick
affected play or not.  The throw should go back even if the pick was in
a completely different direction.  Of course a lot of team will allow
the play to stand if it turns out the pick was irrelevant.


and started a new thread:
> `view A':
>         "if a player runs off the field and then back onto the
>         field, they are ineligible to receive the next pass."

The rules do not support this view at all (as you thought).  It is only
your current points of contact, or if in the air your previous and next
point of contact, that need to be considered.

The rules for this are:

404.06 Out-of-Bounds:

C. Receiving Players: Receiving players may not go out-of-bounds to make
a play on the disc. For a receiver to be considered in-bounds at the
time of gaining possession of the disc, the player's first point of
contact with the ground must be completely in-bounds. If any portion of
the first point of contact is out-of-bounds, the player is considered
out-of-bounds. 

D. Definition Player: A player is out-of-bounds whenever he is
contacting an out-of-bounds area. When a player is in the air, whether
he is in or out-of-bounds is determined by where he last contacted the
ground. 


-- 
Neil Travers - work                            <neil@texcel.no>
Texcel (UK) Ltd, Braywick House West,  Maidenhead, SL6 1DN, UK.