From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Mon Apr 8 16:07:20 2002 Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g38F7Jd12322 for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 16:07:20 +0100 (BST) Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@agave [137.205.192.52]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g38EuZ709709; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:56:35 +0100 (BST) Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daemon@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g38ErZQR027385 for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:53:35 +0100 (BST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g38ErZVJ027384 for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:53:35 +0100 (BST) Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31]) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g38ErYQR027379 for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:53:34 +0100 (BST) Received: from cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.174]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g38ErXt29782 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:53:33 +0100 (BST) Received: from modem-2281.zebra.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.134.248.233] helo=ben) by cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 16uaWS-0006wS-00 for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 15:53:32 +0100 Message-ID: <006001c1df0d$e364fda0$8774893e@ben> From: "Ben Ravilious" <ben@ravilious.net> To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> References: <80256B95.004C1143.00@birmingham.gov.uk> Subject: Re: The Tour/Relegation Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:58:39 +0100 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 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Simon, We are fully aware of the problem you have brought up and will be discussing it at a board meeting this weekend and at further meetings of the competitions committee. Your indignation is justified but there are some very simple reasons why things have turned out like this and I don't think blaming the top teams for this is particularly fair - they have done nothing wrong. An open debate on ways to allow the national competitions to grow flexibly would be most welcome this week. I believe the current UK Ultimate officers are more than capable of devising a system which fits everyones needs - however previous attempts to do this were scotched by various groups on the argument that divisionalisation of our national competitions was somehow 'unfair' on the lower teams. I would dispute your claim that the fun tournaments are in decline. I quick glance down the diary at www.ukultimate.com revealed eight unnofficial events listed already this year and I'm sure there will be more. I would think 'fun' teams fixation with entering inappropriate Tour events is more of a problem though I accept there is a need to organise the lower end of the tour better. Watch this space.... Ben UK Ultimate ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simon Statham" <Simon_Statham@birmingham.gov.uk> To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Sent: 08 April 2002 14:54 Subject: The Tour/Relegation > Carrying on from a debate that was raging a few weeks ago about the future of > the Tour etc., with the possibilities of having an upper and lower tier etc. At > the time I didn't really have an opinion, I thought it was all going ok. > > But now I read that there are 48 teams entered in Tour 1 and that it is likely > that there will have to be relegation of some of the bottom teams because Tour 2 > and Tour 3 can't accommodate this number of teams, or that more than 48 teams > wanted to enter so the others are given a chance in the other Tours. I have to > ask what happens to the teams who are relegated from Tour 1? When and where do > they get to play their Ulitimate over the summer? > > I am sure that I am not alone in noticing the decline in the number of 'fun' or > non-official tournaments being hosted over the summer, what with the Tour and > the Mixed Tour running every 2nd weekend. People don't seem to want to play 3 > weekends in a row, so the weekeds between official tournaments are not used for > non-official events. So, if a team gets relegated from Tour 1 and they don't > have enough girls to play in the Mixed Tour (and we know there are a distinct > lack of girls, seeing as everyone fights to pick-up more girls the days before > the tournaments!), they won't get to play again until Tour 4 in late July! This > just seems crazy to me. > > If the Tour is so popular, why can't 2 tournaments be held on the same weekends > over the summer, having a top tier (top 32 or so teams?) and a bottom tier (the > rest). There could be promotion/relegation between the tournaments, but at > least if you get relegated you just go to the other tournament the next month, > and are not just excluded. This will provide more tournaments for teams to go > to in the year, encourage newer teams and players to come to the Tour, provide > some genuine incentive for lower teams to do well and improve as well as giving > all teams a truer picture of where they stand in the national rankings > (especially if they're not in the top 16). > > I obviously raise this from a partly selfish point of view as Slipdisc are one > of those teams who don't have enough girls to play in the Mixed Tour, so we rely > on the open Tour events as pretty much the only tournaments we can get to April > to July. This year we will have a 1st and 2nd team, the 1st team will be ok but > the 2nd team could well be fighting down in these relegation places. If they do > get relegated we'll have around 30 players and only able to enter 1 team, so > half our sqaud will have to stay at home. > > Something needs to be done if there are that many teams out there wanting to > play in competitive events. I don't believe it is too late to do this this > summer, if the venues can be found, after Tour 1 cut off at the top 24 or 32 > teams and run another tournament for the lower teams. Or would this mean less > profit for TDs? The "I'm alright, Jack" attitude of the top teams has got to > change for the benefit of the rest of us or nothing will have changed at all in > the way that the game is run in this Country. > > Si > (Slipdisc) > > > > > ********************************************************************** > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they > are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify > the system manager. > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by > MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. > > www.mimesweeper.com > ********************************************************************** >