From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Wed Apr 10 14:25:36 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 g3ADPZd09790 for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:25:35 +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 g3ADNZ724178; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:23:35 +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 g3ADG2QR019578 for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:16:02 +0100 (BST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g3ADG1Ev019577 for britdisc-outgoing; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:16:01 +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 g3ADG0QR019570 for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:16:00 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail4.messagelabs.com (mail4.messagelabs.com [212.125.75.12]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g3ADFxt18561 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:16:00 +0100 (BST) X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 24996 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2002 13:15:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ukfw1.ge.boc.com) (193.131.2.157) by server-19.tower-4.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2002 13:15:53 -0000 Received: by excgfd01.uk.gases.boc.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <24PPGZGS>; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:14:19 +0100 Message-ID: <551EC9B2A042D411AE6E0008C75B9AD701E42304@excgfd02.uk.gases.boc.com> From: "Cahill,Maria" <Maria.Cahill@uk.gases.boc.com> To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Subject: RE: TOUR and Regulation Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:14:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk On the subject of women's ultimate and geo teams. Has anyone considered the impact of geo team's on women's ultimate? Having lived both near Leeds and London since the development of geo teams in the past 18 months, my personal experience has been that it is becoming increasingly difficult for competitive women to benefit from practicing with experienced men as a result of closed practices. I understand the need for and applaud the move towards geo teams but because of the small player base of competitive women I believe it may result in a weaker GB women's team till the problem is addressed and many more women are recruited. Maria > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah Gibbons [SMTP:sargibbons@hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:41 PM > To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk > Subject: Re: TOUR and Regulation > > > > I couldn't disagree more strongly with Hussey's previous comments > concerning > the women's tour. There are a handful of exceptional female players who > can compete effectively in the upper eschelons of the open tour. However, > the majority of women who compete at this level will get less disc, less > pitch time and less opportunity to develop their skills as players. I find > > it really difficult to believe that those women who end up playing for > open > teams in the lower half of the Tour get to play as tactically a > sophisticated game, with as many opportunities to learn and improve there > skills as they would if they played for a team of experienced women in the > > Women's Tour. In terms of separation of the sport into men's ultimate and > women's ultimate, what's wrong with that? Mixed ultimate already allows us > > to compete on an equal footing, why is open so important for women? In > terms > of Ultimate as a sport, speed, agility, athleticism and height are > becoming > more important, and it's unrealistic to believe that all women can compete > > against men as athletes. They are more likely to develop their athletic > capacities playing against other women, where they will have more > responsibility on the pitch and probably more game time. > > In terms of wanting to play at a high standard, it doesn't take a genius > work out that if more women committed to playing in the women's tour > instead > of writing it off as a low grade competition, then it would be (and I > certainly wouldn't dismiss the possibility that it will still be anyway) a > > high standard event. > > As for hosting the women's tour on separate weekends, it's already been > mentioned that we have a pretty packed calender in our relatively short > outdoor season, so I doubt that this is a practical suggestion anyway. > > Finally, I think it's important to note that the nations that produce the > world's top women's teams (the US and Canada) have clearly defined and > extremely competitive women's divisions. Clearly, there are more female > players in these countries and we can't yet hope to emulate this. However, > > there are 19 teams currently entered in the first Mixed series event. > Each > team must have a minimum of 4 women to enter. That's enough for 10 > potential women's teams. I would welcome any comments or explanations as > to > why this has never happened. It's time for an honest and serious appraisal > > of women's ultimate in this country if we really want to build a platform > from which we can produce an excellent GB women's team. > > Sarah Gibbons > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > > > ********************************************************************* > This footnote confirms that this e-mail message has been scanned for > the presence of known computer viruses by the MessageLabs Virus > Control Centre. However, it is still recommended that you use > local virus scanning software to monitor for the presence of viruses. > ********************************************************************* ********************************************************************* This footnote confirms that this e-mail message has been scanned for the presence of known computer viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. However, it is still recommended that you use local virus scanning software to monitor for the presence of viruses. *********************************************************************