From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue Jun 11 12:53:33 2002 Received: from woodruff.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@woodruff [137.205.192.58]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5BBrWe10526 for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:53:32 +0100 (BST) Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@agave [137.205.192.52]) by woodruff.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g5BBpHGH028917; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:51:17 +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 g5BBglQR013475 for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:42:47 +0100 (BST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g5BBglA6013474 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:42:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from woodruff.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@woodruff [137.205.192.58]) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g5BBgfQR013469 for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:42:41 +0100 (BST) Received: from aluminium.rcp.co.uk (backbone-station2.rcp.co.uk [194.154.18.66]) by woodruff.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g5BBgUGH028038 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:42:40 +0100 (BST) Received: from [194.154.28.101] by aluminium.rcp.co.uk (NTMail 7.00.0022/NT1534.00.2214606e) with ESMTP id lenffaaa for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:43:47 +0100 Received: by oldlace.rcp.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <M4X5X29J>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:43:46 +0100 Message-ID: <AEB073C179AC424CB102DF5EF17508A0D37022@NewLace> From: Andy Cotgreave <Andy.Cotgreave@RCP.co.uk> To: "'Dora Kemp'" <dak12@cam.ac.uk>, britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Cc: "Ben Ravilious (E-mail)" <ben@ravilious.net> Subject: RE: [BD] Coed Tour 2 Boston Spa Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:43:45 +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 Dora, et al, I agree with what you say. There were several good things about the tournament - particularly ample provision of food and drink pitchside. I didn't have the breakfast, but I was told that that too was good value. However, you're right, there were too many things missing. And as you say, too many of them were not "luxuries", but fundamental requirements. I hope your mail can generate some debate about this to prevent it happening again. I have been talking to some people about this recently, and have a suggestion to make to UKUltimate - For tour events (open and coed), we should have a list of fundamental requirements for a Tour event. This list shouldn't be too hard to compile. Bids are then accepted as normal, and the tour calendar created. Entry payment from teams is made DIRECT to UKUltimate. The tournament then takes place. Payment to the tournament directors is then made after the event, dependent on how many of the list of requirements are made. Two obvious advantages to the playing community are: 1. Teams always know who to send the money to. It's always going to the same place. 2. Tournament directors have a proper incentive to provide required facilities. In the current situation, mistakes are made, but there is no reason for the same mistakes not to be made again. On the downside of this, some problems may be: 1. Added admin for UKUltimate 2. How do you quantify the "fines" for missing facilities? Are missing scoreboards less of a problem than cold showers? 3. Could it possibly put off TDs from making bids for tour events? Personally, I don't think any of those disadvantages outweigh the benefits to the UK playing community. What do people think? Is this something we could implement for next year? Andy