> Entry to the finals really should not be down to the whim of a couple of > people. Particularly when it's 25% of the teams that we're talking about. It > makes a mockery of the whole qualifying process, and doesn't exactly help > lend the sport any credibility.
This is infact very true. I think we really should be trying to make a professional top to our sport and it should not be obtainable by not playing. I do have issue with those that don't want a high level to the game, if you don't want to compete then stick to the fun tournaments! But, it is also vital that we do not change the game to get our top level. Attempts to get Ultimate into the olympics have been hampered by the short sighted nature of the officals involved who can't get thier heads around the self refereeing. Now there are a few changes that could be made to the top level of the sport and I can't see any reason why you wouldn't accept these changes, unless you are cheating! There is no reason why we can not use video replays to decide whether a player is in or out (except for cost at the moment). The system which we should be using is outlined in the 9th edition of the rules under chapter 20. It states that upto six observers should be used, these are in effect the referee's. MY INTERPRETATION --> They should be arranged in a similar fashion to tenis to call the line calls (if videos are not available). They can only intervenne if a dispute can not be resolved on the pitch. On most occassions there is no need for them to act. For top level games the UKU could provide a system for approved observers and we could come up with a non-offensive term for them (as I know there would be upset people if we called them referee's). Anyway I won't carry on at the moment, but, I'd like to encourage you all to think about ways we can improve our sport. Paul. __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pootle.near.me.uk/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
