Tom, Barry & BD, I don't think we should support the removal of observers from the game of ultimate.
In the US the observers have two very distinct roles. First they make active line calls and flag offsides. I don't think you can make any argument that for in/out calls or offsides that " handing over responsibility for any sort of calls to a third party you take something away from the players." Quite the opposite the rules state that the person with best perspective makes the call. All too often players in the UK and elsewhere claim best perspective when they couldn't have had it, i.e. O and D players both skying for a disc and claiming that they where simultaneously looking at their feet! (The last point of the Poughkeepsie semi final in Rimini 2003, for a particularly ugly example) Having observers making active line calls means only that there is someone who's job it is to always have best perspective. It improves the flow of the game because there is no discussion about in or out. Similarly with observers flagging offside, when seven players are trying to cross the line at top speed as the disc is being pulled none off them nor the defence really know whether they where offside or not. Having an observer make this call from a position on the line cannot hurt the game. As far as I see it observers making line/offside calls can't hurt the game but only make it better, faster and played more in line with the rules. The second role of the observers in the US is to make passive calls regarding on the field incidents, fouls, picks, strips, travels etc. The crucial factor being passive calls, the initial responsibility for making the call is still with the players, if they cannot agree or take too long in making the decision then the observers are used. If the observers saw the play they make a ruling if they didn't see the play then they make no ruling. The worry, as Tom stated, is that with such a system that people will try to break/bend the rules as much as you can. I don't think that logic really works. If you are a person who wants to break/bend the rules then with no observers you ALLWAYS get away with it. You just contest the foul/travel etc. and gain an advantage. With observers at least some, if not all, of your shit calls will get overturned by the observers and repeated shit calls/fouling/dangerous play will get you/your team penalized. The question you have to ask yourself is: Is it better for you as a player/you as a spectator/the game of ultimate in general, for close games to be decided by a) three or four shit foul calls that rob the D of a great game saving block, or shit travel/pick calls rob the O of the great score? b) having an impartial third party eliminate the shit calls and let the fair/great plays stand? I'm not saying that we should be introducing observers into the UK game because I don't think we currently need them but if in the future we do use them or our national/club teams play with observers in WDFD European/Worlds events then that would be fine and I don't see a need to remove the rule. JP Oxford Ultimate __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pootle.near.me.uk/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
