While its interesting to note the evolution of the football Referee, I think Jon P made a valid point we need to remember when reading it - in the US, observers were brought in because cheating started happening to a greater extent - not the other way around. The same is seen here in the football case.
Ultimate is growing, there is no doubt about that. What we really need to ask is, is Ultimate qualitatively different from other sports in its notion of Spirit and self-calling, or is it pretty much a sport like any other - where, at the highest levels, you need someone to judge differences of opinion (John McEnroe may disagree here...)? Someday money may be at stake - not just the (limited) fame from being a championship team - when winning means a bigger paycheque, can we expect spirit to prevail? - the history of Football seems to show it probably wont - indeed, what has happened in the US also shows this. As it grows, it becomes more competitive, and as that happens, people will be more and more willing to break the rules - or at least push them to a more competitive edge. It's only natural that when you play in the park you dont need to worry about this, but when you drop several thousand pounds to fly to Hawaii to compete after training for months, you are going to push the envelope more - and thats what is happening. As an example, can I bring up a past BritDisc discussion on whether you can start stalling someone when they have caught the disc and run out of bounds. The fact of the matter is, I only know competitive teams in competitive environments who do this - this interpretation of the rule (and no, I'm not accusing anyone of cheating) would not have happened if we all still played for fun in the park Similarly, discussions I've had about intentionally stepping into a cutter's way - is it allowed? is it a pick? a foul? whatever your interpretation, people are pushing the envelope with ultimate as it grows more competitive. In the US people were starting to cheat intentionally (I've had tips on how to fast count or bump the thrower without getting called on it) - and this was not because of observers, but lead to them. I'd love it if we could all be self-regulating. I'd love it if we all played with great spirit (and I value the spirit awards I've won) but the question is, will this actually happen if Ultimate continues to grow? Many of you reading this will say 'I play Ultimate because I love it and one aspect of that is loving the lack of referee' That is a great feeling, but the sad fact is, that is not why everyone plays Ultimate - they play because its a great sport - like football, basketball, tennis, and every other great sport which relies on referees. The only alternative I can see to an eventual phasing in observers is a more clear and powerful institutional regulatory force in place - that is to say, if someone cheats, you can make complaints to a body with the power to ban them from matches. Writing observers out of the rulebook does not address the problem of people starting to push the rules and, yes, break them intentionally. Otherwise, what recourse do we have but to take our disc and go home? -Justin P ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vitali, Adriano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 2:06 PM Subject: RE: [BD] SoG & observers I've been following the discussion on ED and from what I see it is not so much about whether observers are good or bad but more about where they may lead to (see the attached mail if it gets through). It's a tough call. There is little doubt a person on the sideline may have a better perspective than most people on the pitch for calling line fouls and I am sure people have experienced cases where the sideline has been called upon to help make a decision and this is fundamentally the role the observer would have if used, to give a neutral perspective when no one else can agree or doesn't know. No doubt there are cases where observers are required. I personally experienced such a game in Rimini a few years ago where a team persistently made bad calls because they didn't know the rules correctly. They bullied us throughout the game and even resorted to abuse from the sidelines. The captain even had the nerve before the game to suggest we keep it spirited! Obviously we lost in true Superfly fashion but until the game started getting out of hand we were level pegging. Had there been observers the outcome could have been different. After the game we made a complaint to the organisers and I haven't seen that team at the Paganello since, whether it's a coincidence or not I don't know! My concern is that Ultimate may end up going down the same road as football. My worry is that as things evolve over the long term the decision making is going to be placed more on the observers making the players less responsible. Start introducing money into the equation and the whole thing could snowball and before you know spirit is just a consolation prize as the fair play award is in football. Have a read through the following article I found on the UEFA website regarding football and see what you think. OK, maybe times are different but possibly something to keep in mind. Vito PS. I wouldn't have wanted to be the observer to make the call in the Poughkeepsie game in Rimini! 1891: Referees, penalties and nets There was no such thing as a penalty up until 1891. Born in England's public schools of Victorian England, a gentleman, it was assumed, would never deliberately commit a foul. Although the advent of professionalism in 1885 had served to increase the growing number of working-class men to the sport, the inclusion of the penalty, or as it was originally called "the kick of death", was more likely a consequence of increased competition and a commitment to fairness. It became one of a number of dramatic changes to the Laws of the Game in 1891. Penalties, of course, had to be awarded by someone and following a proposal from the Irish Association, the referee was allowed onto the field of play. True to its gentlemanly beginnings, disputes were originally settled by the two team captains, but, as the stakes grew, so did the number of complaints. By the time the first FA Cup and international fixture took place, two umpires, one per team, were being employed to whom each side could appeal. But it was not the ideal solution as decisions, some more favourable than others, were only arrived at following lengthy delays and several appeals. The referee, at first, stood on the touchline keeping time and was "referred" to if the umpires could not agree but that all changed in 1891. >From that date a single person with powers to send players off as well as give penalties and free kicks without listening to appeals became a permanent fixture in the game, while the two umpires were made linesman or "assistant referees" as they are called now. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > __________________________________________________ > BritDisc mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://pootle.near.me.uk/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp > __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pootle.near.me.uk/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
