http://www.wfdf.org/index.php?page=rules/2007_wfdf_ultimate_rules.htm
"15.1. A goal is scored if an in-bounds player catches a legal pass and all of their first simultaneous points of contact after catching the disc are entirely within their attacking End Zone (note 13.1, 13.2). 15.3. The time at which a goal is scored is when, after the disc is caught, contact is first made with the End zone. " Taken alone, these would seem to validate your view. However, if you look at the sections noted.... "13.1. A player "catches" the disc by demonstrating sustained control of a non-spinning disc. 13.2. If the player loses control of the disc due to subsequent contact with the ground or a teammate or a legitimately positioned opposition player, the catch is deemed to have not occurred." If the catch is deemed to have not occurred, then the score must be deemed to have not occurred. At least, that's my understanding. Hope ABH On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Felix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (Forwarded message on behalf of Scott from Vision who can't post directly) > > ------------------------------------------------- > > I know I'm going to regret getting involved in this, but ah well... > > At 0:58, Rodders is out of bounds and the disc first contacts the > ground. He's already established a point of contact within bounds, > during the layout, and has subsequently rolled out. > > At 0:59, we can see the disc has fallen from his grip, whilst he's > upside down (impressive btw), although now, no part of his body is in > bounds. > > As we know, ultimate takes rules from many different sports. The fact > that we must get a point of contact in bounds after catching the disc > is taken from NCAA rules college American football (NFL demanding that > two feet be in bounds, rather than the NCAA's one). By their rules, a > player, once having established that in-bounds catch as a catch, by > having that point of contact, may then drop the ball. Granted, they > drop it/hand it to a ref to initiate a new play. > > However, our rules really aren't clear on this. *Logically*, because > he established a contact point before he was out-of-bounds, and was in > control before moving out-of-bounds, before being "ground-stripped" > (Which I too thought was a rule in the US!) after leaving the field of > play, the catch should stand. Had he had to make a further pass, you > could argue that the drop is a change of possession. But as it was in > the endzone (I assume by everyone shouting that it was a score!), no > further pass is needed, so surely an out-of-bounds drop, after having > established said in-bounds contact, is irrelevant? It's already a > score. The second that contact is made, and he has not dropped it, > it's a score, surely? That's why we can spike it/throw it etc in > celebration, immediately after catching it in-bounds. He drops it > out-of-bounds, after the catch has already been deemed valid, by our > own rules! > > Had he dropped it in bounds, it should have been a turnover. But the > rules are a bit ...meh...about it all. I think he did the right thing, > because if there's any doubt, you should always give it up, but > clearer definitions are needed. > > Not really after an argument. Just pointing out that the rules are > unclear on the matter and this might want to be addressed next time > they're up for review. > > Of course I might just not be understanding where the pitch lies! Kind > of hard to tell with only one line for perspective! :) > > --------------- > > With regards to pitch water, we (Vision) had to get our own all > weekend. No pitch that we were on, at any time during the weekend, had > tournament-supplied water. We saw the truck drive past, often empty, > but it never gave us water. Almost every team we played complained > about this, too. > > Of course the weather didn't help, but it's something you've got to > expect. Rain or shine, we still need water. The volume isn't the > issue. It's whether it's there or not that is. Every 90minutes, each > pitch should have been replenished. The fact that I didn't even SEE a > tournament water-bottle, indicates that there were too few, or people > had taken them with them. > > As has been mentioned, back-to-back games prohibit filling up bottles > between games (and unlike the previous poster, I'm not a fan of > back-to-back, when there's time for one-on-one-off, but that's an > argument for another time!). There's only so much a player can do to > keep hydrated. I think taking a large bottle (unsure of the metric > sizes to be honest, but the ones that are about 12 inches tall each) > each should be enough. In these conditions, that lasts you (usually) > 60-90 minutes. Sometimes it runs out, and you have to steal teammates > water. But there should always be sideline water. For £180, we ought > to get water almost on demand, especially when we're unable to fetch > it ourselves! > > That's my two-penneth worth. > > Cheers, > > Scott > Vision Ultimate #87 > > (BD still doesn't allow me to post messages, so hopefully this will be > forwarded accordingly!) > > > 2008/5/13 IndoorsDOC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Just in case anyone's confused, here's why rodders wanted to check up on > > it - if it had been a foul, it WOULD have been a goal. You don't have to > > directly knock the disc out of a guy's hands for it to be a strip; any > > foul that results in him letting go of the disc is enough, so if you > > trip or unbalance the guy after the catch, it could be a strip. > > > > WFDF Rules: > > 16.5.4. A defensive foul that causes the receiver or thrower to drop > > the disc after they have gained possession is a "Strip" foul. > > 16.5.4.1. If such a foul occurs and the reception would have > > otherwise been a goal, and the foul is uncontested, a goal is > > awarded. > > > > B > > > > > > > > Justin Parkhurst wrote: > > > Indeed, well spirited by Rodders in the COTD we saw. I don't fault the > > > sideline though, they are allowed to be involved in the game - indeed, > one > > > of the great things about big games are the spectators - but Rodders > knew > > > what happened, and he wasn't about to pretend it didn't simply because > > > others didn't see it happen (indeed, anyone who would have tried to 'get > > > away with it' really is in the wrong sport, in my opinion.) > > > > > > For some reason, several people on the sidelines that day were saying > 'in > > > the US that would have been a goal' > > > > > > This does not appear to be true. Both UPA rules and WFDF rules seem to > say > > > this is a turn over. Relevant rules from both are posted below: > > > > > > This is from WFDF > > > (http://www.wfdf.org/index.php?page=rules/2007_wfdf_ultimate_rules.htm) > see > > > 13.2 > > > 13. Receivers and Positioning > > > > > > 13.1. A player "catches" the disc by demonstrating sustained control > of a > > > non-spinning disc. > > > > > > > > > 13.2. If the player loses control of the disc due to subsequent > contact > > > with the ground or a teammate or a legitimately positioned opposition > > > player, the catch is deemed to have not occurred. > > > > > > > > > UPA rules (section II, sub-section O, as well as Section XI) : > > > http://www.upa.org/ultimate/rules/11th#XV > > > > > > II Definitions: > > > .. > > > O. Possession of the disc: Sustained contact with, and control of, a > > > non-spinning disc. > > > 1.. Catching a pass is equivalent to establishing possession of that > pass. > > > 2.. Loss of possession due to ground contact related to a catch > negates > > > that player's possession up to that point. > > > .. > > > XI. Scoring > > > 1.. A goal is scored when an in-bounds player catches any legal pass > in > > > the end zone of attack, and retains possession of the disc throughout > all > > > ground contact related to the catch. > > > > > > > > > -Justin > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Dan Knapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 7:55 AM > > > Subject: Re: [BD] COTD: Fire v Chevron - Rodders' layout grab > > > > > > > > > > > >> And the clip also nicely highlights why uninvolved players and the > > >> sideline hecklers should stay out of it and not get involved. You can > here > > >> people calling out and moaning about the speed of the game. > > >> > > >> Rodders made an awesome call, and had to ignore a lot of his peers to > do > > >> so. Lesson there? He is a teacher I guess... > > >> _________________________________________________________________ > > >> Win Indiana Jones prizes with Live Search > > >> http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/msnnkmgl0010000002ukm/direct/01/ > > >> __________________________________________________ > > >> BritDisc mailing list > > >> [email protected] > > >> http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > > >> Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > BritDisc mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > > > Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > BritDisc mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > > Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed > > > > __________________________________________________ > BritDisc mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed > __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed
