Fair point. My immediate reaction was "I wouldn't call that!" but on further thinking about it it would be fairer to say "Having read the new rules I wouldn't call that." What I would have done if it happened prior to the new rules I am not so sure about.
The new rules are a definite improvement in that regard as the situation you highlight is directly equivalent to a "ground strip" but was probably not played that way in many (most/all) situations. Regards, Paul Holden mailto: [email protected] [email protected] wrote: > Two people go up for a high disc and as the catcher comes down the disc is > knocked out of his hands because it hits the other player. Lots of people > call this a strip. But the defender did not foul at any point…so in the new > rules it shouldn’t be a strip but a turnover. > ------------------ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Holden <[email protected]> > > Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:41:29 > Cc: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [BD] Strip > > > Lewis, > > I don't think that there is any functional difference in the new > wording, just an attempt at simplification. > > Noting that: > > Definitions - Possession of the disc > ... > A disc in the possession of a player is considered part of that player. > ... > > And: > > 17.4. Defensive Throwing (Marking) Fouls: > 17.4.1. A Defensive Throwing Foul occurs when: > 17.4.1.1. A defensive player is illegally positioned (Section 18.1), and > there is contact with the thrower; or > 17.4.1.2. A defensive player initiates contact with the thrower, or a > part of their body was moving and contacted the thrower, prior to the > release. > > And: > > 17.5. Strip Fouls: > 17.5.1. A Strip Foul occurs when a defensive foul causes the > receiver or thrower to drop the disc after they have gained possession. > > It seems to amount to the same thing? I'm am not sure in what way the > old wording can be seen to be broader in scope than the new wording? > > > Regards, > Paul Holden mailto: [email protected] > > Lewis wrote: >> I'm going to be incredibly nerdy here but I don't care :P >> >> I've just noticed....the 2002 rules said... >> >> # D. Strip: No defensive player may touch the disc while it is in the >> possession of the thrower or receiver. If a defensive player does so, >> causing the thrower or receiver to drop the disc, the player who was in >> possession of the disc calls, "Strip." >> >> 1. The player formerly in possession of the disc regains possession at >> the point where the strip occurred and play shall resume via a check. >> 2. If a stall count was in progress as the disc was stripped, the count >> is reset to zero. >> 3. A contested strip of the receiver is treated the same as a contested >> catching foul; an uncontested strip in the end zone is a goal. >> >> >> >> New (2009) / 2008 rules say: >> >> 17.5. Strip Fouls: >> 17.5.1. A Strip Foul occurs when a defensive foul causes the receiver or >> thrower to >> drop the disc after they have gained possession. >> 17.5.2. If the reception would have otherwise been a goal, and the foul is >> uncontested, a >> goal is awarded. >> >> >> It seems that a lot of people are still playing the top rule any contact and >> the disc gets dropped = strip, but in fact it must be a defensive foul that >> causes a strip. >> >> Lewis >> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> 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
