Rather than continue to add positive and negatives I would like to state that after the weekend I still strongly feel that we don't need referees or observers for ultimate. I really enjoyed the weekend and particularly the ability to foul the opposition and the sheer joy of doing it without being seen - then to cap it all seeing Brummie getting sent off ensured the weekend was complete :O)
With reference to referees despite them putting up with a lot of abuse (mainly by me for which I apologise) I did feel they missed far too much (not intended as a dig at them specifically) which had consequences to the outcome of points and therefore the game. It also greatly reduced the feeling of fair play and I think this is too big an issue to ignore and supports the spirit of the game ethos we currently have. With regards to how observers could work as an intermediate measure. The biggest thing which seems to support them is positive affect on the speed of the game. I think that this can be done by other means and quite easily. I agree with Felix and Brummie that the restricted time to get discs back into play was beneficial and the ability to play quickly from the wayward pull was also good however this could easily be introduced into ultimate by introducing the 7 second rule we played and by having a disc spare discs for the game which can be used rather than having to retrieve the same disc over and over again.... As for their opinions on contested calls we always have the option to send it back as though the "foul" never occurred therefore negating the need once again! Up the North.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- AstraZeneca UK Limited is a company incorporated in England and Wales with registered number: 03674842 and a registered office at 15 Stanhope Gate, London W1K 1LN. Confidentiality Notice: This message is private and may contain confidential, proprietary and legally privileged information. If you have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from your system and note that you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Any unauthorised use or disclosure of the contents of this message is not permitted and may be unlawful. Disclaimer: Email messages may be subject to delays, interception, non-delivery and unauthorised alterations. Therefore, information expressed in this message is not given or endorsed by AstraZeneca UK Limited unless otherwise notified by an authorised representative independent of this message. No contractual relationship is created by this message by any person unless specifically indicated by agreement in writing other than email. Monitoring: AstraZeneca UK Limited may monitor email traffic data and content for the purposes of the prevention and detection of crime, ensuring the security of our computer systems and checking Compliance with our Code of Conduct and Policies. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]on Behalf Of Felix Sent: 22 April 2009 12:19 To: Britdisc Subject: Re: [BD] Rylands: The Aftermath Hey, Firstly, it was great to see so many top players at the tournament, getting involved in the experiment & giving it a shot. Combining the top Uni players with many of the top Club players was also great for club-uni relations and for the the development of uni players, both in the short & long term. Thanks to the organisers for putting it together, doing the legwork both in training the refs and recruiting the players. Push Pass were filming all weekend, so that's my perspective on the event. I didn't notice all the small fouls - the jostling in the stack for example - but easily the most notable difference was the speed at which the game moved. Usually when filming, if a pull goes out of bounds then I stop recording for a few seconds whilst the players get ready to continue. Same for a lot of turnovers on hucks, call discussions, and wayward passes which end up outside the pitch. When filming this weekend, however, I'd follow the pull out of bounds, and by the time the camera was pointing at the brick mark, a ref would be dropping a disc onto it with the offense running to pick it up & play. Similarly for turnovers - most turns on hucks were put into play by the player that got the D, with a maximum of 7 seconds to get the disc, so there was no need to stop recording for a few seconds. Turns which were out the side of the pitch occasionally came back into play so fast (using a sideline ref's spare disc) that the offense got a pass off before the camera even found them. Discussions were exciting to watch as the referees stamped their authority and blew the whistle to resume the game after just a few seconds. It was fast & exciting; a totally different pace to what Ultimate feels like for those not on the pitch. It could've been the location, but I also had far more members of the public coming up & asking questions about the game after standing watching it for a while. Usually I notice these random spectators get bored and wander away during discussions, or failed hucks where the handler is walking to pick up the disc (not a bad tactic, if allowed), but because there was no significant down-time during points they would stay for an entire point, and usually a lot more. Perhaps seeing the referees on the pitch sparked their interest further, as in football that means the difference between a pickup game and an official match, and that recognition of importance transfers to watching other sports, so suddenly they realise the game means something. I interviewed a lot of players this weekend too (the best bits to be included on the upcoming DVD of course, along with the ~), and found general opinion to be against the introduction of referees, but completely for the introduction of disc-carrying officials to get the game moving quickly on turnovers / OB pulls etc. This seemed to be by far the most positive thing taken from the weekend. Personally I think that there are far too many close calls / tight decisions in a game of Ultimate for referees to be able to do an adequate job. Even if we had an American Football setup of headsetted-refs, video replays and such, somebody would still need to make the call to stop the game on a possible foul-on-the-throw turnover... an appeal then meaning consulting the video replay etc really breaks up the flow of the game, which isn't such a problem in American Football where everything resets after each play anyway. Making the decision whether to play advantage or not was a tough one at the weekend - the refs sometimes realised they had made the wrong decision to stop the play, and sometimes let it continue and got berated by the fouled player (though when I saw this happen, I agreed with the ref's decision to play advantage). Again, this is something which is very hard to judge and thus the decision could be better made by the player in the middle of it all. Another SOTG-impacting factor was the effect of never having to communicate with the opposing team - no discussions about calls, either between the people involved in the calls or the other players on the pitch talking amongst themselves about it, I think had the effect of de-humanising the opposing team, which probably results in a lack of concern about fair play. So, to take all the good bits and leave the bad bits: - officials with discs on the sidelines / on the brick mark to get play started/restarted quickly - 7-10 second limit on putting the disc back into play after a turnover - calls made by players - the option for discussion - an official putting their foot down to stop uneccessary delay on decisions These last three points are covered by the passive observer system which is currently used under the UPA ruleset. Players make their own calls, and at any point one of the players can 'go to observer' to get a final ruling, after which play resumes quickly. I believe the observers also carry discs to be put into play when one rolls out the side etc, and that they make 'active' line calls - i.e. are able to call players in/out so there is no weird 'check feet' semi-stoppage when someone on the sideline can tell quite easily. The extra active line calling by observers would be something to work up to I think, once people are accustomed to working with fully passive observers. That's all for now - starting work on the DVD so it should be out in the summer! Felix 2009/4/20 Sion Scone <[email protected]>: > Here's my thoughts on refereed ultimate as played at the Rylands this > past weekend. Take it or leave it. :-) > > Firstly, a massive thank you to everyone involved, particularly the > referees who had a difficult (maybe impossible) job, took a lot of > flak, an dealt with it all in a very professional manner. It is > obvious they had been trained, they had practiced and the tournament > had a very professional feel to it; whistle blowers, timekeepers and > scorekeepers were all there, so it was more like a world championships > than a pickup tournament. > > It was a *lot* of fun. Everyone who was there played it in a very > friendly manner; there was plenty of deliberate fouling between > friends and even people who didn't know each other, yet there was > nothing aggro going on at all. Most teams were having a good laugh at > the opportunity to play ultimate in an entirely new way, and it was > very good natured. In normal ultimate every player is a referee, so it > was nice to be able to do two things differently this weekend; 1) not > have to think about the rules for once (if you did something wrong > then the ref would blow, right?), and 2) try to gain whatever > advantages you can against a ref that you can't against another person > (i.e. cheat). If the idea of cheating sounds abhorrent then please > bear with me while I explain... > > I don't think, nor have ever thought, that fully refereed ultimate can > replace ultimate in the same manner it is played now. My objective > for the weekend was to see exactly how easy it was to cheat and get > away with it, and to find the level of contact that was acceptable to > the refs. It soon became obvious that when the disc moved quickly it > was far easier to foul on the mark without being seen; this resulted > in fouls on throws that resulted in turnovers which wouldn't have > occurred in a normal game of ultimate: advantage defence. When the > disc moved slowly (such as swings, dumps etc with few players behind > the disc) the refs had a better view of the action and even small > infractions (disc space seemed a common one) were harshly punished > compared to normal ultimate (mlu: 2 "disc space" calls = sending off; > ultimate: 2 "disc space" calls = foul, reset stall): advantage > offence. Having said that, it was far easier to get away with fouls > on the mark at the start of the count before the refs got into > position; one quick foul then step away while the player on the disc > appeals to the ref. There was a lot of appealing for decisions, a lot > more than I expected, and the refs didn't really know how to deal with > it - they were very tentative sometimes which made it difficult to > play to the whistle, as sometimes the whistle stopped play and > sometimes it didn't. Sometimes fouls, strips, etc were given when > they weren't and vice versa, but that kind of thing will probably even > out over the course of a game. The refs stalled far too slowly and let > lots of rather blatant travels (particularly changing direction on > catches) go: advantage offence. They were also far too harsh on > incidental contact, particularly on contested under cuts: again, > advantage offence. If fouling on the mark wasn't seen then breaking > the mark became quite a dangerous option; teams seemed very cagey > about breaking marks aggressively because small contact that might not > be seen by the ref, and a lot of throws resulted in turns that would > have been called back in ultimate. > > As for how the games played vs ultimate, it was quite different. The > rules for OB pulls and offsides are absolutely brilliant and should be > used in ultimate; virtually no teams were offside compared to in a > normal game of ultimate when almost every pull has someone offside on > O or D. New discs were provided whenever the disc went out of bounds, > and the O had only 7 seconds to get the disc in play following a turn, > which resulted in a lot less downtime during points, which was great > and kept the games fast. Because breaking the mark was a lot more > risky, offence was a lot more cagey and generally involved swinging > the disc a lot until a good deep threat became available. Any dodgy > throws deep usually resulted in turnovers because it was too difficult > to pull the disc down in a crowd when you're being fouled, and too > hard for the refs to see it. Its also a lot harder to get open when > someone is holding your arm :-) > > I'd like to see this become an annual event: All-Star Refereed > Ultimate. I don't think it will ever replace ultimate so you can stop > panicking, but it was a lot of fun. I would like to see the rules > become streamlined (I don't think there is a need for two types of > fouls, and a whistle should always stop play) and think they should > mimic the rules of ultimate more closely (things like holding > someone's arm while they're cutting or in the stack should be dealt > with more harshly, while minor infractions such as disc space and > double teaming needs to be made less harsh). The refs could make > their own lives easier by being harsh on anyone who argues with them, > rather than being bullied (as happened a little during the first North > v Midlands game when we spent half the time with both teams shouting > at the refs). There should also be a points cap, and the time that > the first half runs over should be taken from the second half (if > there are ten seconds on the clock when the point starts and the point > lasts 3 minutes of game time, then the second half should be 3 mins > shorter); some of the games were really long. I did enjoy the long > gap between games though, having one game off meant having a 2 1/2 hr > break, which was the kind of thing you usually only get at big > international tournaments. > > I think that having referees can stop people cheating in the same way > that they can in self-refereed ultimate, but it just opens up new ways > for those people to cheat when the ref's back is turned (3-4 refs on > one pitch can't see everything), and of course they will miss things > that happen that are blatant to both players (such as contact on the > mark or strips). Conclusion: referees should not be used in ultimate; > but refereed ultimate makes for a very enjoyable weekend. :-) Thanks > again to those who made it happen. > > Brummie > > __________________________________________________ > 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
