From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Thu Oct 31 10:35:13 1996
Received: from thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk by clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
id JAA05099; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 09:34:40 GMT
Received: by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk
id CAA08052; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 02:42:38 GMT
Received: from violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
id CAA08035; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 02:41:36 GMT
Received: from relay-2.mail.demon.net by violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk with SMTP
id AAA15689; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 00:10:21 GMT
Received: from post.demon.co.uk ([(null)]) by relay-2.mail.demon.net id af09568;
30 Oct 96 0:06 GMT
Received: from phidelta.demon.co.uk ([158.152.248.177])
by relay-3.mail.demon.net id aa24619; 29 Oct 96 23:59 GMT
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:08:58 GMT
From: Wayne Retter <LayoutDreams@phidelta.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: LayoutDreams@phidelta.demon.co.uk
Message-Id: <3192@phidelta.demon.co.uk>
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject: Re: The nationals aftermath
X-Mailer: PCElm 1.10
Lines: 150
Sender: owner-britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
Hi all,
Here's the most important bit (which was right at the end) of what has turned
out to be a rather long message.
In response to Andy Cotgreave's:
> -anyone have any opinions on this
Yep, me (suprise!). To everybody: Make a constructive list of what you liked;
what you didn't like; what could have been better; what could have been
done, and send it to Si Hill for his Tourney_Guidelines collective.
We made a few mistakes, mostly minor (I hope). Hopefully next year will be
better - which only leaves me to tell you that unless you get off your
backsides then maybe we'll be doing it again (we have 2 sites provisionally
booked already!)
---this is where it began---
Apologies to the innocent, whose names haven't been changed, and for being a
bit picky in places, but I still ache and I've had a couple of BAD days at
work, so I DID NOT need this:
Andy "more of a whinger than Dave Murray" Cotgreave writes:
>
> (snip - some nice stuff!)
>
> However, there were a couple of things that I really thought were out of
> order,...
>
> Most teams yesterday (Sunday) had to play three consecutive games...
Well, 8 of 16, which by my reckoning is HALF of the teams
> Now, I know that long games are better than short, but expecting players to
> play over 4 hours of games without a real break is not only gruelling, but
> potentially dangerous....
Fair comment. This was discussed at length with the BUF Director of
Competitions and the final decision was that it had to be done, or else we'd
have to have shorter games than in the earlier stages (which gets a bit silly!).
It does, however make you more aware of how fit your team is, how efficient
your offense and defense is and how much time you spent drinking instead of
sleeping on Saturday night. You'll be better prepared for next time.
> This was made worse by the fact that the 'breakfast' provided at the campsite
> wasn't served until 30 minutes before games begun -not enough time to get
> anything eaten and digested....
Breakfast arrived at 7.05. I was carrying it. The only team waiting for it
to arrive were Strange Blue (they camped inside the marquee). Kenny was trying
to decide whether to eat or visit the toilet at 7.30. Where were you ?
> Also, the breakfast was a rip off. Ten pounds per team ...
Lets see, Nationals, teams of say, 13 or more (even UTI had that many!) so
thats less than ONE pound per person for as much as you can eat without being
caught! Where else at 7.30 on a Sunday for that much ?
> for the cheapest bread and jam that can be bought ...
wanna bet ? Anyway, what about the Weetabix and Kellogs cornflakes (note the
cheap brandnames)
> ...does not get appreciated.
Breakfast was available to teams that paid the EXTRA 10.00 in ADVANCE of the
tournament (so we could plan food quantities, etc) and was not in the initial
spec for the tournament. Apologies to all for Chris not including the B+B lists
in the invites BTW. Checking the receords, we don't find an advance payment for
breakfast from Chevron, so if you ate, please send me Ten Pounds, if you
didn't, stop complaining.
> Secondly, the end of tournament cermony was a real anti-climax.
Agreed. Sorry. It is worth mentioning that it would be worth having a
nonPlaying TD (or an Asst TD not in the final) to do some of the running around.
Also,
> Why Chris could not organise a proper spirit vote is beyond me...
Try running a tournament and playing in a team that is determined to get
to and win (if possible) the Final and putting 100 per cent into either or
both of these objectives
> (for those who weren't there, none of the organisers ...
all 2 of us (maybe that's our problem)
>...thought to collect spirit votes....
and nobody volunteered
> and the trophy was given to Stan by default, it seems).
actually, the Spirit trophy was given to Stan because they deserved it, which
Si "the buck stops here" Hill asked as many people as possible around the pitch
during the Final and they seemed to agree. Sorry he didn't ask you.
> ... my point is that this is one of the most important aspects of the game,
> especially for the teams who don't get into the top 5 or 6;
why the "especially...". Sure, top 5/6 have the best chances of qualification
for WUCC, but does this mean that they shouldn't be awarded Spirit because they
already have one prize?
> it angered me that this aspect of the tournament was ignored.
and it angered me that we don't have many scores (except Strange Blue) on our
scoresheets, especially after Chris asked you all so nicely in the
Captains Meeting to fill in the sheets on the board. So we can't even help
David from Strange Blue with his ranking program.
> This *was* the National Finals after all, so every aspect of our sport should
> be afforded the utmost respect
So why should Chris and I work so hard to organise it in less than 3 months, to
find that we were the only option that could guarantee a venue and then be told
that it's a rip off and you're unhappy with it ? We could have just NOT had a
Nationals, couldn't we ?
> - including the women's tournament, which Chris also didn't seem to care
> about, either.
We have the utmost respect for the Women who managed to pull this event
together in about 3 weeks (as far as we know). The deal was that there would
be a quantity of women who wanted to play a tournament at Nationals so
could they please have some pitches and maybe a trophy. I believe it was
originally planned for 3 or 4 teams, at one point the rumours suggested 7 or 8,
in the end there were 4 or 5. It was not that we didn't care, it was more that
we had no hand in the organisation of this particular event.
(PS to Liz, if she or Jon have read this far: the Funky Nuns say "thanks!")
> These were my gripes about an otherwise okay tournament, and asking around
> briefly, I know that there were a good number of people who agreed with me
So why haven't they told us ?
Thanks to all the people that said they'd enjoyed it and made constructive
criticism. I'll try to remember it for next time I (help) run *any* tournament.
(***this bit's right at the beginning)
> Looking forward to indoors,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Wrong Sig. to use when discussing the Outdoor
Nationals!
Wayne
_____________________________________________________________________________
Chris Hughes layoutDREAMS Wayne Retter
+44/0-151-260-1840 LayoutDreams@phidelta.demon.co.uk +44/0-1737-242109