From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Tue Aug 17 14:31:20 1999
Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA18947
	for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:29:57 +0100 (BST)
Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daffodil [137.205.192.30])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA18942
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:29:56 +0100 (BST)
Received: from nuclear.bomb.co.uk (nuclear.bomb.co.uk [198.80.124.122])
	by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA24836
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:29:54 +0100 (BST)
Received: from pow ([198.80.124.200])
	by nuclear.bomb.co.uk (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA14244
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:25:36 +0100
Message-Id: <199908171325.OAA14244@nuclear.bomb.co.uk>
X-Sender: barry@mail.endzone.co.uk
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:34:42 +0100
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
From: "Barry O'Kane" <barry@endzone.co.uk>
Subject: Re: 2000 GB Women
In-Reply-To: <l03102803b3deff189f8a@[137.205.222.1]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

At 02:01 PM 8/17/99 +0100, sammy wrote:
>
>I believe we should be planning as early as possible for the GB assault on
>the World Ultimate (national team) Championships to be held in Germany next
>year. So,without wishing for a moment to find fault with the sterling
>efforts of GB managers, selectors, coaches and trainers of past years, I
>wanted to put forward an idea for an alternative approach to national team
>selection.
>
>Might we better harness the great club level cohesion, that is mostly a
>result of lots of regular practices, by sending our best club team (plus a
>number of invited 'guests') to represent GB in Germany? I am thinking
>initially about GB Women, but the same argument might be applied to the GB
>Open squads?! I feel that the Co-ed and Masters (and Juniors) squads will
>still be best served by combining the best talent on offer across a broader
>spectrum of clubs.
>

A sound idea IMHO.  Also lets not forget the fact that next years results
will decide wether GB send a team to the World Games in Japan.  While many
people seem to be less than excited about this (particularly the 'purists'
- there have been some changes to the 'usual' rules for that competition) I
think they are being exceptionally dim-witted and insular.  This is an
unbelievably chance for Ultimate and it would be a disaster if GB weren't
involved.  I quote (from memory so it's probably not exact) "athletes will
be accorded the same responsibility, restrictions and privileges as Olympic
athletes"  - hands up anyone playing Ultimate even half seriously who
doesn't want to be part of that?  (PS the "restrictions" refare to drug
testing).

My point being that those not either playing on the club teams in question
or 'guested' should consider putting a kick-ass coed team together, and
that all of the stronger players should be coaxed out of the woodwork for
the other teams (eg masters).

Just putting my oar in...

Barry