From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Wed Sep 8 19:47:45 1999 Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA10281 for britdisc-outgoing; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 19:46:00 +0100 (BST) Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (snowdrop [137.205.192.31]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA10263 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 19:45:57 +0100 (BST) Received: from finch-post-11.mail.demon.net (finch-post-11.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.39]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA20479 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 19:45:56 +0100 (BST) Received: from phidelta.demon.co.uk ([158.152.248.177]) by finch-post-11.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 11Omj7-000PEb-0B for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 18:45:50 +0000 Message-ID: <AsyyzDAg+Z13EwfI@phidelta.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 00:28:32 +0100 To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk From: Wayne Retter <postmaster@phidelta.demon.co.uk> Reply-To: Wayne Retter <wayne@phidelta.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: nationals References: <009601bef958$d344eae0$3bef31d4@simon> In-Reply-To: <009601bef958$d344eae0$3bef31d4@simon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S <pjZRgFWDsQK5ViyP$l4rxVrb6a> Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Simon P Barlow <dgcltd@dgcltd.screaming.net> writes > My comments were meant slightly tongue in cheek to put forward the point that's fine then... > that tournament directors/clubs make far too much profit out of a tourney try it, and then tell me what you forgot to budget for (Colin did, and his mistake was to expect teams to attend, before asking them, and budgeting accordingly! - he'll know next time, assuming there is one.) > .And how the price of entry to tournaments has increased considerably over > the past couple of years since the introduction of the "compulsory > tournaments". ...and the introduction of half-reasonable venues? ...charging reasonable ground fees? Take the going rate for a decent quality football/hockey pitch for a game slot (2 hrs?)... multiply by the number of hours that an Ultimate tournament uses it for, and multiply again by the number of pitches you need to use for an Ultimate tournament - and hope that we are always able to get a "bulk booking" discount! (even Southampton Uni are planning to charge their own students full whack for hosting any future TOUR events - mostly due of the number of NON students that attend!) Add in the (not inconsiderable) costs of "luxuries" like St Johns, Masseurs, trophies, game discs, booking the campsite... > I feel personally that if / when the UK Ultimate community decide to form the > BUA to take over from the BUF, then when these compulsory tournaments in the > future are put on then all the profits/less reasonable expenses, should go > back to the BUA A few years ago the BUF was a.k.a. Toby Green - he was just about the only person doing anything (visible) - i.e. he ran ALL the National Tournaments (in Oxford) AND published Ultimatum. Why? He was the only (visible) one to get of his arse and do something for the simple rewards of doing it, and (mostly) making people happy. > instead of the present situation that we have found ourselves > in where certain individuals profit. The rewards now exist that other/more people are willing to get up and do things. If you want to remove those rewards, fine, but be prepared to train with your team, arrange fixtures with others, and play very few tournaments, unless you organise them. Once "competition" between Tournament Directors occurs, there'll be more chance of the "minimal profit" scenario. > Before you say BUF TAX let me point out > that I feel this rate needs to be increased. Um, I think you'll find that the move from BUF to BUA would be designed to REDUCE the tournament taxes (and make tournies slightly cheaper!) > I'm not bothered and you've NOT struck on one of my pet hates, in the slightest, at all, and it doesn't sound that way, does it? :) > And by the way how many teams did bid for this years nationals!! apart from > "Leicester city council" How many _teams_ actually bid for ANY of the "compulsory" events? or run the non-compulsory ones, for that matter? Southampton was bid for/run by the Skunks committee, Exeter used to be a "Uriel" affair, but now is really Kev + Jenny Lowe, Leicester events are generally _staffed_ by Red players, The Lurkers tournament was organised and run (predominantly) by Cliff, Druids manage to attend Ross (but the organisation and staffing is generally quite specifically limited) Edinburgh? not many! why not? lack of knowledge of facilities, or requirements, or lack of time to get out and find things? or lack of willingness do so? > P.S I know how difficult it is to run Tournaments as I have run many tennis > (week long) tournaments that's why I don't want to run an ultimate one as I > know how many moaning players there are in our wonderful sport. Yeah - most players try to skive the presentation to be home in time for tea, don't say "thanks" on the way out, leave their rubbish on a convenient patch of grass and then complain that they've left their boots behind and won't have them back in time for training. They bitch about the location, the cost, the weather, the seedings, schedule and format, the lack of drinking water, ice, hot showers, the hard ground in the campsite, the distance to the cashpoint, and the strength of the coffee - so why do TDs run Tournaments? Obviously, so they can bitch back, and know what they're talking about! Wayne co-ordinating TD for Fluid Druids joint-TD, Layout Dreams consultant-TD and unofficial staff member, many other UK Ultimate events - just raking it in!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Retter wayne@phidelta.demon.co.uk