From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Wed Feb 26 15:12:02 1997
Received: from thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id PAA10014; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:11:56 GMT
Received: by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk
	id PAA15401; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:07:18 GMT
Received: from pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id PAA15393; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:06:56 GMT
Received: from amsta.leeds.ac.uk by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id PAA09246; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:06:52 GMT
Received: from newton.leeds.amsta (newton.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.36.64])
	by amsta.leeds.ac.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA14770
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:06:27 GMT
Received: by newton.leeds.amsta (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id PAA04082; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:10:00 GMT
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:10:00 GMT
From: amtsjh@amsta.leeds.ac.uk (S J Hill)
Message-Id: <199702261510.PAA04082@newton.leeds.amsta>
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject: we had an argument....
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Sender: owner-britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

Stu wrote about having a consistent viewpoint on the dropped pull thing.

I agree.  About a year back we played in a tourney and had our opponents
drop a pull.  It was 1-1 at the time - and we didn't really have much idea
how good our oppenents would turn out to be... so a couple of us wanted to 
take it  - and a couple of us were uneasy about the idea.

At the time, we took it, and got roundly boo'd (for the first time!)

After the game, we went down a corridor and had a fairly long team-argument
about the rights and wrongs of what had happened.  Not wanting to argue
in front of other people (!) we decided to make a decision and stick to it.
So we ALWAYS will take a dropped pull, 

unless
1. we think the player might not know the rule - in which case we ask.
2. the game is totally irrelevant to anything and we are just having a laugh
with our opponents.
3. we want to turn the team over further away from the endzone to practice
running some kind of play!  (Joke!)

This rule has special meaning to me.  When playing with Sneeeky's at Worlds
in 95 we had this situation against the Sharks.  At 3-3, they dropped the
pull.  Much to my suprise, the decision was to let them play on.  When we lost
the game in sudden death 90 minutes later, I remember being somewhat dismayed
at turning down a near-certain point near the beginning of the match!
(Consequently we ended up in the match for last place!)

Even this w/e, Ow! dropped a pull in sudden death against Flying Sorcerers, 
who didN'T take the turnover.  20 secs later, the Sorcerers lost the match.
If Ow! had dropped the last pass in the endzone, would Sorcerers have
given them another chance at that too?


The comment about training is a good one - in Leeds people take a turnover
after a dropped pull.  I know that in Manchester, they don't.  And we often
have very enjoyable discussions about the relative merits of our attitudes
to this with the Chevvy players!

As Barry says, more pointless comment.... but probably
not as pointless as doing research into how fish swim - 
which explains a lot.

Si