From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Fri Feb 28 16:24:36 1997
Received: from thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id QAA07206; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 16:24:24 GMT
Received: by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk
	id QAA10741; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 16:15:01 GMT
Received: from pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk by thistle.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id QAA10736; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 16:14:51 GMT
Received: from dryctnath.mmu.ac.uk by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id QAA05770; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 16:14:48 GMT
Received: from ghondr.mmu.ac.uk by dryctnath.mmu.ac.uk with internet SMTP 
          with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 16:14:18 +0000
Received: from MMU-HSS-GHONDR/SpoolDir by ghondr.mmu.ac.uk (Mercury 1.21);
          28 Feb 97 16:16:17 +0100
Received: from SpoolDir by MMU-HSS-GHONDR (Mercury 1.30);
          28 Feb 97 16:15:05 +0100
From: Lawrence PAULSON <94853843@mmu.ac.uk>
Organization: Manchester Metropolitan University
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 16:14:59 +0100
Subject: Here's One!
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Message-ID: <25C2E035B4B@ghondr.mmu.ac.uk>
Sender: owner-britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

Dear All,

Here's one that I've always wondered about...(I haven't checked this 
in the rules so please forguive me if I'm talking bollocks (it;s what 
I'm good at) and correctly in an orderly and polite manner).

The pull is the scoring team 'voluntarily' giving up possession to 
the opposing team (I presume, I may well be wrong).  

If in open play team 'A' makes a pass, but it is intercepted by a
player from team 'B' who attempts to catch in in the process of
intercepting it but instead knocks it to the ground, sure ly it is
team 'B' who get to pick up the disk.  The idea of it going back to
team 'A' is frankly ridiculous.  

Why should the pull be any different?

Just a thought.
Love and Luck,

Lawrence PAULSON.
Chair, Fingers 6 (Manchester,UK) Ultimate Frisbee Club.
Tel: (0161) 882-0560
Webpage:http://yi.com/home/Fingers6/