From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Mon May 22 20:25:08 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e4MJMec24808 for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 22 May 2000 20:22:40 +0100 (BST) Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4MJMcp24800 for <Britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 May 2000 20:22:38 +0100 (BST) Received: from stargate (stargate.kpmg.co.uk [194.131.238.82]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4MJMbV05520 for <Britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 May 2000 20:22:38 +0100 (BST) Received: by stargate; id UAA03982; Mon, 22 May 2000 20:22:12 +0100 (GMT) Received: from unknown(158.174.200.96) by stargate.kpmg.co.uk via smap (V5.5) id xma003506; Mon, 22 May 00 20:21:27 +0100 Received: from ukwatexc01.uk.kpmg.com (unverified) by ukwatexc01.uk.kpmg.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with ESMTP id <B0010730369@ukwatexc01.uk.kpmg.com> for <Britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 May 2000 20:21:43 +0100 Received: by ukwatexc01.kpmg.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <LH7W3XCT>; Mon, 22 May 2000 20:21:43 +0100 Message-Id: <53CAF6AD6B08D3118F700008C7A473E91BAF82@ukbirexc06.uk.kworld.kpmg.com> From: "Eagles, Colin L" <colin.eagles@kpmg.co.uk> To: "'Britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk'" <Britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Tour 2 - is the Tour too large? Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 20:21:41 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Is it the case that there are just not enough suitable venues for events the size of the Tour events of the past couple of seasons? As Chris noted, he had just four bids for Tour events this year. Whilst I know of a number of venues in the Milton Keynes/ Northampton area which could provide 6-8 pitches of real quality, any more is very unlikely. I'm sure the number of bids is something of a reflection of the situation up and down the country. If we wish to maintain the quality of pitches, perhaps it is time to reduce the size of these events. At the same time, I'm sure there would be greater support for non-Tour events. To that end, I hope that the coed events in the summer are a real success. There have been fewer non-Tour events over the last couple of years, as a lot of players' disposable time and money has been taken up to attend the Tour and make it the success it has become. To a lesser extent, both with more open teams, and the last year or two of regional student leagues, the Tour has clashed with exams etc. somewhat restricting the student teams. Perhaps there could be more smaller, almost regional events that took this into consideration. Given that the issue of safe playing surfaces has to be a priority, is the way to solve the problem? I guess there are a number of other issues that would have to be addressed if this were to happen, such as how to decide who goes to each tournament, but I imagine that if we can make sure of high quality surfaces at all events, then it will solve the issue of teams not wanting to play. I agree with Hannah that the pitches caused concern for many more of the teams besides Catch. I would like to thank Nancy, Ian and everyone involved in the organisation of Tour 2 for the quality and smooth running of every other aspect of the event. See you all at Tour 3. Slasher Point Blank Email Disclaimer The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter.