From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue May 23 17:06:33 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e4NG5Jd15469 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 23 May 2000 17:05:19 +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 e4NG5Gp15458 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 23 May 2000 17:05:16 +0100 (BST) Received: from relay2.mail.uk.psi.net (relay2.mail.uk.psi.net [154.32.107.6]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4NG5GV05680 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 23 May 2000 17:05:16 +0100 (BST) Received: from [193.82.136.110] (helo=Farid) by relay2.mail.uk.psi.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 12uHB8-0003t2-00 for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Tue, 23 May 2000 17:05:10 +0100 Message-ID: <008c01bfc4d0$fce87e40$6e8852c1@home2home> From: "Colin Smith" <colin@08004homes.com> To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: Dodgy fields Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 17:07:16 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Given the apparent widespread feeling that this event was not up to the standard everyone would like, and given that one of the stronger teams in the tour was not involved, why are ANY results from the event still standing? Do Catch still have any chance of gaining a representative placing at the end of the tour? I'm sure that the teams who played and improved on their positions from tour one would disagree, but if the pitches were that bad, and a number of unnecessary injuries occured as a result (possibly to key players?), are the final placings (and therefore points allocated) any reflection of the relative standard of the teams involved in the tour. And for the record: No, I wasn't there - injury that I'm glad I rested. I applaud anyone who has the time, dedication & application to host a tournament or run the sport. No, I don't believe that teams who took the time to travel long distances should be rewarded for their dedication. Had I travelled up from London I would definitely have played (long way to go without playing - and I'm sure some had longer journeys), but wouldn't have had a problem with Tour points not counting. I think the tour should be tiered. Five National Tour events with 16 competing each one, maintaining the basic principle of good competition for top teams, and maybe two regional qualification events with top team from each replacing bottom two of tour. The idea of play-off games is fantastic, but how do you work it. If 10 pitches is tough, how tough is it going to be to find two tournament directors and two 6 pitch venues close to one another? Colin Hammerage COLIN SMITH Account Executive e-commerce www.08004homes.com colin@08004homes.com Tel: 020 7864 2807 Fax: 020 7864 2809