From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue May 23 23:26:23 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e4NMNjY02508 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 23 May 2000 23:23:45 +0100 (BST) Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4NMNgp02499 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 23 May 2000 23:23:42 +0100 (BST) Received: from hose.pipex.net (hose.mail.pipex.net [158.43.128.58]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4NMNgU01995 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 23 May 2000 23:23:42 +0100 (BST) Received: from oemcomputer (userbn09.uk.uudial.com [62.188.145.60]) by hose.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 678954577 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 23 May 2000 23:23:41 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <001901bfc506$33513960$fc5495c1@oemcomputer> From: "Si and/or Jack" <JackAndSi.Hill@ukgateway.net> To: "Britdisc" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> References: <ACJIENHBFBENGAAA@shared2-mail.whowhere.com> <00a401bfc4e4$45f31790$6c64a8c0@ev01007> Subject: Re: Of course Catch can still gain a good place. Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 23:27:37 +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 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Some questions spring to mind: > Not sure if we or Headrush lose out, but why should either of us? We lost > (or had severly hampered) 4 players during this, and I know they lost some > also. 1. Why did you lose 4 players? And why (if they did) did Headrush lose players? > As it happens, we did not 'benefit' at all from Catch pulling out, > given that we didnt have any situation where they would have played us. 2. Did anybody *really* benefit from Catch pulling out? Si not talking for the team not managing to stay out of the discussion (its important)