From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Thu Feb 22 18:59:11 2001 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id f1MIwbr26171 for britdisc-outgoing; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:58:37 GMT 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 f1MIwah26162 for <britdisc-real@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:58:36 GMT Received: from mail.totalise.co.uk (mail.totalise.co.uk [212.1.157.18]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f1MIwZF18621 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:58:35 GMT Received: from hq1039 [212.159.131.62] (ruth11@totalise.co.uk) by mail.totalise.co.uk; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:58:28 +0000 X-WM-Posted-At: mail.totalise.co.uk; Thu, 22 Feb 01 18:58:28 +0000 Message-ID: <00b601c09d00$e0c128d0$3a859fd4@hq1039.bass.co.uk> From: "Ruth" <ruth11@totalise.co.uk> To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Tour Costs. Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:54:00 -0000 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 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk OK OK. Seeing as everyone seems to think I was slagging off all Students, and have started slagging back, I'd better put the record straight. Please cast your minds back to the email I responded to... "Bearing in mind that student teams often struggle during the summer to get more than 8 or 9 players it would make it very expensive for us." The inference from the email was that because it is not term time, student teams find it hard fielding a full squad. I was simply saying that this is not a good enough argument to ask for a reduction in costs. I do NOT think that all students have no commitment to the sport, or are worse players than Open players, as some people seemed to think I said. Most "serious" teams (there's that word again) have loads of players who commit to the Tour early and that's the way it should be. The Tour should not have teams in it that have just been scraped together. That's what I firmly believe. I know, you'll all say that there are not enough other tournaments for teams like this to play in outside of the Tour and this is the age old argument. Maybe now Tour tournaments are too expensive, more of you will start organising your own. I do agree that Student ultimate is the greatest area of growth for the sport, and should continue to be. Now you have more incentive to get even more players together! To illustrate what I was suggesting, Red will probably field squads of around 15 players, maybe more, for all Tours. This has already been confirmed and this includes some students from the local universities because they realise that their own university teams would be unlikely to be able to field a full squad. Another instance of Uni teams organising themselves for the Tour is the Mohawks and Mwnci See collaboration - they realised that on their own they didn't have enough players, but together they could do it justice. Believe it or not, I have nothing against a discount for students if there's a good reason (although that will undoubtedly mean that us tax-payers will be paying even more and subsidising you again ;-) ), and you've come up with lots of more viable arguments now than lack of players and that's fair enough. Now please - let's stop the personal slagging, there's no need. It looks like you'll have to wait for the next AGM to sort it all out now, because most of the Tours are well into the organised stage. So take my suggestion as an idea on how students can compete in the Tour without paying astronomical costs. Ruth Red