From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Thu Apr 18 10:26:00 2002 Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g3I9Pxd25196 for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 10:25:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@agave [137.205.192.52]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g3I96H708415; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 10:06:18 +0100 (BST) Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daemon@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g3I8t1QR009663 for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:55:01 +0100 (BST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g3I8t0O1009660 for britdisc-outgoing; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:55:00 +0100 (BST) Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31]) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g3I8sxQR009655 for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:54:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail1.messagelabs.com (mail1.messagelabs.com [212.125.75.4]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g3I8swt07292 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:54:59 +0100 (BST) X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 13152 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2002 08:54:52 -0000 Received: from mail.oyster.co.uk (HELO aurora.oyster.co.uk) (193.132.201.148) by server-3.tower-1.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 18 Apr 2002 08:54:52 -0000 Received: by AURORA with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <GZQT0H4M>; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:54:52 +0100 Message-ID: <7165D5A55FC4D41184DB00D0B7B9E62D0480D474@AURORA> From: Roger Thomson <Roger.Thomson@oyster.com> To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Subject: RE: Tour 1 Results Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:54:52 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk id g3I8sxQR009656 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >But surely, the sooner everyone actually sends in their entry and >cheque, the sooner we'll know which team will be excluded due to >capacity, no? No, because Kev is still obliged to accept entries that arrive on May 3rd, so nothing is final until then. Anyway, of course you're right that it's better for entries to get there sooner - I was more reacting to Adam's implication that entering NOW would increase the chances of teams getting into the tournament; and was doing my civic duty in pointing out the Tour rules on distribution of places so that teams understood the implications of relegation, could plan their seasons accordingly and knew which games it was important to win at Tour 2. There seem to be 2 slight problems with the current set up: 1/ As the deadline for Tour 1 is Friday May 3rd it seems likely that teams won't find out whether their entries have been accepted until Monday May 6th at the earliest - only 12 days before the tournament. Is this fair on people who plan their whole summers around the Tour, have to make travel and accommodation arrangements, put so much into their sport and look forward to these events so much? Having earlier deadlines would make some sense as most teams probably know well in advance which Tours they'd like to enter and can raise a team for. 2/ Unless the entry deadline for each Tour is before the previous Tour we won't know how many teams will be relegated and which are the play-off games that determine it. We're depriving the teams this is relevant to of really dramatic games that have a real impact on their seasons and condemning them to a several week wait while they see how many of the teams on the waiting list want to enter the next Tour. Given the increasingly competitive nature of UKU Tours right the way through the seedings wouldn't they all rather know what was at stake when they play those important play-off games?...(comments from those who it might concern would help....JB7, Mohawk Mwinci Magic, Rats of Nimh, Trigger Happy - was there a relegation feel about your last games? If not, would you rather have known that these games would determine whether you can get into Tour 2?). Anyway, thought they were worth mentioning as we debate the sense and practicalities of moving to a more divisional approach. Was anything worth mentioning decided or discussed at the UKU meeting? Cheers, sorry to bore you all so early in the day, RT cu#1 PS - Yes it was 15-12 Clapham1 vs Clapham2. PPS - Yes the Sharks really gave Clapham2 a good game and have really improved over the winter. We thought they did so well only because Milky was confined to the sideline injured, so I wouldn't expect them to do so well in Tour 2 if he's better. 10th place maybe? PPPS - Remember it's a relatively open practice on Clapham Common tonight @ 6.30 pm or so - so come down if you want to play a competitive game and are a relatively experienced and/or talented player in London. -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Retter [mailto:druid#6@phidelta.demon.co.uk] Sent: 17 April 2002 21:13 To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Subject: Re: Tour 1 Results Wed, 17 Apr 2002, by Roger Thomson <mailto:Roger.Thomson@oyster.com>; Subject: Tour 1 Results > >There are still places at Tour 2 so get your entry in NOW!!!!!! > > Surely there's no hurry? But surely, the sooner everyone actually sends in their entry and cheque, the sooner we'll know which team will be excluded due to capacity, no? And the less likely anyone will be to fall foul of a postal service error. (Imagine the hullaballoo if cheques went missing in the post only two days before the deadline - it'd be too late to send another and the team may not be permitted to enter!) It might even be possible that we could be emailed captains meeting notes and see a finalised schedule several days before the tournament!? Wayne Fluid Druids ---------------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Retter mobile: 07970-903420 wayne@fluiddruids.com ----------------------------------------------------------- Internet communications are not secure and therefore Oyster Partners Ltd does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Oyster Partners Ltd.