BUML "Controversy" Coverage - Ending Games with Last Possession, Points Caps and Time Caps

Following on from yesterday's BPL "Controversy" Coverage post here on the Brisbane Ultimate Blog, and in the same spirit of 'controversy for the fun of it' not to genuinely bother anyone, let's consider the discomfort around BUML's use of a 'last possession rule' to complete its games.

At present, BUML games finish with 'last possession', which involves a League Director type blowing a whistle at time cap, and play continuing until the next change of possession (either from a score or a turnover).

The rule is arguably an effort at a half-way house between the ways games end under the formal rules of Ultimate (and the traditional variations), and the need of the League to finish its games pretty much on time to either allow for games following or to get the lights turned off. Let's go through these, as often people aren't clear on these issues anyways.

The WFDF rules of Ultimate, state: "4.2 A game is finished and won by the first team to score seventeen (17) goals." For practicality though, the following is also in there: "4.6 A variation of the basic strcture may be used to accommodate special competitons, number of players, age of players or available space."

A common variation under 4.6 applied by League and Tournament Directors is setting the Points Cap at a number other than 17 (usually 15 or 13).

The change is typically for timing reasons, although it may also be used in events where 'blowout' scores (eg 17-0) are anticipated, which are thought to be less enjoyable and thus better to be over quickly (eg ending at 13-0 is believed to be better than 17-0).

However, Points Caps can still result in overly-long games, which can cause havok when League and Tournament Directors are trying to coordinate to a schedule (either because of limits on field and light availability, and/or because they are managing a large number of consecutive games). Long games at tournaments may also raise safe play and fairness issues, should players be exhausted by a long game and then need to back up to play another game (and possibly against relatively fresh opponents). Hence, Time Caps may also be be applied should the Points Cap not be attained.

Time Caps have their own variations, generally with a central timer (either agreed by the teams themselves, or provided by the League or Tournament Director). Generally, time caps for higher level tournaments will be set at 70 to 100 minutes, although some more social events will use times around 45-70 minutes (generally to enable players to play several games against as many other players as possible).

Equally, there is then a lot of variation in terms of 'what happens at Time Cap'. Commonly at higher level tournaments, the rule used is along the lines of "Finish the point, add two to the highest score to establish the revised Points Cap." Sometimes in more social contexts this will be truncated to merely adding one to the highest score, or truncated even further to merely finishing the point.


Sometimes people get different ideas about Time Cap, and I'll use an example of something BUML Assistant League Director Chris Fox recently wrote to the players:

"One last point about "last possession" (This is my opinion only, and not that
of John or Adilia): I do not understand why people think it is strange that they
are not allowed to keep playing after game time has expired. Perhaps this is
just a Ultimate tradition? Correct me if I am wrong, but in every other sport I
can think of if you are down 1 point at the buzzer then you lose. There is never
any chance to tie up the game or play until someone scores after time has
expired. So I don't understand why Ultimate players expect to be able to do
this. Just my two cents."

I think Chris pulls out the important factors in people's confusion here (and their dislike of the 'last possession' rule), but let's tease them out more.

A common error for people confused by Time Cap is to compare to other sports. Something like soccer, for example, is predicated on there being an agreement that play will stop after precisely 90 minutes of play.

In contrast, Ultimate is predicated on the agreement that play will stop when a team has won - that is, scored the Points Cap.

In Ultimate, the addition of a Time Cap doesn't establish an absolute finishing time as in soccer - instead it establishes a modified Points Cap, one that is specific to that game.

I'll repeat that - in Ultimate, you win the game by achieving the Points Cap (not by scoring more than the opposition). A Time Cap merely modifies the Points Cap. When there's a Time Cap, you still win the game by achieving the Points Cap.

There are a bunch of reasons why this is, and it comes back to self-refereeing - Ultimate actively doesn't use whistles or referees, who in other sports provide independent timekeeping and declare one team the winner over the other.

Instead in Ultimate, we conclude games in a manner all players can agree on while still being players - when a Points Cap (modified or otherwise) is achieved.

The method of firstly finishing the point after Time Cap is called also allows a moment when teams can confer amongst themselves and with each other to confirm that Time Cap was called. In the heat of an Ultimate game, without a referee and whistle having dominance and control throughout, a whistle from a competiton director doesn't have the same weight.

The method of adding one or two to the score after the point has been finished has two functions. First, it provides some balance to the impact of wind and other weather conditions, which have a significant impact on Ultimate compared to other sports. Ultimate combats this by swapping ends at the end of each point and by the scorers returning the disc to the other team with the pull.

Second, it discourages unspirited time-wasting. In other sports where one team has gone ahead, but another team is coming back from behind, the leading team will look at the clock and waste time as much as possible. This happens less in Ultimate when a Time Cap merely modifies the Points Cap. The leading team still needs to strive towards the Points Cap at all times (yes, it can waste a bit of time to slow their opponents catching up, but not as much).

(Obviously, these situations also add a lot of extra excitement and drama to a game!)

Another way to look at it - if everyone is Ultimate is a referee, and you want play to stop at an agreed time as per something like soccer, then either everyone needs a watch on (that's synchronised with everyone elses), or you need a separate timer that is visible to all players all the time.

Anyway, leaving aside the world of rules philosphy and back to the realities of BUML, the 'last possession rule' isn't too bad. It is challenging practically in that it does require most players to be able to hear a whistle and for the League Director to be reliable in blowing it on time, but it does give people time to spread the word. A change in possession is more likely to happen sooner than a score, so that schedules can be kept to, and a change in possession does provide a moment when players can agree the game is over.

This has been a bit of a long warble and time is out in terms of cleaning it up a bit. But we hope its interesting and our readers have learned and thought about it a bit.

But we'd hate to see people thinking 'the whistle' as the natural way to finish an Ultimate game.