Wednesday, September 01, 2010

WFDF Bi-Annual Rules Review

WFDF has begun it's biannual review the rules of Ultimate, and invite anyone to contribute.

There's a place to make suggestions and discuss the suggestions of others, over here:http://ultimaterules.co.cc/?page_id=1277&vasthtmlaction=viewforum&f=2.0

Personally, while I like having a regular process to review the rules (rather than something 'crisis' driven. And goo don WFDF and those involved for committing and delivering on making it happen), I'm not so keen on every two years.

Every two years is driven by the international playing schedule, and this is probably right for people playing Ultimate at that level.

But for the vast majority of players and organisers, changes every two years is probably too often.

Don't have a solution though, except possibly that while its worth having a discussion every two years, the bias should be towards not changing anything if at all possible, or possibly deferring the introduction of minor changes until the next review (ie to have major updates every four years).

2 comments:

BW said...

Not sure if this is too late, but a rule/situation that i think needs to be fixed is:

A player starts a stall count, gets to more than 2, drops away a bit (outside the 3m) and then comes back in to the 3m area and continues the stall count where they left off. The applicable rules (that i see) are:

9.5. If the marker moves more than three (3) metres from the thrower, or a different player becomes the marker, the stall count must be restarted at one (1).
18.1.1.1. “Fast Count” – the marker:
18.1.1.1.4. does not subtract two (2) seconds from the stall count after the first call of any marking infraction, or
18.1.1.1.5. does not start the stall count from the correct number.


Now, by calling fast count the marker will naturally drop their stall count by 2, but the fast count is being called for not starting back at 1. So a second fast count, and a subsequent violation, is needed to be called which causes a stoppage.

My frustration, as well as the players i called it on, is that there is no difference in call between me asking them to drop 1 and reset the stall count. And because of this, it is inevitably going to end in a violation with them wondering what they did wrong and (rightfully) thinking they didn't do anything wrong. Luckily for me all the players i called it on were very civil about it, but i know that will not always be the case.

It had been suggested that i just immediately call a violation to cause a stoppage straight up. Less confusion, gets to the point quicker etc.

But it would be nice to have a call that continues play without the stoppage and gets the marker back to the right stall count.

Would be nice to see some others thoughts on the situation.

Pete said...

That is an excellent point BW. Should send that one through to Rubes.