UV Clip of the Day: Monday April 24th

[Rob]

Check out this catch by Aaron Bell of Oregon vs Wisconsin in the Semi
Finals of Centex.

www.ultivillage.com

Semi and Quarterfinal action are now available for download on the UV
site.

Rob
UltiVillage.com
"Quality Ultimate Frisbee Videos, DVDs and more!"

[Daag Alemayehu]

Nice catch.

Travel on the throw.

[Schmittles]

it's not a travel. play the clip in really slow motion. you'll see that
his toe doesn't move until he has released the frisbee.

[Justin]

This is an interesting example related to the discussion last week
about whether the bottom and the top of the toe are the same part of
the body. Some felt that the toe is the toe and it does not matter
whether it is the top or the bottom. Other people disagreed (I think
wrongly).

Here were the rules:

II. (I) Pivot: A pivot is the particular part of the body in continuous
contact with a single spot on the field during a thrower's
possession. When there is a definitive spot for putting the disc in
play, the part of the body in contact with that spot is the pivot.

XIII. (D).Traveling: [...]
1. The thrower must keep all or part of the pivot in contact with a
single spot on the field. If the thrower loses contact with the
appropriate spot, the thrower has traveled.

So (ignoring whether his foot slid off the appropriate spot on the
field) it comes down to whether you believe that he changed "the part
of the body in contact with that spot" on the field.

[jt]

Very close for sure. In a big game at nationals, would some teams call
this? I think some might.

[Rob]

This is NOT a travel. If teams start calling travel every time a player
moves to his pivot toe to release a backhand huck, then every backhand
huck would warrant a travel call. Some teams already call this. Not fun
to watch, play, or film.

Only feet watching cheaters would call this a travel.

Rob

[Daag Alemayehu]

"Schmittles" <ultimate...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145953711.3...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...

> it's not a travel. play the clip in really slow motion. you'll see that
> his toe doesn't move until he has released the frisbee.

I did watch it in slow motion. It looked like a travel at full-speed, it
looked like a travel in frame-by-frame mode. His pivot moved before he
released.

[Daag Alemayehu]

"Rob" <r...@ultivillage.com> wrote in message
news:1145978357.6...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...

I guess I'm a feet watching cheater then, Rob. I don't understand your
argument, though. Are you saying that calling a travel every time a player
moves his pivot to throw the disc (known as "traveling" in the rules) is
cheating? Help me out here.

[Rob]

What I'm saying, is that if you slow down the video, watch it frame by
frame, and can then have a discussion about whether or not his toe
moved an inch before the release of the disc, and you want to call a
travel, you are abusing the rules. No ref would call that a travel.
Only players who want to stop the other team from scoring because they
have a vested interest in doing so would call this a travel. It's
killing ultimate. It's painful to watch. It's got me so pissed off that
I'm ranting on RSD about it.

I could go on about this. I could put up clip after clip of this
happening. I don't want to.

Rob

[HowDoYouThrowYo...@gmail.com]

Honestly, this is really absurd. You guys are the people who call
"carry" every two seconds watching an NBA game. If it's blatant, it'll
be seen and called. Don't go looking for it. I'd like to think that
at the highest level of ultimate, players are less likely to call fouls
in general. A good player knows when he's been beat, regardless of
whether his opponent dragged his toe 1.83 inches, or encroached on your
"vertical space." Listen to Rob and play the game.

[ahal...@gmail.com]

I get 2 frames of disc in the air before the toe moves. 2 frames moves
the disc 15-30 feet (tough perspective). One where the disc is
superimposed over a green fan on the sideline, one where it's over the
trees.

h

[Daag Alemayehu]

"Rob" <r...@ultivillage.com> wrote in message

news:1145980540.8...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

> What I'm saying, is that if you slow down the video, watch it frame by
> frame, and can then have a discussion about whether or not his toe
> moved an inch before the release of the disc, and you want to call a
> travel, you are abusing the rules. No ref would call that a travel.

I can agree with you that being nit picky about any call, particularly
travel calls, is annoying and can ruin the flow of a game. My point was
that, for this particular play, I thought it was obvious it was a travel. I
wasn't even looking for it, I was looking for a sweet catch by Mr. Bell.
But the travel jumped out at me. It was obvious at full speed.

I think it's also relevant to say that if a) people didn't travel so much,
or b) the travel rule was changed in some way, we wouldn't see so many
discussions on RSD about how annoying travel calls are. In my opinion, if
the calls are legit, the travels are more annoying than the calls
themselves.

To the person in this thread who likened travel calls to calling carry
repeatedly in an NBA game, you've highlighted an important difference
between ultimate and NBA basketball created by self-officiating. When there
are refs, they can set a uniform, impartial threshold level for calling a
particular violation. Perhaps if travel was an active call by observers
we'd have fewer travel calls because they could make an impartial
determination of how much traveling they will let the players get away with.
As it is, though, if the two biased parties are responsible for calling out
their opponents on their travels, I just don't see any way for there to be a
uniform standard for what should be called as a travel unless that standard
is exactly what is stated in the rules (i.e., moved pivot = travel every
time).

[pat.ps...@gmail.com]

If you're calling travels when a guy changes his pivot point from his
heel to his toe on a throw, then god help you.

[name...@gmail.com]

I think Parinella had a good point about this, from his blog a couple
months back:

"If you have to review a video frame by frame to see if a call is
correct, then it's not a bad call. It might be incorrect, but it's a
justifiable call if it's that close. Exception: if it's a non-contact
violation (such as a travel) and you need that degree of granularity to
show that the violation actually happened, then it's a pussy call.
There is just no way that a player (who is, of course, also attempting
to play ultimate besides being a ref) in real time can discern this."

Remember that because of the self-officating nature of the game,
whenever you begin to use a particularly rigorous interpretation of
this rule, you are opening up your own team for the same type of
scrutiny, so that the game is even. Maybe it is advantageous to make
this call for a particular throw, but if you piss the other team into
having to even out calls, this may not be an advantage for the whole
game. Sometimes it can really fire up a team into wanting to beat you
even more, because they feel that you are cheating bastards.

Travel calls seem to be attractive because they cannot be contested,
they are difficult for an observer to overturn, and the person probably
technically traveled a bit. There are other rules that can be abused
like this, such as fast counts, so just remember if you want to demand
this kind of scrutiny, that it will come right back, and make Rob angry
and want to go film women's.

[jt]

Rob wrote:
> This is NOT a travel. If teams start calling travel every time a player
> moves to his pivot toe to release a backhand huck, then every backhand
> huck would warrant a travel call. Some teams already call this. Not fun
> to watch, play, or film.

The first time I viewed it in normal speed, I thought travel. Upon
further review, it is too close to tell. I agree, travel/foul call
fests are not fun to watch or play in for that matter but in highly
competitive games where one goal can mean a championship, I am pretty
sure that someone would have called travel here.

>
> Only feet watching cheaters would call this a travel.
>
> Rob

I watch feet and I might have called this a travel in realtime but do
not feel I cheat (we do not have instant replay for the slow motion
needed out on the field when we play). Normally when I see someone
drag their foot about 8 inches or more, it looks like they traveled.

JT
travel caller extraordinaire (oh and cheater too)

[His Airness]

After looking at the play a handful of times in fast and slow I think
that I might have moved my foot but it looks like i'm on my toe and
then I drag it once I release the disc. In general, I think that
unless the travel gives the offense a significant advantage, it should
not be called.

[Edelman]

what's your definition of "significant advantage?" being able to move
your pivot foot so you can get the throw off the way you want for a
score? i believe that's a travel, just like this CLEARLY is in the
video.

awesome catch, tho.

[Joa'quine (Joaq)]

CLEARLY, WE SHOULD ALL START YELLING!

[botan...@yahoo.com]

I'm with you Eli. If the travel isn't an advantage ie. used to throw
around the mark, throw a goal, etc. there's no reason to call it. Yeah,
he throws a goal here. And he drags during the throw, but weather the
disc was off or not? It's close. But it's not like he drags around the
cup. In this case if he traveled it a) was almost non-existant and b)
had no impact on the throw.

James
Wisconsin Hodags

[His Airness]

> A significant advantage is anything where you travel to gain yards around your defender. If you try to throw around the cup and drag your foot to get an extra foot then that travel should be called. If you are pretty much all by yourself and make a throw that was uncontested and you maybe drag your foot a inch, then that is bad spirit and should not be called.
Eli
Oregon EGO

> awesome catch, tho.

[bell.e...@gmail.com]

Hot filming, Rob... good lookin' out! Thanks for the props, ya'll...
and thanks for rippin' that up-winder Jungle Janin...

jah boi,
~Bell

PS: all subsequent gold-grill pics are exclusively the property of UV.

[DikEar]

You cannot possibly imagine how happy this thread makes me.

Dear Rob, you are a genius. Thanks for the sweet ass clip and also for
showing that bitches that call travel are CHEATERS! Even if they don't
know it.

Dear JT, HAHAHAHAHAH!!! Thanks for proving my point douche bag.

NOT A TRAVEL!!!

-dikear (thome time)

[Origi...@gmail.com]

Rob, if youre making a DVD for this college season, is this the kind of
material you'd use? If so, I wanna save it so Disc 6/7 is new to me!

[Justin]

The toe-slide was really a secondary point. There was a discussion
last week (or the week before) about how changing from the bottom to
the top of the toe was a travel.

Assume for a second that the foot was stationary..... it seems pretty
ridiculous to call this throw illegal because the top vs. the bottom of
the toe.

I hope this video shows that the top / bottom of the toe is just a bad
basis for calling travels.

[Rob]

What I'm finding really interesting now is that we have people looking
at the same clip frame by frame with some saying that it is clearly a
travel, while other are saying it is clearly not a travel. This speaks
volumes as to why players are continuously debating travels on the
field. Why such a discrepancy in interpreting the rules?

As for you Aaron Bell, what happened to the gold grill pics? Did you
chicken out or are you still fundraising?

Rob

[bell.e...@gmail.com]

chicken out? Rob, I thought you knew me better. It's all gravy...
check it:

http://www.triplexgoldteeth.com/top_teeth_3.htm

I just ordered a design pretty similar to "T-160", but in white gold.
Fundraising is complete for this order, my man.

jah will provide,
~bell.tron

[kdoe]

If the only way a person can throw a huck is by travelling then that
gives them a significant advantage. It shouldn't matter if they don't
have a mark or not.

[Doginth...@gmail.com]

I dont know what yall are talking about... the dumptruck does not
foul!!!

back it up

beep..beep..beep

[jt]

DikEar wrote:

> Dear JT, HAHAHAHAHAH!!! Thanks for proving my point douche bag.
>
> NOT A TRAVEL!!!

Dear Dik,
Did you read my posts? Did I call it a travel? I said might but I can
see where people would asswipe.

So glad you can say things on here without putting a name to your
posts.
JT

PS. And I too am glad that Rob posts these videos as they are helpful
in future calls/incidents. Keep it up Rob!

[jeff...@yahoo.com]

This may be way off, but are we talking about the "white jersery" playr
traveling or the "black jersey" player traveling. I had to watch the
video a few times before I saw that the "blasck jersey" players caught
the disc on defense. I know I am a little slow. The "black jersey"
player did not travel, at least when I watch it frame by frame

[Rob]

Hey Jeff. That's todays COTD you're watching. This discussion is about
the Oregon vs Wisconsin COTD from Monday.

Rob

[jeff...@yahoo.com]

Got it, like I said I am slow. At least I am right when I say the
"black jersey" player does not travel!

Yea,

Jeff

[jeff...@yahoo.com]

[DikEar]

> Dear Dik,
> Did you read my posts? Did I call it a travel? I said might but I can
> see where people would asswipe.
>

Dear JT, follow me on a trip into our near past. As I remember we were
having a light-hearted curse word free discussion of whether someone
watching feet can know when the person released the disc. Glorious JT
in your infinite wisdom made the bold statement that even though you
are looking at the mark's feet, you still know when the disc is
released. And Rob, the genius that he is, has just proven to the world,
and Kyle W (who didn't disagree but this just demonstrates my point),
that even from a distance (nevertheless on the mark while staring at
someone's feet) you can't really tell. Ergo JT is a cheating douchebag.
Shall I draw you a picture?

The defense rests.

-dikear

[tatc...@hotmail.com]

I, for one, would like to see that picture.

Tom

[jt]

I recall the conversation. And I watch feet but I also stand off my
mark when doing so in a way that I can see both basically at the same
time. I am not cross-eyed and it is difficult to do, but it can be
done. If you had ever played me, you would never say that I cheat and
to do so here makes you a moron. I joke on this site quite frequently
as I feel that is what rsd is for. If we should ever meet on the
field, you will see that I am a good natured fella that plays by the
rules and respects my opponent (even in heated games).

>
> The defense rests.
>
> -dikear

Maybe I will sky you if we play so we can change your name to teabag.

JT