This is what will happen when you add refs to Ultimate
Frank
(of Course Todd will tell you that this is what the fans want..)
John
you can get away with", and also to "flopping". I also agree
with others who say, purely self-officiated is unworkable
because of the inevitable unresolvable disagreement, not to
mention that self-officiated is a system too, just like
refereed is a system, and there are many people out there
who will game the system, whatever the system is.
Observers is an attempt to have the best of both worlds, or
to avoid the worst of each world. Observers should be given
a good chance to succeed or fail in practice.
--
Posted from http://www.rsdnospam.com
Matthew Childs
have gotten about 5 Red cards there? She shoulda been gone after the
first dangerous from behind tackle. Whoever that ref was needs to be
fired.
ulticritic
> http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4629837
>
> (of Course Todd will tell you that this is what the fans want..)
are you talking about c c c c cat fights???? actually what todd will
tell you is this is why you dont emulate soccers 1 ref system to cover
a field that big. so in this case as well, it was the officiating
standard of soccer in general that enables this.
ulticritic
.
>
> Observers is an attempt to have the best of both worlds
actually it was an attempt to save money and effort(realistically
speaking...........or it was an attempt to save the world
(idealistically speaking). what you deem to be "the best of both
worlds" is just a byproduct of that apathy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
, or
> to avoid the worst of each world. Observers should be given
> a good chance to succeed or fail in practice.
why shouldnt refs get a fair chance as well?
James
> > a good chance to succeed or fail in practice.
>
> why shouldnt refs get a fair chance as well?
I'll be the first to admit that I haven't read every post you've made
on the ref topic. Given the speed of the game, and the myopic focus
it takes to reel in a tricky disc, that 100% self officiated play is
unrealistic.
However, you seem to be rather fervent about this, so I've got to ask:
besides posting on RSD, what have you done to make ref's happen? Have
you put together prototype training manuals for refs, covering the
ways in which they'll interact with the game and what powers they'll
be granted? Have you made proposals for how many there will be, what
their division of labor will be, who will have decision authority
between conflicting refs, what role video playback might have in
dispute resolution? Have you run the numbers on referee training?
How long it will take to train a ref, how many ref's per game, how
many crews you'll need to complete a college/club series? How much
will this training cost, what equipment will a ref need, how much will
they be paid to ref a game, how will seniority/skill be factored into
pay? Have you put any thoughts down regarding how changes to this
system will be administered if refs are adopted? What role will refs
have in rules changes? Who will oversee changes in regulations for on-
field ref behavior? Have you put any of this into practice,
organizing a tournament (even a small, informal local one) that uses
refs to provide some tangible support for all this? Assuming you put
together a few tournaments and it yields all the magnificent results
you hope refs will bring to the sport, how do you extrapolate that
model across the US/internationally?
Again, I'm all for experimentation with refs, and think that a ref-
esque figure might clean up the sport and bring it a fair measure of
legitimacy. But at least go as far as Frank did, and provide a well
thought out solution.
thefan
> http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4629837
>
> (of Course Todd will tell you that this is what the fans want..)
This is a reply to the original post;
Your argument is flawed on two accounts:
1 One of the things Toad proposes could be a result of adding refs to
the sport of ultimate is that it will be more popular and make TV.
well, there you have it. everyone, everyone is talking tonight about
two mediocre teams in the mountain west or Pac 10 conference that will
not scare the sweet 16 in the NCAA tournament. that means they
wouldn't make nationals. everyone is talking about these two mediocre
teams, they're on ESPN. last weekend 3 teams won a national
championship. No one cares. Fury won their 37th national title in a
row. one of the greatest dynasty's in team sports, no one gives a
rats ass. Chain won the first national title of their history and the
first from the south region. Who gives a shit? Axis didn't even make
nationals last year. That could be a story if anyone gave a flying
fuk about ultimate. so, yeah. if you add refs you get popularity and
television coverage. Shit, if somebody pulled that shit at nationals
this year there wouldn't even be video coverage to show anyone.
2. That is probably the dirtiest, most cheating ass highlight reel
ever put together by any one athlete in the history of sports. not
one, or two cheating ass, dirty plays, but 6! 6 that they showed or
caught on camera. and no one buys the argument that if you add refs,
all of the sudden people are going to start cheating. cheaters cheat
and those that don't cheat don't. the difference between with and
without refs is that right now, they are cheating you and it's within
the rules and there is nothing you can do about it. Add some refs and
at least you can hope that the official sees the cheating and does
something about it.
Observers you say? good on you. a start. but when it comes down to
it, an observer is a watered down ref. Quit futzing around and get on
with it already. stop trying to be different. join the real sports
world, buck up and get some ref action going. you're only fooling
yourself. and the rest of the sports world would be laughing, if they
had ever heard of ultimate.
Quiet Coyote #19 -- the Cutest Girl in Ultimate
The Fan
Heinousboy
> On Nov 6, 1:08 pm, Frank <fhuguen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4629837
>
> > (of Course Todd will tell you that this is what the fans want..)
>
> This is a reply to the original post;
>
> Your argument is flawed on two accounts:
> 1 One of the things Toad proposes could be a result of adding refs to
> the sport of ultimate is that it will be more popular and make TV.
> well, there you have it. everyone, everyone is talking tonight about
> two mediocre teams in the mountain west or Pac 10 conference that will
> not scare the sweet 16 in the NCAA tournament. that means they
> wouldn't make nationals. everyone is talking about these two mediocre
> teams, they're on ESPN. last weekend 3 teams won a national
> championship. No one cares. Fury won their 37th national title in a
> row. one of the greatest dynasty's in team sports, no one gives a
> rats ass. Chain won the first national title of their history and the
> first from the south region. Who gives a shit? Axis didn't even make
> nationals last year. That could be a story if anyone gave a flying
> fuk about ultimate. so, yeah. if you add refs you get popularity and
> television coverage. Shit, if somebody pulled that shit at nationals
> this year there wouldn't even be video coverage to show anyone.
Love it.
> 2. That is probably the dirtiest, most cheating ass highlight reel
> ever put together by any one athlete in the history of sports. not
> one, or two cheating ass, dirty plays, but 6! 6 that they showed or
> caught on camera. and no one buys the argument that if you add refs,
> all of the sudden people are going to start cheating.
There's 100000 more people playing other sports besides ultimate.
That makes it 100000 times more likely that some crazy shit like this
could happen at one of those events. And since almost all of these
events have referees then this kind of thing needs to happen 100000
times more often outside of ultimate for there to be any corelation to
the use of referees. I think we do have our head butt spit in other
peoples face sideline clearing brawl in our past.
Is anyone out there really thinking, I can't wait till I play in a
ref'd game so I can mark up behind the first long haired dude I match
up with and yank him to the ground by his pony tail just to see if I
can get away with it? And if you are please stop playing ultimate.
ulticritic
> I completely agree that adding refs will lead to "whatever
> you can get away with", and also to "flopping".
this is the spirit zealot argument??????
for real??????
so if the incorporation of refs lead to this then how does a spirit
zealot explain the fact that there are zillions of other sporting
events with refs in which this kinda behavior DOSENT take place?????
I think this was a very rare display of unsportsmanlike behavior
(although it dosent surprise me that it took place in soccer as that
sports arbitration system((one ref and all)) seems to enable that sort
of play) and thats why they aired it.
I will take this moment to warn ultimate players NOT to adopt any of
soccers reffing practices due to this though......like carding or
having people out there qualified to observe be subjigated them to
being just a "lines man"........OR not having enough to begin
with........which lets face it......THATS what enabled that chick to
go agro the way she did. as the announcers eluded to
though.......THER WAS NO EXCUSE FOR THE REF NOT TO CATCH/SEE ANY OF
THIS..........which is why they simply need more of them out
there.......kinda a no brainer, eh?
either way.......john........this is about as piss poor of an argument
you could come up with to show opposition for refs.
ulticritic
> > > to avoid the worst of each world. Observers should be given
> > > a good chance to succeed or fail in practice.
>
> > why shouldnt refs get a fair chance as well?
>
> I'll be the first to admit that I haven't read every post you've made
> on the ref topic. Given the speed of the game, and the myopic focus
> it takes to reel in a tricky disc, that 100% self officiated play is
> unrealistic.
>
> However, you seem to be rather fervent about this, so I've got to ask:
> besides posting on RSD, what have you done to make ref's happen?
if you dont know you better axs sombody
-------------------------------------------------------
Have
> you put together prototype training manuals for refs, covering the
> ways in which they'll interact with the game and what powers they'll
> be granted?
or even just doing a serch here on rsd might answer these questions.
------------------------------------------------------------
Have you made proposals for how many there will be, what
> their division of labor will be, who will have decision authority
> between conflicting refs, what role video playback might have in
> dispute resolution?
dont make it more complicated than it has to be.......referee(ing) is
as easy as one two three. seriously, youde be AMAZED at how much
having fully active refs actually simplifies the whole rule
enforcement process. ever herd of the term "streamline"?.....THATS
what effect refs have on ultimate.......and any sport for that matter.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you run the numbers on referee training?
> How long it will take to train a ref, how many ref's per game, how
> many crews you'll need to complete a college/club series? How much
> will this training cost, what equipment will a ref need, how much will
> they be paid to ref a game, how will seniority/skill be factored into
> pay? Have you put any thoughts down regarding how changes to this
> system will be administered if refs are adopted? What role will refs
> have in rules changes? Who will oversee changes in regulations for on-
> field ref behavior? Have you put any of this into practice,
> organizing a tournament (even a small, informal local one) that uses
> refs to provide some tangible support for all this? Assuming you put
> together a few tournaments and it yields all the magnificent results
> you hope refs will bring to the sport, how do you extrapolate that
> model across the US/internationally?
dude......again, dont over think the whole thing. Having refs in
sports is as normal as the day is long. All these questions are
easily answered and delt with once we decde as a membership
organization the accept and adapt to the sport being reffed. It aint
brain surgery thats for sure. And many of these questions would/could
be easily answerewd simply by reasearching how other sports facilitate
this service demand.
I mean, are people that play and organize other sports SMARTER than
the people that play and organize ultimate? They seem more than
capable enough to pull it(reffing) off. Are you suggesting that
ultimate people just arent that smart? if so, you might be onto
somthing. whats that saying again......"stupid is as stupid does (or
dosent)". if so fat so.......you seem to be saying that ultimate
people are just too stupid to pull it off.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Again, I'm all for experimentation with refs, and think that a ref-
> esque figure might clean up the sport and bring it a fair measure of
> legitimacy. But at least go as far as Frank did, and provide a well
> thought out solution.
the incorporation of refs IS the well thought out solution. Its just
that the lack of ref incorporation is whats got the sport where it is
today. all the other stuff is just time, money and effort. So if its
just the case that you people arent willing to afford any extra time
moiney or effort to make the transition and see this thing through
then thats a different story
Grant
the players to continue to "self officiate", but let the
observer call what they see. Let the players make the final
call if there was a foul. If they cant agree than the
observers call stays. If you go to an all ref system you
take away a lot of what ultimate is about. You lose a lot
of the spirit aspect.
How many times have you watched a game on tv where the ref
mademade a bad call. Even the replay shows their mistake. I
would rather take a shitty call from my opponent than some
person that thought they saw something.
CBrowning
> On Nov 6, 4:08 pm, Frank <fhuguen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4629837
>
> > (of Course Todd will tell you that this is what the fans want..)
>
> are you talking about c c c c cat fights????
"Because men think if women are grabbing and clawing at each other
there's a chance they might somehow... kiss"
ulticritic
> What about giving the observers more calling power. Allow
> the players to continue to "self officiate", but let the
> observer call what they see. Let the players make the final
> call if there was a foul. If they cant agree than the
> observers call stays. If you go to an all ref system you
> take away a lot of what ultimate is about. You lose a lot
> of the spirit aspect.
FIRST OFF....me thinks ther is a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG
difference in what you people think ultimate is SUPPOSED to be IDEALY
about and what its REALLY about (which is people being too cheap and
lazy to facilitate the service of 3rd party arb.) and DISPLAY
UNSPIRITED BEHAVIOR FAIRLY REGULARLY
SECONDLY.....if you people REALLY wanted to test and tout you
spiritual superiority youde get refs to call EVERYTHING and let
players take back or change calls when the refs got it wrong.......AS
STEVE PETERSON SO GEINUSLY SUGGESTED MANY THREADS AGO
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> How many times have you watched a game on tv where the ref
> mademade a bad call. Even the replay shows their mistake. I
> would rather take a shitty call from my opponent than some
> person that thought they saw something.
see now, i find that a person that has bought into, and play by, an
honor system being intentionally DIShonorable("shitty calls" and
whatnot) to be MUCH MORE deplorable, appauling and unappealing.
ulticritic
you got that right!
Jared Smith
So you prefer that shitty calls come at crucial points in the game, as
often as an opponent sees fit and directly related to attempting to
gain an advantage for one team versus randomly, as infrequently as
possible and without bias towards either team? That seems ridiculous
Jared Smith
>
> (of Course Todd will tell you that this is what the fans want..)
Also why would adding refs to ultimate turn it into Women's Soccer?
fishklan41
This happened because there was no ref....just an observer
Reggie Fanelli
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---i didn't click, of course, is this the girl soccer player pulling
hair and punching and tripping out of control?
if so....i would have punched that bitch in the side of the head and
knocked her ass out the VERY FIRST time she tried any of that shit on
me.....and no ref would have seen it....and that would have been
that. no highlights of her at all.
same for any dude that tried it.
ask around.
fishklan41
Ill testify....
Grant
possible you would have
just as many problems. Those
ulticritic
> >http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4629837
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ---i didn't click, of course, is this the girl soccer player pulling
> hair and punching and tripping out of control?
you really should........this bitch is crazed. in fact, it was
surprising to me that she didnt fully comprehand the level of he
unsportsmanship. I guess these are the kind of thing that happen to
otherwise good natured people when they compete in sports........and
probably the reason that refs were invented.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> if so....i would have punched that bitch in the side of the head and
> knocked her ass out the VERY FIRST time she tried any of that shit on
> me.....and no ref would have seen it....and that would have been
> that.
yet another reason why soccer could use an extra ref on the
field........too easy to get away with cheap plays.....whether
initiated or retalitory. but this is the case with any sport really.
One can get away with ANYTHING the ref dosent see.......and even in
ultimate it would be quite hard for a player ref to make a call on
someone when he is "knocked out".
i think we were all wondering how no ref or linesman saw even one of
this crazed bitches cheap plays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
no highlights of her at all.
> same for any dude that tried it.
yea, but the highlight would have been of you then.......and soccer
would still have a flawed ref system.
ulticritic
> I'm not saying that a ref system wouldnt work, but its
> possible you would have
> just as many problems.
yea......if you only had one freaking ref workin the game. but thats
an easy fix that would nip said "problems" in the bud, no?
Max
that there was one (or few, as I haven't seen any actual reporting on
the ref himself) marginally-skilled referee at this game. If this
were an international game she would have been red carded about 5
times. To those claiming that having one ref is a problem, what say
you to this: wouldn't the game have been better officiated if there
were a system where each player had the ability to police each other?
Having 14 "refs" (or 22, if we're still talking about soccer) with
sufficient checks and balances would have seen all of these
infractions and taken action. Second, I haven't yet heard the point
brought up that this is a Women's Soccer game in a low-level
conference. They wouldn't throw their money away hiring 5 refs/
linesmen for this meaningless game (they didn't - empirical evidence
of market forces at work), so why would you assume that the overall
unpopular sport of Ultimate would spend more on the same?
>SECONDLY.....if you people REALLY wanted to test and tout you
>spiritual superiority youde get refs to call EVERYTHING and let
>players take back or change calls when the refs got it wrong.......AS
>STEVE PETERSON SO GEINUSLY SUGGESTED MANY THREADS AGO '
this sounds like a terrible idea...if players are going to overrule
the refs why bring the refs at all?
__________________________________________
>Your argument is flawed on two accounts:
>1 One of the things Toad proposes could be a result of adding refs to
>the sport of ultimate is that it will be more popular and make TV.
>well, there you have it. everyone, everyone is talking tonight about
>two mediocre teams in the mountain west or Pac 10 conference that will
>not scare the sweet 16 in the NCAA tournament. that means they
>wouldn't make nationals. everyone is talking about these two mediocre
>teams, they're on ESPN. last weekend 3 teams won a national
>championship. No one cares. Fury won their 37th national title in a
>row. one of the greatest dynasty's in team sports, no one gives a
>rats ass. Chain won the first national title of their history and the
>first from the south region. Who gives a shit? Axis didn't even make
>nationals last year. That could be a story if anyone gave a flying
>fuk about ultimate. so, yeah. if you add refs you get popularity and
>television coverage. Shit, if somebody pulled that shit at nationals
>this year there wouldn't even be video coverage to show anyone.
I'm all for experimentation and continuing the great debate about
player control and refs and observers and refzervers, but cmon...your
statement is full of non-sequiturs and gaps in reasoning. Toad says
adding refs will make ulti popular. That's cool, and IMO there are a
lot of other factors that adding or not adding refs will eventually
have greater effect, but I don't need to debunk this thread. Refs
didn't make this particular incident popular. The violence and
blatant lack of sportsmanship (and the catfights) made this story
popular.
Everyone knows what Soccer is. Not everyone knows what Ulti is - so
at this point, any publicity is good publicity. "if you add refs then
you get popularity and television coverage" doesn't follow. There are
a LOT of steps missing between the if and the then...and I hope one of
them isn't "people will start hitting and fouling each other and we'll
get a viral video on ESPN".
Heinousboy
and explain how self officiating will solve their problems and prevent
this from ever happening again. I'm sure they're ready to change
their system and all the women who play college soccer probably hate
having a ref in the games they play.
Oh, and the idea of allowing players to overrule a refs call (which
was my idea Toad I don't know where you got Steve Peterson) only
applies if the ruling is in your favor. In other words you can call
yourself out if the ref ruled you were in but you can't rule yourself
in if the ref ruled you were out. And you could rule your opponent in
if the ref ruled he was out but not vice verse. Seems way more
spirited than the current system where people pretty much only make
calls that go in their favor. Not much spirit..gag..sportsmanship
there.
Max
> This all sounds like great stuff Max. Why don't you call up the NCAA
> and explain how self officiating will solve their problems and prevent
> this from ever happening again. I'm sure they're ready to change
> their system and all the women who play college soccer probably hate
> having a ref in the games they play.
I'm not saying that they should abolish the arbiter, I'm just directly
responding to the point that there aren't enough eyes on the field to
handle all the infractions going on. There ARE enough eyes, but under
the current system they don't have the power to do anything about it.
> Oh, and the idea of allowing players to overrule a refs call (which
> was my idea Toad I don't know where you got Steve Peterson) only
> applies if the ruling is in your favor. In other words you can call
> yourself out if the ref ruled you were in but you can't rule yourself
> in if the ref ruled you were out. And you could rule your opponent in
> if the ref ruled he was out but not vice verse. Seems way more
> spirited than the current system where people pretty much only make
> calls that go in their favor. Not much spirit..gag..sportsmanship
> there.
Thanks for clearing that up - that sounds acceptable to me.
fishklan41
>
> - Show quoted text -
I defense of Elizabeth Lambert....
21s:Elbow by BYU player-E.Lambert retaliates
26s:Dangerous Play/Obstruction by BYU player-E.Lambert does nothing
wrong she is playing the ball
31s:Fair tackle (physical but not dirty)
33s: BYU girl holds E.Lambert's arm and pulls her to the ground
37s:BYU girl pulls E.Lamberts shorts then dives when E.Lamb...ert
pulls ponytail
1:05:Lambert clears ball and inadvertantly hits the girl who was
fouled in the face
1:14 :E.Lambert clears ball and girl runs into her hand as she follows
through
This wouldn't have gotten out of hand if the ref had controlled the
game...
I'm not sayin what she did was right...the commentators were focusing
on her....but if the ref isn't going to protect the players the
players end up protecting themselves....and the results are usually
this...or in ultimate ...a call fest
ulticritic
> I think a big reason so much of her shenanigans weren't called was
> that there was one (or few, as I haven't seen any actual reporting on
> the ref himself) marginally-skilled referee at this game.
marginally skilled????? more like "completly SUCK"!
--------------------------------------------------------------
If this
> were an international game she would have been red carded about 5
> times. To those claiming that having one ref is a problem, what say
> you to this: wouldn't the game have been better officiated if there
> were a system where each player had the ability to police each other?
not nesessarily. sure she might not have been able to get away with
the level of aggression but there may have been many other "bailout
calls" or even similar "cheap" plays that would have been just as
easily missed by and observer style soccer ref (and obviously
contested by the offender)......no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Having 14 "refs" (or 22, if we're still talking about soccer) with
> sufficient checks and balances would have seen all of these
> infractions and taken action.
what action is that....refering to the same official that didnt see
all the fouls to begin with?
---------------------------------------------------------------
Second, I haven't yet heard the point
> brought up that this is a Women's Soccer game in a low-level
> conference. They wouldn't throw their money away hiring 5 refs/
> linesmen for this meaningless game
well isnt that moe due to the tradition of soccer not using 5 refs.
to me, too few refs is an epidemic that plauges that whole sport
-----------------------------------------------------
(they didn't - empirical evidence
> of market forces at work),
i'd say empirical evidense of tradition/culture at work. i mean
wouldnt that be like saying that mlb dosent use IR due to financial
constraints?
-------------------------------------------------------------
so why would you assume that the overall
> unpopular sport of Ultimate would spend more on the same?
cause they are smarter and have learned from the mistakes and
shortcomings of othre sports rules and management techniques
---------------------------------------------------------
>
> >SECONDLY.....if you people REALLY wanted to test and tout you
> >spiritual superiority youde get refs to call EVERYTHING and let
> >players take back or change calls when the refs got it wrong.......AS
> >STEVE PETERSON SO GEINUSLY SUGGESTED MANY THREADS AGO '
>
> this sounds like a terrible idea...if players are going to overrule
> the refs why bring the refs at all?
to test and tout spirit.......JUST LIKE I SAID. maybe i need to
clarify.......the refs would make all the initial calls, just to keep
it effecient and impartial. now in order for the system to be perfect
we also need accuracy AND a way for players to demonstrate good spirit
SO we allow players to overturn JUST CALLS THAT GO AGAINST THEIR TEAMS
BEST INTERESTS (maybe i didnt clarify that part). and showing good
spirit requires more that just admitting when bad calls are made in
your favor BUT ALSO not bitching about bad calls that go in the other
teams favor. I mean wouldnt adhearing to such a system not only
REQUIRE higher levels of spirit, honor and piety but also INSTILL them
alot better than the current system?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm all for experimentation and continuing the great debate about
> player control and refs and observers and refzervers, but cmon...your
> statement is full of non-sequiturs and gaps in reasoning. Toad says
> adding refs will make ulti popular. That's cool, and IMO there are a
> lot of other factors that adding or not adding refs will eventually
> have greater effect, but I don't need to debunk this thread.
why dont ya......its about run its course anyways
---------------------------------------------
Refs
> didn't make this particular incident popular. The violence and
> blatant lack of sportsmanship (and the catfights) made this story
> popular.
i think it was the bad officiating (like EVERYONE has said) that
ENABLED the unsportsmanship and the story that followed to become
popular
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Everyone knows what Soccer is.
a contact sport?
--------------------------------------------
>Not everyone knows what Ulti is
a non contact sport? oh.....you mean "know of its existance". I
think most just know it as frisbee football
--------------------------------------------------------
- so
> at this point, any publicity is good publicity. "if you add refs then
> you get popularity and television coverage" doesn't follow.
whaaaaaaa?
-------------------------------------------------------------
There are
> a LOT of steps missing between the if and the then...and I hope one of
> them isn't "people will start hitting and fouling each other and we'll
> get a viral video on ESPN.
theres been plenty(dirty plays and fighting) of that kind of stuff in
ultimates history that hasent helped it gain popularity without
refs........so i dont know why throwin refs in at this stage would
make any difference in THAT respect.
Max
Doesn't mean I don't enjoy it tho
> If this
>
> > were an international game she would have been red carded about 5
> > times. To those claiming that having one ref is a problem, what say
> > you to this: wouldn't the game have been better officiated if there
> > were a system where each player had the ability to police each other?
>
> not nesessarily. sure she might not have been able to get away with
> the level of aggression but there may have been many other "bailout
> calls" or even similar "cheap" plays that would have been just as
> easily missed by and observer style soccer ref (and obviously
> contested by the offender)......no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Having 14 "refs" (or 22, if we're still talking about soccer) with
> > sufficient checks and balances would have seen all of these
> > infractions and taken action.
>
> what action is that....refering to the same official that didnt see
> all the fouls to begin with?
I'm talking about the players. The action would be self-officiation,
although it's more complicated than just letting them call their own
fouls. I know that presents its own set of problems, but at least we
don't have to pay them to come instead of 22 refs each with an eye on
a player
---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Second, I haven't yet heard the point
>
> > brought up that this is a Women's Soccer game in a low-level
> > conference. They wouldn't throw their money away hiring 5 refs/
> > linesmen for this meaningless game
>
> well isnt that moe due to the tradition of soccer not using 5 refs.
> to me, too few refs is an epidemic that plauges that whole sport
At the highest level they do use 5 refs.
-----------------------------------------------------
> (they didn't - empirical evidence
>
> > of market forces at work),
>
> i'd say empirical evidense of tradition/culture at work. i mean
> wouldnt that be like saying that mlb dosent use IR due to financial
> constraints?
Not at all...it's more like saying why MLB uses 4 umps during the
regular season and 6 during the playoffs.
-------------------------------------------------------------
> > this sounds like a terrible idea...if players are going to overrule
> > the refs why bring the refs at all?
>
> to test and tout spirit.......JUST LIKE I SAID. maybe i need to
> clarify.......the refs would make all the initial calls, just to keep
> it effecient and impartial. now in order for the system to be perfect
> we also need accuracy AND a way for players to demonstrate good spirit
> SO we allow players to overturn JUST CALLS THAT GO AGAINST THEIR TEAMS
> BEST INTERESTS (maybe i didnt clarify that part). and showing good
> spirit requires more that just admitting when bad calls are made in
> your favor BUT ALSO not bitching about bad calls that go in the other
> teams favor. I mean wouldnt adhearing to such a system not only
> REQUIRE higher levels of spirit, honor and piety but also INSTILL them
> alot better than the current system?
No yeah...after it was clarified I totaly see the benefit of this. I
can think of plenty of times when players have tried to convince their
own teammates that they're making a bad call.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
> Refs
>
> > didn't make this particular incident popular. The violence and
> > blatant lack of sportsmanship (and the catfights) made this story
> > popular.
>
> i think it was the bad officiating (like EVERYONE has said) that
> ENABLED the unsportsmanship and the story that followed to become
> popular
Agreed, but it's not why this is a fun story. It's a fun story
because girls are punching and kicking and pulling each other and it'
sall caught on camera.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> a non contact sport? oh.....you mean "know of its existance". I
> think most just know it as frisbee football
sure...whatever
--------------------------------------------------------
> - so
>
> > at this point, any publicity is good publicity. "if you add refs then
> > you get popularity and television coverage" doesn't follow.
>
> whaaaaaaa?
Because I see the same sentence written over and over on this forum by
you and some others. It usually reads close to what's in quotations
above, and in YOUR mind, it might make sense, but it reality there are
logical steps in between the "if" and the "then" that aren't written
down, and I can't read your mind, and I don't see the connection
myself, and I don't agree with it...so it comes off as a stupid and
borish opinion. If you all said "if you add refs then this then this
then this then ulti will be more popular" maybe I could agree with
you.
-------------------------------------------------------------
> theres been plenty(dirty plays and fighting) of that kind of stuff in
> ultimates history that hasent helped it gain popularity without
> refs........so i dont know why throwin refs in at this stage would
> make any difference in THAT respect.
Exactly. Thefan or whoever it was made it sound like that was exactly
what would happen. I can see it now...Lead story on Sportscenter
tomorrow morning...Hey everyone, Ultimate Frisbee! They agreed to use
referees instead of self-officiating themselves. Do you really think
the addition of refs would make this story, and this sport, so
interesting?
Heinousboy
> Exactly. Thefan or whoever it was made it sound like that was exactly
> what would happen. I can see it now...Lead story on Sportscenter
> tomorrow morning...Hey everyone, Ultimate Frisbee! They agreed to use
> referees instead of self-officiating themselves. Do you really think
> the addition of refs would make this story, and this sport, so
> interesting?
It's not so much make it happen as have a chance. I'd rather have a
1% chance of having the national championships or an elite league be
picked up by a major TV outlet (Hell I'd take Hulu) then a 0% chance
as it stands now. There's a reason why tennis, a sport which is
almost always self officiated all the way up to the college level
always has an official for televised events.
Max
> 1% chance of having the national championships or an elite league be
> picked up by a major TV outlet (Hell I'd take Hulu) then a 0% chance
> as it stands now. There's a reason why tennis, a sport which is
> almost always self officiated all the way up to the college level
> always has an official for televised events.
this plausible, even 1% plausible. Now you can make the case that
refs will speed up the pace of the game and eliminate unnecessary
player arguments and the like, but I don't see this as the prominent
barrier to entry. I can just as easily imagine a world where Ultimate
exists as a major popular sport in its self-officiated and observed
form. It needs exposure, sponsorship, player-base, etc. Refs don't
make sports interesting to watch. The sport itself makes the sport
interesting to watch.
Jared Smith
I don't think the argument is that the literal presence of refs would
make the game more marketable. But the things that refs would add, or
remove, from the game would make it more marketable. Firstly refs
would end tedious and drawn out arguments between players. This is
painfully boring and no fan who's first checking out the game is going
to want to stick around and watch people debate the finer points of a
collision for ten minutes. Refs would also increase stop time
efficiency such as time outs, half time and time between points. This
also increases the enjoyability of the game as fans get more action
and less downtime. Refs help to reduce blatantly incorrect (biased)
calls, which I feel like is reasonably thought to turn off a spectator
as well. Not to mention refs would help to bring continuity with hand
signals so that spectators quickly know the cause and outcome of an
infraction. This is really a comparison of refs vs. self-officiation,
observers could theoretically provide all of the benefits too, though
probably not as well in their current application.
ulticritic
> > 1% chance of having the national championships or an elite league be
> > picked up by a major TV outlet (Hell I'd take Hulu) then a 0% chance
> > as it stands now. There's a reason why tennis, a sport which is
> > almost always self officiated all the way up to the college level
> > always has an official for televised events.
>
> Sounds good to me too...I just don't see where including Refs makes
> this plausible, even 1% plausible.
how about because they help to make the presentation and entertainment
value 100% better.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now you can make the case that
> refs will speed up the pace of the game and eliminate unnecessary
> player arguments and the like,
which adds to entertainment value, attracts more interest and
exposure, grows more rapidly, attracts better athleats(more hs and
college VARASITY programs), then a pro league ......its all just part
of the progression and evolution of it all.......and it(refs) may just
be a first step but its a key fiirst step. I kinda equate it to the
cave mans evolutionary use of tools (refs are tools)........first they
discovered how to use stones as weapons and tools.....they refined
them by shaping and sharpening them......BUT it took them millions of
years to figure out how much more effecient the "sharpened shaped
rock" (which are the observers in this analogy) would be with a stick
attatched to it (th stick in this case being full power gien to
officials to make calls. so ya see, its just recently that people
have been experimenting with the new trend of attatching a stick to
their stones (a la mike g and the uoa). Once the cave man had this
new invention it opened the doors to a whole ne relm of life and
existance. So if you dont use the modern tools then you will be
viewed as (and BE) primative and archaic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
but I don't see this as the prominent
> barrier to entry.
do ya now?
----------------------------------------
I can just as easily imagine a world where Ultimate
> exists as a major popular sport in its self-officiated and observed
> form.
koo koo.......and like i said, with the uoa version of rule
enforcement and game management the officials are more ref than
observer.........WAY more. full on self officiation with an action/
field sport wouldnt have a chance in hell on tv.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It needs exposure, sponsorship, player-base, etc. Refs don't
> make sports interesting to watch.
sure they do......and more entertaining
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The sport itself makes the sport
> interesting to watch.
elements of the sport are phenomenal........but in show business you
got to put together those elements in a neat and easy to follow
package AND ya got to fluff it up with bells, whistles and sea appeal
on top of that. Refs are like the condustors of an
orchistra......without them, every thing gets jumbled up and out of
tune. refs simply help to add the continuity so that entertainment
value (diving blocks, long hucks, fast break scores) is maximized. I
dont know why its so hard for some of you to understand that this
brings us back to the point..."no refs, no show(or bad show)"..."no
show no business", its that simple.
Max
>make the game more marketable. But the things that refs would add, or
>This is really a comparison of refs vs. self-officiation,
>observers could theoretically provide all of the benefits too, though
>probably not as well in their current application.
Call me a spirit zealot, but I agree that all of the things you said
could AND SHOULD be handled by an observer system, and we should be
creating a set of rules that accomplish all of these goals while still
giving the players a level of control and self-officiation.
________________________
> (refs are tools)
teehee
> so ya see, its just recently that people
> have been experimenting with the new trend of attatching a stick to
> their stones (a la mike g and the uoa). Once the cave man had this
> new invention it opened the doors to a whole ne relm of life and
> existance. So if you dont use the modern tools then you will be
> viewed as (and BE) primative and archaic.
Couldn't agree more. I'll use your analogy to reiterate that it's an
evolution, and you can't simply jump from the system we have now to a
complete overhaul with refs making all the calls. Maybe someday we'll
get up there. I've used other phrases to describe this like happy
medium, baby steps, compromise.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> but I don't see this as the prominent
>
> > barrier to entry.
>
> do ya now?
eh, yes and no. I understand the benefits of making the sport
"cleaner", but I certainly don't see it as the singular end-all
barrier holding Ulti back.
----------------------------------------
> I can just as easily imagine a world where Ultimate
>
> > exists as a major popular sport in its self-officiated and observed
> > form.
>
> koo koo.......and like i said, with the uoa version of rule
> enforcement and game management the officials are more ref than
> observer.........WAY more. full on self officiation with an action/
> field sport wouldnt have a chance in hell on tv.
The position of observer is definitely evolving in the direction of
referee, but I don't think, nor do I want it to get all the way
there. I know Mike is for experimentation with full-power referees,
but I think he knows the importance of self-officiation, and he's
doing a great job trying to make the system better.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> elements of the sport are phenomenal........but in show business you
> got to put together those elements in a neat and easy to follow
> package AND ya got to fluff it up with bells, whistles and sea appeal
> on top of that. Refs are like the condustors of an
> orchistra......without them, every thing gets jumbled up and out of
> tune. refs simply help to add the continuity so that entertainment
> value (diving blocks, long hucks, fast break scores) is maximized. I
> dont know why its so hard for some of you to understand that this
> brings us back to the point..."no refs, no show(or bad show)"..."no
> show no business", its that simple.
I understand where you're coming from, but the only time I see refs or
umps in highlight reels is when they do something glaringly wrong. I
think the show will be just as good with proper observers.