UPA tryin' to hold back the UOA?????
Reggie Fanelli
be UPA certified IN ORDER to make that event UPA SANCTIONED....
BUT....an event with NO OBSERVERs can be sanctioned with no problem.
that's weird right?
the UPA offers VERY FEW Observer training clinics....but THEN EXPECTS
that if an event has observers...that they must ALL BE UPA certified
in order for the tournament to be UPA Sanctioned?
that can't be legit, right?
The UOA has created the change that has been adopted by the
UPA.....but if our observers aren't UPA certified...they may forbid
our events from being UPA Sanctioned??????????
is that for real???????
Reggie Fanelli
allowed to officiate UPA Sanctioned events?
so that means....unless i'm wrong....that no NEW Observers can EVER
work a tournament that is UPA Sanctioned....
that means that no new comer to observing can work an event that's upa
sanctioned.
that means that the UPA prefers to have NO OBSERVERS at a Sanctioned
event, rather than new blood in the pool....
that means that NO NEW OBSERVER can TRAIN and get experience...or
even 'give it a try' at an official UPA Sanctioned event??????
so....someone interested in observing has to wait like....4 years
until a UPA Clinic comes nearby....before they can work an event
that's upa certified?
how can observing advance......if the UPA "PUNISHES" an event, by not
letting it be certified....because it has a new observer cutting his
teeth at an event????
Throw
If that rumor mill info is true the way to turn things around for the
UOAA is pretty clear cut.
The UOAA simply needs to ramp up it's web presence a bit (i.e.
website)...and possibly "professionalism" in general. But what do we
know with only 138 years of disc sports between the 5 of us here at
tiu.com.
Here is a world wide web "link" which takes you to the UPA world wide
"website" and Official observer information.
http://www.upa.org/observers/manual#app2
below are short hand signal descriptions.
Have a good week there out East,
Hank & Co.
www.thisisultimate.com
read on !!
Some Ultimate Players Association hand signals,etc.
Appendix 2: Hand Signals
ACTIVE CALLS (Signal at time of occurrence and verbally echo the call)
In/out-of-bounds. Point with both arms, index fingers extended, to
the appropriate side of the line (i.e., toward the field or toward the
out-of-bounds area).
In/out of the end zone. Point with both arms, index fingers extended,
to the appropriate side of the goal line (i.e., toward the end zone or
toward the playing field proper).
Goal. Raise both arms straight up by ears, palms facing inward
(similar to a touchdown signal in football). Signal only after (i) it
has been determined that the receiver made the catch in the end zone
(initial point of contact completely in the end zone), and (ii) there
are no unresolved calls that might negate the score.
Time limits. 20 seconds – two closed fists raised above head; 10
seconds – one closed fist raised above head; 5 seconds – open hand,
fingers extended, raised above head.
Off-sides. Arms crossed overhead in an “X.”
Force-out foul. If a player is considered in-bounds due to a force-
out foul, point towards out-of-bounds using a pushing motion with both
palms outward, and verbally call "force-out!" as well. Note that this
is now an active call, and player must be restarted with a check
afterwards.
Reggie Fanelli
said that getting UPA SANCTIONED wouldn't be difficult.
they said, around the table...that as long as a tournament wasn't
changing the rules, to make the event something NOT RECOGNIZABLE as
ultimate, that it would be eligible for UPA Sanctioning......
now it seems like the upa would rather there be no observers at an
event.....than having observers that are learning and trying to
advance the officiating process of ultimate!
seriously...why would the upa prefer NO OBSERVERS....to having new
observers who have not yet been certified at one of their VERY FEW and
far away and far between UPA certification clinics.
AND...why not make ME an observer trainer...and Jason Weddle
too......since we are working with TONS OF NEW OBSERVERS every few
weeks?????
why punish....rather than praise?
what the fuck?????
it's like they are ASKING to be competed against, rather than
including folks trying to help.
what the fuck???
Reggie Fanelli
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---these signals are out dated.
not sure what else you wrote.
Tooth
pisses me off given the new regular season structuring. Would it help
if the teams going contacted the UPA and told them what they think?
Throw
them what they think?"
Probably not....
gerics fanelli made his own bed ...upa is now letting him sleep in it
(since they can).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jzdadheKI8
Just our 2 cents of course.
Later
Lance Marput
www.thisisultimate.com
Hummer
14-hour trip to go to this tournament under the assumption that it
will be a UPA-sanctioned event.
The case I see the UPA using to say that is event cannot be sanctioned
is that play may not be fair since all the observers aren't UPA
certified. However, all teams committed have known the structure and
heard great reports from the teams that played in the two fall 8s, and
I assume that all of the teams want this to be a sanctioned event and
teams not going have no problem with this being a sanctioned event and
counting.
You can host a tournament with terrible communication, small and
uneven fields, no lines, a drunk TD ect. and get UPA sanctioning, as
I've been to tournaments like that. Something here doesn't make sense.
Lastly, the UPA has so far done an awful job in implementing their
regular season rules. As a team in the northeast it is a little harder
to get your 10 sanctioned games in, and the UPA website has absolutely
no way in determining what tournaments are sanctioned or counting by
looking at the tournament listings besides asking the TD. We have even
contacted them about this, and now this late in the game they say a
tournament cannot be UPA sanctioned when we already have committed the
plans and money to make an extremely long trip.
Jason Weddle
Feb 13-14
Feb 20-21
ARE NOT AFFECTED BY THE NEW RULES.
FUTURE EVENTS WILL BE BUT THEY SAID THAT THEY WILL TAKE INTO
CONSIDERATION ANY EXPERIMENTAL RULES AND NON UPA OFFICIALS IF
COMMUNICATED PRIOR TO THE EVENT.
Feb 13-14
Feb20-21
have been approved for sanctioning under the current UPA Standards.
The UPA said that they are in the process of making new standards for
sanctioning.........
the standards are that any experimental rules be approved prior to
approval AND that the observers MUST BE UPA Certified.
BUT THE UPA is willing to make considerations for experimental rules
and officiating as long as it is communicated in the NEW SANCTIONING
APPLICATION.
This is NOT a HUGE deal right now....... but could be for the UOA
considering that we train officials and want to work with the UPA for
sanctioning and improving officiating in the sport.
Jason
UOA Founder-co
Reggie Fanelli
> pisses me off given the new regular season structuring. Would it help
> if the teams going contacted the UPA and told them what they think?
--we have been told, as far as i know, that our Feb 13-14 and Feb
20-21 events WILL be SANCTIONED.
do i think it will help if you contacted the UPA?
yes...i think it would help out a great deal if everyone on each team
that's planning to attend phoned the UPA directly to talk to them
about this issue.
Please have every single athlete on your TEAMS call 1800-upa-
geth....NOW!
sincerely
Mike Gerics
Reggie Fanelli
> gerics fanelli made his own bed ...upa is now letting him sleep in it
> (since they can).
---hey faggot...what are you writing about...and why?
Reggie Fanelli
> 14-hour trip to go to this tournament under the assumption that it
> will be a UPA-sanctioned event.
---the tournament Buffalo is attending WILL be Sanctioned.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> You can host a tournament with terrible communication, small and
> uneven fields, no lines, a drunk TD ect. and get UPA sanctioning, as
> I've been to tournaments like that. Something here doesn't make sense.
---it seems that the answer to this is going to be yes!
crazy as hell, huh?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Lastly, the UPA has so far done an awful job in implementing their
> regular season rules. As a team in the northeast it is a little harder
> to get your 10 sanctioned games in, and the UPA website has absolutely
> no way in determining what tournaments are sanctioned or counting by
> looking at the tournament listings besides asking the TD. We have even
> contacted them about this, and now this late in the game they say a
> tournament cannot be UPA sanctioned when we already have committed the
> plans and money to make an extremely long trip.
---our events WILL be UOA Sanctioned......and maybe the UPA fears the
potential.
get ready!
Throw
mike gerics ---"hey faggot...what are you writing about...and why? "
oh....
I'm just chiming in with related comments pertaining to your thread.
Remember, you and i have the same goals Mike ....and we've been
involved in disc sports for essentially the same number of years.
Act like an adult Mike and maybe the upa will treat you like an
adult. But at this point that is a big" maybe."
It really isn't rocket science buddy.
Peter & Hank & Co.
www.thisisultimate.com
Reggie Fanelli
---try getting at least one brain between you 5 and you'll be on to
something....maybe.
Reggie Fanelli
> oh....
> I'm just chiming in with related comments pertaining to your thread.
>
> Remember, you and i have the same goals Mike ....and we've been
> involved in disc sports for essentially the same number of years.
>
> Act like an adult Mike and maybe the upa will treat you like an
> adult. But at this point that is a big" maybe."
>
> It really isn't rocket science buddy.
>
> Peter & Hank & Co.www.thisisultimate.com
---i'm gonna act just like me.
so keep your dumbassed advice and give it to someone else.
now...eat some shit...and fuck off.
Mitch
i think, long term, the UPA is right to require "certified officials"
for sanctioned games....but we are so far from "long term." The UPA
just doesn't have enough certified observers, nor does it have enough
certification clinics. I believe the number is somewhere between 100
and 200 certified observers....for 50 states. When that number is 10
times the current number or more, they can look at a policy like that,
but when the current population can't even support getting one single
pair of observers present at many of the college sectionals events,
all the requirement is saying is that "you realistically can't have
observers for your sanctioned games."
Two really bad thing I see with instituing the policy *now*.....
1) College players will have less access to observed games while ALL
college nationals games are observed. Give the players the experience
before the big games.
2) Fewer potential observers get the chance to be exposed to
observing. Getting some people experience before getting certified in
the very few certification opportunities out there only serves to get
more people interested in observing and improving people's skills
going into the certification process. Anything that stifles the
current growth of observing is a bad thing.
As I said, I think the UPA has the right idea for the future....but
the future is WAY too far away to make it the present.
Mitch
(UPA certified and UOA experienced observer)
Knappy
adult" here by contributing uninformed opinions ("probably not"
helping by contacting the UPA) or instigating with Mike.
Mike has an excellent point....the UPA has done a very poor job of
getting observers trained & qualified. I have no doubt that their
volunteers that are assigned to this are working extremely hard (Greg
C, etc), but they obviously lack the support & resources to handle the
job. I have asked for an observer clinic in Philly multiple times over
the past 3 years....even offered a decent sized (30 teams) tournament
as a resource to them near the largest population center in the US in
July when volunteers should be available....and they have yet to come
through with a clinic within an hour's drive of Philly.
The UPA needs to partner with local groups & other orgs to get this
done, but they seem reluctant to do so.
Hope they get their priorities straight.
Also, why would they take on the PR nightmare of confronting Jason/
Mike & UOA? They know how popular these 8's have been & how much work
these two have done to try some new things out. Poking the bear while
they're still unsure of what they will or will not sanction in the
future seems counter productive.
Reggie Fanelli
> (UPA certified and UOA experienced observer)-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--Mitch, you ARE UOA certified!
Throw
nice post....thanks for clearing the air a bit.
Just 1 comment.
Knappy: "Also, why would they take on the PR nightmare of confronting
Jason/
Mike & UOA?"
I am obviously of a totally different opinion than yourself on this.
My take on it, considering the nature of upa's long term
perspective..... why WOULD the UPA align themselves with Mike
"fanelli" Gerics?
Most players with 3 - 5 years experience simply don't know his
history,etc.
From a PR perspective I think gerics is far more toxic than you
realize.
He wants to be the # 1 officiating trainer in the US and he doesn't
even post under his name. wtf?
Gerics has obviously done some great stuff for the sport. He just
needs to let Jason, or some other level-headed person, be the "face"
of the ultimate observers association.
Also, I don't see him as a "bear" in the upa's eyes at all. A bear cub
maybe....but not a grizzly.
Either way....just "our" opinions of course.
Have a good day on that end.
Reggie Fanelli
> Mike & UOA? They know how popular these 8's have been & how much work
> these two have done to try some new things out. Poking the bear while
> they're still unsure of what they will or will not sanction in the
> future seems counter productive.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---am i the bear?
i like that.
and...thanks for the grown up replies.
very nice.
MG
bil
stop diluting this (otherwise interesting) thread.
gerics wrote:
> --Mitch, you ARE UOA certified!
This line is, perhaps, one reason that UPA certification is preferable
to the UOA.
The UPA certification process has 1) a series of steps that are
required 2) with exposure/mastery of specific content taught and 3)
tested. My guess/hope is that this process has been thought through to
ensure that observers can meet the requirements for all series issues.
The UPA doesn't have assurances, nor have they vetted, the UOA's
process.
And if Gerics can hand out "certification" by just saying so, that's
probably an indication that the UOA process is insufficient as it
currently stands.
At the same time - there's Knappy's problem of the UPA not offering up
enough certification clinics - possibly part of the cause for the UOA
springing up to fill hole that the UPA has left (Mitch addresses this
point as well). Whose authority is this under (scheduling and holding
of observer certification)? Let's complain about this, en masse, to
that person.
And there's the problem of tournaments being fly by your pants and
generally of low standards regardless of the presence or non-presence
of "observers." Mike's comments in this regard are appropriate (i.e.
aren't some observers better than no observers?).
So why should there suddenly be an UPA observer requirement?
Well, don't the UPA sanctioned college events results _matter_ now?
In any case, for future UOA events, can't the UOA just throw together
a standard proposal that they include in their tournament sanctioning
request that includes a statement addressing UOA observers, who meet
the minimum requirements of competency - hopefully they can negotiate
an agreement w/ the UPA who reasonably would allow this.
Although, possibly, and hopefully reasonably, the UPA might find
legitimate problems w/ the UOA's vetting process for observers - in
which case the UOA can improve its processes, thus resulting in a win
for everyone (although maybe more work for gerics).
- I went through the UPA process several years ago. Of course, I was
lucky enough to live in an area w/ lots of UPA certification clinics.
Reggie Fanelli
>
> This line is, perhaps, one reason that UPA certification is preferable
> to the UOA.
---look...i am totally sure that UPA "CERTIFICATION" is
preferable.....to the UPA....because there is no real "certification"
for the UOA at this point, aside from attending, being open minded to
change and to changing when instruction is given....and in general,
doing well as an observer.
however...having experienced both the UPA certification and worked UOA
events....i know that UOA officiating is preferable.
UOA methods and philosophies...are preferable.
UOA handsignals and mechanics....are preferable.
otherwise....the UOA would have invited the UPA to our
meetings......rather than the UPA inviting the UOA to theirs!
Stephen
your comments add nothing to most any discussion you chime
in to. why the snarky attitude? you gotta be the only one
laughing at these pitiful attempts to mess with mike.
have a good day on that end...
--
Posted from http://www.rsdnospam.com
Mimmo
the sextuple post has to be a new record!
but i agree...all the people from this is ultimate suck
Denmark
what they are requiring I would be willing to become a UPA certified
observer in order to learn how to become a UOA observer. I had
planned on being a UOA observer for College Terminus and went to
upa.org/observers/clinics to find out when the UPA observer clinics
were for this year and there are none planned. In fact last years
schedule is still posted. How are we supposed to develop new
observers and thereby develop our sport?
I am not trying to be sarcastic when I say can somebody point out to
me where the UPA observer clinics are scheduled? This can't be a step
forward for our sport. Why does the UPA do such a poor job of
communicating with its now 30,000 members? Is it really that hard to
do? I could not even find anything about it on upa.org/media/
pressreleases.
The whole point of making a tournament UPA sanctioned were to insure
that the results can from a well run tournament with credibility.
Right now if I were to seed teams for a tournament that I was running
I would weigh UOA tournament results much heavier that I would UPA
sanctioned tournaments.
Seemingly, hopelessly seeking answer from the UPA,
Denmark
Peter Jacobs
know why the UPA wants to keep their distance.
Larry Johnson was punted from the KC Chiefs for using that word.
Wow. See below.
Train-Wreck
I believe that the timing of this decision is horrible. Whether or not
you think certain people on RSD are a PR nightmare, making a decision
like this at the onset of the college season is a shotty call at
best.
Though many people may disagree with his posts, MG has created an
event that is getting serious national attention. He is also allowing
teams that are not perennial top 8 regional contenders to experience
ultimate with observers, which I believe to be synonymous with higher
quality ultimate.
If you want all of your observers to follow a particular certification
policy, that's your call. But this is not the time. This is a
discussion that should happen during the summer, since 8s events are
not typical club tournaments yet.
I'm nothing but excited to attend the 8s tournament on February
13th-14th and I hope that it is as great as people have said.
David I. Vatz
> i've just gotten word that the UPA wants ALL observers at an event to
> be UPA certified IN ORDER to make that event UPA SANCTIONED....
Where did this word come from? I don't see anything in the 2010
College Division guidelines stating that all observers have to be UPA
certified, nor do I see anything in the sanctioning application.
Where is this coming from? Was there something passed at the board
meeting?
Vatz
Mitch
> I'm nothing but excited to attend the 8s tournament on February
>
> - Show quoted text -
it will be great. people can and have said what they want about Mike,
but I don't think anyone questions his ability to put on a good
tournament.
This whole sanctioning policy will come down to their end goal. If
they are trying to "reserve the right to withhold sanctioning" if they
see a glaring problem with the rules being played with or observing
system being used, but really don't intend to stop whats already been
set in motion, then everything shoudl be fine. If they are just
saying "we want anything 'different' to be on record with us in order
to get sanctioning", this won't even be felt outside of making the
application process *slightly* longer. I hope this is what it is. If
they really are trying to "stop the UOA", then that is a VERY bad
thing IMO. Given that it sounds like the UPA adopted lots of what
Mike put forth, I'm guessing they just want any differences to be on
file so they can veto anything way out there (maybe keep two colleges
from playing a game of disc hoops and having it count towards the
standings).
As far as the UOA certification versus UPA...they are very different.
UPA is ~80% about rules and philisophy and ~20% about mechanics. UOA
is 100% about mechanics and philosophy without any focus on the
rules. Someone with a good working knowledge of the rules and poor
field work can pass the UPA class just like someone with good
mechanics and almost no knowledge of the rules can be UOA certified.
Neither of those solutions alone are in the best interest of ultimate
long term in my opinion. Combining the UOA standards for mechanics
along with a the UPA standards for rules knowledge (or stricter) would
make for a very capable officiating pool.
Colin
> i've just gotten word that the UPA wants ALL observers at an event to
> be UPA certified IN ORDER to make that event UPA SANCTIONED....
>
>
> that's weird right?
>
> the UPA offers VERY FEW Observer training clinics....but THEN EXPECTS
> that if an event has observers...that they must ALL BE UPA certified
> in order for the tournament to be UPA Sanctioned?
>
> that can't be legit, right?
>
> The UOA has created the change that has been adopted by the
> UPA.....but if our observers aren't UPA certified...they may forbid
> our events from being UPA Sanctioned??????????
>
> is that for real???????
I'm not a big fan of much of what the UPA is doing. Maybe this, too.
One question:
1) Does the UOA do any testing to ensure that the UOA observers know
the rules REALLY well?
Reggie Fanelli
> even post under his name. wtf?
---WANTS to be??????
he is already...
doesn't post under his own name................nor his own email
address!
crazy man......crazy.
Reggie Fanelli
> know why the UPA wants to keep their distance.
----keep their distance...that's fine with me.
but give our efforts and results the credit they deserve by NOT
pulling the rug out from under our feet and trying to slow us down.
Reggie Fanelli
---guess again!
see you in feb.
Colin
I drove 13 hours to go to a clinic. Well, passenged, I guess. It
worked out great. But that's not the ideal way to get people
certified. It'd be good for the UPA to throw some money at its
program to get a) more certified observer instructors, b) more
observer clinics, and, as a result, c) more UPA certified observers.
But I don't think any observers are better than no observers. I think
bad observers are worse than no observers. And they undermine the
observer program as a whole (players lose confidence in observers
generally, not organization-specific observers). So if the UOA
process weren't comprehensive enough, I could understand an
objection. That said, I don't know anything about the UPA's decision-
making on this.
Reggie Fanelli
> along with a the UPA standards for rules knowledge
---done.
start studying.
i have the test in hand.
Reggie Fanelli
> 1) Does the UOA do any testing to ensure that the UOA observers know
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---rules schmules.
communicate well with the teams, your partner and the sideline.
know if it's a foul or a travel or a foul or a travel or a foul or a
travel over and over again.
hustle to be in best perspective.
....rules test is in hand....so start studying.
also working on the official certification form.
Colin
Where's the rules test from? Would you like any help in creating or
making sure you have a really solid test? I'm good at the rules.
Reggie Fanelli
> bad observers are worse than no observers. And they undermine the
> observer program as a whole (players lose confidence in observers
> generally, not organization-specific observers). So if the UOA
> process weren't comprehensive enough, I could understand an
> objection.
---do we need to pull out the survey results AGAIN?
Reggie Fanelli
> making sure you have a really solid test? I'm good at the rules.
---no.
Colin
You have survey results about how comprehensive the UOA observer-
training process is? What are the observers saying who are both UOA
and UPA certified? Didn't Mitch say UOA training camp put 0% of its
focus on knowing the rules and 100% of focus on looking good
(mechanics, etc.)?
Reggie Fanelli
> training process is?
---indirectly, i suppose.
most of the surveys were filled out by athletes....
we have received high marks in all observer categories.
no one complained about any aspect of the observers or their effect on
the games.
i'd say that that bodes well for the observer training process.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What are the observers saying who are both UOA
> and UPA certified?
---i'm both.
the UOA observers are better.
the UOA training is better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Didn't Mitch say UOA training camp put 0% of its
> focus on knowing the rules and 100% of focus on looking good
> (mechanics, etc.)?
---tough to say that there's 0% emphasis on rules...since...we're
calling travels...and counting the stall...and returning athletes to
where they were when calls are made....and restarting play....
by no means are we trying to teach our observers to be able to quote a
bunch of rules.
we're training them to be AWESOME OBSERVERS.
so...you can weigh your focus however you think you should....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Greg Southfield
that an observer know what they're enforcing. That hole he
digs for himself just got even more deep. Looking good on
the field will never make up for poor rules emphasis.
Toad - Here's the infamous Gerics "Fag" link you requested,
but you could have used the search function.
http://www.rsdnospam.com/index.php?t=msg&th=14438&goto=50568&#msg_50568
And yes, we all know Mike was part of the Observer committee
meeting in December 09', then was suspended for a year for
misconduct as a tournament organizer the following month.
Its embarrassing when you're one of the top observers and
don't get invited to USAU's College Nationals where they
need observers for every game. That's what happens when
attitude exceeds talent.
Reggie Fanelli
> that an observer know what they're enforcing. That hole he
> digs for himself just got even more deep. Looking good on
> the field will never make up for poor rules emphasis.
--dipshit....i'm the best observer that there's ever been.
i haven't had a rule problem yet.
how cool is it...for me...to look soooo good, and be a great observer.
my attitude and talen are equal...just so you know.
how about you and yours?
got either?
Reggie Fanelli
> but you could have used the search function.http://www.rsdnospam.com/index.php?t=msg&th=14438&goto=50568&#msg_50568
---yeah...that guy is always deserving of a name calling.
do some research.
big whoop.
ulticritic
i was just reading throught this thread and was practically getting a
hard on listening to all those people torch peter "lance" dickhead
from this is ultimte dot com.
and couldnt help notice how he disappeared from the thread after being
repeatedly called out for being the imature idiot he WAS, STILL IS AND
ALWAYS WILL BE.
CLASSIC!!!!