UltiTalk.Com
Welcome to the ULTIMATE Ultimate Frisbee forum. May 29, 2020, 11:17:27 PM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

The ultimate forum for talking about Ultimate Frisbee. Aimed at bringing new life to the world of Ultimate Frisbee discussions, UltiTalk.Com (UT) combines both regional and international topics in one friendly place. So say hello to UT: The International Ultimate Frisbee forum.

Register your FREE UltiTalk.Com account to reveal the members-only Shout Box, Chatroom, and more!
Subscribe to our RSS feeds. Click the next to the board of your choice.
 
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Members Links Gallery Login Register  
Visit UltiTalk.Com on TwitterVisit UltiTalk.Com on Facebook

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2
1  Regional / Australasia / Re: Nationals 2009 in Perth on: March 04, 2009, 05:28:11 PM
are these pickup players looking to skip regionals and then pick up on a team heading to nats? there's a lot of skill not going to nats otherwise.
2  Regional / Europe / Re: World Games '09 on: February 27, 2009, 09:49:58 PM
If the Aussie and Japanese teams are any indication, just go through the goal stats (scored and assists) from Worlds in Vancouver and pick the top half dozen men and women, which would mean Wigsy's a cert, and you would expect the Forth lassies, and Janey and Sally to have strong cases also, but I don't know how many of these ppl are trying out. I'd throw Sealy in also, cos for a big guy, he is very athletic.  I have no other idea but I fear whoever is chosen may suffer from burnout by the time the tourney arrives given the seemingly long campaign just to make the team. The biggest challenge the selectors face is choosing a coed team when so many of the players are lacking substantial amounts of recent (ie last couple of years) coed play. Good luck to those still in the hunt and I eagerly await the GB team announcement.
3  Regional / Australasia / Re: World Games 09 on: February 20, 2009, 12:24:30 PM
pity we wont get to see matty, gack and mike all together again.

also, http://www.the-huddle.org/weblog/2009/02/20/japanese-worlds-team-announced/

4  Regional / Australasia / Re: MVP Awards on: November 13, 2008, 11:18:35 AM
1) PotT (Player of the Tournament) - who played the best at the tournament
2) BPRttT (Best Player Relative to their Team) - this is what we currently give

ok, late with my 2 cents, but thought it might provide a useful flipside. I believe the BPRttT is a worthwhile award for what it is, but it is in no way comparable to a far more elite and prestigious, and in my mind preferred, PotT style award. I believe there is currently room for both, but the BPRttT is just that and is not really the MVP as most would recognise the MVP in other sports, so we can't continue to use the current system/s to if we are going to continue to call the award the MVP. With many clubs these days having end of seasons awards, the BPRttT can kinda be acknowledged in this manner, and its probably a more relevant place to do so. The unspoken part of the current MVP title is MVP "of the tourney".
I won the award playing on a team with far better players than myself (and against far superior players), because I did the most speccie stuff on my team, primarily on D. That gets you noticed - 1 layout block will be remembered over 5 goal assists. Heck even 3 layout bids without actually getting a block stands out enough to poll. The girl making a layout bid for anything will win votes no matter how many times she dropped the disc. (ok, I exaggerate my last point a little)

I think this is related to the 'receivers' dominating the voting, its a bigger visual impact to take a superb offense-saving grab than to handle turnover free and not throw swill requiring superb grabs. One good catch far exceeds one sweet break throw for impact. These visual cues are easily recalled come voting time when rushed, like voting at nats/mixed nats often is.

Another problem with the recent system is that captains are unlikely to include themselves in the 3 vote tally too often. Many captains are likely to get votes from opposing teams, but wouldn't necessarily give themselves their full, when justified, reward. The recent system of voting for both teams instead of just the opposition is far better, but if we open it up for each team to discuss amongst themselves before voting instead of it being solely the captain's choice, that is better again. Requiring proper consideration to awarding votes will increase the award's respect amongst players and provide better vote recipients, not just the flashy layout-D-bidding person.

We should maintain the opportunity that every player competing should be eligible to win the PotT, however only in rare cases should someone outside of the quarterfinals actually win it, as evidence by the gridiron, basketball, dally M, brownlow examples. But the benefit these polls have in voting is the votes are never rushed, its always done upon a little quiet reflection, something no captain ever has at a tourney. Post game umpires and media folk do have this time. And thereby the panel at tourneys might well be an ideal way to detemine the PotT, but the challenge will be to get an even spread of objective eyes. That's something that the UPA can probably achieve, but Aust can't, due to a lack of game wise spectators at nationals.

So if we are going to go ahead maintaining one award, make it the PotT (not sure of a system to get there though), or split the award and give proper recognition to the tourney MVP alongside the BPRttT. Winning any award is nice, but I sometimes wonder if the value of the award was matched by the prize I was given for winning it - a pair of animal feet slippers! (To be fair, the Vics did organise a proper trophy for the award and I don't really pay attention anymore to what the recipients are given these days.)

PS Tom - no offence taken mate Smiley
PPS Definitely bring back the Garvey/Basten award if we continue with the current MVP(/BPRttT) system.
5  Regional / Australasia / Re: City rankings on: November 12, 2008, 04:11:39 PM
its funny that on the strength of AUG and a decent showing in AMUC, adelaide leapfrogged canberra in the mixed. you'd never have thought that would be the case.
6  Regional / Australasia / Re: Spirit at AMUC08 on: November 12, 2008, 03:58:24 PM

Jason - I've never heard anyone mention any of the things you've suggested in a circle after the game.

i've heard comments like this coming from JDR at league in canberra and also after playing against him at interstate tourneys, over the years and its one of the reasons i love and respect the man dearly. yes, it might take a brass pair to summon the courage to do so, but ultimately you are trying to enrich the experience of all ulti players when they next take to the field, so should be seen as a positive thing to do and a fearless approach is required. the method and motive you have for commenting on spirit is important and so the delivery should be in a manner like jase has described - positive reinforcement. it's important in this respect to mention the positive aspects of the game, as jase mentioned, as rewarding fair play is just as important as chastising the poorer moments.

there are many good things that can come from having a discussion of spirit after a game. in smaller leagues (the old hills league, canberra div 1 etc) the benefits shrink as everyone already knows everyone else from frequently playing against them and having shared many beers discussing the last frisbee game at the local after league. also, league games between friends are less likely to have spirit issues than league/tourney games between acquaintances (not to say it doesn't happen, but in general). at tournaments or larger leagues is where i think this idea is best utilised.

i believe that the discussion of spirit is best if a team hears it from both an opposition captain and also their own captain, rather than one or the other, as some people may be less inclined towards corrective action upon hearing a negative comment from an opposition player/capt then they may from their own capt. you only play the other team once, maybe twice a tourney, whereas you play every game with your capt.

the best scenario is to have a brief discussion within your own team and then have the spirit circle. it does not add more than 3 minutes to the total time, so its not a drama for those who have to dash off after league or need to cool down between games at a tourney. the only catch is i would struggle to see a captain commenting on their teams poor spirit in this public forum, despite the fact it should be an acceptable forum for doing so, as means of recognising fault and apologising.

we just have to want to do it this way and unfortunately apathy can be contagious.  if 'spirit captains' are a good starting point to achieving the goal of spirit awareness, well, sign me up. a great initiative ruebs!
7  Regional / Australasia / Re: WUGC 2008 on: August 05, 2008, 02:39:42 AM
I think the stats are all over the place. At one point they said Mama threw a goal to herself Smiley.

Aussie worlds first callahan actually Smiley yeah mama.

the canada v japan game was a balltearer. japan lost from 15-11 up. double match point, canada on d, pull lands one yard in from back of endzone, slides out. then a first pass layout block by kevin (#4). huge!! 33 points played for total of 33 turnovers, it was a great game to watch.

yeah, sweet as was gimping it up, we simply had to get him out there though. JD is looking iffy, but will play at some point (has played with a torn calf before) despite the fact he'll prolly tear it worse. he'll live.  terra are the aussie team of the tourney though, they had a mammoth cheer squad v usa today. outside of beach worlds, the first aussie team to beat USA in international competition. anyway, past my bedtime, gotta run.

'mundis blog is rolling, check it out - barramundis2008.blogspot.com
8  Regional / Australasia / Re: WWOS on: May 19, 2008, 10:15:43 PM
It didn't air last week. Not sure about yesterday. Was up at Stampede.

wasn't on again. gonna write to channel 9 and find out more, methinks...
9  Regional / Australasia / Re: Frisbee couples on: May 16, 2008, 03:20:57 AM
I just got given the spreadsheet that included all the players and guests going to worlds. 

A better question is what purpose do you have in needing that list?
10  Regional / Australasia / Re: NUFL08 on: May 08, 2008, 08:15:45 PM
littletom meant that on the back of results at nats, FU got an invite to play NUFL as FU. it was deemed too late notice, by someone, so some FU players are joining the 'newly formed' team 'COUNTRY' (its about how you pronounce it, not spell it), which is a combined canb/newc/gong team. if only we could have used our first choice name...
11  Regional / Australasia / Re: Nationals 2008 on: March 25, 2008, 12:25:48 AM
Given that regionals is really the 'first round of nationals' as JdR notes, with a known seeding outcome and draw structure for nationals, changing the seedings structure between regionals and nats is dangerous. Teams *could* deliberately lose games at regionals to ensure a particular finish and therefore seeding for nationals, with the intent of getting a preferred nats draw.
eg. Fyshwick United *could* have thrown the 2v3 game at regionals with I-Beam to ensure an overall 4th seed, and a pool game with HoS to claim #1 seed - a move they *might* consider 'preferable'. If then NZ were to be moved to the top 4 seeding after regionals, a possibility, then Fyshwick would be bumped to 5th seeds, and the less favourable cusp C-pool, an outcome not predicted when they played I-Beam. We are only trying to determine seedings, not final places, so the accuracy is important but not critical. Otherwise we shouldn't bother and just crown HoS nat champs now. Surely we don't want that Wink

My point - I believe any alterations to the seeding structure (ie regional rankings) should happen before regionals or not at all. This doesn't alleviate the dilemma Rachg mentioned from last year. Last year was a twist of fate but results and therefore final seedings should ultimately be the responsibility of the individual teams who performed poorly at regionals due to player shortages, not the nationals draw-makers. (Who's to say another team didn't get the same wedding invites but turned them down to play regionals and gain a better seeding? I guess it was all dealt with in the appeals process, couldn't be bothered reading it.) Teams in these situations should work to their own fate and the luck of the draw goes to the other teams. Whereas structural seeding alterations like the amendment of the NZ team whose relative regional strength varies (with no true comparitive factoring) depending on whether they send a club team or a worlds team should occur before regionals. That way teams know the possible outcomes waiting for them after regionals.

Appeals against seedings should be limited to out-of-control reasons for incorrect seedings, not that 'your results were not a true reflection of reality' (like last year). Otherwise Manly could argue they had an off game and are actually much better than Fakulbee and deserve the wildcard spot more. Noone would accept that, so why accept other results as 'inaccurate'. There are too many shades of grey to be subjective about it.

Given we have cusp pools, if there is a team whose seeding is between 5 and 12, their seeding would have to be considered to be wrong and either actually 1-4 or 12-16 before any change in seeding has a real effect on the draw anyway!

And whilst I'm stirring the pot - as the strength and depth of the open division increases and the regional strengths are more firmly established, how much longer do we continue with the 'cusp pool' concept. Surely if the regions are seeded based on relative strengths, this cusp pool becomes irrelevant, does it not, due to the seedings being true? Are we designing the draw to give a better chance to the 9th seeded team of winning nats? Is the cusp pool here to stay?
12  Regional / Australasia / Re: WUGC 2008 on: January 25, 2008, 10:33:46 PM
team announced today - Australia day  Wink

Steve Antonopoulos (NSW)
Tim Booth (NSW)
Paul Denyer (WA)
Anthony Dowle (NSW)
Matthew Dowle (NSW)
Peter Gardner (NSW)
Abra Garfield (NSW)
Andrew Glover (NSW)
Jonathan Holmes (ACT)
Angus Keenan (NSW)
Tim Lavis (NSW)
John Liddicoat (VIC)
Brett Matzuka (QLD)
Gavin Moore (NSW)
Michael Neild (QLD)
David O'Brien (NSW)
Joel Pillar (SA)
Jonathan Potts (NSW)
Daniel Rule (VIC)
Ken Shepherd (NSW)
Owen Shepherd (VIC)
Jonathan Tatham (NSW)
Mark Taylor (NSW)
Chris Warris (NSW)

13  Regional / Australasia / Re: Longest Day on: November 22, 2007, 05:53:49 PM
Alas, while I won't be there this year I hope to be there the next.  Seppo has officially begun the Skilled Migration application process.
- Seppoooooooooooooo #22  Roll Eyes

that's is awesome news seppo.  unfortunately prob a bit late to make another run for the 'mundis but it would be great to see your smiling face and hear that big broad accent back in these parts. good luck with it all!
14  Regional / Australasia / Re: worlds08 - open v mixed on: November 13, 2007, 02:22:35 AM
glad you mentioned the final of mixed nats this year. i almost brought it up in my last post in reference to intense mixed ulti. FAF v booty and newcastle had some enjoyably tight games at that tourney too. our semi with booty had a similar low number of turnovers, ending well before time cap due to the efficiency of both offences. like many tournaments if you play 8-10 games, only a handful will be against evenly matched opposition, especially if you are at the pointy end of the draw.

the sense of satisfaction for the big plays is a great point and one i hadn't really thought before. i'll think about that more tonight as i bid for a layout block in league...

and slow white's 8 pt choke was i dare say a feat that any chilly team could manage Wink (one for the older ultitalkers)
15  Regional / Australasia / Re: worlds08 - open v mixed on: November 13, 2007, 12:44:00 AM
thanks guys,
that blog was an interesting read, thanks brett. i am mostly familiar with the style differences between the divisions but the difference in standard was something i'd never seen compared from someone's direct experience. as an outsider i always thought the difference was minimal for the 1st couple of players in a roster but substantial past that.
my dilemma is i don't know which style of ulti i want to play more as both have qualities that uniquely appeal. i don't know if the standard of ulti will affect my looming decision. i've often wondered if it's that people prefer open over mixed and feel i am missing what this is, which is why i started the thread. perhaps, like brett, most people don't care and therefore follow the option which gives them 2 chances of selection - open 1st, then mixed - in which case i haven't missed anything. i kinda expected more folk to pipe up about open being superior to mixed but maybe that belief isn't as common as i'd thought - maybe its a clubs only thing...

i do agree that the standard of opposition will be different between the divisions, as suggested by the blog brett mentioned (referring to UPA) but opposite to what brett was saying (referring to worlds). i expect the open div will be better as most countries do what we do, and send the best players to play open/womens. if we sent our world games team (plus a few extra subs) as the barra's, they'd come home with gold almost unrivalled yet this option barely raises a second thought because the best dozen boys want to play open not mixed. i would like to rate gold in mixed as a better result than silver in open but the standard of opposition means i have some trouble doing so. (i'd still take the gold though Wink )

if the main attraction to playing mixed (at worlds) is having a broader role, what is the main attraction to playing open? would it be the standard of the ulti, intensity of ulti or something else?

(brett - we also played both TeamFisherPrice and Brass Monkey at WUCC and i understand from conversations with pat hard that brass had a substantially weaker roster in perth, despite the addition of ben. they lost their main female receiver (ex-donner party) at UPA nats to an horrendous knee injury (i think it was 3 separate tears in the same knee) and were giving more PT to boys who were bit players at UPA due to a smaller roster in perth. i didn't realise TFP were bolstered by furious players. we recognised early they had stronger men (and team overall) so we kept sending our women long, which annoyed their captain (as leon accidently overheard at halftime). these comments are in no way detractive of my thoughts that the mundi's can bring home gold.)

anyone heard which division/s the kiwis are planning on competing in next year?
Pages: [1] 2





Advertise on UT!



Register your FREE UltiTalk.Com account to remove these ads!
Change language to English Change language to Brazilian Change language to Chinese-Simplified Change language to Danish Change language to Dutch Change language to English Change language to Finnish Change language to French Change language to German Change language to Greek Change language to Hebrew Change language to Hungarian Change language to Indonesian Change language to Italian Change language to Japanese Change language to Norwegian Change language to Polish Change language to Portuguese Change language to Romanian Change language to Russian Change language to Spanish Change language to Swedish Change language to Thai Change language to Turkish Change language to Ukranian Change language to Vietnamese

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
UltiTalk.Com is the #1 forum and bulletin board for talking about, chatting about and discussing Ultimate Frisbee.
Please help spread the word to promote an international community of Ultimate Frisbee players, coaches and teachers.


Site Design By MWM Consulting, Inc. MWM Consulting, Inc.



Google last visited this page September 29, 2019, 10:06:13 AM
SimplePortal 2.1.1