UltiTalk.Com
Welcome to the ULTIMATE Ultimate Frisbee forum. November 20, 2019, 07:09:53 AM
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

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
Del.icio.us Digg FURL FaceBook Stumble Upon Reddit SlashDot Google Bookmarks Ma.gnolia MSN Live Squidoo Yahoo My Web     Bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: To Split or Not to Split - X/X vs A/B Team Splits  (Read 18216 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Chris
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +18/-20
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 368



View Profile
« on: May 18, 2007, 05:06:37 AM »

    Sorry Tom, but I though that the points you raised in the other thread were deserving an entire new thread - rather than us cluttering up the WUGC 2008 topic.

Chris, I don't mean to be rude, but when was the last time you ran a club that took an A/B or X/X (even) teams to Nationals?  You're not exactly talking from a position of experience.
LOL - let's be honest, how could that not be considered rude...  Grin... but you're definitely right and I'm not offended at all! I definitely don't come from a position of experience in terms of "running a club" and for the most part I agree with the points you raise, and for those I don't agree with I can still see your perspective on them.

Now whilst I have only been playing Ultimate for two years (thus my lack of experience), I'd argue, as I'm sure many of my teammates would, that I have for the most part I haven't looked to "just play" and have looked to get "involved" where possible in the other aspects helping the development of QLD ultimate, but obviously like most people my "intentions" are are well short of my "actions". At the same time it is obviously it is a bit premature for me to walk into the meetings and start outlining how things are going to be for QLD Ultimate... but we can all dream can't we... Tongue.

So yeah, I'm fully aware that people's desire to listen to someone is usually proportional to the respect they have for the person, and well respect is rarely earned by being the loudest voice in the room and it better gained with past actions. So that also makes me fully aware that my influence over decisions in the greater Ultimate community is about equivalent to four fifths of fuck all, but the way I figure is "while we are all discussing the issue here on UltiTalk I'll throw in my two aussie cents" - plus I don't really think these forums have any influence over policy decisions at any level of Ultimate, rather is just a place for people to vent their opinions or bounce their ideas of the game.


Quote
  • B teams invariably lack leadership, which is provided by many of the A team players if you split
  • players who would be in a B team have to step up as they are marking/being marked by comparatively stronger players on the opposition
  • players who would be on the A team also have to step up for the same reason
  • more A team players have to take leadership roles as they are split over the two teams
  • both teams have a better chance of making Nationals
  • the B team players rave about the experience
  • training is more effective as you can play in the same teams as you're taking to Regionals/Nationals
  • selection is easier (in some ways)
  • there's no glory in winning with a stacked team, but there sure is for an underdog
OK on the topic of leadership I get the impressions you are talking about "leadership" in terms of players within the team that can analyze the game and make decisions for the team accordingly as well and give the team direction.

Now whilst there aren't really many alternatives for it at this stage I still believe that this to be one of the most counter productive things in Ultimate. The fact that teams are run by players - when they are rarely the best option to "lead" considering they can't get global perspective while playing, in addition to the fact that they are physically, mentally and emotionally involved in the game often creating a biased perspective. I'd like to think that the vast majority of teams need a "coach/manager" to be fulfilling these sorts of duties effectively yet it seems to be an attitude that is under utilized in the Ultimate community.

Now obviously at this stage of Ultimate's development within Australia coaches are rarely feasible, and for the most part many of the most experienced individuals of Australian ultimate are still playing, but I truly believe that obtaining coaches/managers is the direction that most higher level teams should be heading, and it will remove a lot of that "directional leadership" required of players and will allow them to get on with doing their jobs on the field, and letting their leadership be one that is more "inspirational" in terms of layout D's and big grabs than a "calling the shots leader".

In terms of the points you raised about "making selecting teams easier", "qualifying easier" and "no glory in winning with a stacked team" all I can say is that is bugs me that so many have this attitude, and I know it's just a reflection of where Ultimate is at the moment - but when it comes to a tournament like Nationals I would much prefer that teams were heading there with the intention of "winning" rather than just "participating". So inline with this perspective I think selecting the "best" team should just be the way it is, and the qualification of the top team is the only priority, and the team playing their best and "winning" is the ONLY glory.

Over my many years of playing sport, not just Ultimate, I have "not made the cut" on a number of occasions and almost every time I look back at those moments of not making the team and think it was the greatest thing that could happen to me because it only inspired to me to get out there train harder and develop my skill and abilities. Sure it sucked in the moment, and I'm sure it was hard for the coaches/selectors to make the call but at the end of the day, I became a better player and because I was a better player and when I made the team I "earned" my sport and the team was stronger for it - so everyone wins in the end.

So when you have an X/Y split it removes the motivation to develop your game for the purpose of making a higher level team and it also removes both teams' and individuals within the teams' aspiration to work harder to attempt to "win" the tournament because they are going there to "participate" rather than "win". So then the only motivation left for people to develop their game is for their own personal reasons (which traditionally are terrible forms of motivation - for some reason people generally find it easier to let themselves down that others for fear of embarisment). Though probably the strongest aspiration individuals are using for "personal motivation" to train harder and develop their game is normally to increase their chances of making the Australian team, which un-coincidentally is a "selection" based team where people need to "earn" their spots.

One my biggest pet peeves about Ultimate is the fact that I have never ever felt like I have had to "earn" my place on any team I have played for - I have always been invited and felt like I essentially just walked on, and for me personally it would appear that only team where you have to justifiably "earn" a spot is when you are trying out for an Australian team. Now obviously this isn't the case at Chilly but I'd probably argue that almost anywhere else in Australia if you have been playing Ultimate for 12 months and are even slightly athletic you could get a place on a Nationals team.

See in my opinion when this happen it effectively takes way any intrinsic value gained in the  "achievement" of representing your corner of Australia at Nationals. So when you say "makes selection easier" I think is sort of just a cop out (it should have no influence on ability to selected or not select players). I mean I'm of the opinion that selectors need to be able to make the tough decisions and say "sorry mate, your didn't make the cut this year, but keep working hard your game is really coming along" or even in the event of an A/B squad say to a couple of the guys on the fringe of the A team and the selectors said they were going to take 18 but they make the judgment call that there is really only 16 than worthy of being on the A team then they should be able to make that call for the benefit of the team and the level of Ultimate at Nationals.

Once again I know this is something that can't be changed over night and is really only just a reflection of where the game is at presently, but I'd like to think that those making the decisions for clubs are factoring things like this in, and that with the continued growth of the sport over the next two or three years really start to change their attitudes. At least I'm hoping this is the way I hope QLD trends (it's really the only region of Australian Ultimate that I have good perspective of).


Quote
In fact, the only good reason I can come up with for going A/B is that you presumably increase your chance of winning Nationals.
Well I'm of the opinion that if teams are going to be bothered going to Nationals they may as well go with the intention of winning - and it is a shame that once again that ultimate is at a stage where teams can't reasonably aspire to this.


Quote
Personally, I think it was a pity for the development of ultimate in Victoria that after Chilly won Nationals in 2005, they didn't use that as an opportunity to split into two even teams.
Now this is something I think is a pity - that people still look to Nationals as an event for "development".

I'm a big believer that if we want to be taken seriously as highly competitive sport and take Ultimate to new heights then we need to "act" like we are a high level sport that is focussed on "high level competition" at our National level, not "development", and I'm quietly confident that if we take this attitude will we find renewed motivation of those in local leagues looking to aspire to higher level competition.

I know I must be coming across as condescending, but I'd just like to clarify that I don't claim for a second to be able to run teams better than those who are presently running them, for the most part (at least up here in QLD) I think club managers do a wonderful job and genuinely are making all their decisions in what they believe to be the best interests of the club and sport's development and I'm very aware of the tough decisions that they need to make and the balancing act of "development" with promoting "high level competition", I just think we should be aspiring to be a more A/B orientated, even if it's not feasible for most right now.


Quote
Anyway, Chris, at least the way the results went at Nationals, you can say you beat one of the finalists Smiley
And damn proud of it too...  Grin!
Logged

Help spread the word about the AUDL - "like" it @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/AUDL/

UQ Lovers & Firestorm
rjhberg
Full Member
***

Karma: +10/-2
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 147



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 18, 2007, 07:32:08 AM »

Hey Chris

I think you make some good points there

It's good to get your perspective on where Ultimate is, given that you have played another sport to a fairly high level (soccer) so you are more aware of how other 'legitimate' sports address high level competions.
Logged

simmo
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +45/-21
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 884



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2007, 09:02:54 AM »

Just like to clarify from the get-go that this post is opinion only. Not claiming to "know" anything.

As Chris said, an A/B split is a fantastic motivational tool for your players to work harder to get that spot on the A squad. It also provides a clear development path for players hoping to make the team - that they aim to make the B team, then from there to the A team. So ideally a B team would be consist of future stars and past stars (who would provide the leadership) while the A team has the top, on-form players. However with an X/X split I feel that the players could become a bit stagnant, with no "threat" to their place on the team.

In the last three years, Chilly have split A/B and Fakulti X/X. Chilly have three National titles to their name, Fakulti don't - that evidence alone is pretty damning. But Fakulti could prove me wrong and win the next five in a row and good on them if they do. But here's an example of how an X/X split could fail - the last couple of mixed league seasons in Melbourne saw Honey Badgers split their team X/X for "development". Two seasons in a row both their teams made the final, and absolutely no one cared who won, including the players themselves. Then we saw Honey Badgers go to Worlds and completely chump it because they had become complacent. Now all the players have gone their separate ways. I'm not comparing Fakulti to the Badgers here - just pointing out how X/X can work against you.

The thing that has me most curious is what exactly are Fakulti developing all these players for?
Logged

Time to waste? Visit the Ballarat Ultimate blog!
tom_brennan
Newbie
*

Karma: +7/-0
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 30



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2007, 10:26:32 AM »

Fair points, Chris.

In terms of the points you raised about "making selecting teams easier", "qualifying easier" and "no glory in winning with a stacked team" all I can say is that is bugs me that so many have this attitude, and I know it's just a reflection of where Ultimate is at the moment - but when it comes to a tournament like Nationals I would much prefer that teams were heading there with the intention of "winning" rather than just "participating". So inline with this perspective I think selecting the "best" team should just be the way it is, and the qualification of the top team is the only priority, and the team playing their best and "winning" is the ONLY glory.

You'll note that I prefixed my list with "there are some good reasons (and some less good ones too) for splitting into two even teams". Ease of selection and qualification were actually two of the less good reasons - but I thought I should put them for completeness. I don't think they are good reasons for going X/X!

A few points to correct some fallacies (not in your comments, just about things that Fakulti do/don't do)
  • Fakulti went to Nationals this year with the intention of winning. Not selecting your top team (decreasing your chance of winning) is quite different to not intending to win. Sure, it makes the hurdle higher ...
  • Fakulti cut players to get to their squad of two teams (in 2006 and 2007).
  • Simmo, Fakulti played A and B in 2005, although the B team was bolstered with one or two Deathstar B players to get to their squad of two teams.
  • Fakulti has dropped numerous players over the past few years in selecting A teams for NUFL events, and for WUCC, so many players have "not made the cut", and selectors have had to make this call.
 

So I don't disagree with many of your A/B arguments. But when it comes down to it, there are times of year to be A/B oriented and there are times to develop your up and coming players for those events when your are picking your A team.

The thing that has me most curious is what exactly are Fakulti developing all these players for?
NUFL, WUCC, WUGC ... actually, who wants a bet on which club will contribute most players to the Dingoes?
Logged
Blink
Newbie
*

Karma: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 2



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2007, 12:28:11 PM »

At this stage in the development of such a small player base it seems prudent to encourage as many individual clubs as possible. Constant competion encoureges the growth of elite players. I hear this has been seen in NUFL. The A/B split encourages an offshoot club to form in response, (Who really wants to play for a B team?). An offshoot that intime may reach or even surpass the level of the original A team. I guess i dont believe in the A/B or the X/X split rather, i think if clubs have too many players for one team they should encourage new rivals too form. What do the rest of you guys feel are the problems with such a policy? I confess im not experienced with such issues but i feel i can add another dimension to the debate.
Logged
simmo
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +45/-21
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 884



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2007, 06:46:12 PM »

I think you're absolutely spot on. We really need to encourage the formation of clubs and, more importantly, the continuation of clubs from year to year.
Logged

Time to waste? Visit the Ballarat Ultimate blog!
Chris
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +18/-20
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 368



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 18, 2007, 11:20:59 PM »

I should probably state that I'm not "anti" X/X split I can see completely understand why clubs do it, I mean if QLD had the numbers for two teams I'd imagine we'd be going X/X and I'd fully support that, for the most part I'm just playing devil's advocate.

That said if QLD had the numbers for three teams, my opinion would change and I would be pushing for more of a Chilly setup with the A/B/C split with obviously A & B looking to go to Nationals, because if you have the numbers to send three National teams you'd argue that the B team would have enough "leadership" and "experience" to be able to fend for themselves at a Nationals level and you should allow those on the A team to aspire to win the tournament, and if you are coming from a club that has the ability to send three teams to Nationals and your on the A team I'm quietly confident you'd have a fair crack at the title.

So I guess for me there is a tipping point and it's a case where for the vast majority of Ultimate clubs around Australia that they just don't have the depth at the moment, with exception of Fakulti and Chilly. So when it comes to teams like Fyshwick it makes sense to go X/X, because if they didn't X/X team split their B team wouldn't be able to compete to a level where they could even give other teams a game.

So when it comes to teams like Fakulti I just think that they should be considering moving out of the X/X split and into A/B/C breakdown of teams because they can cater for it and it gives the A team a reasonable chance to win, and the B team will still get a great deal of experience out of competing.

You'll note that I prefixed my list with "there are some good reasons (and some less good ones too) for splitting into two even teams". Ease of selection and qualification were actually two of the less good reasons - but I thought I should put them for completeness. I don't think they are good reasons for going X/X!
Yeah I know what you are saying about selections, and I can definitely appreciate that whilst it is a bad reasons for an X/X split it is still very hard to do when there is such a small community of players, and it is very hard to treat people that are often your friends impersonally, but that is often what you need to do when you are talking about "selections" and making decisions based on the best interest of the team or club.

Plus when you play and train with people it is hard to say to someone that has worked so hard to improve their game "that they are still not good enough". I mean that sucks. And I mean with a such a small community and so much effort going into getting people not just play but keep playing ultimate, I have no doubt it makes it hard for those running clubs to constantly have to juggle that focus on "development" and being "inclusive" with the looking to have an elite teams that's only focus is "being the best".


Quote
  • Fakulti went to Nationals this year with the intention of winning. Not selecting your top team (decreasing your chance of winning) is quite different to not intending to win. Sure, it makes the hurdle higher ...
Well I'm going to sound like a jerk here, but Fakulti can't win with a X/X split, and you guys obviously aren't going there with the primary focus to win because if you were your wouldn't split your teams.

When a full strength Fakulti play Chilly it's a good match, but is still one that Chilly arguably still have the edge in, so when you split to X/X teams, in my opinion, I don't think Fakulti S or R have what it takes to beat a stacked Chilly. I mean you can have a solid game against them - but you probably only have about a 5% chance of beating them.

Speaking from my experience, I remember playing both Chilly and Fak S on the second day of Nationals this year (I play for Firestorm), and when I was standing on the line against Chilly, it was blatantly obviously that man for man we were going to be out classed. That said when I was standing on the line against Fakulti I was seriously looking at the man for man match ups and was quietly confident that we could and would win (and we did, but not before I attempted to "Kiss Ant Dowle's Feet" - most unsavvy people would have thought it was just a really late and terrible attempt at what would have been a phantom D, but I was really just trying to worship the greatness that is Ant Dowle...  Roll Eyes).

So anyway, from my perspective the gap between the Fak teams and Chilly is just too big for Fak to say they have a reasonably good chance of beating them.


Quote
  • Fakulti cut players to get to their squad of two teams (in 2006 and 2007).
I mean almost all teams "cut" people - I know Firestorm had "try outs" and quite a few "didn't make it" but the people that were cut weren't people that had been playing Ultimate for 4 or 5 years and reasonably athletic, but those are the sort of people that Chilly cut from their A team. So is Fakulti cutting those sorts of people or is it more cutting the newer players to Ultimate, that aren't quite ready for Nationals yet?


Quote
So I don't disagree with many of your A/B arguments. But when it comes down to it, there are times of year to be A/B oriented and there are times to develop your up and coming players for those events when your are picking your A team.
I can completely understand what you are saying, but I'd like to think that in comings years (assuming most clubs can continue to get out there and bolster their ranks) that the time for X/X teams won't be at Nationals, rather will be at the local and regional level, and we can truly develop a Nationals that is purely about the high level competition of the sport and not about development.


Quote
NUFL, WUCC, WUGC ... actually, who wants a bet on which club will contribute most players to the Dingoes?
Anyone want a bet about which state will have the biggest percentage decrease in players representing Australia on the Dingoes...?
Logged

Help spread the word about the AUDL - "like" it @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/AUDL/

UQ Lovers & Firestorm
Chris
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +18/-20
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 368



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 18, 2007, 11:51:58 PM »

At this stage in the development of such a small player base it seems prudent to encourage as many individual clubs as possible. Constant competion encoureges the growth of elite players.
I definitely agree that increased competition is the best motivation for development and at this stage "more" clubs would probably be very beneficial at the local level of competition at QLD, though I don't necessarily believe the creating more teams for the sake of having more teams is always the best option when it requires regions to spread their "elite" players too thinly, because it hinders the development of the elite players due to disillusion and frustration of those they are playing with. But for the most part I do agree that more teams at a local level would increase competition and hopefully stimulate development.


Quote
The A/B split encourages an offshoot club to form in response, (Who really wants to play for a B team?).
I have often opted to play with "B" teams in the same comeptition as "A" teams because I felt it would give me a greater chance to develop my skills. Plus I would much rather play for a B team of a strong club than play with an "offshoot" team because the people on the team didn't want to have the letter "B" behind their team name.

More often than not you also have a many more opportunities playing with a strong club than with an "offshoot" club - because being a part of strong clubs opens opportunities like competing at NUFL and WUCC events, and it is these sort of tournaments that really develop you as a player.


Quote
I guess i dont believe in the A/B or the X/X split rather, i think if clubs have too many players for one team they should encourage new rivals too form.
I think at a local level more teams and healthy rivalries between local clubs is a good thing, but at a representative level it isn't quite as applicable.
Logged

Help spread the word about the AUDL - "like" it @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/AUDL/

UQ Lovers & Firestorm
tom_brennan
Newbie
*

Karma: +7/-0
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 30



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2007, 04:13:54 AM »

Quote
  • Fakulti went to Nationals this year with the intention of winning. Not selecting your top team (decreasing your chance of winning) is quite different to not intending to win. Sure, it makes the hurdle higher ...
Well I'm going to sound like a jerk here, but Fakulti can't win with a X/X split, and you guys obviously aren't going there with the primary focus to win because if you were your wouldn't split your teams.
OK, let's try a hypothetical here. Instead of two Fakulti teams plus Barefoot out of Sydney, say Sydney just sent the one top team. Presumably that team would win Nationals, and probably without being stretched too much. But exactly what would have been achieved - other than winning Nationals? Very little.

So obviously you split. But where do you stop splitting your talent? At the point where you think you're still a little ahead of the competition? Or where you're a little behind? As you can see from the discussions, I'm of the second opinion. That way you need to improve as a team over the season if you are to win.

Neither Fakulti R nor S had beaten Barefoot during the season either, yet on the final day of Nationals, both teams stepped it up and beat Barefoot. Yes, Chilly is another step again, but they're hardly unbeatable.

Quote
When a full strength Fakulti play Chilly it's a good match, but is still one that Chilly arguably still have the edge in, so when you split to X/X teams, in my opinion, I don't think Fakulti S or R have what it takes to beat a stacked Chilly. I mean you can have a solid game against them - but you probably only have about a 5% chance of beating them.
Currently it stands at 14% so we're ahead at the moment! Smiley

Quote
Speaking from my experience, I remember playing both Chilly and Fak S on the second day of Nationals this year (I play for Firestorm), and when I was standing on the line against Chilly, it was blatantly obviously that man for man we were going to be out classed. That said when I was standing on the line against Fakulti I was seriously looking at the man for man match ups and was quietly confident that we could and would win

That's just the QLD conundrum - it's been happening for years. Get thumped by Chilly but turn around and beat other teams that you shouldn't. Smiley

Quote
So I don't disagree with many of your A/B arguments. But when it comes down to it, there are times of year to be A/B oriented and there are times to develop your up and coming players for those events when your are picking your A team.
I can completely understand what you are saying, but I'd like to think that in comings years (assuming most clubs can continue to get out there and bolster their ranks) that the time for X/X teams won't be at Nationals, rather will be at the local and regional level, and we can truly develop a Nationals that is purely about the high level competition of the sport and not about development. [/quote]

I agree with you here. However, I reckon you need 16 teams all of whom would have made the top 8 at this year's Nationals before that becomes a given

Quote
Quote
NUFL, WUCC, WUGC ... actually, who wants a bet on which club will contribute most players to the Dingoes?
Anyone want a bet about which state will have the biggest percentage decrease in players representing Australia on the Dingoes...?
WA, assuming Billy isn't eligible ...
Logged
oshep
Newbie
*

Karma: +4/-1
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 39



View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2007, 04:50:35 AM »

tom can claim some credit for showing me some of the merits of X/Y vs A/B, over the last few years Smiley

now, for some of the top Aussie players, they will have played worlds and clubs numerous times, and some are lining up again for the 2008 campaign.

Nationals is not the top level of ultimate... for these players.

for them, Worlds (and sometimes NUFL) is of a higher standard than Nationals. i know of several players who are keener to develop new promising talent than they are keen to win Nationals. and this is partly due to their selfish desire to play on stronger teams at Worlds and Clubs. and sometimes an altruistic desire to help others improve their play.

Chris, you may be keen to see the strongest Fakulti vs Chilly in the Nationals final whenever possible. however, the 2 teams faced off during 5 NUFL events over the last little while, and again at World Clubs. so sometimes, just sometimes, there isn't the same imperative to have to bring those strongest rosters to Nationals.

there can be a range of goals at Nationals.

goals can include: beating seed, beating a rival, developing new players, coming 9th, coming 1st, having fun, gaining a reputation as a spirited team, dominating in the wind, feeling like the team reached its potential, partying lots. however some teams do put winning as high priority. a team should set its own goals.

people also have different goals. consider a player, Fred, who has won Nationals more than once, and but has only got bronze playing for Australia. compared to say, Ernie, who has no expectations of playing at Worlds or Clubs, but has narrowly missed winning Nationals several times. they will have different goals when forming Nationals teams, or competing at Nationals.

lastly, i reckon missing selection to an A team is only motivation to a few players on any B team. many of the B team players don't have expectations of playing on the A team, and only some people have a personality that turns disappointment into motivation.

building strong development pathways is the biggest influence on lifting the standard of play. this means developing more leagues, more coaching, more junior teams, more tournaments, better training methods, giving more players opportunities on elite teams, etc.

Chris, these points might help answer your question of why forming the strongest team possible for Nationals every year, isn't the path that some choose.
Logged

Tactics, coaching and fun at http://thinkulti.blogspot.com
Chris
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +18/-20
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 368



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2007, 11:28:56 AM »

« Last Edit: May 20, 2007, 01:04:54 PM by Seppo » Logged

Help spread the word about the AUDL - "like" it @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/AUDL/

UQ Lovers & Firestorm
mattdowle
Guest
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2007, 09:16:16 PM »

Haha - this is some good shite. Obviously i could inprint my opinion here but in true form, i'll be a man of small words - only i can't remember what i was going to say. Chris, i know you understand that ultimate is played with the first premise of spirit of the game. Fortunately or unfortunately that spirit attracts players with a certain personality and is unlike other sports in that regard. Do i think ultimate should be run more like other sports? yes, in most cases i do - a dictatorship, as i too have come from a sporting background of other sports. It's ok, i'm not going to defend or critisize fakulti's decision for this year nationals teams (i was happy to leave that up the brainstrust) - but all i can say is that as a club, coming 2nd and 3rd (with the goal of winning, although our chances might have be less) meant more to me than the club coming 1st and 13th (which would probably have been the case if we split A and B)

But until that (being players of a certain personality trait) changes, you are going to get a national champoinships with teams (in our case - a club) putting in XX and AB split. However, national championships have grown remarkably in recent years where teams formed just to play nationals and then disbanded and then a totally different team would form the next year. We are definitely on track to competing at a nationals level where every team has a chance of winning and their goals are too win - but until that happens, we are making the small steps necessary in the meantime. Just know Chris, that you have great ideals and i agree with a lot of them (obviously not all), but having a better understanding of where we have come from might help you put the current state of play in better perspective - although you doing a great job of playinig devils advocate (even if it does seem to be devils advocate from one side).

eehhwww, you wanted to kiss Ant's feet - haha

« Last Edit: May 20, 2007, 09:18:37 PM by mattdowle » Logged
Dens
Newbie
*

Karma: +1/-2
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 15



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2007, 11:47:55 PM »

Really interesting to read the Fakulti view as I think most clubs are incredibly envious of your talent and depth .... I still don't understand but I haven't played any higher level comp than Nationals/Mixed Worlds Clubs and if the brains trust are content to not field A/B, I guess Chilly for four in a row?   

Also as I recall WA doesn't have a current Dingoes player so it's a little hard to go backwards from there Smiley  I'm sure it is probably captured on the Dingoe's club rep trophy or is it a shield, fill me in as it seems pretty elusive ;P  (ahahaha)
Logged
Frank
Full Member
***

Karma: +8/-0
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 104



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: May 21, 2007, 08:54:07 AM »

.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 09:02:08 AM by Frank » Logged
Chris
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +18/-20
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 368



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: May 21, 2007, 10:26:44 AM »

Quote
Chris, i know you understand that ultimate is played with the first premise of spirit of the game. Fortunately or unfortunately that spirit attracts players with a certain personality and is unlike other sports in that regard.
Ah yes, the conundrum of Ultimate - trying to maintain the "friendly attitude" in "competitive sport". It's the sport's greatest strength, and at the same time, its greatest weakness...  Roll Eyes.


Quote
All i can say is that as a club, coming 2nd and 3rd (with the goal of winning, although our chances might have be less) meant more to me than the club coming 1st and 13th.
Firstly... very confident aren't we... LOL!

In hindsight of the tournament Fak getting 2nd and 3rd was an awesome achievement, and obviously puts forward a strong case from operating under an X/X split - especially in light of the fact that even if Fak had put in an A/B split it still would have been a tough fight for 1st as has traditionally been seen with the full strength Fak v Chilly.

That said, for you personally, Nationals probably isn't the highest level of game that you aspire to win at, but you have had the opportunity to experience playing at the International level, which obviously dwarfs Nationals in terms of achievement, but those feeling might not be reciprocated by the majority of the Fakulti club whose highest aspiration in Ultimate will be to win a Nationals with Fakulti, something that might not be achievable over the next couple of years with a X/X split. 


Quote
Just know Chris, that you have great ideals and i agree with a lot of them (obviously not all), but having a better understanding of where we have come from might help you put the current state of play in better perspective - although you doing a great job of playinig devils advocate.
Ahhh... the idealist visions of youth...  Roll Eyes.

I obviously have only been playing Ultimate for two years now, and I'm happy to say that for the most part I like the direction it is heading (at least up here in QLD) and I think it will have a very interesting and bright next three years which I will hope be the launching pad for bigger things.


Quote
eehhwww, you wanted to kiss Ant's feet?
Doesn't everyone?

 Huh

.
I don't think I could have said it any better myself!

LOL - but on the topic - this thread is MASSIVE! I started reading it again from the start and got half way through my first post and all I could think was "fuck I need a girlfreind". UltiTalk is ruining my life.

Logged

Help spread the word about the AUDL - "like" it @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/AUDL/

UQ Lovers & Firestorm
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
Del.icio.us Digg FURL FaceBook Stumble Upon Reddit SlashDot Google Bookmarks Ma.gnolia MSN Live Squidoo Yahoo My Web     Bookmark  |  Print  
 
Facebook Comments

Jump to:  






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 June 30, 2019, 05:26:04 PM
SimplePortal 2.1.1