[BD] Squad Sizes

Tue Jul 8 16:02:55 BST 2008

Quick comment on the process for changing the rules

The WFDF rules are discussed and updated (sort of annually-ish) by a
specific subgroup of the WFDF Ultimate Committee.  The process by which
changes get agreed is that this committee proposes a new set of rules from
time to time (in theory annually) to the WFDF Board for approval.  I've been
on this group for the last year or so.

The process for suggesting a change - from my experience so far - is
somewhat less formal that you are assuming Dave.  Although I suppose it
could be done the way you are suggesting too.  Most of the changes are put
forward by the members of that group following ad-hoc
discussions/experiences/requests from the countries/communities they play
in.

A number of the latest changes/clarifications occurred because people sent
me questions about them which I then brought up in the group - thanks Jon
Hope in particular who sent me many questions ;-)

So I guess the first step - as you are doing - is to get a groundswell of
public opinion...  

Based on what I saw of the conversation about squad sizes that resulted in
the latest reduction from 32 to 28 I think quite a few people share the view
that the current limit is still too high.  I would not be surprised if the
number was further reduced over the next few years - although I would be
very surprised if it moved as far as 14!

The other aspect of note is that the squad limits are in the appendix that
apply to WFDF competition.  They are not part of the rules proper.

Hope this helps

Si

> -----Original Message-----
> From: britdisc-bounces at ranulf.net 
> [mailto:britdisc-bounces at ranulf.net] On Behalf Of Dave Grayson
> Sent: 08 July 2008 14:58
> To: John Hope
> Cc: brit disc
> Subject: Re: [BD] Squad Sizes
> 
> Thanks for posting those rules, I must confess I didn't know 
> about them.
> Now all we need to do is change a rule - not introduce a new one :-)
> 
> I dont think its about players not being happy about not 
> getting enough playtime. Lots of people like to be associated 
> with winners. I think this rule change would create better 
> competition, a level playing field between teams, more growth 
> in the sport, and a greater challenge both physically and 
> tactically for individual players.
> 
> I'm not trying to save anyone or speak on behalf of anyone 
> type of player.
> I think this would benefit the sport as a whole.
> 
> Dave.
> 
> 
> 
> 2008/7/8 John Hope <john.hope at gmail.com>:
> 
> > There already is a limit on squad sizes. It's 14 players _minimum_ 
> > (For competitions where these rules are used)
> >
> > Appendix B: WFDF Additional Championship Event Rules
> >
> > B1. Teams
> > B1.1. A team must have a minimum of fourteen (14) players 
> registered 
> > on its playing roster for the event.
> > B1.1.1. A team in the mixed division must also have a minimum of six
> > (6) male and six (6)
> > female players on its roster.
> > B1.2. A team may have a maximum of twenty-eight (28) 
> players on its roster.
> > B1.2.1. For 2008 only, the maximum number of players will be 
> > thirty-two (32).
> >
> > I really see no value in forcing a smaller squad. If a player isn't 
> > getting enough pitch time and that really matters to 
> them... play for 
> > a different team?
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Dave Grayson 
> > <chevron03 at googlemail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Phillip,
> > >
> > > I dont get why international players should have any 
> bearing on anything?
> > >
> > > I dont get why there would be guest spots?
> > >
> > > I think you are maybe confused between Tour rules and 
> WFDF rules.  
> > > Just
> > to
> > > be clear, I am proposing that we get consensus for the UKU to 
> > > propose to WFDF that in the rules of ultimate there is a 
> limit of 14 
> > > players per
> > match.
> > >
> > >
> > > This says nothing about any individual competition, nothing about 
> > > overall squad sizes (separate issue), nothing about 
> guests, internationals etc.
> > >
> > > Hope that makes things clearer,
> > >
> > > Dave.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2008/7/8 <Phillip.Lowman at marsh.com>:
> > >
> > >> I hate to complicate matters, but surely if you are going to 
> > >> introduce limits it would be sensible to have:
> > >>
> > >> a, a limit of X players on the roster per game b, a limit of X+Y 
> > >> players on the roster per tournament c, a limit of Z 
> international 
> > >> players in your squad d, a limit of N guest spots (subject to 
> > >> limitation c) e, a limit of Q 6ft+ players per team
> > >>
> > >> And I think it is important that we establish a transfer window 
> > >> within
> > the
> > >> season that allows players to move between clubs ;o)
> > >>
> > >> But in all seriousness I'd back a-c, d already exists 
> and e well I 
> > >> just need to feed my team growth hormone obviously..
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> adam KEEN <adamkeen at btinternet.com> Sent by: 
> > >> britdisc-bounces at ranulf.net
> > >>
> > >> 08/07/2008 12:14
> > >>
> > >> To
> > >> britdisc at ranulf.net
> > >>
> > >> cc
> > >> chevron03 at googlemail.com
> > >>
> > >> Subject
> > >> [BD] Squad Sizes
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I am with Dave on limiting the squad sizes to a sensible number. 
> > >> Out of interest, is there any other team sport where there is no 
> > >> upper limit to the size of a competing squad or is 
> ultimate unique 
> > >> in this respect?
> > >>
> > >> Best wishes,
> > >> Adam K
> > >> (London Revolution)
> > >>
> > >> __________________________________________________
> > >> BritDisc mailing list
> > >> BritDisc at ranulf.net
> > >> http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc
> > >> Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed
> > >>
> >
> __________________________________________________
> BritDisc mailing list
> BritDisc at ranulf.net
> http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc
> Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed
> 