Re: are you ignoring me punto?

On Mar 5, 11:18 am, ulticritic <t...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 5, 11:44 am, Adam Tarr <ahtarrNOS...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I've said before that I'd be willing to try IRS (or 5 or 10 second
max, whatever - the concept of a short and hard limit on discussion is
the idea).

10 seconds is hardly immediate......and in the sports entertainment
industry, expensivly precious. And *** a discussion.....call,
contest, referal........bam,bam,bam back in play. no brainer

Of course it's not immediate - neither is the enforcement of any call
in basketball, football, hockey, or soccer. As has pointed out on
many threads, ultimate's ratio of action to down time is pretty good
compared to most sports, and drastically better than baseball.

That said, sure, I'd be fine with experimenting with the third party
making the call immediately after the call is contested. I believe
that's how the Illinois folks did it last time they ran an
experimental game.

There's certainly a possible problem with teams making bad calls to
slow down the pace of play. The other thread I've been commenting in
is all about this, basically. I also made this exact comment on this
thread a few posts back (post 12 in my google reader).

so in that vein(which is very interconnected to entertainment
value)......advantage goes to refs

Potentially, yes. But plenty of ultimate games don't get bogged down
by sketchy foul/contests. And anyone who's watched enough Joey
Crawford games (NBA referee) knows that an official can slow down play
by making too many calls, as well.

because:
- Active stall counts are tricky with the new marker rules - the
observer has to be able to hear the thrower's calls.

whaaaaa??? what throwers calls? wise up......aint nobody got to hear
*** acept a whistle. In mlu we did active silent stall
counts......it was a big hit.

In this context, I mostly mean the thrower's disc space call. If the
third party is calling active stalls , they needs to be able to hear
the thrower making disc space calls so that they can subtract two from
the stall count. Ditto for double teams, although that seems like
another decent candidate for an active call.

MLU had the third party initiating all calls, so of course there was
no issue with hearing the thrower. Of course you like the idea of all
calls coming from the official, but we disagree about that.

This doesn't mean observers can't call
travel or won't be more consistent - it just means we shouldn't fool
ourselves into thinking this will reduce controversy.

well when its an active call that has a tangible consequence (ie
turnover) there is no allowance for controversy, discussions,
interpretations. Its done and over and the disc is back in play goin
the other way...

That doesn't mean people won't think it's a bad call or dislike the
effect it has on the game. Traveling being a turnover is a whole
different issue and not really related to self-officiating versus
third party officials.

The amount of time it takes for the words "foul" and "contest" to be
spoken is enough time for me as an observer to think about the play
and have my call ready.

which is about 3 seconds i'd say.......which is immediate enouph for
me.

That's the point - as a third party official I have a huge advantage
if I get those three seconds to think about my call, versus an
official who has to make a call immediately.

Whats the current limit.....30 secs......yawn(and i change the
channel).....or start the b o r i n g chant

Covered this above. Basically, I agree with you... and yet, people
watch baseball and football where 30 seconds of dead time routinely
pass between things actually happening.
.

Loading