Person with disc puts disc down, storms off field. Turnover?

[Edk001]

This happened during the final minutes of a game this weekend. Person with disc repeatedly called violation on marker. After several incidences of this occurring (and lengthy discussions after each call), person with disc put disc down and stormed off the field, saying "someone take my place, I can't play against this person". The others on the team had already de-cleated, not expecting to come on again. Play paused while team with possession waited for a player to cleat up and come on the field to take this person's place at the disc.

Should the other team have simply called "turnover" the second the disc was put on the ground, and taken possession? There was no timeout call (since this was the last point after time cap was called), nor was it an injury call.

[muskokajoe]

Should the other team have simply called "turnover" the second the disc was put on the ground, and taken possession?

Technically, I suspect this is valid, but it would be terrible spirit. I think the option chosen was one of the better ones, considering.....? Sounds like the other issue needs to be resolved first.

Speaking of which, what was the disagreement call about?

[Crunchy]

The disc can be in three states: In play, live, or dead.

I don't know how you guys got there, but if there are "lengthy discussions", then the disc is dead.

A dead disc is not subject to a turnover.


Also, this game went to hell already. Someone just walked off the field. How emotional do you have to be to walk off a field? Right or wrong, he's doing it to stop escalating the situation. I wouldn't call the turnover...

[tugbo]

I agree with Crunchy. Sounds like the disc was dead, therefore not a turnover.

Technically speaking you are only allowed to make a substitution for an injury. However, it seems like the best way to handle this is to treat this situation as an injury. Seems more productive to treat it as an injury than insisting that there is no legal way for them to leave the field. In particular, play should resume with them (or their "injury" replacement) in possession of the disc.

I've encountered something similar where I was a captain and one of my players was getting very upset at the marker. I wanted to sub him off to give him some time to cool down (and time to talk to the opposing captain on the sideline so we could get the marking situation resolved). So while "I need time off or this is going to escalate" is not technically an injury, pretending it is seems appropriate.

[larrypmac]

It is an injury. It's injury to spirit and feelings are hurt.

Larry

[lwswong]

Technically speaking you are only allowed to make a substitution for an injury. However, it seems like the best way to handle this is to treat this situation as an injury. Seems more productive to treat it as an injury than insisting that there is no legal way for them to leave the field. In particular, play should resume with them (or their "injury" replacement) in possession of the disc.

injury of the mind? injury of feelings?

are feelings part of the body? can you foul feelings? I WANT ANSWERS!!!

[nyxll]

Technically speaking you are only allowed to make a substitution for an injury. However, it seems like the best way to handle this is to treat this situation as an injury. Seems more productive to treat it as an injury than insisting that there is no legal way for them to leave the field. In particular, play should resume with them (or their "injury" replacement) in possession of the disc.

injury of the mind? injury of feelings?

are feelings part of the body? can you foul feelings? I WANT ANSWERS!!!

The worst kind, injury of spirit.

[rryyaann]

Ultimate has traditionally relied upon a spirit of sportsmanship which places the responsibility for fair play on the player. Highly competitive play is encouraged, but never at the expense of the bond of mutual respect between players, adherence to the agreed upon rules of the game, or the basic joy of play. Protection of these vital elements serves to eliminate adverse conduct from the Ultimate field. Such actions as taunting of opposing players, dangerous aggression, intentional fouling, or other 'win-at-all-costs' behavior are contrary to the spirit of the game and must be avoided by all players.



Both players were in error, my interpretation would be to send them both (without being there) off. Spirit is paramount as defined by the rules and should take precedents over all other rules.

[GwaiLo]

...dangerous aggression, intentional fouling, or other 'win-at-all-costs' behavior...
...

While we're on the topic...
*cough cough*

[atanarjuat]

As stated below, there can be no turnover, whether because an infraction has been called (XVI.C) or because of a dispute producing a stoppage (XVI.D). Thus, the disc is dead, and not subject to a turnover.

The player should not -- by the letter of the rule (USAU 11th Ed, that is) -- leave the playing field for reasons other than injury substitution. However, I have seen players storm off before, and most captains will let them, because it's not in the interest of either team or the league to force someone on the verge of a fit to play.

I don't know why rryaann thinks either team displayed poor spirit. Based on the description, I cannot discern any reason to think there was taunting, belligerent aggression, intimidation, or deliberate infractions. Two people got on each others' nerves; one of them needed a time-out before losing his temper. I'd argue that's a pretty sensible course of action.

[rryyaann]

As stated below, there can be no turnover, whether because an infraction has been called (XVI.C) or because of a dispute producing a stoppage (XVI.D). Thus, the disc is dead, and not subject to a turnover.

The player should not -- by the letter of the rule (USAU 11th Ed, that is) -- leave the playing field for reasons other than injury substitution. However, I have seen players storm off before, and most captains will let them, because it's not in the interest of either team or the league to force someone on the verge of a fit to play.

I don't know why rryaann thinks either team displayed poor spirit. Based on the description, I cannot discern any reason to think there was taunting, belligerent aggression, intimidation, or deliberate infractions. Two people got on each others' nerves; one of them needed a time-out before losing his temper. I'd argue that's a pretty sensible course of action.

Both were displaying win at all costs behaviour. Spirit is suppose to paramount it is what the sport is based on, if you cannot maintain the spirit of the game, the captains should step in based on spirit, not the rule of law...there is no refs or arbitrary third party hence decisions need to be made to keep peace. I have made lots of calls and plays to keep the peace as opposed to be right and more and more people are forgetting the spirit on the field.

[atanarjuat]

Doesn't sound like win-at-all-costs behaviour to me, but to each his own.

[Gonzo]

Something that nobody has asked yet is whether the disagreement resulted from different judgements on the call or from different interpretations of the rules. This is a key point here, as the rules are set up to deal with the two circumstances differently.

If it's a rules difference, bring in the captains to discuss the proper interpretation. If it's a judgement call, contest and move on. (I know, a whole lot easier to say than to do.)

Bill

[GwaiLo]

Doesn't sound like win-at-all-costs behaviour to me, but to each his own.

How about making dangerous plays and ridiculously BS calls all tournament (against all teams)? Does that qualify?

The unfortunate part is that most of this particular team was great. But there were 2 or 3 bad apples that earned the team a horrible reputation at this tournament. In my opinion, the rest of the team should have stepped in to get these few in check. But it happened all tournament, both from what Iexperienced first hand, as well as heard from others.

[atanarjuat]

Well, okay, you clearly have information that goes beyond the description of the dispute in question.

Regardless, we've sorted out what the rules tell us -- there's a stoppage and no turnover. Whatever teams/individuals decide to do in this situation is more about diplomacy and personality management than interpreting the rules.

[GwaiLo]

Well, okay, you clearly have information that goes beyond the description of the dispute in question.

Regardless, we've sorted out what the rules tell us -- there's a stoppage and no turnover. Whatever teams/individuals decide to do in this situation is more about diplomacy and personality management than interpreting the rules.

Agreed. In the situation posted by the OP, I actually think walking off was the right move. Otherwise things would have gotten ugly(er). And nobody wants that.

[Greg123]

Doesn't sound like win-at-all-costs behaviour to me, but to each his own.

How about making dangerous plays and ridiculously BS calls all tournament (against all teams)? Does that qualify?

The unfortunate part is that most of this particular team was great. But there were 2 or 3 bad apples that earned the team a horrible reputation at this tournament. In my opinion, the rest of the team should have stepped in to get these few in check. But it happened all tournament, both from what Iexperienced first hand, as well as heard from others.

Darren, not sure what you heard or what you saw, but I don't think your comments are very fair as there were an equal number of players on your team in the same boat during our game. That is dangerous plays and BS calls. Yes there were a couple of heated calls on both sides.. but I believe you're taking it a little out of context.

Just sayin'

G

[GwaiLo]

Doesn't sound like win-at-all-costs behaviour to me, but to each his own.

How about making dangerous plays and ridiculously BS calls all tournament (against all teams)? Does that qualify?

The unfortunate part is that most of this particular team was great. But there were 2 or 3 bad apples that earned the team a horrible reputation at this tournament. In my opinion, the rest of the team should have stepped in to get these few in check. But it happened all tournament, both from what Iexperienced first hand, as well as heard from others.

Darren, not sure what you heard or what you saw, but I don't think your comments are very fair as there were an equal number of players on your team in the same boat during our game. That is dangerous plays and BS calls. Yes there were a couple of heated calls on both sides.. but I believe you're taking it a little out of context.

Just sayin'

G

Hey Greg,

The BS calls are open to interpretation, and I wouldn't expect both teams to agree. They happen in any game, and don't concern me as much as dangerous plays do.

In our game though, there were a number of Dangerous plays by one person on NoBS in particular. I don't know of any "dangerous" plays by anyone on Hammer Hawks from that game, or from the tourney, and would love for you to fill in details of those to support your claim. I don't want to get personal with you on this, as I know you're a good guy, and as mentioned, my issues were only with a select few (as mentioned, the rest of NoBS were great, and it's a shame the others were acting the way they did). But since you mention the dangerous plays went both ways, I would love to hear more on this. Kudos to you for sticking up for your team. But there's also a point where people have to realize when their teammates are getting out of hand, and not come to their defence just because they are teammates.

What I can say is that I know one of our players had a an elbow drop to the head, and when he called a foul, he was heckled by a couple of NoBS players who didn't even want to contest the call and move on (as should be done if teams can't agree). Then only a few throws later, our same player caught a disc at the sideline and as he wound up to huck to one of our players striking to the endzone, the same NoBS player dove right at him, taking him out (physically knocking him over), in an attempt to slow play and stop momentum. It was clearly a "take out" play, and nothing else. That was not cool at all. And risked injuring our player. I have absolutely no respect for that.

There were plenty of BS calls, but I won't go into detail on them, as like I said, they could be open to interpretation, and I don't expect teams to agree on them as they clearly couldn't agree on the field either. Those aren't worth discussing again. But physical play like that is going way outside of just calls. It was some of the worst sportsmanship that I have seen in my 7 years of Frisbee, or actually in my lifetime of playing sports.

Again....almost all of NoBS were great. This was 2 or 3 players in particular. But unfortunately they earned the team a bad rep as nobody stepped in to get them in check. And this is not just my sentiment. I heard this from several teams that played NoBS that weekend.

[HotSauce]

Can we clarify something? What is NoBS an acronym for?