Rules of Ultimate governed by the World Flying Disc Federation

How to interpret (ep.3)?

  • Yurka
  • Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
More
6 years 7 months ago - 6 years 7 months ago #86 by Yurka
How to interpret (ep.3)? was created by Yurka
Another question-play from KNO'12:

Last edit: 6 years 7 months ago by Yurka.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 7 months ago #88 by rueben
Replied by rueben on topic How to interpret (ep.3)?
It is a bit difficult to tell exactly what is happening in this play.
However this appears to be a foul by the defender (in black).

The player in green is entitled to their position and has not moved in a way that is unavoidable by the defender - it seems likely that if the defender had been looking in the direction they were running they would have been able to see the player in green and would have been able to avoid them (keeping in mind that “Making a play for the disc” is not a valid excuse for initiating contact with other players).

It is important to look at the interpretation for section 17.8 for this play:
"Every player has space reserved in the direction of their movement. The size of this space depends on a lot of things (speed, direction of view, playing surface, etc) and is as large as the answer to the question 'if a tree suddenly materialized in this space, could the player avoid contact (without a manoeuvre risking the health of their joints)?'

Moving in a way that this space becomes unreasonably large (running full speed with your eyes closed without checking frequently where you are going would be an extreme example) is considered reckless."


In this case the defender's movement could be considered reckless as they are not looking where they are going, and therefore making the space reserved in front of them unreasonable large.

Instead of making a play on the disc, the player in green would have been entitled to call Dangerous Play and move out of the way:
17.1.1. Reckless disregard for the safety of fellow players is considered dangerous play and is to be treated as a foul, regardless of whether or when contact occurs. This rule is not superseded by any other rule.
The following user(s) said Thank You: VoRTeX, Nolotov

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #258 by JCaceres
Replied by JCaceres on topic How to interpret (ep.3)?
Hello Yurka, Rueben.

I differ from the opinion of Rueben, because of the interpretation for 17.8.1

Says:
"If two players have the same space reserved at the same time and contact occurs, whoever caused the conflict of reservations (i.e. whoever last moved so that their reserved space clashed with the other players reserved space - usually the player who got the reservation last) is guilty of the foul."

My point of view is that the player in black was running in a straight forward line, yes, he was not looking forward to where he was running, but he did not change his speed or expected place to be. The player in green, instead, made a movement in an "L" shape towards the position the player in black would be expected to be, that is, where the disc would have been caught.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #259 by rueben
Replied by rueben on topic How to interpret (ep.3)?
Yes but you have missed the other important part of the interpretation to 17.8.1. (which I helped to write):

The size of this space depends on a lot of things (speed, direction of view, playing surface, etc) and is as large as the answer to the question 'if a tree suddenly materialized in this space, could the player avoid contact (without a manoeuvre risking the health of their joints)?'


It's not just a case of who moved last, but did they move into the reserved space in a way that was unavoidable (noting that the size of the reserved space is only a limited space in front of the player, not all the area in front of the player).

As I noted in my reply, it is a bit difficult to tell exactly what is happening in this play.
The other possible view could be that this was an offsetting foul, in that both players initiated contact, in which case the disc would be returned to the thrower.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #260 by JCaceres
Replied by JCaceres on topic How to interpret (ep.3)?
I think that if a tree suddenly appeared where the collision happened, the offense (green) could have avoided it, but the defense (black) wouldn't have been able to avoid it because he was running forward without looking forward... Or if you want, you can see the player in green as the tree that appears right there to where black was going, obviously, he could not avoid it.

Defense is running along with the disk to catch it while it comes closer to the ground, but ofense makes a turn and runs towards the disc and the reserved space of the other player, or at least that is what I see.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #261 by rueben
Replied by rueben on topic How to interpret (ep.3)?
Also from the same interpretation:

Moving in a way that this space becomes unreasonably large (running full speed with your eyes closed without checking frequently where you are going would be an extreme example) is considered reckless.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #262 by BenjiH
Replied by BenjiH on topic How to interpret (ep.3)?
I agree with Rueben. If you look at the start of the play (not clear on the replay, but easily seen on the first run-through) the player in black looks downfield and sees a player in green who will be going for the disc. Knowing that another player is likely to be in the area, but choosing not to look in the direction you're running, does appear 'reckless' under that rule.

It is generally reckless to run without looking where you're going unless you're certain there is no one in that space. When you know, as here, that someone probably IS in that space, it does definitely appear reckless.
The following user(s) said Thank You: rueben, JCaceres

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #263 by JCaceres
Replied by JCaceres on topic How to interpret (ep.3)?
Yes, it is certainly reckless what the defense did, but then again, the offense knew he had one player at each side that may go for the disc.

I don't know why I want to take the side of the defense team, I guess I just want to "squeeze" the rules, but watching and watching and watching the video, and reading your responses I have to admit that it looks like a foul by the black team.

Thanks for the debate.

Greetings. :)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.228 seconds