2009-10 New England TC Rules/Guidelines.

[Derek Brazauskas]

i hate to stir the pot but it seems that the tully roster has more than 15 people on it

are we allowed more than 15 people on a roster but can only play 14+1 per round?

Why don't you worry about your own team and maybe you can win a match!!!

[Titan Bariloni]

Rules are there for a reason.

they change so often

[Derek Brazauskas]

so argue all week about to few of players at challenges...now lets argue that teams have to many players

make up our minds for us

we should be commended for a first year team that has had a full squad with bench players and helpers at every challenge

before the season this post was made, also your the only roster oversized.

I frankly dont care what size your roster is, if you have 16, at finals, you'll only be using 12 per round, so. if you bring 16, you'll be sitting 3 per round anyways.

Marcy will play both rounds.

or a player 900 or less!

[Eric Kevorkian]

70% of our team is sub 900. We don't even have a pro open player, for that matter we have one pro grandmaster..The rest all am's and most am 2...

Call it bitter or whatever you want, but it doesn't seem right for a team comprised of "most am 2" players to be playing in finals over teams that have to play against much higher caliber players throughout the year.

I know it's the structure of the challenges, and that's the way it is, but that just doesn't make much sense.

Probably opening a can of worms here...

[Derek Brazauskas]

70% of our team is sub 900. We don't even have a pro open player, for that matter we have one pro grandmaster..The rest all am's and most am 2...

Call it bitter or whatever you want, but it doesn't seem right for a team comprised of "most am 2" players to be playing in finals over teams that have to play against much higher caliber players throughout the year.

I know it's the structure of the challenges, and that's the way it is, but that just doesn't make much sense.

Probably opening a can of worms here...

Does the word TEAM mean anything to all you? It's not an individaul tourney!!!

[Eric Kevorkian]

"all you", It was just me that said it.

I'm going with the flow of the challenge. We will do everything in our power to avoid swimming in the B pool next year. If that's the case, we just gotta win ourselves back into the A pool.

[Derek Brazauskas]

"all you", It was just me that said it.

I'm going with the flow of the challenge. We will do everything in our power to avoid swimming in the B pool next year. If that's the case, we just gotta win ourselves back into the A pool.

So what you are saying is A and B pools should stay seperate?Finals and all?

[Eric Kevorkian]

I was more just pointing out that it's somewhat frustrating having a good team, going against solid opponents every challenge and being delegated to the B pool, while a team of "most am2's" plays against lesser opponents over the course of the season, and then has the shot at winning some $$$.

Not trying to argue or start a battle or anything Derek, just my 02.

If we were in the B pool and qualified for finals, you better believe i'd be psyched!

Best of luck if you guys get in!

The answer on our teams part is simple: WIN MORE CHALLENGES!

[Alan MacLean]

Wouldn't it be more disturbing if the team of AM2s was pretty much the punching bag of Pool B and was handing out "gimme" wins to other teams?

The AM players (and others) @ Team T-R are 3-1 which means we're winning some quality matches. What's so wrong about a bunch of AM players qualifying for finals?

[Eric Kevorkian]

PM sent

[Chris Bolton]

i hate to stir the pot but it seems that the tully roster has more than 15 people on it

are we allowed more than 15 people on a roster but can only play 14+1 per round?

Why don't you worry about your own team and maybe you can win a match!!!

woah carefully buddy

i am glad that i know you cause normally i would be going off and being really pissed at that statement

i don't care if we win or not.....winning is not everything

we have a good time as a team and enjoy playing every match

i can say many other things but i am choosing not to b/c they are not worth it...you guys beat us and it is over with....you guys are a great group of people that i have no problem with

just wanted to clear some things up that i have noticed through out the season

[Paul Sullivan]

another perfect example of somebody that throws a blanket insult out there(calling other people lesser opponents") and then gets their feelings hurt when someone responds to it.

[Steve Solbo]

so argue all week about to few of players at challenges...now lets argue that teams have to many players

make up our minds for us

we should be commended for a first year team that has had a full squad with bench players and helpers at every challenge

before the season this post was made, also your the only roster oversized.

I frankly dont care what size your roster is, if you have 16, at finals, you'll only be using 12 per round, so. if you bring 16, you'll be sitting 3 per round anyways.

Marcy will play both rounds.

or a player 900 or less!

No. If your woman comes, she'll be playing both rounds. So, there in lies the question... if you bring Marcy, she'll be playing both rounds. If not. Then I guess I'll give you guys a sub 900 for both rounds.

I may have the women do their own thing in doubles with eachother, random with other women from other teams, for a little side pot action, as well as their singles matchup.

[Steven Dakai]

OK, now I am confused.

Can you spell out who is expected to play at the finals? It sounds like what you are saying is that some teams will be forced to play a sub 900 player or a female player for both rounds even if they can only use 12 players.
If that is true, why make them come at all? The odds of a b pool team winning is slim already but that would be wrong to dictate who they can and cannot play.

If I am reading this wrong, I apologize.

[Steve Solbo]

Ask Todd, I dont give a [bleep] anymore.

Here's what I think Todd spelled out.

Teams that qualify 1-4 will be able to play their entire roster.
Teams that qualify 5-8 (Including B Pool) will only be able to play 12 open spots and their womens slot.

if your woman shows up, she'll play both rounds.

SIMPLY being done due to numbers, rationale, the teams that played the best over the course of the season deserve it, I can tell you now, it looks like Burgess, even though likely to qualify top 4 will only be playing 12 TOTAL.

[Mark Valis]

If we really want to find out which Team is the Best , than I would have to agree with those that think player's should be ranked down the lines from1-? and they should be matched up that way for singles and for Dubs. No picking match-ups and all the other BS . Run what you brung #1 vs. #1 (and so on) mano a mano !

[Tim_Griskus]

i hate to stir the pot but it seems that the tully roster has more than 15 people on it

are we allowed more than 15 people on a roster but can only play 14+1 per round?

Why don't you worry about your own team and maybe you can win a match!!!

Derek that comment was a bit below the belt. If we win a match or not I really don't care, yes winning is fun but so is just playing year round.

I think the biggest question/concern myself and Chris had when we saw that Tully had more then the 14+1 on the roster (which I don't care about) was...

Can we add more players to our team? Say have 17 people on the roster and only play 14+1.

Main reasoning behind that question is lots of Team Panthorn have families not all of us can make certain matches (yes one per month how hard is that to schedule?) well for some of us it's pretty tough depending on the situation. So the reason we wanted to know an answer was we had a few more people in mind that would have liked to play on the team.

That way, we can bring a full 14+1 instead of 12+1 or 10+0 and our opponents have to sit players, which is the last thing I as a Co-Capt or Chris as our Capt what to have the other team do.

That's where the question stemmed from and the reason behind it. It was not to have you disqualified or lashed at the whipping post for fielding a full squad at every challenge, to me that's awesome that way everyone (if both teams bring full squads) gets to play disc golf.

And really that's the main point of these things right? To play disc golf.

Thanks,
TRB

[Steve Solbo]

If we really want to find out which Team is the Best , than I would have to agree with those that think player's should be ranked down the lines from1-? and they should be matched up that way for singles and for Dubs. No picking match-ups and all the other BS . Run what you brung #1 vs. #1 (and so on) mano a mano !

Then likely, there would never be upsets. Matchups are huge. Also, I could just go like this with Team Burgess

#1 Cow
#2 Drew
#3 Ralph...

so on and so forth.

Stupid idea. 98% of the time, the better team would win.

[Steven Dakai]

Whoa, Steve...I was asking a question. If those are the rules fine. I just never heard the part that if you bring a female player she isn't allowed to sit out either round.
Not saying it would happen, just asking.

[Steve Solbo]

Whoa, Steve...I was asking a question. If those are the rules fine. I just never heard the part that if you bring a female player she isn't allowed to sit out either round.
Not saying it would happen, just asking.

I know Steve, it wasnt really directed at you, but kind of like everyone, haha.

Anyways, I believe that is the way Todd has it set up, you'll need clarification from him.

[Titan Bariloni]

If we win a match or not I really don't care,

if we have 17 or 400 why do you care?

if you guys want more player then ask don't hint around it by questioning our roster....just simply ask

[Tim_Griskus]

If we win a match or not I really don't care,

if we have 17 or 400 why do you care?

if you guys want more player then ask don't hint around it by questioning our roster....just simply ask

I did ask titan and never got a response. It's not Tully's fault and I wasn't saying it was.

I like all of Tully except you for ducking me at our challenge!!!

[Shawn Mullen]

The roster size is a rule and now that the rules are clear. Follow them.

A rule like max roster size may not effect your team but it could effect a team in say...CT where we have 3 teams within a 20 mile radius of each other. If this was ok I could list half of CT as my team and then bam....those people can't get picked up by any other team as a sub or replacement.

You also only get two roster moves and you guys are way beyond that already. Just to get 17 qualified takes more than two moves. If the rules were being enforced you really should have to use the roster you had after the two moves for the rest of the season.

I am just stating what it looks like from another's prospective. Do I have a problem with your team NO not at all. You guys deserved every win you got. Plus your extra players were all locals and you weren't looking for a loophole to get a ringer in there. That's why when I spoke to Derek before our match I said it didn't matter how many he brough as long as I knew who they were and how many would play each round.

The rules were not clear at the start of the season so you guys really didn't do anything wrong or unethical but from this point forward I think everyone needs to follow the rules that were laid out.

Good luck the rest of the season everyone.

[Derek Brazauskas]

i hate to stir the pot but it seems that the tully roster has more than 15 people on it

are we allowed more than 15 people on a roster but can only play 14+1 per round?

Why don't you worry about your own team and maybe you can win a match!!!

Derek that comment was a bit below the belt. If we win a match or not I really don't care, yes winning is fun but so is just playing year round.

I think the biggest question/concern myself and Chris had when we saw that Tully had more then the 14+1 on the roster (which I don't care about) was...

Can we add more players to our team? Say have 17 people on the roster and only play 14+1.

Main reasoning behind that question is lots of Team Panthorn have families not all of us can make certain matches (yes one per month how hard is that to schedule?) well for some of us it's pretty tough depending on the situation. So the reason we wanted to know an answer was we had a few more people in mind that would have liked to play on the team.

That way, we can bring a full 14+1 instead of 12+1 or 10+0 and our opponents have to sit players, which is the last thing I as a Co-Capt or Chris as our Capt what to have the other team do.

That's where the question stemmed from and the reason behind it. It was not to have you disqualified or lashed at the whipping post for fielding a full squad at every challenge, to me that's awesome that way everyone (if both teams bring full squads) gets to play disc golf.

And really that's the main point of these things right? To play disc golf.

Thanks,
TRB

Your right it was a bit below the belt...Look at it this way if you don't care about winning or losing then why get caught up in all of this discussion???Sounds a bit like you may care more than you let on..

Nothing personal against you guys, you know I like all of you Panthornians..I've kept to myself a number of times on this issue and felt like we needed to stand up and say something!!


In the end I was just trying to say your effort would be better served concentrating on Tolland Feb 28th...Sorry If I offended Panthorn...Just standing up for TULLY ROCK...


D

[Steve Solbo]

Derek, you are spot on.

All these people coming out and saying they play for "fun", yet, they all come out complaining about every little rule that is broken. Sounds like it's all about the "fun" for them... haha.

Like I said elsewhere, Burgess is "in it, to win it" we play to win, not please anyone and our team has a crapload of fun... we have "fun" when we lose, but we have SOO much more fun when we win.

[Derek Brazauskas]

The roster size is a rule and now that the rules are clear. Follow them.

A rule like max roster size may not effect your team but it could effect a team in say...CT where we have 3 teams within a 20 mile radius of each other. If this was ok I could list half of CT as my team and then bam....those people can't get picked up by any other team as a sub or replacement.

You also only get two roster moves and you guys are way beyond that already. Just to get 17 qualified takes more than two moves. If the rules were being enforced you really should have to use the roster you had after the two moves for the rest of the season.

I am just stating what it looks like from another's prospective. Do I have a problem with your team NO not at all. You guys deserved every win you got. Plus your extra players were all locals and you weren't looking for a loophole to get a ringer in there. That's why when I spoke to Derek before our match I said it didn't matter how many he brough as long as I knew who they were and how many would play each round. This is why I decided to not bring up your roster size. But now that it's out there.

The rules were not clear at the start of the season so you guys really didn't do anything wrong or unethical but from this point forward I think everyone needs to follow the rules that were laid out.

Good luck the rest of the season everyone.

Didn't the rule say that you could make as many roster move as you want this year??Was there new rules and Captains didn't get PM's??

Is this another case of Solbamanomics??? Not sure....

[Shawn Mullen]

The roster size is a rule and now that the rules are clear. Follow them.

A rule like max roster size may not effect your team but it could effect a team in say...CT where we have 3 teams within a 20 mile radius of each other. If this was ok I could list half of CT as my team and then bam....those people can't get picked up by any other team as a sub or replacement.

You also only get two roster moves and you guys are way beyond that already. Just to get 17 qualified takes more than two moves. If the rules were being enforced you really should have to use the roster you had after the two moves for the rest of the season.

I am just stating what it looks like from another's prospective. Do I have a problem with your team NO not at all. You guys deserved every win you got. Plus your extra players were all locals and you weren't looking for a loophole to get a ringer in there. That's why when I spoke to Derek before our match I said it didn't matter how many he brough as long as I knew who they were and how many would play each round. This is why I decided to not bring up your roster size. But now that it's out there.

The rules were not clear at the start of the season so you guys really didn't do anything wrong or unethical but from this point forward I think everyone needs to follow the rules that were laid out.

Good luck the rest of the season everyone.

Didn't the rule say that you could make as many roster move as you want this year??Was there new rules and Captains didn't get PM's??

Is this another case of Solbamanomics??? Not sure....

I really have no clue at all, I just read the rules at the start of this thread and that's what they said. I don't really care tho. I have no problem with what you guys did. So wait...are there rules on the roster or not....now my head is spinning

[Steven Dakai]

There is no paradox to playing for fun and asking for clear,consistent rules that are applied to every team evenly.

I don't find it FUN to have these discussions about rules that were unclear or unstated.
I do find it FUN to PLAY and WIN.

[Derek Brazauskas]

The roster size is a rule and now that the rules are clear. Follow them.

A rule like max roster size may not effect your team but it could effect a team in say...CT where we have 3 teams within a 20 mile radius of each other. If this was ok I could list half of CT as my team and then bam....those people can't get picked up by any other team as a sub or replacement.

You also only get two roster moves and you guys are way beyond that already. Just to get 17 qualified takes more than two moves. If the rules were being enforced you really should have to use the roster you had after the two moves for the rest of the season.

I am just stating what it looks like from another's prospective. Do I have a problem with your team NO not at all. You guys deserved every win you got. Plus your extra players were all locals and you weren't looking for a loophole to get a ringer in there. That's why when I spoke to Derek before our match I said it didn't matter how many he brough as long as I knew who they were and how many would play each round. This is why I decided to not bring up your roster size. But now that it's out there.

The rules were not clear at the start of the season so you guys really didn't do anything wrong or unethical but from this point forward I think everyone needs to follow the rules that were laid out.

Good luck the rest of the season everyone.

Didn't the rule say that you could make as many roster move as you want this year??Was there new rules and Captains didn't get PM's??

Is this another case of Solbamanomics??? Not sure....

I really have no clue at all, I just read the rules at the start of this thread and that's what they said. I don't really care tho. I have no problem with what you guys did. So wait...are there rules on the roster or not....now my head is spinning

Join the club!! Now you know our frustration...

[Steven Dakai]

Can we get a ruling?