footbag.org

[Oskari Forstén (odi)]

[Theodore Fritsch (yyz)]

I have often wondered why rules seem to be discussed and changed in such a short period of time. I am aware of how the IFC works, I also wish that they would weigh some feedback from ORGANIZERS WHO HAVE RAN FIVE OR MORE EVENTS. As for the current stuff we should play as the rules are now and see how it pans out, rules can obviously be changed!!!!!

[Jeremy Mirken (TheSpecialist)]

The current batch of IFC members is MORE THAN QUALIFIED to make rule changes any time it wants. There is representation from 7 different countries, with a total of more than 200 years of footbag experience. 80-90% of the members have run between 5 and 20 tournaments during their footbag careers. There is no more qualified panel:


# Wiktor Debski (Poland) Current IFPA Rules Director

# John Leys (USA) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Steve Goldberg (USA) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Chris Ott (USA) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Vince Bradley (USA) has run countless events

# Justin Sexton (Finland) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Scott Davidson (USA) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Bruce Guettich (USA) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Tricia George (USA) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Matti Pohjola (Finland) has run countless events (incl worlds)

# Jan Struz (Czech Republic) not sure

# Grischa Tellenbach (France) has run countless events

# Dan Ednie (Australia) not sure

# Ianek Regimbald (Canada) has run countless events

# Michal Biarda (Poland) not sure

Rally scoring has been on the table for many years now. Chaos has been using it in practice for more than 5 years, as have other clubs. This change has not been made over night.

[Christopher Siebert (conan)]

I have honestly never played a tourny using anything but sideout scoring, though I have practiced other ways. Optional scoring systems won't change the presentation of the game much, but from the player perspective there are some fundamental changes.

"Rally scoring" actually involves 3 potential changes to the game, each of which should be independently debated:

1. You can lose a point while serving.
2. You can win a game/match without doing anything. Currently at least one successful kick must be made to win.
3. Games are capped (25 points?). Currently we have no score caps on games.

Overall, I have to agree with Yves on this issue: It doesn't matter, it doesn't help the sport, and it doesn't address any of our core problems. Besides, who could watch the 2010 doubles final and think that we need to change anything?

Conan

[Theodore Fritsch (yyz)]

of course there qualified they are ifc members, i believe the concern of some on this post is why are they not consoling the majority before making any rule changes. I am sure that the ifc by laws does not require this, but some here(not necessarily me) wonder if it should. I usually never here about a rule change, until it is already voted on and changed.

[Steve Dusablon (dusablon)]

That lengthy list of distinguished IFC members could be reduced down to 2 or 3 people who know how to use internet communication.

Rock the Vote!

[Wiktor Debski (wiktordebski)]

Steve,

i can't believe that you are so offensive!

The IFC people are players with expierenced, that
know HOW TO USE internet communication.
This is how we work. And imagine that we VOTE.
Representative democracy works here.

Personally i'm in sport since 2002 and i'm involved in
organising this sport in many areas. I play net and freestyle.
If you want to know be better > write me.
How can i respect opinion from someone like you on forum?
There are many people who just sit in front of PC and complain.
...
Too bad we didn't met when i was in Portland this summer.

[Steve Dusablon (dusablon)]

I am not trying to be offensive (it just comes naturally )

All I am trying to do is figure out how a rule gets changed without the consent of the players who need to abide by it.

In a representative democracy, the representatives are elected. These representatives best serve their constituents by finding out what they want through polling and town meetings. Then (and only then) are these representatives supposed to act on behalf of the people.

I have been involved in the "pro" aspect of this game since 1992 and I have participated in organizing at least one (sometimes as many as 4) event every year since then.
Again I say that neither I nor any organizer I know was ever consulted or even contacted by anyone from the IFC about any rule change until it appeared in the rule book.

Again, I am not trying to start a controversy or insult any IFC members. I am registering my frustration with how this "system" currently works and presenting ideas on how it can work better.
I sincerely believe that a simple "Rules Discussion Forum" (with the ability to add polls) and a few mass footbag.org emails per year would be of great benefit to our community.

I will happily meet with you to discuss the IFC, or to just have a beer, next time you are in town.

[Theodore Fritsch (yyz)]

I tend to agree with steve. What is the current process of consulting with the players about a rule change prior to changing it?? whatever it currently is, i always seem to miss it until the rule has actually been changed. Is the current system assuming that the highly experienced, highly motivated, and thankless workers on the IFC simply no whats best for those of us that choose not to serve?
Here's a ? what is the process for me as a single player to petition the ifc to change a rule?

[John Leys (jleys)]

[John Leys (jleys)]

Steve,
I take your comments to heart and will look for more ways to involve the greater net footbag community in rule discussions. The forum is likely the best route.

FYI though, here is how much of it happens today. We run an annual meeting at each Worlds where the IFC gathers to discuss the rules and proposed changes that have been submitted. This meeting is open to the public and announced prior to the event so people can come and listen in. See the 2010 Worlds schedule for the time and date of the meeting in Oakland: http://www.footbag.org/reference/-/Worlds_2010_Schedule?lkl=1

Of course, if there is a controversial rule proposed, like breaking the plane, we typically just discuss it and move on.

Ted, if you want to propose a rule change you should follow the instructions in the rule book: http://www.footbag.org/rules/chapter/40

Most of the rules we work on are clarifications and don't have a big impact on the sport but over the past four years here are some of the rule changes we implemented:

1. Inclusion of the ranking system and a refined description of seeding in the rule book.
2. Footbag can't cause a net foul.
3. Defined breaks in play between games (3 minutes) and when you switch sides at 8 points in game 3 of a match (90 seconds).
4. Addition of Rally Scoring System.
5.Addition of GSM Scoring System.
6. Principle of continuous play. 20 seconds from time bag is dead to next serve.


Rule book potential changes we have been discussing for a few years now:
1. Breaking the plane
2. Clearer definition for use of yellow cards and red cards
3. Dangerous play over the net
4. Whether a squish should really be a contact foul


Again, your points are well taken and I think we can send out more regular updates. My feeling has always been that there is a good amount of the community that hears about potential rule changes because there are so many of us on the IFC who discuss with our local club members. Maybe PDX needs more representation on the IFC?

John

[John Leys (jleys)]

[Russ Arsenault (Calumniate)]

Alright fine. I humbly agree to disagree. These two new scoring systems were introduced for gawd knows why. Now it is apparently the best thing since sliced bread. I know you have a good serve John but is this new system creating real incentives for you to serve harder? I think not. Tennis players have two serves and their first serve lands at about 50% on average. Their second serve is substantially safer. I'm impressed you have that kind of confidence in your serve however.

I dunno, maybe it's the Canadians that like the drama and the side-outs more, along with our comrades from Portland. Jeremy mentioned how boring basketball became and thus changed the rules. But that is a pretty weak argument. Playoff overtime in hockey can go many periods in overtime.. you don't see people leaving the stands and complaining that they all the sudden aren't getting good value for their money. Knowing that a match will end in three or four serves regardless of how intense the match is absolutely kills an aspect of the game that I find endearing.

Cheers

[Russ Arsenault (Calumniate)]

By the way John, I find it pretty sad you can't grasp at what I, Yves and others are getting at. Yes Franky is going to kill me right now regardless of the rules. Thanks for the reminder. But that in no way should change the arguments against rally scoring.

[Theodore Fritsch (yyz)]

thanks john!! Why would we not want the general footbag public involved in rule changes? OOPPSS sorry you said voting. Well they should have a voice and with out a vote, since IFC members are not elected, this could be difficult! Yes john they are experienced and well intentioned(also under appreciated) However we still have a lot of players griping about this recent change in the rule book!! To be honest only a very few have commented here, i heard a lot of complaining this passed year. I like the odea of a discussion group here at footbag.org, atleast if there was a discussion group than i could tell people " hey you should have expressed your concerns here at this site on this link.

Apparently for the purpose of this discussion John has been very helpful. If you find that a particular tournament is going to run a scoring system that you do not like, than i would go and not play under protest of said system. I may also simply choose to not go!
As i see the rule book today I do not see a rule that says a particular tournament MUST choose there scoring system prior to requiring registration fees being paid( ie choosing and not being able to change system prior to close of registration). Considering the various views here this could be a real problem for directors who will be confronted with people who WILL not play a particular system if per say they have to change the system due to perceived timing difficulty do to weather, number of entrants, or some other time delaying event. if there is a rule and i missed it, sorry. If there is not one than there should be one REAL soon.
For the people who do not want these scoring systems, You should explore the link john gave me and see what the steps are to change the rules to only recognize one scoring system.
As a advocate for the beginner, I DO NOT want to be teaching new people three or more scoring systems, THERE IS ALREADY WAY TO MUCH TO LEARN IN ORDER TO GET GOOD AT NET!! I can only hope that directors will see this and stick to the most common scoring system!!
TJF