Forum Search:
RSD No Spam
rec.sport.disc without the spam


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » Major UOA Field Marking Advancement
Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52332] Mon, 15 February 2010 06:04 Go to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
The UOA has done it again......
We have made another improvement to the sport.

We have added a new mark to the field.

Sure...all lines...sideline, backline, goal line....of course.
brick marks.....yes...we got them too.

now....this weekend...unveiled for the first time for your
approval.....

"HASH MARKS"

we added to the field lining....hash marks 3 feet long, perpendicular
to the sideline....at the brick mark.
so.....the observer could hustle to the hash mark and point straight
out to indicate where the disc should be walked to for the brick.

the fields got torn up pretty good in the middle.....so the sideline
hash mark made it super easy for the observers to signal where to walk
the disc to.
athletes standing on the sideline could help out too.....

it's the latest craze....or will be....and should also be adopted by
the upa.

futuristically speaking....it could also determine the future coaches
box....or team bench area....

word.
we're forward thinking.
how about you?
MG
UOA Founder-co
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52341 is a reply to message #52332] Mon, 15 February 2010 08:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
homrbush
Messages: 429
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
agerics20 wrote on Mon, 15 February 2010 09:04


it's the latest craze....or will be....and should also be adopted by
the upa.

futuristically speaking....it could also determine the future coaches
box....or team bench area....

word.
we're forward thinking.
how about you?
MG
UOA Founder-co


Hash marks do sound like a good idea, but I would prefer not to have a team bench area. This are big strategic advantages to being able to walk the sideline and call out help to your on-field teammates, especially on end zone plays, where reaction time is so key.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52346 is a reply to message #52341] Mon, 15 February 2010 11:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Feb 15, 11:32 am, homrbush <homrb...@homerbush.net> wrote:
>
> > futuristically speaking....it could also determine the
> > future coaches
> > box....or team bench area....

how about if you just made the line go all the way accross and it
could tripple as a two point line????
--------------------------------------------------
>
> Hash marks do sound like a good idea, but I would prefer not
> to have a team bench area.  This are big strategic
> advantages to being able to walk the sideline and call out
> help to your on-field teammates, especially on end zone
> plays, where reaction time is so key.


but wouldnt that put ALL TEAMS at the same stategic disadvantage?
seems to me NOT HAVING player restrictive areas would be an unfair
advantage to the larger teams that have enough man power to play the
sidelines while other team mates are resting, getting water, medical
assistance, etc.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52350 is a reply to message #52346] Mon, 15 February 2010 12:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joaqman
Messages: 115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 15, 11:26 am, ulticritic <ulticri...@live.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 11:32 am, homrbush <homrb...@homerbush.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > futuristically speaking....it could also determine the
> > > future coaches
> > > box....or team bench area....
>
> how about if you just made the line go all the way accross and it
> could tripple as a two point line????
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> > Hash marks do sound like a good idea, but I would prefer not
> > to have a team bench area.  This are big strategic
> > advantages to being able to walk the sideline and call out
> > help to your on-field teammates, especially on end zone
> > plays, where reaction time is so key.
>
> but wouldnt that put ALL TEAMS at the same stategic disadvantage?
> seems to me NOT HAVING player restrictive areas would be an unfair
> advantage to the larger teams that have enough man power to play the
> sidelines while other team mates are resting, getting water, medical
> assistance, etc.

Have to agree with Toad here on the team bench area. Also makes the
game better for spectators. Not sure on the two pointer yet, is there
a no zone clause with the two pointer?
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52360 is a reply to message #52350] Mon, 15 February 2010 12:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oreo
Messages: 28
Registered: February 2009
Junior Member
two point line idea is lame, its not an incredibly difficult throw to
make and it just seems like a lame as gimmick to me
team bench area is dumb. I agree its an advantage that both teams have
so taking it away wouldnt be unfair. but having a sideline also makes
the game much more fun and active
Making changes for spectators over players seem like a horrible idea
for the improvement of a sport..
Back to the point of this thread. I played this weekend, the hash
marks were nice!
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52362 is a reply to message #52341] Mon, 15 February 2010 13:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
> Hash marks do sound like a good idea, but I would prefer not
> to have a team bench area.  This are big strategic
> advantages to being able to walk the sideline and call out
> help to your on-field teammates, especially on end zone
> plays, where reaction time is so key.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


---hey, i hear you!
i don't WANT a team bench area, for all the same reasons that you
don't....and more maybe.
....but...most sports have some sort of restricted team
area.......so...........maybe one day.......
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52363 is a reply to message #52360] Mon, 15 February 2010 13:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
I played this weekend, the hash
> marks were nice!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


---thank YOU!
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52366 is a reply to message #52360] Mon, 15 February 2010 13:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joaqman
Messages: 115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 15, 12:56 pm, oreo <oreo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> two point line idea is lame, its not an incredibly difficult throw to
> make and it just seems like a lame as gimmick to me
> team bench area is dumb. I agree its an advantage that both teams have
> so taking it away wouldnt be unfair. but having a sideline also makes
> the game much more fun and active
> Making changes for spectators over players seem like a horrible idea
> for the improvement of a sport..
> Back to the point of this thread. I played this weekend, the hash
> marks were nice!

Two point line does seem gimmicky, but I'm not going to rule it out
completely yet. The three point line was also considered a gimmick
but is now accepted.

I'm not sure having a large and vocal sideline makes the game more
fun, it certainty can make it more annoying (Blaaaaaaak-Tiiiiiiiiiide,
Hoooooooo-daaaaaaags, UC!-UsD! Squi-D!, Braaaaaaaaains!). Also,
having a team bench area (hopefully pulled back from the sideline)
would help to eliminate dumb sideline arguments and sideline players
making calls. Mind you, this all only works with observers.

P.S. Love the hash mark idea.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52374 is a reply to message #52366] Mon, 15 February 2010 15:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
bslade86
Messages: 357
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
I like hash marks, restricting uniformed players to stay between the brick marks (if the game is observed- otherwise, they can be helpful for offsides and in/out calls), and experimenting with a two-point line.


I agree with Joaq that rowdy competitors crowding the sideline by the endzone does not make ultimate more fun (although I agree that it helps your team- so keep doing it until it's outlawed).

The two point line adds some human drama and makes comebacks more feasible. It could also lead to yardage bleeding zones and fewer hucks than today's ultimate game if teams sell out to prevent the two-pointer.

I think all of these changes COULD improve the quality of play for participants. Improved watchability is possible, but of secondary consideration.

Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52391 is a reply to message #52374] Mon, 15 February 2010 18:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BJones
Messages: 253
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
There was an instance this weekend where the team Buffalo was playing
blocked the line for a view on a call. As a result, the player who had
"toed the line" and was in, was called out probably because the
observer couldn't look straight down the line.

On Feb 15, 6:20 pm, Slade <bslad...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I like hash marks, restricting uniformed players to stay
> between the brick marks (if the game is observed- otherwise,
> they can be helpful for offsides and in/out calls), and
> experimenting with a two-point line.
>
> I agree with Joaq that rowdy competitors crowding the
> sideline by the endzone does not make ultimate more fun
> (although I agree that it helps your team- so keep doing it
> until it's outlawed).
>
> The two point line adds some human drama and makes comebacks
> more feasible. It could also lead to yardage bleeding zones
> and fewer hucks than today's ultimate game if teams sell out
> to prevent the two-pointer.
>
> I think all of these changes COULD improve the quality of
> play for participants. Improved watchability is possible,
> but of secondary consideration.
>
> --
> Posted fromhttp://www.rsdnospam.com
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52402 is a reply to message #52391] Mon, 15 February 2010 21:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BMaster
Messages: 33
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Feb 15, 8:22 pm, BJones <alyan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There was an instance this weekend where the team Buffalo was playing
> blocked the line for a view on a call. As a result, the player who had
> "toed the line" and was in, was called out probably because the
> observer couldn't look straight down the line.

UCSB received a TMF for this at College Nationals last year. They had
several warnings, but those shouldn't even be necessary. How hard is
it to stay behind a line?
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52407 is a reply to message #52402] Tue, 16 February 2010 03:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Feb 16, 12:03 am, BMaster <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 8:22 pm, BJones <alyan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> UCSB received a TMF for this at College Nationals last year.  They had
> several warnings, but those shouldn't even be necessary.  How hard is
> it to stay behind a line?

obviously VERY HARD......just look how the offsides rule is INCREDIBLY
abused (when unobserved.........or should i say un-
REFFED.......because, you know, even with observers "offsides" is an
ACTIVE, REF STYLE CALL, right?)
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52410 is a reply to message #52374] Tue, 16 February 2010 04:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Feb 15, 6:20 pm, Slade <bslad...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> The two point line adds some human drama and makes comebacks
> more feasible.


best ending to an ultimate came BY FAR for me was due to the two point
line comeback. Also the game was timed so the winning goal HAD to be
thrown prior to the clock expiring......WHICH ADDED EVEN MORE DRAMA
AND EXCITEMENT. really it was the combination of those two elements
that enabled that scenerio.

the bad side though is that teams actually defended their opponents
from going BACKWARDS up the field when they attempeted to make dump
type passes just to get back to two point range(for the potential
comeback). I also herd of teams playing that trash zone for the
initial part of a freshly pulled point to thwart a two point play
attempt off the pull. so, it has its drawbacks......but its nuthin
that couldnt be solved by regulating defense or backwards movement
with the disc......or somthin.

i predict TIMED GAMES will eventually come back, especially in single
game formats or showcased games where there is a large visible clock.
Not only is it just a traditional sports norm for ALL similar type
"team/field" sports BUT it does allow for more drama. Also, its
somthing that keeps the spectators attentative of game statues on a
second to second basis.

as for the whole "sideline" issue. my prediction there is that
"playing the sideline" will eventually be restricted to non playing
coaches. I'd allow two per sideline for each team
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52463 is a reply to message #52402] Tue, 16 February 2010 15:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 16, 12:03 am, BMaster <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 8:22 pm, BJones <alyan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There was an instance this weekend where the team Buffalo was playing
> > blocked the line for a view on a call. As a result, the player who had
> > "toed the line" and was in, was called out probably because the
> > observer couldn't look straight down the line.
>
> UCSB received a TMF for this at College Nationals last year.  They had
> several warnings, but those shouldn't even be necessary.  How hard is
> it to stay behind a line?

Good that TMFs are getting given out for something, but this is a
waste and it's stupid that a bunch of warnings were required. Just
more baby-sitting TMFs and still only in the "I'm warning you, that if
you keep doing this, I'm going to give you a warning TMF" setting.
"No fighting, no swearing, no dangerous plays, and no interfering with
play, but go ahead and cheat as much as you want."

Staying behind a line only 1m from the sideline still will not allow
the observer to see both the disc/catch and the feet in many cases,
especially if it's a true line-toeing catch.

That's why it's stupid for the UPA to go to the trouble of putting a
line down and then put it too close to the sideline to accomplish the
purposes of that line. Ever picked up the disc on the sideline and
pivoted out? You're already stepping across that 1m line and your
throw is obstructed by all the players lined up along/behind the 1m
line.

This 1m line is referred to as "The Deaver Line." And it's crap.
What is this, a sideline buffer for ants?! There needs to be at least
2-3 times as much space.

I suggested that more space be allowed, but my suggestions were
dismissed. The "McIntyre Line" would be at least 2m from the
sideline, at least making a legitimate attempt to keep the sideline
clear, while balancing space constraints.

And that's the line that'll be down at any tournaments I'm involved in
organizing. A true advancement. I mean, I guess the sideline hash is
fine and useful, but only if the brick marks are wearing away or
something. Good for the UOA, I guess. But the sideline buffers are
more important and not that much work.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52464 is a reply to message #52463] Tue, 16 February 2010 15:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ultimatephotography
Messages: 422
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
team bench hashmarks:

suggestion: what if we added the bench area, but allowed 2 players per
team to go outside of the "bench area."

it's more to keep track of, but you get the benefit of BOTH
1. continued communication on the sideline
2. a lot less obstruction.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52465 is a reply to message #52463] Tue, 16 February 2010 15:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ultimatephotography
Messages: 422
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
> Good that TMFs are getting given out for something, but this is a
> waste and it's stupid that a bunch of warnings were required.  Just
> more baby-sitting TMFs and still only in the "I'm warning you, that if
> you keep doing this, I'm going to give you a warning TMF" setting.

Colin - hasn't the UPA basically said, we're not going to do more than
we are doing.

So it's up to someone else to make things happen = if the observers
agree to rigidly enforce off field players' movement by TMF, they can
do so, and we'll be one step closer to what you want...
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52466 is a reply to message #52464] Tue, 16 February 2010 15:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 16, 6:42 pm, bil <ultimatephotogra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> team bench hashmarks:
>
> suggestion: what if we added the bench area, but allowed 2 players per
> team to go outside of the "bench area."
>
> it's more to keep track of, but you get the benefit of BOTH
> 1. continued communication on the sideline
> 2. a lot less obstruction.

Sounds ok. Where are these players allowed to roam (i.e., how close
to the sideline)? And how far back are the bench areas? We're
talking primarily about spectator-friendliness with the bench areas,
right? In general, I think bench areas are perhaps the third step in
the right direction. I'd rather take the first two steps first.

I've also heard talk of designated gear areas. I like this idea A
LOT. Getting gear in an organized, limited space makes things a whole
lot safer and provides more room for players to roam the sidelines.
I'm going to try to work this in to any events I'm involved in, too.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52469 is a reply to message #52465] Tue, 16 February 2010 16:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 16, 6:45 pm, bil <ultimatephotogra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Good that TMFs are getting given out for something, but this is a
> > waste and it's stupid that a bunch of warnings were required.  Just
> > more baby-sitting TMFs and still only in the "I'm warning you, that if
> > you keep doing this, I'm going to give you a warning TMF" setting.
>
> Colin - hasn't the UPA basically said, we're not going to do more than
> we are doing.
>
> So it's up to someone else to make things happen = if the observers
> agree to rigidly enforce off field players' movement by TMF, they can
> do so, and we'll be one step closer to what you want...

Yeah. The UPA has basically said that it will do whatever it wants,
regardless of my efforts. I am expected to trust the UPA to get it
right, despite its track record. And instead of functioning properly
to oversee the Committees, the Board is required (by the President's
actions) to give Committees a free pass to do whatever they want, even
if it puts the UPA at risk of financially devastating lawsuits.

I tried to get a provision into the observer manual to allow observers
to give TMFs immediately for sideline encroachment that interferes
with play. Unsuccessfully.

So yes, observers will continue to have to play the role of baby-
sitter, as well as official. Yes, I will be issuing TMFs as freely as
I possibly can on this issue (within the limits of the observer
manual).

But TD's should take the lead on this. The UPA's claim at being a
leader in safety is only valid because so many tournaments are so
awful about this. But that's changing and the UPA will soon be
falling way, way, way behind if it keeps at its current pace.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52470 is a reply to message #52463] Tue, 16 February 2010 16:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
 The "McIntyre Line" would be at least 2m from the
> sideline,



---the Gerics Line would be 3 yards/steps off the sideline at midfield
and 1/2 yard/step from the goal lines....in an arc.

no straight line.
arc
this way, the folks at one end can see the other end without anyone
being in the way.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  I mean, I guess the sideline hash is
> fine and useful, but only if the brick marks are wearing away or
> something.


---plenty of times i have seen the brick mark NOT wearing away....but
folks still having to look around for it.....even observers.
a walk up the sideline to find a three yard hash mark and a point to
the center.....or teammates standing there telling you where it is.
it's the bomb.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52471 is a reply to message #52464] Tue, 16 February 2010 16:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
> suggestion: what if we added the bench area, but allowed 2 players per
> team to go outside of the "bench area."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

----something besides "players".
two team personel?
two team members?

something to include coaches or helpers.

of course, enforcing this would mean that FANS would have to be
restricted to somewhere..somewhere??????
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52472 is a reply to message #52469] Tue, 16 February 2010 16:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
hey...go get into one of toad's threads with this talk.
this thread is about hash marks and the UOA 8s
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52478 is a reply to message #52470] Tue, 16 February 2010 19:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 16, 7:39 pm, Reggie Fanelli <ageric...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> ---the Gerics Line would be 3 yards/steps off the sideline at midfield
> and 1/2 yard/step from the goal lines....in an arc.
>
> no straight line.
> arc
> this way, the folks at one end can see the other end without anyone
> being in the way.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cool, I guess. Sounds like it'll accomplish your goals. Do it.

> ---plenty of times i have seen the brick mark NOT wearing away....but
> folks still having to look around for it.....even observers.
> a walk up the sideline to find a three yard hash mark and a point to
> the center.....or teammates standing there telling you where it is.
> it's the bomb.

I like it. Simple solution to a problem. Making that little extra
effort to get the job done.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52480 is a reply to message #52472] Tue, 16 February 2010 19:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 16, 7:43 pm, Reggie Fanelli <ageric...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> hey...go get into one of toad's threads with this talk.
> this thread is about hash marks and the UOA 8s

My mistake. I thought it was about major field marking advancements.

Hash marks at UOA 8's. Good work. Not sure what's major about it,
but it sounds like a good idea. I sometimes set a shirt or a disc or
something off the field even with the brick. The hash mark would save
that trouble.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52487 is a reply to message #52478] Tue, 16 February 2010 20:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
> > ---the Gerics Line would be 3 yards/steps off the sideline at midfield
> > and 1/2 yard/step from the goal lines....in an arc.
>
> > no straight line.
> > arc
> > this way, the folks at one end can see the other end without anyone
> > being in the way.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Cool, I guess.  Sounds like it'll accomplish your goals.  Do it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


--you can tell me that my idea is better than yours.
go ahead.

and that the hash mark is the bomb!
go ahead.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52488 is a reply to message #52487] Tue, 16 February 2010 20:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Feb 16, 11:01 pm, Reggie Fanelli <ageric...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > ---the Gerics Line would be 3 yards/steps off the sideline at midfield
> > > and 1/2 yard/step from the goal lines....in an arc.
>
> > > no straight line.
> > > arc
> > > this way, the folks at one end can see the other end without anyone
> > > being in the way.
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > Cool, I guess.  Sounds like it'll accomplish your goals.  Do it.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> --you can tell me that my idea is better than yours.
> go ahead.

Well, I don't want anyone a half yard from the sideline. Yours is
better for accomplishing your goal. Mine is better for my goal. An
arc beginning 3m away at each end zone would accomplish both goals,
but that's pretty space-demanding. Easy enough to do for the finals
of Nationals, though.

> and that the hash mark is the bomb!
> go ahead.

I don't throw "the bomb" around lightly. The hash mark sounds like a
good, simple solution to a minor problem. Now, a good, simple
solution to a major problem would be the bomb.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52489 is a reply to message #52488] Tue, 16 February 2010 20:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
> I don't throw "the bomb" around lightly.  The hash mark sounds like a
> good, simple solution to a minor problem.  Now, a good, simple
> solution to a major problem would be the bomb.
~~~~~~~~~~~~

---jealous much?
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52528 is a reply to message #52487] Wed, 17 February 2010 11:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MD
Messages: 98
Registered: September 2008
Member
Mike, the hash mark things... cool if you're an observer, I guess.
Port-a-fields have brick marks on the sidelines, but I guess hash
marks are easier to see.

Now the Gerics Line... that is a great idea, IMO. I'm pretty sure
every single ultimate player has been a spectator at some point, and
most likely had their vision blocked by players/fans. I'm not sure if
there would be enough curvature with only 2.5 yards of "width" over 70
yards of "length", but I think the idea is a good one. Better than the
hash marks for sure.
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52531 is a reply to message #52463] Wed, 17 February 2010 12:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ckerr4
Messages: 281
Registered: January 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC
Senior Member
colinmcintyre wrote on Tue, 16 February 2010 18:30


This 1m line is referred to as "The Deaver Line." And it's crap.
What is this, a sideline buffer for ants?! There needs to be at least
2-3 times as much space.



Zoolander.

Charles
Re: Major UOA Field Marking Advancement [message #52533 is a reply to message #52528] Wed, 17 February 2010 12:47 Go to previous message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
> Now the Gerics Line... that is a great idea, IMO. I'm pretty sure
> every single ultimate player has been a spectator at some point, and
> most likely had their vision blocked by players/fans. I'm not sure if
> there would be enough curvature with only 2.5 yards of "width" over 70
> yards of "length", but I think the idea is a good one. Better than the
> hash marks for sure.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---the slight curve is like the curve of a stadium.......

normally, i have created this curved line on the championship field
with cones as a tournament nears its end and NON-championship game
fields' cones are picked up.


5 or 6 pr 7 yards in the middle is plenty.......down to a yard or so
at the cone

curved player/fan line....better than hash marks?
'bout even, probably

the gerics line
and the weddle hash marks.

UOA
Previous Topic:Mardi Gras Open Pools Up...
Next Topic:Pitt Hype?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Apr 9 16:37:56 PDT 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.0RC2.
Copyright ©2001-2009 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software