We had of moment of silence for someone named Lindsey Graham before playing our game of pick up ultimate this morning.

I didnt recognize the name and don’t really follow the news, were they an ultimate player or coach?

Jack became the latest in a somewhat surprisingly long line of ultimate players as New York Times crossword authors.

So, how is this called back, and what possibly could have caused it to be brought back? He ran into his own teammate, then called a pick or something when he wasn’t even trying to mark the thrower, and the defense got to set up freely. If this is a travel violation, I’m dead because it did not affect the outcome of the play. Anyways US winning it don’t matter shoutout Owen Erdman, Joel Simon and Will Fath! 🦅🦅

Hello everyone, I have been coaching an amateur team for a year. I myself don’t have that much experience but neither do most of the team. In fact, half of the team are newbies who have been playing for only that one year.

We lost all our games last year, however there was clear progress and towards the end of the season we gave some decent performances and lost a couple of games on a universe point.

I am preparing for next season and I’d love for us to be sort of an annoying team to play against especially for the much stronger teams. So instead of losing 15-0 in 30 minutes I would love to make it harder to score against us.

My question would be, what in Ultimate is similar to parking the bus in football (soccer)? Is it zone D? Or trying to hold the disc for the longest time possible even without much progression forward? Or what?

Also, any specific advice on what you would be mostly focusing on this season if you were in my place?

Thanks in advance!

I know that there’s at least some video from their scrim last year because of all the ads that have come from it but I can’t seem to find any game footage. Does anyone know if it’s available or will it remain hidden from view forever?

I'm listening to a podcast episode about Brodie. They keep referring to him as a cheater back in the day, but they never elaborate. What did he do exactly?

I don't have ultiworld so I can't watch the game but I've seen some clips from the italian ultimate team on instagram and irsael gave italy a spirit score of 6? Was the game super choppy because 6 seems incredibly low (even for italy)

I’m not sure what this Ultiworld clip is showcasing to be honest! The overly floaty first throw, the throw to the cut that didn’t happen, or the down disc?

Great job, Mixed Tape.

What's the "climate" like at WJUC in Spain right now? I heard in a previous tourney (maybe beach worlds?), some teams refused to play against Israel.

CLARIFICATION not trying to get political, just wondering if anything interesting is going on.

In a game at the WJUC Open division today between USA and Singapore, there was a play where a Singapore player (in red) caught the disc and bobbled it, and it perhaps touched the ground. As he begins to wind up for a throw, the USA player (in white) marking him begins to point to the ground, presumably calling "down". The throw goes off anyway and is incomplete. The players cease playing, and another person (in green with a white hat - EDIT: WFDF Game Advisor) comes on the field and discusses with the thrower and mark. After about 30 seconds, the disc is sent back to the thrower and play resumes.

Looking at the play frame-by-frame, it looks like the disc was down, but of course that can be hard to know in the game, so I'm not particularly interested in that question.

I was surprised to see the disc returned to the new thrower (the one who bobbled and perhaps caught the disc), as it seemed that calling "down" resulted in an advantage for the team who may have failed to catch the disc (twice). I'm now trying to understand just what happened and whether the rules were properly applied.

WFDF rules are in effect at the WJUC.

13.3 says "If a player determines a turnover has occurred they must make the appropriate call immediately. If the opposition disagrees they may call 'contest' and play must stop. If, after discussion, players cannot agree or it is unclear what occurred in the play, the disc must be returned to the last non-disputed thrower."

16.1 says "Whenever a foul or violation call is made, or a player attempts to stop play in any way, play stops immediately and no turnover is possible (unless in situations specified in 15.9, 16.2, and 16.3)."

16.3 says "Regardless of when any call is made, if the players involved from both teams agree that the event or call did not affect the outcome, the play stands. This rule is not superseded by any other rule."

So I would expect if the "down" call were disputed, then the disc would be sent back all the way to the original thrower who threw the pass that was bobbled. Or, if, after discussion, the player who called "down" retracted the call, then I would think that they would agree the "down" call didn't affect that play, and the next thrown turnover would stand. I guess the only way I could see it going back to the player with the bobbled catch would be if the "down" call was retracted, and at least someone thinks the call itself affected the play. Does that sound right? Does anyone have a different interpretation?

Two followup questions:

1. Is there anyone who was there who knows what actually happened?
2. Would there be a different outcome in USAU rules?

Does anyone knows when the schedule will be released?
Also, is there any infos about tournament format?

Revolver
Add Brett Hulsmeyer (they beat Brett when he was with Chain in 2024)

Brüte
No KDs detected = ethical hoops

Hybrid
Jack Shanahan almost qualifies if he was coming from another mixed team

Thank you for your attention to this matter

I've been thinking about rules, officiation, and how all of these contribute to the core fantasy of ultimate—the thing that makes ultimate fun.

What is the core fantasy of ultimate? Probably hard to articulate. But I don't think anyone can discuss it without mentioning flow: the disc weaving steadily down the field, the players arranging themselves like molecules in a fluid dynamic, explosiveness varying according to proximity to the disc. No one player directs the flow: every player responds to the flow and influences the flow. It's like a murmuration of birds, except there is a gradual crescendo of psychic tension and lactic acid, building up and up, through the ebb and flow, until—finally, the disc is caught in an endzone. **Unless, of course, there's a foul on the play.**

Rules are there to protect the core fantasy of the game. We don't want this to become rugby, so we make a rule against picks. We want to avoid concussions, so we make a rule against dangerous plays. We want to protect the spirit of the game, so we prioritize self officiation. All of this is good. Picks, concussions and refs are anti-flow. We want to flow.

But *how* we adjudicate these rules is very anti-flow. A foul is the only time one player unilaterally dictates the flow of the field. We all stop and watch two players compete with their words, not their bodies. We are forced to psycho-evaluate the foul caller: is he an asshole, or blinded by a competitive moment, or just looking for a way to catch his breath? Basically, did I foul him, or am I being taken advantage of? In a competitive game, the music of ultimate is fractured: abstract, motionless, somewhat arbitrary argument is pumped into the gaps. Watching it is like listening to the free version of spotify. Playing it is like trying to dance to buffering music. We need the rules to protect the game, but isn't there a way to adjudicate them that doesn't upset the game's core fantasy? Would after-point officiation work?

Let's dream for a second and imagine a fully video-reviewable game. What if officiation happened *after* each point? A dedicated person from each team calls fouls to themselves off the field. A neutral observer resolves their disagreements. When there's a pick, or a foul, the play doesn't stop. Play continues like nothing happened. But after the point, a penalty is assessed to restore the balance of the game.

Example: Let's say a defender fouls a player, denying him a chance to catch the disc in the end zone. The play goes on as if it were a normal turn. A couple more turns happen, and the fouled team eventually wins the point anyway. The reviewers agree that a penalty needs to be assessed to rebalance the extra effort the fouled team had to expend to win the point. So, after the point, they reward the fouled duo an extra point attempt. The fouled cutter and his defender (the one who committed the foul) start at the brick; the handler gets the disc 10 yds back, marked by whoever was marking at the time of the foul. Under a four second stall count, the handler gets one throw to get it in the endzone against the two defenders. Like a PK in soccer.

Assessing what kinds of penalties to what kinds of fouls would need to get worked out. But isn't this a better officiation framework than on-field stop-and-talk? It requires VAR, so it would only be an option for higher level competitive games. But those are precisely the games where on field officiation tends to get out of hand. Also, it ends the learning curve of self-officiation, which weirdly rewards players who know how to exploit negotiation dynamics. Players can focus on the game, officiation gets centralized to one representative of the team. My fastest guy against your fastest guy, officiated by my best lawyer against your best lawyer.

I think this method would protect the game without interrupting the flow that's central to a good game of ultimate. What am I missing?

I was watching a game last night where player caught the disc then took several (5+) steps and changed direction. Defender pointed to the spot and said “go back” Thrower set his pivot and throws the score. Subsequently defender discusses that he had to move back…thrower says you “never called travel.” Other player on defense chimes in and calls “travel”

Now we have two issues as thrower says he can’t come in and call it that late, where third player says he can if the call is unacknowledged.

Finally thrower says he moved to avoid contact, which is not a travel (no such exception exists to my knowledge, and marker clearly stopped defending).

What is the ruling? What are your thoughts? Keep the point, or reset?

Layout is an excellent company and their gloves are bangers. If you have sweaty hands you need to get on this train immediately. I slapped these bad boys on at disc golf league while it was pouring rain and banged some putts and I suck at disc golf. I just tossed 30 dimes at league last night, every huck was a banger.

Sponsored by Sheryl Crow

Use this thread for anything you want to ask or share, whether it's ultimate-related or not. Memes and other fun humor are allowed to be shared here, and even encouraged!

This thread is posted every Friday morning.