Now for those of you not versed in the rules of Ultimate Frisbee, usually pulls are thrown from your end zone. This is done to assure that the defense has the time to set up an offense. It was a big surprise to me that the pull was taken from midfield. At the time, I thought that there was some kind of weird rule going on, so I checked the rules and sure enough, there was. From the head of the MLU rulebook, Ian McClellan,
If the pulling team calls a timeout between points (before readiness is signaled), they will get to pull from midfield after that timeout. This provides an exciting strategic option for using a timeout between points apply some extra defensive pressure to start the next point. Hopefully this becomes a useful tool for teams that are behind to create some break opportunities to improve comeback chances.
Now, let's get to the point. I believe that this rule change is a terrible decision. Let's first talk about how this effects the starting field position and starting flow of the game. Normally after the pull, the offense has about one or two uninterrupted throws before the defensive team can set a play on the offensive team. This short freedom allows the offense to solidify the beginnings of their offense. Furthermore, the disc after the pull usually ends up outside of the end zone, giving the offense better field position. These two things allow the offense to get a slight advantage after previously losing a point. Unfortunately, with the new timeout rule in place, both of these slight offensive advantages are lost. When pulling from midfield, the defense can both easily set up a defense and apply massive pressure to the offense because of the imbalanced field position of the two teams. With the defense starting from midfield, it is much easier to set a defense due to the shortened space between the two teams. Coupled with the fact that any good puller can pull half the field, the defense is in an unfair advantage over the offense with this rule.
But to say that this rule wouldn't achieve its purpose is a false statement. I'm sure that this very advantageous defensive position could be, as Ian McClellan says, "a useful tool for teams that are behind to create some break opportunities to improve comeback chances." However, the converse could be true. This rule could also be used to solidify leads. Now, I'm always excited to see a huge comeback and I would be happy to see a reasonable rule that favors comebacks. Yet this rule is not it. This call, when used when a team is two or three points ahead, could further increase a teams lead by causing turnovers, or even worse, Callahans. This would make a losing team's comeback that much harder, rather than make it easier.
In a sport where the rules are already confusing enough to understand, is this rule worth adding in for the "hype factor" or excitement? In my opinion, it's just poorly designed. A rule that promotes unfair advantages and potentially kills comebacks is a big pass in my book. As an Ultimate player myself, I know that I would be annoyed if I lost or won a game because of some silly rule.
But maybe that's just me. If you have any opinions or want to call me silly for not knowing what I'm talking about, please leave something in the comments! I'm always ready and willing to discuss anything about Ultimate!
No comments:
Post a Comment