From: jpj@cs.hut.fi ()
Subject: Was: Canadian Player, Is: Splitting disc sports
Followup-To: rec.sport.disc
Keywords: disc sports, WFDF
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 06:28:10 GMT


KA>Is it a wise idea to split
KA>sports based on flying discs into (at least) two national
KA>associations each ? I seem to recall that in some nations where
KA>flying disc sports have been nationally recognized as an official
KA>sport (e.g. Sweden) this might even do harm. Any comments ?

ES>I think Ultimate should have its own National organizations.  Frankly, I
ES>think that is, in part, why other countries Ultimate programs are not
ES>further along.  There should be a German UPA, and an English UPA, etc
ES>etc.

ES>There SHOULD be some sort of lose confederation between the sports.  I
ES>wish there were more coordination between the UPA and the PDGA, for
ES>example.  But both Golf and Ultimate have benefited from its leaders
ES>having to focus on only one sport.

ES>Further, I think WFDF suffers from the same problem.  There should be
ES>some sort of World-UPA.  Which, I think, is what Nob proposed at last
ES>years WFDF Congress, and would have passed, except that all the US
ES>Non-Ultimate associations voted against it.

ES>Nob, are you here?  Have any thoughts?

Actually, Nob did not put forward a proposal like that.  He did, however,
propose a re-definition of the goals of WFDF and a re-structuring of the
board and the way it operates.  I believe most of this will happen at this
year's WFDF Congress in Tokyo.  The "World-UPA" concept was meant more
as an ultimatum (no pun intended) to get things moving.  (I am not saying
that it could not be done.  I am saying that I do not think it will happen.)

I must also strongly disagree with your opinion of "the benefit of
splitting Ultimate from the other disc discplines".  Finland and Sweden are
two examples of countries where disc sports have been officially recognized.
For us this has meant concrete benefits, such as equal rights and access to
sports facilities, annual government support (albeit not as much as it
could be, but growing), memberships in the National Federations of Sports
Discplines including our own offices in the same headquarters with most
other major sports, equal opportunities for having disc sports incorporated
in phys. ed. programs, and fringe benefits such as the media taking us much
more seriously than a few years back.  The list goes on...

I assure you that this would not have happened, had the original 100 or so
active disc enthusiasts in Finland started off by each discpline forming
their own national body.  However, the policy that the Finnish association
has adopted, and which I also advocate for the WFDF, is that we are not
going to give artificial respiration to any disc discplines that carry no
interest to the bulk of our disc players.  If no one wants to play guts in
Finland, no guts tournaments are organized.  If you want to play DDC, fine.
Host a tournament.  The only thing we do carry of the individual events are
the annual national championships that gather 50-100 participants, quite a
few of whom are primarily ultimate players.

The splitting of WFDF would have serious consequences for the sport:
1. It would hurt our image for some years.
2. It would make things difficult for national disc associations of
countries such as Sweden and Finland.
3. It would set us back in our efforts to be recognized by international
sports organizations such as the Olympic movement.  This would happen,
because these organizations are set up along the lines of national bodies
instead of super-national membership as the UPA.

You are right though that the WFDF is not achieving as much as it should.
My belief is that we should move cautiously in terms of changing our
outward appearance and be more flexible in terms of our internal operations
instead.  I believe that the WFDF can both have focus that is directed
toward specific disc discplines such as ultimate and serve the role of a
loose confederation that can be useful when presenting an outward image
of disc sports.

Furthermore, with the current world trends such as the European Community
prevailing, I am not sure that in the future national structures will carry
as much importance as currently.  In that case a strong international
governing body could work.  This might mean some interesting new concepts
for the competitive end of the sport, such as a super-national club league
following the examples of e.g. the World League of American Football.

Finally, although I admit the UPA has achieved a great deal for the good of
ultimate, I will challenge your statement regarding the progress of ultimate
in Europe.  The UPA has currently about 7,000 members (correct me here).  I
bet that by the year 2000 you will not have achieved 20,000 members (a 300%
growth).  Our association currently has 260 active members (paying dues and
playing).  I bet that we will have 1,300 members by the year 2000 (a 500%
growth) playing actively.  If both succeed, it is a draw, if only the UPA
does, you win and vice-versa.  The stake: a case of beer. Winner's choice.
If you accept, save this message, it might be worth a drink.

-- Juha