46:30 "Regardless of when the foul or violation call is made, if play had not completely stopped and the players involved from both teams agree that the foul, violation or call did not affect the outcome, the play stands. This rule is not superseded by any other rule." - rule 16.3
commentator at 42:58 says the infamous "low light" (not highlight) reel of the 2012 Japan vs. Canada game "did not reflect well on either team ..." Q: what game were you watching at Worlds in Osaka? Are you kidding? So your saying "both sides do it," I guess? Japan did nothing to deserve the dirty and dangerous plays and BS calls by Canada in that game. The players on the Canadian team that were performing those antics disgraced their fellow teammates, their country and the Spirit and sport of Ultimate in general. I can't understand why that's hard for you to say. Seriously.
In or out of bounds at around 28:00. If his toe lands in and then, as the rest of his food comes down, his heel is on the line, that's in, right? But first contact on part of the line (and part in) would be out.
What a battle by nomadic tribe. Frustrated by the atrocious amount of pick calls, though. Made this game hard to watch. Just clean up the spacing in your stack and time your cuts properly, for the sake of your own offense and for everyone watching.
ᄇ "Regardless of when the foul or violation call is made, if play had not completely stopped and the players involved from both teams agree that the foul, violation or call did not affect the outcome, the play stands. This rule is not superseded by any other rule." - rule 16.3
26:00 or so - first of all, why are the Canadian players always laying out into the Japanese ones? I guess they're hungry but I remember the game against Buzz Bullets a few years ago that was just the scourge of ultimate - layouts directly into players. Maybe that was Furious George? Not sure of the overlap between them and Goat. Anyway - Ojo contacts the Japanese receiver (and doesn't touch the disc) who's going for the goal - it's off his hand around the time Remy hits his hand and shoulders him aside. So, eventually, Remy signals goal - I think that's the right call and nice of him to recognize, but the throw goes back (to the goal line) because that's the WFDF rule. So, that creates an incentive to always foul the receiver in the endzone. Because a foul requires one more throw be made, even if he would've definitely caught it sans the foul. Not a good rule. Sometimes the foul call rewards desperate plays by the offense, when they throw up a well covered hail mary that should easily be D'd. But in this case it was to a pretty open space, receiver got his hand on it first, defender was only able to contact the receiver and not the disc at all. This should be a goal.
This specific play is not even remotely close to the same thing. It's absurd that you think Ojo came close to making a dangerous play. If you saw the slow motion replay, I don't understand how you can come to the objective conclusion that a foul was made. Everything in the play is incidental. The fact that Ojo didn't contest is a crime against SOTG - He grazed the cutter's hand and the cutter rolled around like a sorry soccer player.
Close to the same thing? What same thing? Not a foul? Come on, of course it's a foul. The Japanese player got his hand on the disc at about the same time Remy contacted him. It is interesting because the receiver had to move a little bit in front of Remy to get to the disc first, but I don't think that matters. So a foul is contact that is initiated (or some verb) by the player committing the foul that affects the other players ability to make a play on the disc. Pretty sure it would've been caught without the contact. Clearly a foul, though I'd agree it's reasonably safe (slightly sketchy becuase the player cuts in front of Ojo and they're not going exactly parallel, but he has to know Remy's comin'), and certainly not mean spirited - he has a good chance to make a play and this is very high level ultimate. Anyway, so, contact initiated by one player that affects the other player's ability to make a play on the disc. I wonder how boxing out - holding up to let a disc sail over and then going for the disc is understood. Like I guess holding up is not initiating contact? You got to the space first and held it - there's a lot of shouldering going on in these situations. How about a defender who boxes out and doesn't even try for the disc? But I think it's just establishing position. Anyway - clearly a foul and it should be - otherwise you're playing football and trying to hit the receiver as soon as he contacts the "ball".
![WUCC 2018: Revolver (USA) v GOAT (CAN) [Men's Semi]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5PiIxeGfno/mqdefault.jpg)
46:30
"Regardless of when the foul or violation call is made, if play had not completely stopped and the
players involved from both teams agree that the foul, violation or call did not affect the outcome,
the play stands. This rule is not superseded by any other rule." - rule 16.3
46:25 - 160421
commentator at 42:58 says the infamous "low light" (not highlight) reel of the 2012 Japan vs. Canada game "did not reflect well on either team ..." Q: what game were you watching at Worlds in Osaka? Are you kidding? So your saying "both sides do it," I guess? Japan did nothing to deserve the dirty and dangerous plays and BS calls by Canada in that game. The players on the Canadian team that were performing those antics disgraced their fellow teammates, their country and the Spirit and sport of Ultimate in general. I can't understand why that's hard for you to say. Seriously.
In or out of bounds at around 28:00. If his toe lands in and then, as the rest of his food comes down, his heel is on the line, that's in, right? But first contact on part of the line (and part in) would be out.
What a battle by nomadic tribe. Frustrated by the atrocious amount of pick calls, though. Made this game hard to watch.
Just clean up the spacing in your stack and time your cuts properly, for the sake of your own offense and for everyone watching.
31:06 aint that a foul from the offensive Player?
46:30 If there's a pick called and you don't catch it, then it's a turnover. WTF Canada!
No it's WFDF rules. Learn them before you speak up.
Shitty rules?
If both teams agree that the play wasn't affected by the call then the play should stand. Pick didn't seem to affect that huck
if the pick was called before the throw, disc goes back. if it was called during or after the throw, turnover stands.
ᄇ "Regardless of when the foul or violation call is made, if play had not completely stopped and the
players involved from both teams agree that the foul, violation or call did not affect the outcome,
the play stands. This rule is not superseded by any other rule." - rule 16.3
26:00 or so - first of all, why are the Canadian players always laying out into the Japanese ones? I guess they're hungry but I remember the game against Buzz Bullets a few years ago that was just the scourge of ultimate - layouts directly into players. Maybe that was Furious George? Not sure of the overlap between them and Goat. Anyway - Ojo contacts the Japanese receiver (and doesn't touch the disc) who's going for the goal - it's off his hand around the time Remy hits his hand and shoulders him aside. So, eventually, Remy signals goal - I think that's the right call and nice of him to recognize, but the throw goes back (to the goal line) because that's the WFDF rule. So, that creates an incentive to always foul the receiver in the endzone. Because a foul requires one more throw be made, even if he would've definitely caught it sans the foul. Not a good rule. Sometimes the foul call rewards desperate plays by the offense, when they throw up a well covered hail mary that should easily be D'd. But in this case it was to a pretty open space, receiver got his hand on it first, defender was only able to contact the receiver and not the disc at all. This should be a goal.
This specific play is not even remotely close to the same thing. It's absurd that you think Ojo came close to making a dangerous play. If you saw the slow motion replay, I don't understand how you can come to the objective conclusion that a foul was made. Everything in the play is incidental. The fact that Ojo didn't contest is a crime against SOTG - He grazed the cutter's hand and the cutter rolled around like a sorry soccer player.
There are many cases in the rules where intentional fouls or calls can benefit a team. Wfdf rules aren't based on that, read section 1.2
Close to the same thing? What same thing? Not a foul? Come on, of course it's a foul. The Japanese player got his hand on the disc at about the same time Remy contacted him. It is interesting because the receiver had to move a little bit in front of Remy to get to the disc first, but I don't think that matters. So a foul is contact that is initiated (or some verb) by the player committing the foul that affects the other players ability to make a play on the disc. Pretty sure it would've been caught without the contact. Clearly a foul, though I'd agree it's reasonably safe (slightly sketchy becuase the player cuts in front of Ojo and they're not going exactly parallel, but he has to know Remy's comin'), and certainly not mean spirited - he has a good chance to make a play and this is very high level ultimate. Anyway, so, contact initiated by one player that affects the other player's ability to make a play on the disc. I wonder how boxing out - holding up to let a disc sail over and then going for the disc is understood. Like I guess holding up is not initiating contact? You got to the space first and held it - there's a lot of shouldering going on in these situations. How about a defender who boxes out and doesn't even try for the disc? But I think it's just establishing position. Anyway - clearly a foul and it should be - otherwise you're playing football and trying to hit the receiver as soon as he contacts the "ball".
That other game was Furious v. BB. An embarrassment to the sport, that one, but I do think FG took the feedback to heart and has strived to be better.
25:05 Flop much, Japan?