zazblog

[This is a follow-up post to the one of Dec. 5, 2006.]

I will file the proposal (below) with the UPA. I hope that it will be put on the
agenda for the annual meeting of the Board of Directors. Any readers
who wish to help ensure that happens, please comment as such and
I will include the comments as supplementary material to the proposal.
Thanks,

-zaz

------------


Spirit Ranking System Proposal

BACKGROUND:

Part of the mission of the UPA is to "uphold the Spirit of the Game."
The UPA also seeks to foster and promote SOTG. One problem is
getting an accurate measure of SOTG: where it is best and worst,
how it is changing over time, and what effects the UPA's actions have
on it.

This proposal states that the UPA will form guidelines for ranking
spirit scores at tournaments. Currently, there is already a ranking
system in place at many tournaments. This proposal would formalize
some aspects of that system and lead to the adoption of concrete
guidelines for spirit scores. The problem with current spirit scores
is that they are rather arbitrary, often arrived at whimsically by a
team at the end of a tiring game ("Four? Yeah, sure. Four it is!").

With standards of spirit, the UPA could reliably compare SOTG
in different regions, among different divisions, and in different
time periods.

Guidelines example---

Score:

1. Multiple incidents of acrimonious disputes involving
derision, name-calling, or taunting.
One team unhappy with level of physicality.
2. Game marked by one acrimonious dispute or several
smaller disputes involving needling remarks or other players
getting involved. Some level of disrespect in evidence.
One team unhappy with level of physicality.
3. Game played without any significant incident. Perhaps a few emotional
outbursts or disputed calls with terse words, but no overt signs of
disrespect. Both teams generally agree on the level of physicality.
4. Game played without incident and with evident good will
between teams. One or two areas of dispute settled
civilly, if not amicably. Both teams happy with level
of physicality.
5. Game played without incident and with evident
good will between teams. Contested foul calls were
honored with respect and without emotional outbursts.
Both teams happy with level of physicality. No heckling from team members.

Notes: A score of "5" does not require any cheers, colorful antics,
or "give-back" calls. This measure of SOTG is entirely distinct
from the "spirit" of ultimate: its zany characters, inside jokes, and
cultural touchstones like Rochambeau.

PROPOSAL:

That the UPA
1. Create and adopt guidelines for SOTG scores by April 1, 2007.
2. Require volunteers collecting spirit scores to verify familiarity with, and/or
distribute, the adopted guidelines to team captains before collecting scores.
3. Require that all UPA-certified observers know the guidelines.
4. Print "Ten Things You Need to Know About SOTG" on the back of waiver forms.
5. Expand the collection of spirit scores beyond the current limited
system (at the least, to include regional tournaments).
6. Implement items 1-5 by September 1, 2007.

PROS/CONS:

This proposal aims to improve an existing scoring system which is currently
ad hoc and arbitrary. There are no drawbacks to such an improvement, although
the efforts could conceivably be seen as heavy-handed. I don't think the
hand is heavy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Minimal or none.

CONCLUSION: Spirit scores should mean something. The UPA should
standardize them. Reliable SOTG measurements will allow the
UPA to focus on areas of poor spirit and learn from teams/divisions
which exemplify SOTG. The UPA could also reward and publicize
the efforts of outstanding teams. All this helps to *foster* and *promote*
SOTG, not just "uphold" it.

I am writing to suggest a proposal to the UPA and to solicit your feedback.

The mission of the UPA currently is, in part, "to uphold the Spirit of the Game."
As chair and member of the Conduct committee, I tried to do just that,
including drafting the code of conduct. Standards of conduct and rules for
their consistent enforcement are ways of upholding fair play.

Personally, I think that "uphold" is not a strong enough
word. I think the UPA should "foster and promote" the SOTG.
(No, my proposal is not about changing the mission statement,
though I would support doing so.)
Talking about SOTG is one way that the ultimate community
reinforces its values. I tried to make the *practice* of SOTG
a bit more concrete by drafting Ten Things You Should Know
About Spirit of the Game (www.upa.org/spirit/10Things),
a practical guide to good behavior.

Still, this classifies as "just talk." It was my intention then, and is my
proposal now, to follow "Ten Things" up with something somewhat
more tangible.

Oddly, the thing which makes discussing SOTG difficult
is that we have no measure of the state of spirit;
whether it is getting better or worse over time; and
whether any effort to improve it is working, or would work.

To this end, I would like to develop a standard for measuring
SOTG. A very crude measurement is spirit scores. It is crude
because there is no rubric for creating a spirit score -- a captain
or group of players usually just picks a number out of mid-air.
"Three." "Five." "Four." "Whatever." What's good about taking spirit scores
is that it is a mechanism already in place for gauging spirit. Scores are
taken at many tournaments. The administration for collecting SOTG data
is already up and running. The problem is that the data is unreliable.
There are no standards.

My proposal is that the UPA adopt the following set of guidelines for
spirit scores.

Score:

1. Multiple incidents of acrimonious disputes involving
derision, name-calling, or taunting.
2. Game marked by one acrimonious dispute or several
smaller disputes involving needling remarks or other players
getting involved. Some level of disrespect in evidence.
3. Game played without any significant incident. Perhaps a few emotional
outbursts or disputed calls with terse words, but no overt signs of
disrespect.
4. Game played without incident and with evident good will
between teams. One or two areas of dispute settled
civilly, if not amicably.
5. Game played without incident and with evident
good will between teams. Contested foul calls were
honored with respect and without emotional outbursts. No
heckling from the sideline.

Notes: A score of "5" does not require any cheers, colorful antics,
or "give-back" calls. This measure of SOTG is entirely distinct
from the "spirit" of ultimate: its zany characters, inside jokes, and
cultural touchstones like Rochambeau. Physicality of the game
is not mentioned. (N.B.: perhaps the guidelines should address
the possibility that one team voices unhappiness with the physicality,
to no avail.)

Of course, this will not change spirit overnight. But it would give us
a way of collecting reliable statistics about SOTG. We could:
* determine areas of superb SOTG, and then learn what's working;
* determine areas of spirit deficit, pointing where we should focus efforts;
* give relative comparisons of spirit over time and across regions;
* identify teams with exemplary spirit, e.g. for awards

Without reliable information about SOTG, efforts to foster and promote
it will be too broad and too blunt. My proposal is...

That the UPA:

1. Adopt the above guidelines for SOTG scores.
2. Print the guidelines as part of the literature for every UPA-sanctioned event,
and require TD's to announce and distribute them at the captain's meeting.
3. Require that observers learn the guidelines.
4. Print "Ten Things" on the back of waiver forms.

Cynics will see such moves as either heavy-handed and/or cornballish.
I think it is "handed," but not too heavy, and I'll take cornball if it's effective.
What do you think? Your voiced support will buttress the proposal. Your
disapproval could dissuade me from submitting.