Discussion: What do we think of the new Women's structure?

Editor/Chair: hazard
Contributors: ali, AnnieB, Becky Greenwood, geegee, nic

UKU have recently announced a new structure for Women’s Ultimate. So, we’d like to discuss it! What things we like, and what thing aren’t sure about.  As a quick summary, rather than one weekend for Regionals in March (featuring a whole region), there will now be a league-like structure, with the games played over two one-day tournaments (in November and March).

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: The people at UKU work super hard, mostly as volunteers, trying to improve the Ultimate experience for all of us. While they make big efforts to take into account the opinions of the players (such as the recent survey), they also have to consider things we don’t have to, such as interactions with BUCS. As such, while this chat may get opinionated at point, it is important to recognise that we all share a love for the same sport. The reason this chat is happening is to capture a snapshot of the feelings of some of the players this will effect. We have the easy job of reacting, and we have nothing but immense respect for those behind the decisions, regardless of our feelings surrounding those decisions.

Time to discuss
Photo: Alberto Rossi for the ShowGame

I’d like a snapshot reaction first, what are our general feelings?

Poll

How do we feel about the new Women’s Structure?

1: I’m a fan of the new structure - 3

@AnnieB, @geegee, @nic

2: I liked the Regional tournament structure better - 1.5

@ali, @Becky Greenwood

3: I would’ve preferred a full league system - 0.5

@Becky Greenwood

ali

I mean, my first reaction was just. ..why? There wasn't anything wrong with the old system. The Women's system is fine, I feel like they should try to fix the mess they've made of the Men's first, before creating new mess. It also means more travel time for the same amount of games.

AnnieB

I'm a fan of the new system, as an immediate reaction. But that is also biased in the fact I'm from the Scotland region (like 6 Uni's), so I appreciate the logistical difficulties this presents for the larger regions. I do like that they seem to have thought ahead to working Mixed into this new system, when it comes.

Becky Greenwood

I got quite a wide variety of opinions when I asked around my uni teammates. Some saying this idea seems like a good step in the direction of having Men’s and Women’s BUCS the same, and hopefully being able to introduce Mixed. In Loughborough we are going to find it easier than some other unis because the AU help us out massively, however I’m pretty sure those other unis did have a chance to raise any concerns a month or so ago and presumably uku have taken any of these into account.

geegee

There are a lot of logistical difficulties as Annie said, however regionals this year felt a little frustrating. I understand UKU cannot control the weather, this is nothing on their part, however some games at regionals were purely a case of whoever wins the toss wins the game because working the disc upwind was often impossible in 40+mph winds.

Teams who definitely deserved a fighting chance to Div1 or 100% deserved a spot in Div1 lost out and it's defined their whole season. We were fortunate enough to have another chance at making Div 1, fought for it and got there. Other teams did not. One bad game or even point (windy or not) and you're out of contention. I'm hoping that this new system could give teams a better chance at fighting for the division they deserve to be in, and set up the foundations for a Women's/Mixed league in the future.

But I do also understand why a single regional tournament may be favoured too in terms of travelling.

hazard

Alright, seems like we have a range of opinions here.

Do we think UKU was right not to try the implement the Men’s structure? And, relatedly, should the end goal be to move to a league structure?

ali

Yes, aren't enough Women's teams. Also the league is f***ed

AnnieB

I don't think the Women's teams are ready for the Men's structure, particularly if they were happening at the same time ( e.g on a Wednesday). At the moment, most clubs aren't able to sustain a large enough womens team to take part in a league.

unfortunately

ali

I don't think I can comment on whether the end goal should be league, as I've never played in one.

AnnieB

I ditto Ali on that

Becky Greenwood

Some of us in Loughborough thought a straight transition to BUCS on Wednesdays would be better. Even though some uni’s are concerned about not having enough players, this could be a great way to entice more girls into the club this way. Also the benefit of not having whole weekend tournaments could be beneficial in gaining numbers for games, as whole weekend tournaments could be difficult for some girls to fully commit to. Therefore committing to a Wednesday afternoon would be easier.

hazard

So, lets focus on one of some of the features of the new system, and particularly that one - having two 1-day tournaments in November and March rather than one 2-day tournament in March. Do we like this change, regardless of everything else?  

Becky Greenwood

Some of us don’t really get the idea of two weekend tournaments, it’s great that the women will get experience of playing outdoors competitively before Christmas but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Before Christmas is jam-packed full of indoor stuff so I feel the UKU need to make up their mind on what they want to prioritise. As Hudds and Manchester couldn’t field a team for regionals on a weekend I’m not too sure how two weekends are going to particularly help. Also if these weekends are clashing with Men's Ultimate it brings up loads of logistical issues for unis that don’t have the benefit of being funded by an AU. Also it may mean the women don’t get the chance to sideline their guys! (Which Loughborough love!)

ali

Not really. I'd prefer that freshers were playing beginners tournaments in November. Also for bigger regions, 5+ hours of transport for, what, three games? Maybe four? No thanks.

AnnieB

Apart from some mild nostalgia for the goodbye to the tournament structure, I think it will work fine in Scotland’s case. However, a quick reading of Becky's thoughts makes me agree that it makes November super packed.

hazard

I’m going to drop a reason for and against:

For: It means that if bad weather stops Uni Regionals (like it did last year), more teams have had a chance to play some local Ultimate and we have some idea of team strength. This could mean development for those teams that couldn’t attend Nationals, where otherwise they would have none.

Against: Would a Women’s team’s performance in November represent how they play at Nationals? I know a lot of teams that do a great job developing freshers to be dangerous by March, but in November haven’t learnt enough yet.

nic

I like the new system however, I think it’ll throw up huge issues when it comes to the smaller teams with less depth. A lot of teams such as Huddersfield, Manchester and York rely on a good intake of beginners help to increase the team size. The difference between November and March would be massively inconsistent. Also, as Ali said travelling so far for a one day tournament is not something I and from what I hear, a lot others would find beneficial.

I agree with Becky, November is packed already and just like Ali said - beginners won’t have any experience outdoors by this point, more often than not.

hazard

Do we like the idea of two events? (For argument's sake, late January/February tends to be more free, if we hypothetically put the other tournament there instead).

nic

The weather would be very hit and miss (and more often, horrendous). I think it’ll still be based on the toss in these conditions, especially considering how short the games were at the regionals just gone.

AnnieB

Again, as Scotland is such a small region I think we could manage that. However, there are the weather conditions to think about, and also the exam season

Becky Greenwood

In general, two one day events still seems an improvement on a one off tournament as, there could be more chance of being able to get a team to play for a single day.  

ali

If weather is their only consideration I'd rather they had a backup weekend. I think incidents like last year are rare and not worth shaking the whole system up for.

hazard

For context, it has only happened once in the roughly four year history of Women’s Regionals (and not to any Open/Men’s regionals I’m aware of - although there was one year where some of my teammates did get hypothermia)

ali

I think you're likely to have less consistency over two events. The teams will not be the same for any uni I'd wager.

hazard

Ok, moving on. What about the tiered system they’re looking to introduce?

“The leagues will be set up using the five standard BUCS regions that are used in the Men’s league.  Some regions will have a 2nd division. If possible the Division One leagues will have 5 teams. This may be adjusted for the benefit of other teams in the region to ensure that everyone is able to play.   In regions where there are two divisions, there will be 1-team relegated/promoted.”

Nationals will then be formed of the top 3 from each top league (+1 team) and then everyone else goes to a secondary championship.

ali

Okay. Great. Still doesn't answer the question of why. Under the old system pretty much everyone went to nationals. UKU  was practically begging teams to go because of all the dropouts. I can't imagine the nationals lineup will be one iota different from previous years, except it will maybe screw over Scotland by only allowing them 3 teams in the championship bracket.  

nic

Would there be an opportunity for Division 1 spaces from each BUCS region be reallocated? For example, the northern and scottish region have been the strongest in past years and they’ll lose out on spaces in this new format.

hazard

I would likely say no, given how much Scotland (and sort of the Midlands) have dominated the current system in Men’s and still not been given spaces.

nic

Not only that, it’ll also be unfair for the Division 2 teams because they’ll come up against teams that would do well in Division 1.

AnnieB

Yeah, I agree with Ali said on this. It's slightly unfair to scotland, but really doesn't do much to affect the overall nationals lineup

hazard

I think there’s a few teams that could see their development hit here. The one season I was in the lower leagues we were noticeably worse, because we weren’t getting practice against good opposition. I think teams tend to play up the the level of their opponents (to an extent), and a good team playing a couple games against less good teams doesn’t hurt as much as less good teams not getting a chance to push themselves.

Moving on, here is the stated goal from the UKU website:

“This proposal focuses on achieving a gender-equitable BUCS competition structure, which we hope and expect will support ongoing growth in player numbers for the Women’s and Mixed divisions.  This should, in turn, support UKU’s goal of reaching equal numbers of female and male athletes in Ultimate.”

It doesn’t say anywhere if there would be more BUCS points available, which would be a big advantage of the new system (and something it’s fairly safe to assume, given how many more points Men’s got when it moved to a league). So, aside from that, do we think overall this new system will achieve that aim of growth in the Women’s (and Mixed) divisions

ali

Ok I concede more BUCS points is good for some unis. But also some unis don't care. So I guess they're going off feedback from unis that care.

AnnieB

I think I just say that, yeah, I hope so. This is the decision they've made. There's always some issues with a new system, but I hope it works out for the best after the initial teething troubles that are inevitable

geegee

It's a very difficult call to make as to whether Women's university Ultimate will develop. The UK seems to be in this strange middle area of nothingness where we don't have enough teams to sustain a league or regular scrimmages outside of Scotland, but want to build a league-like system to get to a point where we will have a sustainable Women's program. It could be fantastic, it could encourage a huge surge in Women's teams fielding squads. But it could also harm the smaller squads who currently cannot field teams e.g. Bangor, and discourage growth.

hazard

I found the inclusion of Mixed quite interesting. I’ve definitely found the Men’s league has only really decreased the amount of Mixed engagement and training at most Unis. I have to think a “Women’s league” would have a similar effect (two one-day tournaments are probably not so drastic though). If it does manage to increase female engagement, it’s definitely possible it’ll have a positive impact though.  

geegee

It's easy to say that it's too early to establish the foundations for a future league. But what else can be done other than experimenting new ideas with the support from UKU? It may be too early, but I appreciate the move to make a more inclusive structure. Do agree with you Harry with regards to Mixed, would be very interesting. However not all players on either side of the gender ratio like Mixed, so they may lose out as well.

Becky Greenwood

The suggestion for Mixed inclusion is great. I know some people advocate for mixed BUCS league as a primary focus, and only after that settles followed by Men’s and Women’s, though how you would run both I’m not sure. (the Wednesday and Saturday fixtures could be the answer though).

hazard

Ok, I think that’s a lot to digest. Anyone with any final thoughts?

ali

My thoughts: I was cautiously optimistic about the Men's league but it was a huge disappointment. So I don't really have any faith in this arrangement tbh. Happy to be proven wrong though.