Up/Down Calls

Note that this issue will be included on the experimental changes ballot for potential implementation at the 2009 College Championships. Teams in each division will vote whether to implement the one or the other of the experimental changes, or to play under the current system at the tournament.

The UPA has experimented with two distinct systems that would allow Observers to take a more active role in making or ruling on up/down calls. At Solstice in 2008 and Stanford Invite 2009, games were played with Observers making active up/down calls (i.e. players could not make up/down calls, and Observer up/down calls were final). At Open Centex 2009 and Women's Centex 2009, games were played with Observers making an immediate ruling on up/down calls made by players (i.e. calls were made by players, but if a call was contested, the Observer stepped in and immediately made a ruling without any time provided for discussion/resolution by the players).

Feedback was collected from players after all of these events and can be viewed here. Feedback was also collected from Observers who worked the Spring 2009 events, including specific comments about the pros and cons of each system (click here to view). The Observer's list of pros and cons generally captured individual comments submitted by the players, while also adding some perspective regarding implementation.

Take a look at the feedback, including the general support, or lack thereof, for how up/down calls were handled at these events. Take a look at the pros and cons listed in the Observer feedback section (and copied below).

Observer Comments (active calls):
Pros

• Speeds up play
• Reduces arguments
• Call is objective, like lines, and is better made by a 3rd party official

Cons

• Observers often do not have best perspective for this call (screened, far away)
• Can be confusing if players are waiting on a call from Observer

Observer Comments (immediate referral):
Pros

• Speeds up play
• Reduces arguments
• Animosity towards Observer, not other team
• Objective call is quickly referred to objective 3rd party
• Allows players first shot at call (reduces confusion, players have good perspective, keeps player control)

Cons

• Not as effective as active calls at reducing stoppages
• Doesn’t allow players to work things out; discuss perspectives
• Observer doesn’t always have best perspective

Discuss the tradeoffs of one system over another (current system, immediate referral, active calls). Do the pros of both experimental systems outweigh the cons of removing or reducing player responsibility and control? If so, which experimental system addresses the known problems in the current system in a way that makes the game better to play? To watch? Are there alternative ways to address those same problems, either within the current system (e.g. TMF's for bad calls) or with some other solution?