アルティメット公式ルール
1. スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム
- 1.1. アルティメットは、接触禁止、セルフジャッジ制を用いた競技スポーツであり、すべての選手はこのルールに忠実でなければならない。アルティメットは、「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」という各選手のフェアプレイに対する責任感の上に成り立っている。
- 1.2. 本公式ルールは、いかなる選手も意図的にルールを破ることはないという前提で、意図的ではない反則に対する厳しい罰則は定めず、試合上で起こりうる状況を想定し、試合をスムーズに進行させるための方法を示している。
- 1.2.1. ルールや「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」に対する故意または重大な違反があった場合、両チームのキャプテンは話し合いのうえ、その結果がルールに沿ったものでなくても、適切な解決策を導かなければならない。
解釈： Deliberate or egregious breach of the rules
For a breach to be considered egregious it should be considered a type of breach that you would not normally expect within a standard game of Ultimate, or one for which there is no reasonable justification within the rules.
Example: A defender commits an egregious dangerous play that results in a foul against a receiver who was attempting to gain possession of the disc in their attacking endzone.
Result: Captains may choose to allow the receiver to claim a goal, instead of the receiver gaining possession and moving to the goal line.
Example: A thrower deliberately travels to enable them to move past the marker and gain yardage upwind on a turnover.
Result: Captains may choose to treat the turnover location as the spot where the disc was thrown.
Example: A defender intentionally double teams the thrower, with no regard for any other offensive players, and gets a block.
Result: Captains may choose to return the disc to the thrower.
Steinarのコメント（非公式！）： Captain's clause
There used to be a “Captain's clause” where the two teams' captains could agree to play under any other set of rules, and many players seem to believe that it still exists; however, it has not been in the WFDF rules since 2001. This rule is the closest thing that exists, and it is applicable only in exceptional circumstances. Of course, any tournament could choose to play under non-WFDF rules as they choose.
- 1.2.1. ルールや「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」に対する故意または重大な違反があった場合、両チームのキャプテンは話し合いのうえ、その結果がルールに沿ったものでなくても、適切な解決策を導かなければならない。
- 1.3. 選手は競技者であると同時に、審判としての役割も担っているという認識を持たなければならない。協議が発生した場合、選手には以下のことが求められる。
- 1.3.1. ルール及びその精神を理解し、それに従うこと。
- 1.3.2. 公正かつ客観的に判断すること。
- 1.3.3. 正直であること。
- 1.3.4. 明瞭かつ簡潔に意見を述べること。
解釈： Providing evidence to support a call
What: It is an essential component of good spirit that a player must be prepared, if asked, to explain concisely the objective evidence that led to making a call, or contesting a call.
Example: After making a travel call, if asked, the defender might explain “I saw you lift your pivot foot while the disc was still in your hand.”
Why: The objective evidence is evidence that can be tested for validity. It makes it clear that the call was not based on emotion or what the player wanted or expected to happen, but what they actually observed.
If a player is not reasonably certain of the objective evidence, they should not make a call.
Extra: Players should be aware and understanding of the language limitations accompanying international play, however opponents should still be able to communicate, even through gestures, what they saw. Team captains and team mates should get involved if they think their team’s player is wrong or does not behave correctly.
- 1.3.5. 相手に発言の機会を与えること。
- 1.3.6. 相手の話を聞き、その視点を考慮に入れること。
- 1.3.7. 文化の違いを考慮し、敬意を持った言葉やボディランゲージを使用すること。
- 1.3.8. 問題の解決は効率的におこなうこと。
- 1.3.9. 試合を通して、首尾一貫したコールをすること。
解釈： Making calls in a consistent manner throughout the game
What: Players should make calls without taking into account the context of the game. This means that players should not start making more calls just because the game is nearly over and the scores are quite close.
Example: If at the start of the game minor travel infractions were not called, then they should not be called later in the game.
- 1.3.10. ルールの違反がプレイの結果を左右するほどに重大である場合、もしくは選手の安全を脅かす場合にのみコールをすること。
解釈： Only calling significant breaches
What: Players should allow for a reasonable degree of tolerance for minor breaches involving small discrepancies in distance and time.
Example: If the thrower established a pivot one centimetre away from the correct pivot location then a travel infraction should not be called.
- 1.4. 競争心の高いプレイは奨励されるが、対戦相手を敬う気持ち、ルールの遵守、選手の安全性、プレイを楽しむ気持ちを忘れてはならない。
- 1.5. 「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」に則ったアルティメットに相応しいと考えられる行動を以下に示す。
- 1.6. 「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」に反した、選手がとってはならない行動を以下に示す。
- 1.6.1. 相手に危害を及ぼすような危険なプレイや、他の選手に対して攻撃的な態度をとること。
- 1.6.2. 意図的にファールをしたり、ルールに違反したりすること。
- 1.6.3. 相手チームを嘲ったり、威圧したりすること。
解釈： Intimidation
What: A player could be deemed to be engaging in intimidating behaviour if, for example, they yell loudly at an opponent with the intention of distracting the opponent as they are about to make a catch. Simply undertaking a normal action within the game, such as making a bid in front of someone, should not be seen as intimidation.
- 1.6.4. 得点後に、相手チームに対して礼を欠いた行為をすること。
解釈： Disrespectful celebration after scoring
What: This includes spiking directed at an opponent and taunting of the opponent by “showing” them the disc. These actions must be avoided.
Result: Opposing team captains and spirit captains should discuss all matters relating to violations of spirit and try to resolve them.
- 1.6.5. 相手チームからのコールへの仕返しとして、コールをすること。
- 1.6.6. 相手チームにパスを要求すること。
- 1.6.7. その他勝つために手段を選ばない行動。
- 1.7. チームには、「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」を尊重した上で、以下のことが求められる。
- 1.7.1. チームに対し、ルールや良いスピリットについて責任を持って教えること。
- 1.7.2. 「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」に反した行動をとったチームメイトに対して注意すること。
- 1.7.3. 相手チームに対しても、彼らの取組みの良い点や「スピリット・オブ・ザ・ゲーム」をより尊重するための方法について、建設的な意見を提供すること。
- 1.7.4. スピリットに関する問題の解決のために、必要に応じて「スピリット・ストップ」をコールすること。
Steinarのコメント（非公式！）： Spirit Stoppages
A13 in the WFDF Appendix include more information about spirit stoppages (or “spirit timeouts”, as they as often informally called). Of course, not all tournaments play under the Appendix, but in the absence of other information, following the procedure there is probably uncontroversial.
- 1.8. 初心者が反則の起きた場面に関わっていたが、ルールがわからない場合には、経験者がその反則に関する説明を補助しなければならない。
- 1.9. 経験者は、初心者や若い選手を含む試合において、ルールや試合中の協議に対するアドバイスをすることができる。
- 1.10. コールは、直接プレイに関わっていた選手及びそのプレイを最も良く見える位置にいた選手によって話し合われなければならない。
解釈： Seeking perspective from non players
It is still up to the players involved to make the final call. Non players must not provide advice regarding a call unless they are requested to by a player involved.
If play has stopped, and a player is unable to make a call, for example due to injury or language barriers, then a teammate may make a call on their behalf.
Teams may use a non-player as a translator to assist in communication during a stoppage.
解釈： Use of technology
Players may view photographic or video footage of a call if it is available. However play may not be unreasonably delayed for this purpose. See the Appendix for more detail.
Extra: For example, live instant replay in a stadium setting may be used by players to resolve a contested foul call. Players may not, however, request that a particular play be replayed on the screen. If, after reviewing the video, players still cannot agree, they should not delay the game to rewatch the play multiple times; instead, the play should be treated as a regular contested foul.
Steinarのコメント（非公式！）： Showing vs. describing photos
There's a subtlety in this annotation: If you have photos or video, you cannot say “I have photos where you were clearly out”. You have to show them the photos and let them make up their own mind; often, it turns out different people can easily see different “very clear” things from the same photos.
Steinarのコメント（非公式！）： Extra rules from the appendix
If you are playing a tournament under the WFDF Appendix, there are additional opportunities for advice from the sideline:
- Captains, spirit captains and coaches can enter the field during stoppages to encourage their teammate to change their own call, but only to their own disadvantage (A10.1).
- Team members on the sideline can give advice based on photos or video (i.e., without showing them to the players on the field; see previous comment), but again only to their own disadvantage (A11.1.1).
- 1.11. すべてのコール及び解決策に関して、コールをした選手とキャプテンが責任を持つ。
Steinarのコメント（非公式！）： Spirit captains
It is unclear whether “captains” includes spirit captains or just means both teams' team captains, but my interpretation is that a spirit captain would often be fine to send out instead of the captain. There probably should not be six people discussing a call, though.
Steinarのコメント（非公式！）： Game advisors
Certain high-level WFDF tournaments include game advisors, but they are not referees and not USAU observers; they can give rules explanations and their own perspective when asked, but do not make rulings of any kind and cannot move on the field during play (see B6.3 in the appendix). Please do not call them observers. USAU observers can make certain active calls and on request make binding rulings on disputes.
解釈： Calls by captains
A captain should not make a call that stops play if they were not directly involved in the play. However a captain can be involved in resolving any call once play has already stopped.
- 1.12. プレイ中のコールやその他の問題に対し、協議の結果として双方の合意が得られない場合、もしくは以下の事項について確証がない、あるいは明白でない場合には、協議が発生する直前にディスクを所有していた選手にディスクを戻さなければならない。 the disc must be returned to the last non-disputed thrower.
解釈： Discussion of what occurred in a play
Before the disc is returned to the thrower when players cannot agree, players should discuss what happened in the play. Both players involved should attempt to clearly explain what they think happened and listen to the view of their opponent, or other players with good perspective on the play.
If discussion is difficult due to a language barrier, then gestures or recreations of the incident can be used to indicate what was experienced during the incident (eg striking yourself across the back of the hand to show that your hand was hit as you were trying to catch the disc). Teams may also use a non-player as a translator to assist in communication during a stoppage.
There are times where an event happens where it is not possible to be reasonably certain of exactly what happened (eg no one had a good view, or it happened too quickly). There are also times where it can be difficult to determine whether something ‘affected the play’. In those circumstance the disc should be returned to the last non-disputed thrower.
Discussions should be as brief as possible with the preferred outcome being either a retracted call, or an accepted call. However once it becomes clear that no resolution will be reached, the disc should be returned to the last non-disputed thrower. The suggested maximum length of a stoppage due to a discussion is forty-five (45) seconds). See the Appendix for additional timing rules.
Steinarのコメント（非公式！）： Reading from cover to cover
If you are entirely new to the rules, reading them from start to finish probably isn't the best way to go; they are long (more than 50 pages!), and some things are presented out of order.
The most relevant rules probably start at section 7, and you may want to skip advanced sections such as section 16 until you've understood all the others. This is not to say the other rules are not important—they are! But you will probably get a better understanding if you are willing to skip around a bit.