Quidditch Reserves (No longer OOP)
Hollydaze
hollydaze at btinternet.com
Tue Apr 15 17:10:41 UTC 2003
No: HPFGUIDX 55372
FlamingStar Chows wrote:
> > > Harry missed the final game is SS because he was unconscious in the hospital
> > > wing for three days. It is mentioned early in CoS that they were flattened
> > > in that final game because they had no seeker and had to play one player
> > > short.
Serena wrote:
> > That doesn't make any sense. Of course they would loose, the only
> > way they could win is if you have situation like GoF at World Cup
> > where the opposing seeker decides to end the game even though it
> > means his team will lose--And how often does that happen? I mean
> > could a team even play without a seeker?
Catlady wrote:
> "It must be possible, Captain: it happened."
I have to say I disagree with the statement that Gryffindor played without a seeker in that last game and I have two quotes to show why. I've just finished reading Philosophers stone again (I'm starting my OOP re-reads early because I have A Level exams that only finish a day before the book comes out) and in PS Ron says to Harry: "you missed the last Quidditch match, we were steamrollered by Ravenclaw without you" (Pg 219, PS British Paperback). In CoS, this is explained further: "he (Harry) had been unconscious in the hospital wing for the final match, meaning that Gryffindor had been a player short and had suffered their worst defeat in 300 years" (Pg 84, CoS British Paperback). In neither case does it say they played without a seeker, and only in the second quote does it say that they were one player short.
To me this suggested that they did have a seeker but that it was someone who had moved from another position (probably a chaser as there are 3 of them compared to only 2 beaters - and you really need both of them and the keeper). So because their skills were not those required by a seeker and as they would only have had two chasers, they lost. I think this just because looking at the basic rules of Quidditch, playing without a seeker is almost the same as forfeiting the match (at least at the level they are playing) it just makes no sense to me that they would even consider playing without a seeker.
Although as some other people have pointed out in previous discussions about this subject, I don't understand why they didn't just play someone who had at least half decent seeker skills, surely in a house of between 70 - 250 students (depending on the number of students you believe are at Hogwarts) they should have found ONE person who could have taken on the role, even if they weren't anywhere near as good as Harry. The only way I can think that wouldn't work is if you have to submit your team - including reserves - and then only those people are allowed to play for you through the season. Then, if, as Harry says, there is no reserve seeker, then they would only be able to move someone from another position to fill Harry's.
If I've missed anything that would make my thoughts wrong please 'point me' because I haven't read the books for a while and may have forgotten some important details.
HOLLYDAZE!!!
Who has better things to do than write to HPfGU (cough*revision*cough) but has been out of the loop so long that she just HAD to write something!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive