When spirit scores are tied, who gets the prize?

When spirit scores are tied, and there's only one trophy, who should get it?

I've seen a few different ways of deciding.

1. The higher place team gets the prize.
2. Use rock-paper-scissors to decide.
3. If only one of the tied teams has attended the presentation, give them the trophy.
4. The organisers just announce the winner based on their own opinions
5. Let the team that was mistakenly already given the trophy keep it (don't ask).

In general, I think it's okay to leave the spirit award as a tie. If there is a token prize that can't be easily split between two teams, methods 2 or 3 are fine for deciding who to give it to. 

In the case where it's a decent trophy for an important tournament, I can see the merit of having a well-known convention to decide it. Method 1 does fit the bill. Everyone knows what to expect, even if it is a little arbitrary. 

Presumably, the theory behind method 1 is that it's more difficult to be spirited and good at the sport than to be a spirited loser. I would think there'd be more of an argument to be made for it being more difficult to keep good spirit in close games over blow-outs, rather than just finishing position. But working that out could be too much trouble between a final and a presentation. 

And of course some teams give high scores willy-nilly while other teams only give low scores. Calculating which of the tied teams played those teams that were stingy with spirit scores could be the most accurate method. 

I hear recently this call was made based on the team with the better single game spirit score. Or possibly it was the opposite; the team with the more consistent spirit scores. I think there are arguments for either but neither are great arguments.

 

There are so many variables at work, all at the mercy of the subjective judgements of teams filling out a spirit score sheet that it would be difficult, based on some factor or other, to say for sure that one team is slightly more spirited. Its probably best to just stick with the most straight-forward 'higher placed team gets the trophy' convention. 

Any thoughts?

No discussion 'foul' and 'contest' calls

There are many ways to be unspirited. Some of them bug me more than others.

This one is fairly self explanatory. A player calls "foul" and their opponent immediately calls "contest". One player tries to explain what they think just happened. The other is already sending the disc back to the thrower (or asking for the disc back if they are the thrower); they're not listening. This gives the impression to me that they're only making or contesting the call to advantage their team, rather than fully considering the play in question.

Breaking other rules, like for instance fouling somebody, can be seen as purely accidental. But refusing to engage in a discussion seems a less accidental way of breaking the rules. And it bugs me.

The rule:
"1.3. ... players must:...
1.3.4. explain their viewpoint clearly and briefly;
1.3.5. allow opponents a reasonable chance to speak;..."

If you think you're right, okay. Tell the other player why. They might retract the call.

If you just want to gain an unfair advantage, well, the rules are such that you can do that, but please humour them. Pretend it's the scenario where you honestly think you're right. Let the other player explain their point of view and then choose one detail that you can say you saw differently. Contest the call based on that. People will think you're more spirited.