|
AGM
|
| Lils |
Posted on 26-07-2008 22:37
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 674
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Rainbow wrote:
JugglingSpence wrote "8Gb iPhone for sale. £150. PM me for more details if you are interested..."
Spence, now you know this will p@%* off the site moderators!! Wheres your article?...and has any one second it?...in writing?
Regards,
Rainbow
 |
| |
|
|
| chuckles |
Posted on 03-08-2008 22:25
|
Home From Home
Posts: 214
Joined: 07.10.07
|
I would like to propose 3 sets of five with the minute rule. I propose that the minute rule be introduced at the discretion of either ref as and when needed.
I would also like to counterproposal, if the above is not accepted, that we abolish the 2 bonus points for a win as winning will effectively be gaining 2 points anyway.
Any seconders PM me
Always have a plan 'B'
Even plan 'B' has failed |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 03-08-2008 22:38
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I don't think we're ready for that yet in the lower divisions. We finished at 11 last week playing 11 frames having started on time. Adding half that match time on again would take us to past 12.30. |
| |
|
|
| scottish-hustler |
Posted on 04-08-2008 14:41
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 193
Joined: 12.10.07
|
in the reigate league the lower div teams play 2 sets of 5 and premier play 3 sets? maybe consider doing this? |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 04-08-2008 15:33
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
It's an option but I don't like a 'them and us' mentality. Next thing Div 1 will be wanting bigger trophies . . .  |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 04-08-2008 19:57
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Sass wrote:
I don't think we're ready for that yet in the lower divisions. We finished at 11 last week playing 11 frames having started on time. Adding half that match time on again would take us to past 12.30.
That's too much of a generalisation . . I haven't seen The Prop finish a match before 11pm this season yet we've only gone past 10pm once I think . . We finished our match at just before 10pm last week whilst the Rack Pack were just completing frame seven!!
It's simple . . Propose that the format as it is moves straight over to the Winter League . . Make it so that there is no second set team order, no player can play twice in the same set and get on with it . .
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 04-08-2008 22:06
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I was thinking of our match at The Royal Joakers. It wasn't a table to go dishing on and it made for some very slow frames.
The thing is - it doesn't matter if I'm generalising or not. If 2 or 3 teams in each division regularly have their matches go on past closing time it affects everyone.
I'm not a slow player and to be honest most of my team aren't either and if I'm saying 10 is enough right now I'm not saying it because I don't want more frames (I do!!) I'm saying it because it's going to be a step too far just now. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 05-08-2008 01:45
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I totally agree . . The CDPL has been notorious for not welcoming big changes and it's important to nurture the current format rather than changing it again after such a short period of time . .
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Spud |
Posted on 05-08-2008 15:33
|
Home From Home
Posts: 468
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Right, enough chit chat.
I'm putting the proposal into Mark this morning, to change the Winter format to the one we are currently playing in the Summer.
I'm also suggesting that with regards to playing order, that secretarys are free to play thier players in whatever order they like, so long as two players don't play eachother twice.
Who's my seconder?
|
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 05-08-2008 15:41
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I'll second that. |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 05-08-2008 15:45
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Ok I'm proposing a mixed scotch doubles k/o subject to sponsorship confirmation. There are 21 ladies in the Ladies Singles this season. If 16(plus) enter this we will have a cracking little comp.
Partnerships can be any two registered Croydon players (ie it doesn't matter if you don't play in the same team).
Can I have a seconder please? |
| |
|
|
| Dogger |
Posted on 05-08-2008 15:46
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 805
Joined: 02.10.07
|
And the bonus points are dropped? |
| |
|
|
| Spud |
Posted on 05-08-2008 15:48
|
Home From Home
Posts: 468
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Yeah, bonus points dropped.
A team winning a tight game 6-4, would get twice as many points!!!!!
Crazy.
Will make the rich richer, and the poor poorer.
Not needed over ten frames.
|
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 05-08-2008 15:59
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
Spud wrote:
Right, enough chit chat.
I'm putting the proposal into Mark this morning, to change the Winter format to the one we are currently playing in the Summer.
I'm also suggesting that with regards to playing order, that secretarys are free to play thier players in whatever order they like, so long as two players don't play eachother twice.
Who's my seconder?
I think the Cuemasters participation next season is dependant on this getting through. |
| |
|
|
| Dogger |
Posted on 05-08-2008 16:28
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 805
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Spud wrote:
Yeah, bonus points dropped.
Good. It's better without i think as it keeps each Division tighter leaving no margin for cock ups. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 05-08-2008 17:03
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Spud wrote:
I'm also suggesting that with regards to playing order, that secretarys are free to play thier players in whatever order they like, so long as two players don't play eachother twice.
And not twice in the same set!
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| ThePower |
Posted on 05-08-2008 17:15
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 970
Joined: 05.10.07
|
Spud wrote:
I'm also suggesting that with regards to playing order, that secretarys are free to play thier players in whatever order they like, so long as two players don't play eachother twice.
Sean, am I reading this correctly? Are you proposing a player could therefore possibly play twice in the same set?
Or is it once per set and no clashing of opponent. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 05-08-2008 17:23
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
ThePower wrote:
Or is it once per set and no clashing of opponent.
It HAS to be this IMO . . If it's done as it is now with the home side putting their 5 players down first, it's up to the away secretary/captain to put down their players so that they don't clash . . Sound fair enough?
Sean . . Make it so! |
| |
|
|
| Spud |
Posted on 05-08-2008 17:26
|
Home From Home
Posts: 468
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Yeah.
Purely for the reason that some teams will still be working with 7 players, and will want to see all 7 play before deciding who to play again.
I'll use the Eagles as an Example:
Tony Nuttman picks his 7 as follows:
1. Kyle Win
2. Shaggy Win
3. Wiggy Win Break & Dish
4. Sean Lost
5. Steve Lost
6. Jake Win Break & Dish
7. Hughie Break & Dish
Tony then rewards his three players he feels deserve another frame, in this example with the three lads that B&D.
It also enables people who cannot commit to three / four hours, the chance to play twice. Be it early in the match or late.
As long as they are legally registered players, I don't see the problem where in the order they play they're two frames.
|
| |
|
|
| ThePower |
Posted on 05-08-2008 17:29
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 970
Joined: 05.10.07
|
I'm now totally confused! Just for a change.
Are you saying that Kyle could play 1 & 2?
|
| |
|
