|
Summer league rule changes ?????
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:20
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
During the Legions game with the Patriots on Tuesday night, it was advised to us that you can now play a team member twice in the same half of the current 2x5 summer league format & also you can play the same player twice in the same match.
Example :- I could play at positions 1 & 2 in the first set of 5
Or i could play at 1 & 6 & play the same opponent both times.
This was apparently advised to the Patriots by the Prop (Gary Sweathenham) in their match with them the previous week. In which the Prop used these rule changes.
I believe this has come about from a discussion on this web site where the rule changes were proposed by a select few people & then agreed, i think by Mark Halsey via a post on the thread discussing the rule changes.
Now not in any way wishing to contest how Mark makes these changes or how he runs the league, because he does a great job & i would back his desisions 100 % of the time, surley it can not be right that changes are made in this way via the web site, when only a select few that view the threads will know of the changes.
I come on the site frequently, mostly to check results & gather information, but i do not read all the threads, so was totally unaware of these changes, as i would imagine are about 95% of the rest of the league.
I can well imagine teams only having 5 playes, one of which has to leave early/arrive late & that team giving a frame away because they are not aware that player could play at 1 & 2 or 9 &10.
Also, just because a few select teams express an interest in the changes because they obviously suit their own requirements, that does not represent the vast view of the rest of the teams in the league who surley have an equal opinion of what they would like to happen, which is why i assume rule changes of this nature are made at AGM's so everyone can have a say. As i said before, i do not question Mark Halsey's superb efforts over the years in running this league & keeping it going, & i would imagine he has agreed to this (If he actually has) because its a sort of trial period for this format, but what i am really against is the fact that a very select few people who often frequent this web site seem have become the voice for the whole of the league & a representation of all our opinions, & i feel this is very dangerous ground. I personally along with the rst of the Legion team, would not have voted for these changes, & i wonder how many people, including 1st division teams, actually know the changes even exist.
I just feel that rule chnges of this nature should be kept to the AGM's & not made via this web site, as this can give teams who use the site & become aware of the changes an unfair advantage over anyn teams that does not use the web site or does not read a specific thread.
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| SCORCHIO12 |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:33
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 636
Joined: 11.10.07
|
Chris, i was aware of this change but we the warbank do not agree with the fact that you can play the same player twice in 1 set of 5.
We played the maple tree on tuesday and was going to play a player twice in the last set of 5 but we didnt as we dont agree with this.
Thats why if the format stays the same in the winter i hope that you can only play a player once in each set and that you also cannot play the same player twice.
|
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:38
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Thats my whole point Scott, how can a rule change take place just because 1 or 2 teams want it because it obviously suits them.
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:39
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Chris, I don't think it was 'argeed upon' as such . . The one thing to come out of all the discussion was that as it's a 'trial' then pertty much anything goes as it wasn't catered for in the original proposal . . IT was done with the angle that if it doesn't say you can't do it in the rules then why can't you do it?
As it stands I think the general consensus, on this site at least, agreed on a format where no player can play twice in any one set . . That said it didn't then become an official rule but just an opinion of the site users . .
I'll see if I can dig out exactly what Halsey did say . .
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:41
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
The result cards were printed with a pre-set order for the second set of 5, whereby the home stayed in the same order and the away team changed. As I recall after comments made on here Mark said that in the second set both teams could play in any order they liked, as long as the same players didn't play each other twice and he then communicated that to all secretaries. Certainly those are the rules by which we have played all our matches this season. |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:47
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
I guess the question would be what was agreed at the AGM then. If it was agreed that no one can play twice in the same set of 5 & you could not play the same opponent again in the second set, then that should still stand, as it would have been agreed & understood by all at the AGM.
Any further suggestions via the web site, would have been opinions of web site users (& Specifically regular users & posters) only.
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| JugglingSpence |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:55
|
Home From Home
Posts: 271
Joined: 05.10.07
|
My understanding is that this wasn't a change in the rules, more a case of the rules don't say that the same player can't play the twice in the same set.
We've come up against a couple of times this season and it happened again this Tuesday. Although there isn't a rule to break on this matter, I feel it isn't in the spirit of the game or this format which we have adopted.
The same applies to playing the same player twice. There aren't any rules on this but I don't think it adds anything positive to the night when it happens.
I'd love to see the rules amended to stop this happening. |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 11-09-2008 17:59
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
This was the proposal . . It was passed other than the squad size remained at 12 players and not at 10 . .
PROPOSAL ONE ? Summer League Format Change ? To take effect from the Croydon Summer Pool League 2008 Season and every Summer Season thereafter:
Maximum of 10 players per squad
Matches to be played over 10 frames (2 sets of 5)
5 players to play first set . . Up to five 'substitutions' can be made in the second set . . Therefore up to 10 players can play in any one match . . Substitutions do not HAVE to be made so there is the possibility that 5 players can play twice per match.
The away team's second set order to change so that no player to play the same opponent more than once per match . .
Only a player's first frame counts towards towards Divisional Singles wins if they play more than one frame in any match
Pick again rule to be scrapped and the minimum number of players required to form an eligible team to be 3.
To be in place for the Summer League only as a trial run
Start time to be moved to 8:15pm
Knockout Cup Semi Finals and Final Format to change to the following:
20-frame matches, played to two sets of 10 (as in two league matches in one) where a player can play up to 4 times in the match but not more than once in any set of 5. If the match is tied at 10-10 the match is to be decided by a single frame, 3-man playoff.
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 11-09-2008 18:02
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
It would seem that there was something in the proposal that did say you can't play the same player twice . . Unless this was changed at the AGM, however I'm pretty sure it wasn't . .
The problem came about with regards to the result sheet . . The away order was structured so that a player didn't play the same opponent twice . . However, the rigid structure meant players had to play in certain positions to play twice and didn't allow for in-match performance related team selection . .
Although I can't find it I am pretty sure that Halsey then said as it's a trial run there won't be any penalties imposed if the strict team order isn't adhered to and if a player played the same person twice . . In turn I am pretty sure this was conveyed to all team secretaries although I can't be certain . . Can a secretary confirm?
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 18:22
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
I guess that this needs to be finalised at the AGM tonight then if the 2 x 5 format is to continue for the winter.
I just have a feeling that the majority will vote for no player to play twice in any set of 5.
My reasons for this is that i believe this only suits the top teams, as they can have great players who are not prepared to hang around to actually watch their team & just wanna get their 2 frames & then go.
So they either wanna get their early, play 1 & 2 & then go, or trurn up at 10.00 play 9 & 10 & then go, & the top teams will accept this to keep their top players. I think the rest of the league are more "team" focused, & so will just tell that person to get lost as they are not a team player.
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| sailor |
Posted on 11-09-2008 18:28
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 120
Joined: 19.02.08
|
Chris, Throughout this season we have always played along the lines of no player can play the same player twice and no-one can play more than once in any set. Same goes for our Div 5 team
Chris, our (loud) secretary, would definately have told us of any rule changes if he was aware, but we havent been in a situation yet where this has cropped up
Whatever, all players who turn up for us, which is usually 8, will play at least once on the night, so we wouldnt use the ruling anyway, Captains job is to then decide on the night who plays twice, based on form or to rotate, so eveyone gets a fair run of 2 games a night across the length of the season, but thats up to the individual teams
Does need to be confirmed though for the next round of matches etc. . . |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 18:41
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Sailor, agian, thats my point, apparently it has already been confirmed, but only to those who use the web site & read all the threads, surley that is not fair & not the right way to do things.
We also make sure everyone that turns up gets a game, & if a team of 8 only want to use 5 players twice, thats up to them, but i believe most people still think that it has to be once in each set of 5, not twice in the same set of 5.
My point is how many teams actually read & post on this web site & are aware of the changes ?
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 11-09-2008 18:44
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I honestly don't think anything was 'confirmed' as such . . I think it was left in that no penalties were going to be implied if the strict team order wasn't kept or if a player played someone twice . .
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 19:19
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
I can see your point Dan, but i just think people are stretching the rules & the "trial period" thing to their advantage a bit too much.
I think looking at the proposal's that you put on this link, it doesn't actually say that a player can only play twice, so as long as you have 3 players to constitute a team, can player 1 play at 1,2,3,4 then Player 2 play at 5,6,7 & player 3 at 8,9,10.
Looking at the proposal's it doesn't say you CAN'T do that, so does this mean i CAN.
Edited by Brooker on 11-09-2008 19:21
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 11-09-2008 19:46
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I suppose it could yes . . This highlights the importance of these points being brought up should the format be carried on . .
This isn't intended at a dig at you Chris as I know you're trying to make a different point but you'd be surprised how many people went out of their way to pick holes in the new format as soon as it was brought in, instead of thinking "Hey we've got more pool for our Tuesday night out" and embracing it for what it was, a progression with a number of substantiated reasons . . It's these same people who I can pretty much assure you didn't give their feedback to their secretary who is voting on their behalf at AGMs and the ones who give absolutely nothing to the league/game yet expect to take take take.
The one thing missing from all of this is common sense.
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 11-09-2008 20:00
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Brooker wrote:
I can see your point Dan, but i just think people are stretching the rules & the "trial period" thing to their advantage a bit too much.
Looking at this point specifically I totally agree. The original proposal was brought in for a number of reasons, the main ones being more pool (for both players and venues), more teams in the league, less teams dropping out and turning up short and much more flexibility in general . .
. . yet straight away people are looking at ways of exploiting the system and going out of their way to be different, pretty much for the sake of it.
The format was discussed over a long period of time and the proposal was as well thought out as it could have been at the time. When it was put into practice it became immediately apparent that there were flaws/loopholes in place, the team order and the timescale being the main ones . .
. . yet instead of rectifying the problem in a constructive manner, the focus was centered on disproving the entire format and people calling for the 7 frames to come back!
As has touched on before, Division One Reigate & Redhill league play 15 frames of World Rules . . 3 sets of 5 . . No player plays more than once in a set . . The home team puts their team down first and it's the away team's responsibility to ensure no player plays the same player twice . . It was introduced and everyone just got on with it . . Their matches start at 8pm and finish probably before teams do in Croydon . .
That's really how simple it is . . There is no need for intricate rules and clauses . . Two sets of Five . . No player plays more than once in any one set . . Home team put their names first and the away team put theirs down after so that the same players don't play more than once . .
Simple. |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 20:40
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Golden wrote
That's really how simple it is . . There is no need for intricate rules and clauses . . Two sets of Five . . No player plays more than once in any one set . . Home team put their names first and the away team put theirs down after so that the same players don't play more than once . .
Simple
I agree totally Dan, i believe thats how most people see the rules & it doesn't help when people nit pick at little changes to suit their individual situation as it causes confusion.
Lets hope its that simple at tonights AGM
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 11-09-2008 21:38
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
You've got no chance as long as MOD, Pat Flynn and Jeff Martinez are there 
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
|
| Brooker |
Posted on 11-09-2008 22:17
|
Home From Home
Posts: 233
Joined: 08.10.07
|
The Ministry Of Defence, Bloody hell does it get that bad there
I would rather be playing golf |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 12-09-2008 00:03
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
The new format has showed that it helps teams who are short of players, gives more pool per match should you wish and something that we didn't bargain for it's also opened things up somewhat as can be seen with the Unpredictables at the top of the league . .
The main complaint so far has been the time issue . . If you have players who need to leave early then put them on early for a frame and they can leave . . If you have players who are going to be late, stick them on for a frame towards the end of the match . . BUT if you have a player that wants to play two frames but needs to leave early, wants to regularly be in by 10pm or is going to be late then TOUGH SHIT as clearly they have more important things on than playing pool so they can't have it all and the majority shouldn't be made to suffer as a result of it.
And as for 'reasons' like "Ooh our matches are going on until 11pm" perhaps you should put the cue away and get out some crochet needles as when you are done you can tuck yourself in with a good book in while the majority are out playing pool.
I'm off to register CroydonCrochet.com . . Toodle Pip!
Edited by TheSaxtonator on 12-09-2008 00:04
No Armani No Punani! |
| |
|
