CroydonPool.com - The CDPL Online Community

Posted by Statto on 26-03-2008 06:37

A night full of surprises.....

Forum 3-4 The Seamen

A pleasing result after losing the home tie 7-0, but nearly every game had twists....luck ebbed and flowed, but probably evened out overall....quality pool from both teams....there are going to be a few changes in the divisional singles leaderboard....

Bet the farley boys will be well happy.....also bet farley has done a post while i'm doing this....

Good luck for the end of the season guys...

Posted by Farley on 26-03-2008 07:14

Statto wrote:
A night full of surprises.....

Forum 3-4 The Seamen

Bet the farley boys will be well happy.....also bet farley has done a post while i'm doing this....

Indeed Jason... Farley Loyalists 6 Jolly Salior 1.

Posted by AndyT on 26-03-2008 15:27

Surrey 193's 5 - 2 The Warriors

Had a couple of frames where the black and white were potted together, but we will take the points - wer'e not proud! :winking:

Posted by Cyber The Crucifier on 27-03-2008 00:04

goodies 5 royaloak 2
should of been closer
and we had 6 and they picked cathy Taylor
i will be glad when the summer starts
and get rid of this stupid pick again rule

Posted by undercover on 27-03-2008 00:08

gentlebreeze wrote:
Imperials 5-2 Duke of Glouc
nice win for us but they only had 5 players.

John i know your getting old , They had 6 players

Posted by Lils on 27-03-2008 00:22

chaos wrote:
goodies 5 royaloak 2
should of been closer
and we had 6 and they picked cathy Taylor
i will be glad when the summer starts
and get rid of this stupid pick again rule

I don't understand your point Chaos; what was wrong with them picking Cathy Taylor again? Surely the fact that you weren't penalised for turning up short was in your favour?

Posted by Lils on 27-03-2008 03:07

:lol:

I just don't understand why anyone who can't a full team one Tuesday would moan about the 'pick again' rule. I agree it's a terrible rule - if you can't get a full team out you don't deserve the chance to get an extra frame on the board and it leaves teams able to manipulate the system if they have a weaker player by not putting them in the team and making the opponents choose from a stronger set of individuals, but I'm not sure what Chaos is trying to get at.

Is Cathy Taylor your weakest player and you're not happy at your opponents picking her again?!!

Surely you don't expect them to pick your best player? And surely you should be grateful at having the CHANCE to win the 7th frame after not being able to field a full team?

Maybe i'm just missing something. I'm good at that.

Posted by Dogger on 27-03-2008 16:41

#10

we think pick again rule should be scrapped. if you cant field a full team then you should be penalised.

Edited by Dogger on 27-03-2008 16:43

Posted by Sass on 27-03-2008 18:59

#11

I think the pick again rule is hilarious. I got picked to play again on Tuesday when I was the only player in my team who'd won their frame. The reason they gave? "We want to be able to really take the piss out of him if he loses twice!"

Posted by Cyber The Crucifier on 27-03-2008 20:54

#12

I wish i didnt mention the pick again rule now
wouldnt it be better if u had 7 cards
a 2 3 4 5 6 7 and u had to pickone
this is a pointless conversation
because in the summer it is scrapped
thank god

Posted by Golden on 27-03-2008 21:06

#13

The price you pay for turning up short is the very strong possibility that your weakest player is going to get picked again . . It's just the way it is and rightly so . .

Ask Clive Taylor . .

Why should allowances be made for a team who turns up short? It's bad enough they get to pick again as it is . .

Posted by longshanks on 27-03-2008 21:25

#14

Clive Taylor always turns up short.

A few years ago the pick again rule was a rarity, now it seems to happen all the time.

Posted by Lils on 27-03-2008 23:42

#15

chaos wrote:
I wish i didnt mention the pick again rule now
wouldnt it be better if u had 7 cards
a 2 3 4 5 6 7 and u had to pickone
this is a pointless conversation
because in the summer it is scrapped
thank god

But it's back in the winter if it's decided that the Summer format isn't popular . .

You really believe that a team who can't get enough players out should have the chance for their strongest player to play a second time?!!!

Posted by Shaggy on 27-03-2008 23:59

#16

If the current winter format does return next year, I think it should return to having a maximum number of occasions it can be used.

The stupid thing about it is that you are possibly better off playing five strong players, and giving one frame away, than playing 6 players when the worst player will be picked again effectively giving away two frames.

That cant be right can it.

Posted by BigJake on 28-03-2008 00:27

#17

I think that if a team can't field a full team they should lose the respective frame as simple as that.

If they have five players and it's a 7 game event, they automatically lose two frames. Shouldn't be any question about being allowed to play the same player twice.

It's down to the captain to ensure he has a full squad. Just the way I see it :haha:

Edited by BigJake on 28-03-2008 00:32

Posted by Lils on 28-03-2008 00:58

#18

Make you right Shaggy and BigJake. That's why I really can't understand Chaos's winge about the opposing team picking their weakest player!! You shouldn't even have a chance to win that frame when you can't get a full team.

Posted by Cyber The Crucifier on 28-03-2008 01:06

#19

ok this subject is getting boring
i agree with u shaggy
its not whinging lils
im just stating my opinium
ive spelt that word wrong