---

I have a problem as the ?General playing procedures & rules 2008? does not explain, clear enough, the order of play.
I am assuming the order of play, once the first 5 have been put on the score card, stays the same baring substitutes. That you cannot play someone in the 1st set and change his playing position from, say position 3 to 4 in the 2nd set, even though he is not playing the same player he had played in the first set.
Can someone confirm if my assumptions are right?

---

I read it that the home team is permitted to change the order of 6-10 (inc any subs) and the away team then puts down their order down to make sure no match from 1-5 is duplicated.

---

Correct . .

---

Incorrect . .

---

So if you are playing number one, you have to put the first five down, and then you have to commit one to play 6, prior to actually being able to assess the form of the subs.

Surely you would want to play all 7 players, and then selecting the best three to play again!

If people play the same player what does it matter.

---

It's not laid out in the playing procedures like that. I know that in Interleague the second set has a pre-defined order of players but that's not duplicated in these rules, as far as I see it.

I read it to mean that IF you are playing the same 5 (which not many teams will) then the AWAY team must change their order. It doesn't state what order, just that it must be different to avoid 2 players playing each other twice.

It's a bit late now anyway, without teams having been notified, to dictate playing orders. Not duplicating matches is easy and makes sense, but if the system becomes over-complicated by specifying exact playing positions etc, it runs the risk of being rejected by those teams who "play in a pub league for the fun of it". Baby steps remember.

As it stands, if a player plays twice, they can't play the same opponent again in the second set and only your first frame counts towards ranking points. Simple as that.

---

[quote]Fat-Dart wrote:
I read it to mean that IF you are playing the same 5 (which not many teams will) then the AWAY team must change their order. It doesn't state what order, just that it must be different to avoid 2 players playing each other twice.

The second set order is changed on the score card. The away team order is 1 2 3 4 5. second set is 3 4 5 1 2. So the order is changed for you.

---

so home team puts 5 players down then away team
then home team again and does the away team have to change there order or is it down to the home team
sorry for being spupid lol

---

I fail to see where the problem is ,,, the cards are pre-printed with the players playing number and if he/she plays twice then he/she remains at that number (wheter you are home or away) so to avoid playing his/her opponent again .... if he/she is substituted in the second set then the substitute steps into that number.

HOME TEAM AWAY TEAM
1 V 1
2 V 2
3 V 3
4 V 4
5 V 5

1 V 3
2 V 4
3 V 5
4 V 1
5 V 2

---

ok thanks mark

---

It won't work like that. You can only give one of the first 5 players a second frame in any event as you can't play twice in each set of 5.

---

Talking to a player from the Seamen last night, He never played in the first set of (5) games, But he did play in the second set of (5) games twice at positions 9 & 10.

Surely this is not allowed, even though he did play 2 different players.

---

so can a home player play P1, and then in the second set play P10 or does he have to go in at P6?

---

I know, lets introduce new rules and then not read them until after the first fixture.

All in favour say AYE

:thumb:

---

was slightly messy at the ship last night - there number 6 played again at 9.....no complaints from us; although he won both! would prefer a more liberal approach to this as for example playing number 1 and waiting to play again at 9 (as the away team) may not fit all, especially if the game is extended. that said, we started at 8.20 and were finished by 10:15 inc the secretarys game.

---

He hasn't won both then. . . . That will be invalid.
You can't play twice in the same half of the match. . . .

I can understand what with it being new that there will be a little confusion to begin with, but it's quite clear and easy to follow I think. . .

---

Agree Jamie - provided that noone plays twice in each set of 5, it really shouldn't matter which position they play in.

How anyone can expect Gary to remain sober enough to play at 9 is beyond me! :D

---

It's a bit sick that this has only come to light but as someone mentioned above, that's what trials are all about . .

I would go as far as to say that as long as no-one plays twice in the same set and doesn't play the same player twice then they can change position between sets . . Sound fair?

I know Halsey is taking quite a liberal approach with respect of rule amendments to this so maybe if we're all in agreement he'll get an amendment sorted out and circulated to clear things up . .

---

As there wasn't anything specifically defining this point in the proposal, and subsequently in the rules, there is no right or wrong answer but this is the idea opportunity to get something set in stone . .

---

I think the scorecard defines the order of play quite easily. All you need to remember is in 2nd set, if you want to sub a player - the new player fits into the subbed players position.

Appreciate your comments Dan, but tinkering around and looking to get amendments put through is only going to confuse the confused...

Best to leave it as it is.

---

I don't think it's as simple as that though as if you know at the start who is going to be playing one frame and who is going to be playing two you have to structure your entire lineup around it . .

---

If you play 7 players and 5,6,7 are going to play again then 6 & 7 will play twice in the same set. If you are going down the lines of not allowing anyone to play twice in the same set (that being the 2nd for obvious reasons) then you are gearing this trial to a 5 man team set up which I feel will be voted out by the majority in September.

---

the same player cant play at 6 and 9
its not rocket science

---

The numbering on the cards is gearing this trial to a 5 man team set up. I played 5 in the 1st set, subbed 4 and kept 1 in and played him in the same position. Coach played with 5 players and kept the same 5 in the 2nd set only moving them around as per the numbering on the card.

---

That was the confusion we had yesterday Mark... Sean played at 1 so as far as we were concerned if he was to be played again he would have to play 6, as indicated on the card, and that decison needed to be made prior to playing players 6,7,and 8.

Our understanding was that even if the 3 subs had absolute blinders tehy couldn't play again.

My personal opinion is that the second 5 games should not be dictated by positional changes, and if you happen to draw the same player again, then thats the way it is.

---

May not be rocket science Jamie but he DID play twice.....we only realised afterwards and as there is a bedding period for this trial was no big deal. not in the habit of claiming frames by a technicality either so as long are both sides are happy :)

---

Whatever happens, one format needs to be decided upon . .

---

Sorry Mark, but how can 6 & 7 play again, where would thier position be in the last 3 frames as there is no number 6 or 7 against any of the playing positions.

Your previous post was as follows (as on the result cards)

1 v 1
2 v 2
3 v 3
4 v 4
5 v 5

1 v 3
2 v 4
3 v 5
4 v 1
5 v 2

This led ne to believe that whoever played at position 3 4 & 5 for the home team must play 8 9 &10 in the second half (unless substituted) & whoever played 5 1 & 2 for the away team must play 8 9 & 10 in the second half (unless substituted)

So how could any player who was playing the 6th & 7th frames then play again in the last 3 frames.

Also this does not restrict it to a 5 man team event, you can change all 5 players in the second half as far as i understood, so it extends it to a possible 10 man team (Minimum 5 players)

Not being able to pick players again who have played the 6th & 7th frames if they have played well is nothing new, in the old rules if someone had a blinder in any positon they couldn't be picked again because you only got 1 frame anyway, & its unlikely the other team would pick the best player if you were using the pick again rule.

I like the set up the way it is. the home team keep the same positions in the second 5 frames (Bar substitutes) & the away team change to number 3 plays at 6, 4 plays at 7, 5 plays at 8 etc (unless substitutes)

So if you wan a substitute to play at position number 9 in the second half then either number 4 from the first half is dropped (home team) or number 1 from the first half if you are the away team.

I don't think its that confusing

---

As I've mentioned below, I see where Mark is coming from but it's a case of making the decision before the match . . If you have more than 5 players, you put those playing two frames in the first five . . It's simple . .

---

Ok . . It's this simple . .

You put your first five on the sheet . . This in effect is 'dropping' any others that may be in attendance . .

Then for your second set you decide on who out of the remaining players is coming in for the second set and who they are replacing and make the swaps . .

If you have players who you specifically want to get two frames you make sure they're in the first set . . You make your decision at the point of putting your first five down . . It's the same as before when you had to decide who was being dropped for a match each week . .

If you have say 8 players then you decide after the first set of five who are going to get replaced and by default the remaining players get two frames . .

I think the emphasis needs to be taken away from 'substitues in-running' perhaps . .

Simple enough?

---

Wow Golden - how DID you think of that?

That's proper clever, that explanation. Wish I'd thought of that. . .

---

This is a trial and I am only giving an opinion like everybody else .... the conditions attached to the current set-up does give the impression of a 5 man set-up sp I think that is what is confusing people. We have all season to iron out the creases.

---

That makes sense and is simple and if I get any enquiries re this matter then this is what I will quote

---

Appreciate the comments Chris, like a lot of people I've still got the old system head on and looking at how 7 goes into 5 but as I have mentioned in my reply to Danny, what he as stated does cover a multitude of sins and when peeps get their heads around that then I don't think there will be any further confusion. That works for up to 10 players which is what this catered for in the 1st instance

---

My actions last night seem to have sparked a debate....let me explain...

I have 3 players in my team who live well outside Croydon, and therefore want to leave before the end, and another who wanted to attend to a personal matter. I accomodate them because they are loyal. Under the new proposal put forward in this thread, had I only had 8 players, I would have had to give up a frame. What is the sense in that when I have other players willing to play again? The other alternative is to tell people they can't leave early - not the best policy to ensure continuing loyalty, when the whole point of this change is to stop teams leaving the league.

One of the major plus points whan this proposal was put forward was giving players the option to play twice, but it would seem this is now being limited.

In the match, we actually went 5-0 down, so under this new proposal, I would be forced to pick a player who has already lost. Again, that seems nonsensical to me. Any captain will want to pick players who are playing well, so what is the point in restricting the choice? You might as well just give the frames away.

Perhaps someone can explain to me what is actually wrong with playing a player twice in the second set....

---

I dont think anyone is saying it is wrong, more that if the numbers on the form mean anything then it does restrict what you can do.

Ultimately its why people are discussing it..... There is nothing wrong with either method, but it is something that eventually needs to be clarified for any long term future for the format.

---

Consider 3 playing 2, 1 playing 4 leaving 5 vs. 6 yet to play. The first set finishing 4-1 to the home team. So say in the second set 7 beat 9, 8 lost to 6 then wouldn?t the first home 3 be forced to play against the substituted away number 10?

That is all well and good but imagine the away number 3 lost to the home number 2, the home number 1 playing the away substituted number 4 then would the 3 vs. 8 match be added to the opposing or imposing team?s total score for that particular night? Or would it just affect the set in which the incident occurred in?

Bare in mind the following: 1 V 1 2 V 2 3 V 3 4 V 4 5 V 5 Continue this with 1,3,5,8,4 vs. 6,1,7,3,5.

What if number 3 was running late and/or can?t always make it every Tuesday night? Especially if it was an away match! How would the very early arrival of the home team?s number 3 result be counted towards the overall rankings and should the offending player be replaced the following week?

If the home substituted number 8 destroyed the away number 5.5, why is it not possible to pick him/her to play 1.4792? Even more so if 9.99?s cue was greasy and 12.756 never had the appropriate chalk!

Also if you?re the secretary playing number 3, and number 3 was their sec too. Does that not entitle a player playing the same player twice? But all this goes against E=MC small 2. Y*X/3+Z. If Y is < 4.3 then there is one last thing? Isn?t it unfair 6 could play 7 because 7 ate 9?

All these issues do need ironing out but other than that it is an extremely basic to understand and greatly enjoyable new format. I truly hope it does work out.

P.S. If anyone replies to this I promise they will never beat me ever again!

:mad:

---

For my two pennies worth i think that the whole idea of the new system was to accommodate teams that struggle to get 7 players out every week and that the minimum players required is now 5. With this being the case then each player would play twice and i think the mixing up of the order as per the numbers on the card is fair.

If the team has the same number of players as last year ie 7 then the first 7 would be unique and then 3 can play again (although this does have to be considered at the start of the game and after the first 5 frames have been played). The 3 players who play again have to be put down as per the their numbers on the card (which again is fair as the other team has the freedom to do whatever they want).

If you have more than 7 players, eg 10 then you can put down 10 unique players however you want. That is also fair.

Then you can also have matches where 1 team only has 5 and 1 has 7 or 10 and so the logic above also applies and is fair.

The other case raised is where people who say play at an early number and the team do not have enough subs and will therefore have to play again might not be able to stay around long enough to play 9 or 10 perhaps. I personally feel that as you only need 5 players to have a totally fair chance to win the match, then if a player cant stay around for 2 hours on a tuesday then dont play them. The summer league is not that serious anyway.

So in conclusion i feel the current system is 100% fair and i cannot see a real case for anyone needing to play twice in the same 5 frames.

Why dont you class each 5 frames as its own fixture to make this clearer, then people will understand that no one can play in the same fixture twice as per the old system.

If teams have better players who lack loyalty or cant be bothered to put themselves out then i say fcuck them and play your reliable players twice as they are the one who will ensure the teams survive (which was the whole point of the ruls change in the first place)

ta ta

sting

---

Well i never thought it was that simple... Subject closed then...

---

:clapping:

---

If you turn up with the bare minimum amount of players, you can't expect for 80% of your team to leave early without being penalised at all. If one player has to leave early then as long as they don't play first, they will be able to leave after they play the 5th frame which shouldn't be too late.

It's better than before in some respects as before if you'd turned up with 5, you would automatically drop 1 frame and the opposing team would be well within their rights to keep their options open for picking a player in the last frame. In that case the whole team would need to stay or risk throwing away another point. You can't really say to the opposing team that they get to pick again but everyone except for 1 player has gone home.

In reality you only need 3 players to stay any longer than frame 7 which I don't think is a lot to ask of a team.

---

To me, it's pretty straight forward.

If you want to play twice, you have to play in the first 5 frames, and then again in the second five frames.

Treat each block of these 5 frames as you used to treat the 7 frame format . . . No player plays twice. (Excluding the "Pick again" rule)

If you want to leave early, play in the first five frames.

If you want to arrive late, play in the second five frames.

If you want to arrive late, or leave early, AND play 2 frames, then it's a case of wanting your cake and eating it isn't it?
You can't have it both ways!!!!

However, I'd still be willing to help out a fellow secretary in this situation.
If for instance they only have 5 players, and one of those genuinely needs to go early / arrive late, then we'd work something out on the night to accomadate where possible.
This has always happened anyways!!!

---

So after all the fuss it was pretty straight forward and we'll live happily ever after :)

---

Not really.

I think it should be that if a team has 5 they play in the order on the card. If a team has more than 5 they have freedom of selection in the bottom 5...

At the end of the day its a 10 frame league not a five man league, and you dont want the team with more players to have less flexibility.

---

I don't like the rigid format in the 2nd half. I'd like to be able to play anyone in the second half in the position I'd like them to play in and not be restricted by if and where they played in the first set. The away team secretary should be able to ensure that noone plays the same player twice.

That said, that isn't what we have so we will just have to see how it goes . . .

---

The rigid format is used at both county and Interleague level, and it works there . . . .

You can still predetermine where you'd like your players to play.

If you want to play last for instance, at home you'd play Frames 5&10
Away from home, you play frames 2&10.

---

Exactly.

I honestly don't understand the confusion or discussion. This format works for small and large squads. People work to try to make a format that works for all and after one game you get individuals saying how it should be more flexible!

Last year you had 7 spaces and no-one could play twice in those 7 unless the team was short of players and even then, that team didn't get the choice of who would play again. Now you get the chance to reward people who have played well by giving them a second frame and/or give other players the chance of a frame who have bothered to show up.

As Spud said, it's the same type of format as County and Interleague, so I personally can't see the problem. The set numbers save the away Secretary having to work out putting players in different spots to ensure no person is playing the same player again.

And Statto; I live way outside Croydon too, but if I wanted to be home early on a Tuesday, I wouldn't have signed up and committed to a pool team once a week. Either that, or I'd ask my Secretary if I could play at 1/2 on a home match and 3/4 when playing away (if I could spare the time to play in 2 frames before rushing off for my Horlicks).

---

It's not about that. It's about seeing how my players perform and accepting that 2 of my players may not play till 9 and 10 depending on how well the first 5 do.

Example:

I have 7 players all of whom will be getting a game.

My opening 5 players go on the card. Players 3, 4 and 5 win their games. 1 and 2 don't. So I decide to replace 1 and 2 with 6 and 7 but they won't be able to play immediately - they will have to wait until the last 2 frames of the night. That is why I don't like the system. It's fine for Interleague and County but for league pool it isn't right.

---

And I'm not saying change it now but I am saying it needs looking at because this wasn't what I voted for at the last meeting.

---

Understood Sass.

My solution for that would be to change the order of the second set of frames for the away team.

Instead of the current

3
4
5
1
2

I'd have:
2
1
5
3
4

---

I understand what you're saying but why is that such a problem that they don't play until the last two frames? It's now only about personal preference as to where you'd play them as to why you don't like the system and in that respect, you're not going to be able to keep anyone happy as you don't know who, if anyone, will lose. Surely you're going to put fairly strong players at 1 and 2 to hope for a good start to the match and so would be unlikely to drop them anyway?

And if you haven't chosen to play them in your first set of 5, they're only going to get one frame at best that evening so shouldn't be that bothered about waiting until the end of the night unless they were going to play and leave straight away. I'm just thankful to get a game, no matter what position it's at.

---

I don't see why you need to have pre-determined numbers for the away team in frames 6-10. Can't the secretary of the away side just select the line up he wishes to have in the second half of the match, that way he gets to decide if his "subs" play when it is beneficial to the team.

---

Lils,

You have 7 players of equal ability, and as you want to make an informed decision on who plays the extra frames you want to play all seven in order, and then pick the best three to play again.

In this format you simply cannot do it, so your players who are 6 and 7 have no chance of playing two frames, even though they may well have broke and dished their frames.

I wasn't at the AGM but understood that the intention was to make the matches longer by increasing the frames, but to allow matches to be played with a minimum of 5. To me this is catering more for the minimum number of players than it is to the maximum.

I am not complaining by the way, if thats the way it is then fine. No harm in having a chat about it though.

Incidentally the County/Interleague point is valid, however it is rare that there are substiutes in County matches so generally everyone plays 4 anyway. ANd even if there are, its easier to be flexible with 4x11, and 3x9 sets respectively than it is with 2x5.

---

No, I don't see any harm on chatting about it either Shaggy and totally understand your point about if you had a team of 7 players of equal ability, but I would have said there was more chance of their being substitutes at County than having a team of 7 players where ability was more or less equal (unless all of them are rubbish!!)

And of course, the other side of your point about players 6 and 7 having no chance of playing 2 frames would be that with the current format in the Winter, that wouldn't be possible anyway (discounting the pick-again rule which wouldn't be applicable with a 7th player available).

I do see the point about being able to choose where your 6th+ players slot in, but I would have thought the preordained order on the card is simply easier than your Secretary having to work your team out and ensuring any player competing in a second frame isn't playing the same player again.

Again, this is a pilot season for a new format and it seems to generally be going well after Week One apart from these teething problems with the order. I just can't see how it will be resolved apart from removing all numbers after the first 5 sets.
Then of course, people will moan that it's taking too long to fill out the card after the first half because they can't play the players in the positions they want as it would mean they'd play the same player again, blah blah . . . :lol:

Hey, at least it's been better received by the League so far than World Rules were . . . . ;)

---

Anyone who turns up to a match and expects to play before a certain time and is pissed at playing late in the match is a shitcunt . .

. . if they have a problem with staying late tell them to take up cross stitch or something equally as 'in bed by 9:20pm' like

---

:lol::lol::lol:

---

I can understand the point Shaggy is making, and it's certainly a valid point.
My thinking is, that if a player has a nightmare this week, next week he gets put into the latter 5 frames, promoting the player that was 6th or 7th the previous week, thus putting him into contention for a second frame if that's the case.
That's certainly a method secretarys could use.

With regards to the timing issues, i.e. leaving early, arriving late.
If people want to put themselves into the frame for 2 frames an evening, then get to the venue on time. . . and stay till the end of the match!!!!

If you're pushed for time, then you won't get two frames. . .

---

First of all I would like to take the chance to apologise to the Big Potatoes for what happened on Tuesday ? but in my defence I thought what I was doing was ok because prior to the game there was a conversation involving me, some of my team and a highly esteemed committee member lol regarding team selection.
We were told as a matter of fact that we could play the same player twice in the final set ? so I decided to play my 8 players in any order then pick any 2 to play again at 9 and 10, when I asked if this was ok to do I was told that it was.
I don?t want to sound like that I?m passing the blame because im not, if we have to forfeit that frame then so be it ? it?s no big deal really.
What I don?t understand is why the formation has to be so rigid, surely in the second set as long as no-one plays each other twice you should be able to play whoever .. Where ever

Anyway I apologise again for what happened ? not bad for my first ever game as secretary :lol:

---

I blame Jason Cook . . It's not the first time that he's got it wrong . .

---

:lol:
Jason Cook = The Oracle of all pool knowledge :rofl:

---

Until this is cast in stone then I am not going to forfiet teams who played players twice in the second set as I was led to believe that this was put together to give players the opportunity to play 2 frames whether or not they have a small squad or a large squad. Players 1st match result will only count in the Divisonal Singles comp. I fully understand all points raised from all above parties and no doubt with a bit of fine tuning something will be sorted to accomodate the concerns. IF PLAYERS WANTS TO LEAVE EARLY THEN PLAY 1 FRAME IN THE FIRST SET ..... IF PLAYERS WANT TO ARRIVE LATE THEN PLAY 1 FRAME IN THE 2nd SET but don't start looking to accomodate those players to play 2 frames in the fine turning.

---

Thanks Danny....I'm glad I'm not ginger too....then I'd be suicidal....:lol:

Yes I did tell Wayne what he could do, but only after I had asked the question....I did not come to a unilateral decision on that....:razz:

Juggling Spence....it has nothing to do with having fewer players, it's about having 8 and still being penalised if people leave early....

Lils....I know you do, as do others....they don't always leave early, but I have to accept that sometimes they will want to....

So what exactly is the upshot of this? As there is nothing set in stone at the moment, how long will I be able to continue acting in the way that I feel is best for my team as a whole?

---

I enjoy playing pool, and i love the social side of it, but due to circumstances, ie. Work, i will have to play late or early at times . . . Does that make me a sh*tcu*nt? Should i give up tuesday nights?

Earning money does come first . . . Just!

---

I agree that by forcing the second set to play to a specific order if they played in the first can be a bit inflexible, but it is to prevent players playing the same player twice. I am not sure how easy it would be to get the teams to do this. What if teams made a mistake - what sort of penalty would they incur?

I also thought that the point of the change was to allow more teams to stay in the league ie you only need 5 for a fair match. But from reading some of the posts it looks like it was to do this but also make the games longer and give players a chance of playing twice? Is this right as i wasnt at the AGM

---

i can't belive how people are getting confused and unhappy with this format... it allows teams of 5 or teams of 10 to get everyone involved

it's simple...
if you wanna go early play in the first 'set'
if your gonna be late play in the second 'set'
if you wanna play twice play in the first 'set'
if you wanna/have to play twice and go early i'm sure teams would allow you to bring your second match forward

i must admit in the second set i feel it needn't be so structured as long as you don't play the same player twice i don't see a problem.

i think it's a good format and on i've done before. it's harder to win matches as you have to win by 2 frames rather than 1 and hence more likely to cut out those lucky wins where we all say shoulda, coulda, woulda...

---

I think this format will be good but what happens if u r playing a very tactical side then it will on all night some of us dont drive and r not local
if people like playing pool then this format should suit,
and the pick again rule has gone thank f ***

---

Very good point . . At least you have a valid reason for it and as you say, it's only occasionally . .

. . it's those that have a 15 minute timeslot between 8:40pm and 8:55pm to turn up, socialise, play their match and leave and then piss and whinge about everything if it doesn't happen to that effect that are shitcunts

---

Just so I know, is this what we are going with??

Also providing someone plays in the first set, can they play anywhere in the second set or in the preset order as stated on the match card??
Sorry for going on about it, just wanted some clarification on the matter.

Thanks

---

From the way I see it, you go by the preset order on the card. Hence why there is a preset order.

But as people don't appear to be too keen on this, I will imagine Mr Halsey will either allow this to be changed as long as you don't play the same player twice or will be amended next season, should the format stay.

---

I have not a problem where people play ... as long as they can avoid playing the same opponent twice. If that happens for whatever circumstance then I don't have a problem with that either. Seeing that this is a trial period there is no penalties attached for playing someone twice if it is unavoidable. No doubt the creators of this system (and my own opinion on this system is that it is a definate way forward) will no doubt be aware of the small problems at the moment and I have every faith that a revised alternative will be found which will not be so confusing for some people.

---

I've had a peek through the original thread that led to this format and can't find any mention of this anywhere so I agree in that there can't be any penalties attached and in fact any right or wrong way of doing it . .

After reading everything and listening to a few people's thoughts I'd be inclined to go with the following:

1. Not having the structured player positions in frames 6-10 so that a player can move position from one set to another.
2. The home team list their second set (6-10) first and then the away team list theirs . . A player can play each other twice should the away team choose so . .
3. Allowing a player to play twice in the second set only and not in successive frames . .

How does that sound?

---

Sounds much better, but the way that is worded suggests that anyone who plays in the first set cannot play twice....suggest "Any player can play twice, however, their second game must come in the second set and cannot immediately follow their previous game". I would also be inclined to prohibit playing the same player twice....look at semis and finals of the team cup comps - the order is altered to specifically prevent that....unless someone can provide an instance where it is unavoidable??

---

Had another thought....(i know it's dangerous)....is there anything that would prohibit a player from playing twice before another player has played once....eg team has 8 players, one of them plays at 6 and 8, meaning player at 9 is playing his first game....

---

It's nice and clear now thanks to Mark clearing that up for us, my earlier comments in this thread were based on my belief that we were to abide strictly as the card is set out, but since Mark has made it clear there will be some flexibilty for the duration of the summer, then it should be easy enough for everyone to get on with and enjoy the benefits of the extra frames, and ability to play players twice.

So in summary for those who are still in any doubt.

Play your players where you want, minimum of 5, maximum of 10.
For those players you wish to play twice, no restriction on where they play, so long as they don't play the same player twice.

If, however, for some reason or another, 2 players do play eachother twice, no penalty shall be applied for the duration of this trial summer, with the emphasis on getting more frames played, not more penalty points docked.

Only a players FIRST frame of the evening shall count towards thier individual stats for the Divisional title.

At the end of this season, gather feedback from across the league in order to tweek it where necessary for next season.

Hows that?

Sounds pretty cool to me.

---

See what happens when you bounce things about between each other ... you get progression. I'm not here to deduct points from anybody on a trial system. At some point during this summer period there will be a revised proposition raised for the AGM, from you the members, that will hopefully be confusion free so that when discussed under AOB at the AGM in September there won't be a long drawn out convo about it because the majority have already done it on here. The way I look at it its just a case of a few i's to dot & T's to cross and then job done.

---

The easiest way to avoid the complexity of player sequence, would be to consider reducing team size to just the one player. He would obviously need to be out of work so that he could always turn up early. He would also need to be an insomniac to make sure that he didn't want to go home prematurely. It would make the order of play so much simpler to organise !! It would be an exciting new development for the league because we could finish up with 30 or 40 divisions !! :lol:

---

LOL