---

Bloodhounds 5 - 5 Pond Q's

This could really turn out to be the division of draws this season.

Personally think that this was a fair result - not much between the two teams. Well
done Omar for snatching the last frame to earn a point.
Pond Q's look like another strong team all the way through - only needing 5 probably
suits them. Won't comment on the double break dish by one of their players!! I'm sure
they will want to talk about it!! Was on the receiving end of the second one - GUTTED!!:cry:

---

Forum 6 Warbank 4

Not a good performance woeful! :roll:

---

Another nail-biting DRAW.Great performance from Garry Rawlings who broke and dished twice(brilliant) !! Creditable, but not so eye-catching performance from Bryan McGinty who also won both his games ! But at the end of the day another bloody DRAW !! I really cannot comprehend the mentality of the morons who voted this system in ! It is designed to facilitate the existence of misfits who don't belong to a regular team. They will play for anybody who'll have them,especially if it doesn't cost them anything ! It certainly doesn't benefit stable teams like ours who have been together for years(the back-bone of the League). One can only hope that sanity will prevail at the AGM and that this badly designed and ill thought-out experiment will be thrown out !!! :wall:

---

Please explain what is wrong with the system. :angel:

---

Should have been 5 - 5 on the night. I think 5-5 would have been a fair result. Good bunch of lads down the Forum...

I know Pat from the Pond will enjoy that table :lol:

---

I think that when you play a competitive match,you need a result (whether it is positive or negative). A draw wouldn't be acceptable in a cup match and it certainly shouldn't be possible in a league match. We should be playing an odd number of games to ensure that there is always a winner !! That would be a move in the right direction ! :bite:

---

Why does there HAVE to be a winner?

A draw is a 'result' . .

---

what about in the football league,teams like arsenal seem to draw alot of their games and get a point for doing so,so y is this so different in the pool league if 2 teams perform equally well,then they should both be rewarded with a point and thus keeping both teams happy,if there was a play off game and one team won then the other team would feel hard done by(as with penalties in football) and this could result in teams no longer wanting to play in the league..

---

As I have said before,I disagree with the two sets system. There's absolutely no justification for sets. Players should be able to play a maximum of twice at any number from 1 to 11 ! We should play an odd number of games to ensure a positive result in all matches !! The present system is ill-conceived and badly designed !! Without the necessary amendments,I can't see the trial being extended beyond this season !!:wall:

---

I agree with the sets Pat.

Luckily, Mark has afforded us that flexibility with regards to where people play for the duration of the summer, allowing people to play pretty much wherever suits, so long as we try and avoid the same two players playing eachother twice.

The cards were printed ages ago, so the cards still have two sets of 5, with strict numbering in place, however, try and picture it as a big block of 10 with freedom to move your players where you like.

The "11th frame" is another thing all together.
There are, and never have been, bonus points in place for a win in the summer, so a draws are easily managable with regrads to points.
The Winter as we know has bonus points for a win, so will have to be handled delicatley.
I don't mind draws, but having played 4, Drawn 4 (KO Cup went to a play-off) this year for our team, it would be nice to say we won, or we got beat. It is the basic principle of sport after all.
I'm not overly fussed either way to be honest.

I'm really happy with the way it's got off though, as something certainly needed doing, and I think this is certainly a step in the right direction.

---

Sean,I respect your opinion about the retention of the two sets but I remain unconvinced as to their necessity. I don't think that it matters who plays who or when they play.The numbers on the result cards provide for the playing of only five players(numbered 1 to 5). If you have more than the prescribed number,then the card numbering becomes superfluous. If you don't want the same two players to play each other again,read the name to ensure that it doesn't happen(or is that too easy?) My point about playing an odd number of games is not about win bonuses ! I just think that it would create a more competitive environment ! I think that it's demotivational to play a match for the whole evening and not have a winner. The solution is simple. How long would one more game take when cmpared to the overall match time ? :wall:

---

I agree with you !!!!!

When we first took delivery of the cards, and I saw the way that it had been split into two sets and numbered, I thought that was the way it had to be.
I didn't think twice about it, I'm used to that system with Surrey and Croydon Interleague.

After the first night's play, I begun the forum "First impressions" and it became very apparent, very quickly, that people didn't really like the rigidness of the 2 sets.

Mark then made it clear to us that for the duration of the summer, that this rigidness would be binned, and that the line ups can be flexible.

After 3 matches using the more flexible method, I now stand firmly corrected.

The flexible option suits a tuesday night club league far better than the rigid system does.

Hopefully, when everyone gets together at the AGM, we can get something sorted so everyone knows where they stand.

---

I can see where Pat is coming from in the winner thing though. It doesnt appear that teams are having any trouble playing 10 frames, so why not 11.

If one player has to play a third to decide matters then as long as its agreed I dont see any problem with it.

---

or play best of 9 even ????

---

Indeed.

---

Personally, I didn't see what the problem was with using the original line up on the scorecards. We need rigidness in this league because there are plenty of people who enjoy using and playing the gamesmanship card when it suits them. This new flexible approach to team selection and player positioning has caused even more issues in the past weeks, and its confused people even more than was necessary.

As for Pat's comments about there needing to be a winner. In any sport there can be a 'draw' situation, and I quite like the 10 frame format with the potential draw scenario arising. Play off's at knockout stages works. We were on the receiving end of a play off defeat this week but it was good entertainment all the same.

The start of the Winter league is where we need to have it all resolved, and I really hope the bonus points system is totally scrapped. The system has only benefited the top sides who have relied on the additional two points and it needs to go completely.

---

As said in a previous thread the way forward for me would be to have
3 points per win and 1 point for a draw with frames for and against.
This would certainly make the whole league a lot more interesting, As it would not matter so much if a team lost by a large margin or not, because frames would not come into it unless 2 or more teams were on the same points after the last game has been played.

As for the card the card actually works if people read the home players name on the second set as not to play the same player again, (simple)