|
|
Post by milko on Jun 12, 2014 10:53:03 GMT
It has been over three weeks since the local Oxfordshire Area tournament took place,so can we have the result of the decision that has been made by the AEBBA committee over "illegibility of players" on this forum so that everyone knows.
Milko
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jun 12, 2014 15:48:57 GMT
Keith
As far as I am concerned, and this is a personal view, the county secretary of Oxford is responsible for ensuring the team he/she puts through (with their names given to Dave Alder) meet the eligibility criteria for this competition and have abided by the rules not the AEBBA.
How can the AEBBA committee know where all the players are signed for and whom they play for??
I think of Den Claydon signed for and playing in two different counties every season, for this event he plays for Portsmouth ( Hampshire ), whilst Geoff Pitt in the same position plays for Reading( Berkshire ) in any county event
The Oxfordshire committee should decide if there is an issue here and if so should not allow any person not elligible to play, not the AEBBA.
The rules laid down by the AEBBA are there for counties to abide by, any changes can be requested at the AGM.
Thanks
Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by milko on Jun 13, 2014 10:45:18 GMT
Thanks Chris, for your Personal view!
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jun 13, 2014 20:53:37 GMT
Hi keith
What I am also saying is that no rule has been broken at AEBBA level in terms of entries. It is totally up to county secretaries to ensure eligibility for this event.
Therefore the AEBBA committee should not need to make a statement at this time.
Thanks Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2014 22:41:23 GMT
Isn't there a specific AEBBA rule (55 I believe) which sets out the requirement and mentions 'scrutineering' ?
I only say this as a former dual-county bod who had to be 'vetted' before guesting (twice) for the Surrey representatives.
|
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Jun 14, 2014 7:32:57 GMT
Tommo is quite correct to say that it is Rule 55 that covers this competition, which I have shown below.... 55) Pub/Club Team Competition Rules: a) A team may enter a guest player PROVIDED he only plays for the team he is guesting for (and plays regularly for that league if registered for more than one league). Players are not restricted to the one county rule, rule 47), in this competition, provided they fulfil the other criteria. b) Players must be registered for the host venue and the same league at the start of the calendar year. c) Teams from the same league within a host venue may amalgamate. d) Registration forms must be supplied (normally by the County Secretary) to the A.E.B.B.A. Secretary by the end of August of that year's competition, to allow scrutineering. Failure to comply with this will result in automatic disqualification from the finals. e) County champions will represent their counties at the Grand Finals The requirements for a players eligibility (Rules 55a, 55b and 55c) seem very clear to me and the competition organisers within each county surely must have responsibility for ensuring that teams that enter their respective competitions only use eligible players during the county qualification for the AEBBA finals. The one part of these rules that I do not understand is Rule 55d and I think that Chrissie has put her finger exactly on why this seems unnecessary.... How can the AEBBA committee know where all the players are signed for and whom they play for?? Since there will only normally be about 8 teams at the AEBBA finals why is it necessary for the AEBBA Secretary to have to check the eligibility of players from perhaps 70 or 80 teams (maybe more?) that have played at some stage of the early rounds in the county competitions?  Some counties play specific competitions for their teams to qualify, I know that Sussex and Oxon do that. Other counties use their League Champions or Cup Winners as their representatives, I believe that Surrey do that so it would appear that not only would the AEBBA Secretary have to check the lists of players that are specifically submitted to him by counties, he would also then have to check the teams in every other League to ensure that a player had not representated a team at any time in any competition that could be classified as having taken part in a round of the team competition.  To me that seems madness and would surely be an almost impossible job for the AEBBA Secretary. I understand that in the individiual case that has prompted this thread that the OBBA Secretary has contacted AEBBA Secretary to ask for clarification as to whether the specific player is eligible to play or not. I would assume that AEBBA Secretary has (or will) respond directly to that request and see no need for AEBBA to make any public statement about their decision and would expect that OBBA Secretary will inform the teams and players involved once the decision has been reached as at this stage it is a county matter rather than AEBBA. I do feel however that perhaps Rule 55d) should be re-worded to possibly something along the lines of...... d) County Secretaries will be responsible for ensuring that players are eligible to play for their teams in accordance with rules 55a, 55b and 55c and may request clarification from AEBBA Secretary in the event of any dispute. All counties will submit details of the team that will represent their county to AEBBA Secretary by the end of August to allow scrutineering. Failure to comply with this will result in automatic disqualification from the finals. Just my own personal thoughts on the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Jun 14, 2014 8:07:08 GMT
55D is there specifically to stop players playing for more than one team in more than one county in the same year, individual County secretaries cannot police this. Part of the AEBBA Secretary's job is to collect registration forms for ALL teams by the end of August for scrutineering.
That rule must remain.
The rule that needs changing IMHO is to freely allow one guest player without any qualifications, provided that he is not cup tied by having played in another team in the competition. The difficulty in this is differentiating between registered and played. |
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Jun 14, 2014 11:50:27 GMT
55D is there specifically to stop players playing for more than one team in more than one county in the same year, individual County secretaries cannot police this. Part of the AEBBA Secretary's job is to collect registration forms for ALL teams by the end of August for scrutineering. That rule must remain. Although I understand the point that you are making and you would think perhaps this would be easy enough to enforce IMHO this rule is almost impossible to enforce unless we introduce some form of National Registration System?  Consider the problems that AEBBA Secretary would have to try to overcome if he were to have to check the eligibility of every player that takes part in ANY Competition that ultimately results in a team representing their county.... Firstly, AEBBA Secretary would have to know the exact criteria under which a County selects the team that will represent them. Some counties play a specific competition, others nominate their League Champions or Cup Winners. How is AEBBA Secretary supposed to know that about every county? Having found that out, he would need a full list of players from EVERY League in the Country for every season, so he could then check to see if a player plays for the team he wishes to represent. He would then have to look to see if that player also plays in other Leagues and if any teams that they play for have also played in any competition that would provide their representative. If he has, then clearly he would be ineligible to play for EITHER (or ALL if more than 2) Team.  Perhaps you think that is unlikely to happen.... sorry, but I think that it could happen every year and is never noticed. Taking Surrey as an example, they nominate either their League or Cup winners (I am not sure which?) but under the current rules any player that has played a game in Redhill this year would not be eligible to play for any other team in that League for the competition this year, those players would also therefore be ineligible to play for any other team in any other county even if they are a regular player in that other League. There are numerous examples of Surrey players that regularly play in Sussex Leagues, Sussex players that play in Redhill and we are starting to see an increasing number of Kent players travelling down to play in Sussex as well. Chrissie Newson has also stated that there are players that play in both Hampshire and Berkshire Leagues and I am sure that there are other examples of players that play in more than one county as well. I would therefore ask how is it possible to enforce this rule fairly and allow players that regularly play for a team to represent their team if that team wants to enter this competition? The simple facts are that the number of players at league level are slowly diminishing each year, some teams (and even Leagues) are only kept alive by the players that play more than one night a week in different Leagues and different counties in some cases. Surely we want to encourage people to play the game and we want teams to enter this competition for the years ahead. I agree that players should not be looking to enter the competition deliberately from multiple venues, especially when there are specific individual qualifying competitions for this event within their county (Sussex and Oxon for example), but surely the players should be allowed to choose which team (and county) that they wish to represent and eligibility can be monitored at county level where organisers have a clear understanding and knowledge of their own Leagues? Once they have established that a player is eligible then they should be allowed to play. Once the winners of that county have been found, that is the time for details of the county representatives to be sent to AEBBA Secretary to check eligibility for the national finals. An alternative would be for the teams to be shown here on the Forum, I am sure that we would soon receive the protests should any players be seen and known to have played in other counties qualifying competitions, it usually happens like that!  |
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Jun 14, 2014 12:54:14 GMT
Chroist Dave, how to make a full page reply to a simple point!! 
I am fully aware of the multiple leagues players scenarios.
All that needs to happen under the CURRENT rule is that county secretaries (AKA league secretaries in some case) submit team registrations of all eligible teams to the AEBBA Secretary by the end of August. It's then up to the AEBBA Secretary to do the relatively simple job of cross checking.
That is the current rule (whether or not you or I agree with it) and it stands until changed. Every year there has been muttering about legality of players in the finals and it is unfair to legal Pub/Club Teams to ignore a rule. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 14:29:52 GMT
Qualification for this competition has always been a bone of contention. I can remember Geoff jukes getting upset when he had religiously adhered to the rules of eligibility only to find that another county had blatently contravened them.
Surely any vetting by aebba would only have to be done on the guest player - the nucleus of the team being there by right ?
I would imagine that the spirit of the rule when introduced was to prevent the strengthening of the team with someone who had already competed but failed to get through with his/her first choice team from another county.
This would certainly limit the amount of checking involved if counties were to highlight who their guest players were.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 14:43:08 GMT
How to needlessly confuse a simpleton like me!
Could someone please check the Team Champs thread under AEBBA Tournaments area and check let me know whether you require anything more from Northants?
If not I know that I can happily ignore the rest of this thread.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Jun 15, 2014 8:24:54 GMT
Chroist Dave, how to make a full page reply to a simple point!! Fair comment Chris, so I will try to keep this reply short and sweet.  Please could you clarify what you mean by.... All that needs to happen under the CURRENT rule is that county secretaries (AKA league secretaries in some case) submit team registrations of all eligible teams to the AEBBA Secretary by the end of August. .... are "all eligible teams" only the teams that have qualified for the finals or are they all of the teams that have taken part in the qualifying competition? If it is only the teams that have qualified for the finals I would ask how AEBBA Secretary can effectively cross-check for eligibility.... ....if it is all teams then I would refer you to my previous posts to save me repeating it all!   I agree entirely with your point that we do want to ensure that all players and teams that take part adhere to the rules of the competition.  |
|
colinm
Full Forum Member
Posts: 423
|
Post by colinm on Jun 17, 2014 12:13:09 GMT
Surely the point here is that there are clear rules in place for this and all competitions. Having read the rules I do find the rules relating to guests very odd, but that is another matter and one that I would like to discuss at the AGM.
Surely the point is that once a team has been selected to play in the competition and represent their county (having qualified by whatever route each county chooses) they should provide a list of the team which has been selected in the finals. The captain should ensure that the team qualifies for the competition under the rules of the AEBBA and then the county secretary should confirm their eligibility. Once this has been done the team should then be submitted to the AEBBA secretary by the due date.
This seems logical, straight forward and removes the necessity for the AEBBA secretary to validate each and every entry.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jun 17, 2014 16:27:51 GMT
I so, so, so agree with you Colin and it adds to what BB Warrior has said too.
There may be a need to amend the rule, if so, then this can be done and put forward for the AGM, as Sav has said.
|
|
