|
|
Post by Baby Guinness on Apr 11, 2016 19:06:50 GMT
All Competitions
Contact by 20th April 2016
To be played by 14th May 2016
Mens Singles
Pete Edwards v Adam Bateup @ The Plough
Neil Higgins v Derek Taylor @ C & K R B L
Open Doubles
Neil Higgins v Andy Farmer-Wright @ The Cock
Ros Appleby Pete Edwards
Chase Newman v Darren Newnham @ The Hassocks
Geoff Fairs Dave Knight
Mixed Doubles
Adam Bateup v Rob Hall @ The Brewers
Nikki Bateup Lorraine Hall
Darren Newnham v Pete Edwards @ USC
Jan Bithell Jenny Edwards
Senior Singles
Ros Appleby v Chase Newman
Neil Higgins v Geoff Fairs
1st Division Singles
Glen Wilkinson v Sam Hall @ C & K R B L
Dave Tiffen v Ted Stringer @ The Plough
Ladies Singles
Lorraine Hall v Ros Appleby @ C & K R B L
Liz Lancaster v Jan Bithell @ The Brewers
Please note Sussex County Bar Billiard Association Rule 42
Players may not practice on the day of the match on any table that they have been drawn on to play in any competition. Any player found in breach of this rule will be eliminated from the competition and the match awarded to his/her opponent.
This does included seniors competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ros on Apr 12, 2016 10:38:31 GMT
Please note Sussex County Bar Billiard Association Rule 42Players may not practice on the day of the match on any table that they have been drawn on to play in any competition. Any player found in breach of this rule will be eliminated from the competition and the match awarded to his/her opponent. This does included seniors competition. I don't have an up to date copy of the Sussex rules, but according to my old copy the wording should read "....on any table they have been drawn to play on....." I don't see how this can possibly apply to Senior Singles, which is played on the home tables of the players involved. Nobody is "drawn" to play on their home table. If the Mid Sussex committee wish to have a rule that prevents a player playing on or checking his/her home table, then this should be properly brought before the AGM in the normal way - rules that are meant to apply to neutral tables should not be invoked. The table at the Brewers gets moved across the other side of the room when the pub have a band in. If the table can't be checked when it is moved back, this will severely restrict the available nights for a senior singles match. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2016 12:48:10 GMT
I think you will find by this note...... This does included seniors competition. ........Lorraine was highlighting an exception, and meant to say#: "This does not include the Seniors competition." |
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Apr 12, 2016 14:44:08 GMT
Please note Sussex County Bar Billiard Association Rule 42Players may not practice on the day of the match on any table that they have been drawn on to play in any competition. Any player found in breach of this rule will be eliminated from the competition and the match awarded to his/her opponent. This does included seniors competition. I don't have an up to date copy of the Sussex rules, but according to my old copy the wording should read "....on any table they have been drawn to play on....." I don't see how this can possibly apply to Senior Singles, which is played on the home tables of the players involved. Nobody is "drawn" to play on their home table. If the Mid Sussex committee wish to have a rule that prevents a player playing on or checking his/her home table, then this should be properly brought before the AGM in the normal way - rules that are meant to apply to neutral tables should not be invoked. The table at the Brewers gets moved across the other side of the room when the pub have a band in. If the table can't be checked when it is moved back, this will severely restrict the available nights for a senior singles match. No you can check a table but practicing is not allowed ros sorry and this is the case all competitions including senior singles rules are rules please follow |
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Apr 12, 2016 14:45:12 GMT
I think you will find by this note...... This does included seniors competition. ........Lorraine was highlighting an exception, and meant to say#: "This does not include the Seniors competition." No tommo this includes seniors until a rule is brought in we follow Sussex rules so the rule stands |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2016 15:12:12 GMT
Thanks for the clarification.
Will amend website to read "This does include the Seniors competition"
|
|
|
|
Post by Sparky on Apr 12, 2016 17:05:08 GMT
I think you will find by this note...... ........Lorraine was highlighting an exception, and meant to say#: "This does not include the Seniors competition." No tommo this includes seniors until a rule is brought in we follow Sussex rules so the rule stands I find this a strange interpretation of the Sussex rules when being used for a Mid-Sussex Competition that was deliberately constructed to be unlike any other Competition being used ( I remember this clearly from the AGM discussion when the Competition was started) ... furthermore the closest competition used by Sussex County is the "Home & Away" Interleague Competition which does have a specific rule for this situation 10. No player may practice an "away" table on the day of the match on any table that their team are scheduled to play on. Any Player found in breach of this rule will not be permitted to play at the time of the match and if any player is found retrospectively to have breached this Rule that game will be awarded to their opponents and their game score will be counted as zero.
and so I ask Lorraine, or the Committee, to rethink quickly this decision regarding this years events, and put it to the AGM for future years.NB The Senior Singles is a "Home & Away" Competition, specifically utilising the assumed Home table aspect. NBB The Sussex Rules can be found via the Mid-Sussex Website and are noted as 'Rulebook Updated August 2014'.... which is considerably newer than the '2010' version currently visible on the SCBBA Website |
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Apr 12, 2016 19:14:42 GMT
No tommo this includes seniors until a rule is brought in we follow Sussex rules so the rule stands I find this a strange interpretation of the Sussex rules when being used for a Mid-Sussex Competition that was deliberately constructed to be unlike any other Competition being used ( I remember this clearly from the AGM discussion when the Competition was started) ... furthermore the closest competition used by Sussex County is the "Home & Away" Interleague Competition which does have a specific rule for this situation 10. No player may practice an "away" table on the day of the match on any table that their team are scheduled to play on. Any Player found in breach of this rule will not be permitted to play at the time of the match and if any player is found retrospectively to have breached this Rule that game will be awarded to their opponents and their game score will be counted as zero.
and so I ask Lorraine, or the Committee, to rethink quickly this decision regarding this years events, and put it to the AGM for future years.NB The Senior Singles is a "Home & Away" Competition, specifically utilising the assumed Home table aspect. NBB The Sussex Rules can be found via the Mid-Sussex Website and are noted as 'Rulebook Updated August 2014'.... which is considerably newer than the '2010' version currently visible on the SCBBA Website Nope not sure it is strange sadly people will not follow rules and that is what rules state well all that needs to happen is someone to put a rule in before agm. Sadly though it happens with the same person making excuses and I feel no one should have an advantage of practising on a table before a match. That is my opinion and I feel the rule is fair and does include senior singles until a rule is put in |
|
|
|
Post by Q on Apr 12, 2016 23:35:25 GMT
I find this a strange interpretation of the Sussex rules when being used for a Mid-Sussex Competition that was deliberately constructed to be unlike any other Competition being used ( I remember this clearly from the AGM discussion when the Competition was started) ... furthermore the closest competition used by Sussex County is the "Home & Away" Interleague Competition which does have a specific rule for this situation 10. No player may practice an "away" table on the day of the match on any table that their team are scheduled to play on. Any Player found in breach of this rule will not be permitted to play at the time of the match and if any player is found retrospectively to have breached this Rule that game will be awarded to their opponents and their game score will be counted as zero.
and so I ask Lorraine, or the Committee, to rethink quickly this decision regarding this years events, and put it to the AGM for future years.NB The Senior Singles is a "Home & Away" Competition, specifically utilising the assumed Home table aspect. NBB The Sussex Rules can be found via the Mid-Sussex Website and are noted as 'Rulebook Updated August 2014'.... which is considerably newer than the '2010' version currently visible on the SCBBA Website Nope not sure it is strange sadly people will not follow rules and that is what rules state well all that needs to happen is someone to put a rule in before agm. Sadly though it happens with the same person making excuses and I feel no one should have an advantage of practising on a table before a match. That is my opinion and I feel the rule is fair and does include senior singles until a rule is put in I do believe you are wrong Bob, can we have clarification from your Mum please, Baby Guinness what was the intention of your postscript? |
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Apr 13, 2016 6:40:03 GMT
Nope not sure it is strange sadly people will not follow rules and that is what rules state well all that needs to happen is someone to put a rule in before agm. Sadly though it happens with the same person making excuses and I feel no one should have an advantage of practising on a table before a match. That is my opinion and I feel the rule is fair and does include senior singles until a rule is put in I do believe you are wrong Bob, can we have clarification from your Mum please, Baby Guinness what was the intention of your postscript? Q I am not wrong hence why I answered the post |
|
|
|
Post by Ros on Apr 14, 2016 9:23:16 GMT
Sorry Bob, I also believe you are wrong. Have you been co-opted on to the committee, or are you simply voicing an opinion as an ordinary registered player?
The Sussex rule is very clear - it applies to tables that a player is drawn to play on, not to home tables.
Maybe it was Lorraine's intention to say that the rule applies to the 'away' legs of the Seniors? I don't have any problem with accepting that.
Like others on this thread, I would like official clarification and would respectfully request that the exact wording (not as originally quoted) should be studied carefully before any such response is given.
|
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on Apr 18, 2016 11:25:04 GMT
As an ex-member of MSBBL, could I make a suggestion to try to prevent this topic becoming more heated than is necessary. The Mid-Sussex Seniors competition is unique within Sussex and it is entirely at the descretion of the Mid-Sussex Competition Secretary and Committee how the competition should be run and what rules they choose to use.  Since the competition has been successfully run for about 15 years without any problems, I am surprised that it has now suddenly become such an issue? Surely, the simple answer is just to keep playing it exactly the same for the remainder of this year as you have done for the last 15 years?  If players feel that clarification (or changes) to the rules are needed for the future, then a proposal should be made to the League AGM where ot can be discussed and agreed democratically without the need to fall out about it.  |
|
|
|
Post by Baby Guinness on Apr 18, 2016 12:22:01 GMT
I will not be using the proboards to publish competitions or result as I am fed up with how Mid Sussex Players are always complaining.
In future you will just have to email or telephone results as I won't be picking up results from here.
Lorraine
Competition Secretary
|
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Apr 18, 2016 12:29:20 GMT
Can we please close the thread and keep for results only
|
|
|
|
Post by bigtj on Apr 18, 2016 12:41:51 GMT
I have locked the thread, and set up a new one for results.
|
|
|
|
Post by Q on Apr 18, 2016 12:48:27 GMT
I will not be using the proboards to publish competitions or result as I am fed up with how Mid Sussex Players are always complaining. In future you will just have to email or telephone results as I won't be picking up results from here. Lorraine Competition Secretary This wasn't a complaint Baby Guinness merely a request for clarification from yourself, which I think is a very sensible request. I am NOT closing the thread bobhall because as far as I can see the matter hasn't been resolved, I would ask that you refrain from commenting on this until we have a definate resolution. As an ex-member of MSBBL, could I make a suggestion to try to prevent this topic becoming more heated than is necessary. The Mid-Sussex Seniors competition is unique within Sussex and it is entirely at the descretion of the Mid-Sussex Competition Secretary and Committee how the competition should be run and what rules they choose to use. Since the competition has been successfully run for about 15 years without any problems, I am surprised that it has now suddenly become such an issue? Surely, the simple answer is just to keep playing it exactly the same for the remainder of this year as you have done for the last 15 years? If players feel that clarification (or changes) to the rules are needed for the future, then a proposal should be made to the League AGM where ot can be discussed and agreed democratically without the need to fall out about it. I agree entirely Dave, but there is the slight problem of ambiguous wording on the original post that COULD result in problems, the rule (or lack of) needs clarifying |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2016 15:01:56 GMT
In the absence of any official clarification on the matter, I have removed the reference to 'Senior Singles' in the wording on the Mid Sussex website.  |
|
|
|
Post by iang on Apr 18, 2016 15:56:32 GMT
TJ had locked this thread to stop it getting out of hand and personal please do not make any further comments regarding the rights & wrongs about what is of isn't the rule or comments about individuals.
The draws have been published and a separate thread for posting results has been made and should be used if you want to post your result.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by Q on Apr 18, 2016 19:11:25 GMT
bobhall please stay out of something that doesn't concern you, you're not making things any better, all we want is clarification from your Mum
|
|
|
|
Post by Chunky Monkey on Apr 18, 2016 20:00:58 GMT
bobhall please stay out of something that doesn't concern you, you're not making things any better, all we want is clarification from your Mum Thats not going to happen Q, as Baby Guiness stated in an earlier post, she will not be looking on anymore. I suggest an EGM is called in Immediatly to resolve this! Not done via the proboards! It is about time the Mid Sussex Chairman Stepped in. |
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on Apr 18, 2016 20:24:32 GMT
bobhall please stay out of something that doesn't concern you, you're not making things any better, all we want is clarification from your Mum Q this doesn't concern you either you have nothing to do with the league anymore also I am part of the league so I have more right than you in this matter |
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Apr 18, 2016 20:39:19 GMT
May I ask moderators to make it clear whether they are posting a personal opinion or acting as a moderator.
If the latter then their word stands unless anyone wishes to complain to the management team as a whole via Tony or myself.
Offensive personal comments are once again creeping into this thread. Keep personal opinions about others to yourself or suffer the consequences.
Sav (wearing moderator's hat)
|
|
|
|
Post by Sparky on Apr 18, 2016 22:04:54 GMT
The MSBBL Chairman (Derek) cannot currently post on the forum and has asked me to post, but these are not his exact words as we were only talking by phone, a few minutes ago.
Please do not post any more comments about the above contentious issues.
Please abide by the published ruling, if there are any changes then the 4 players concerned will be notified immediately.
For the long term this must be dealt with at the AGM.
(NB. I will be putting forward a Rule Amendment myself, Graham)
Edit for Typo
|
|
|
|
Post by Q on Apr 18, 2016 22:14:43 GMT
The MSBBL Chairman (Derek) cannot currently post on the forum and has asked me to post, but these are not his exact words as we were only talking by phone, a few minutes ago.
Please do not post any more comments about the above contentious issues.
Please abide by the published ruling, if there are any changes then the 4 players concerned will be notified immediately.
For the long term this must be dealt with at the AGM.
(NB. I will be putting forward a Rule Amendment myself, Graham)
Edit for Typo
Thank you Graham for relaying this, the problem is still that the 'published ruling' is ambiguous , and looks like a mistype, I think all we are really asking for is Lorraines meaning of this 'ruling' If the meaning isn't clear it will be very difficult for the players involved to abide by them. I am obviously speaking as a person who is concerned about MSBBL and its players |
|
|
|
Post by Chunky Monkey on Apr 18, 2016 23:07:29 GMT
The MSBBL Chairman (Derek) cannot currently post on the forum and has asked me to post, but these are not his exact words as we were only talking by phone, a few minutes ago.
Please do not post any more comments about the above contentious issues.
Please abide by the published ruling, if there are any changes then the 4 players concerned will be notified immediately.
For the long term this must be dealt with at the AGM.
(NB. I will be putting forward a Rule Amendment myself, Graham)
Edit for Typo
Thank you Graham for relaying this, the problem is still that the 'published ruling' is ambiguous , and looks like a mistype, I think all we are really asking for is Lorraines meaning of this 'ruling' If the meaning isn't clear it will be very difficult for the players involved to abide by them. I am obviously speaking as a person who is concerned about MSBBL and its players Take the 'd' off and it says "this does include (-d) senior competition" Leave the 'd' on and it says what it does! NOT "THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE(+d) THE SENIORS COMPETITION" |
|
|
|
Post by Q on Apr 19, 2016 0:06:11 GMT
That is your interpretation Kev, if that is the correct meaning would it be so hard for your Mum to correct it? , it could have saved a lot of heated debate
|
|
