County Championship 2017

[NigelS]

Hi Everyone
As some of you may or may not know, the rules for the County championships of somewhat changed this year.

This year’s championships will be made up of a combination mens and ladies teams (7 a side), each county has the right to send one mens side and one ladies side. Each county should state what sides they wish to send to participate no later than the 31 August.

After the 31 August if less than 14 teams have entered the remaining slots will be invited to be filled in the following order.

- A ladies select side (captain appointed by AEBBA committee) made up of players from counties that have not submitted a ladies side.
- B sides that are currently in Division 1 – (currently Sussex B)
- B sides invited in order as to where their A side finished in last years championships.

So can the following counties submit what sides (mens, ladies or both) they will be sending to Didcot on 17 September (Division 1) and 24 September (Division 2) (the sooner the better please).

Sussex - OPEN, LADIES & B TEAMS
Kent - OPEN TEAM
Berks - NO TEAM
Oxon - OPEN, LADIES & B TEAMS
Bucks - OPEN TEAM
Northants - OPEN TEAM
Surrey - OPEN TEAM (TO CONFIRM RE LADIES TEAM)
Hants - OPEN TEAM

I am assuming no Cambs, Suffolk, Yorkshire, Jersey, Guernsey who can all enter as associate members but have not participated recently, so assumed not in unless told otherwise….

[jordans]

Hi Nigel

Bucks will definitely send a MEN'S 7 team, but unfortunately no ladies team. I would definitely be interested in playing in the ladies select side if less than 14 teams enter.

Thanks
Dawn

[milhouse]

Oxon will have mens & ladies team and a mens B team if needed.

[Chris]

Cambs, Jersey, Guernsey and Yorkshire are not associate members Nigel only Suffolk who paid £20 associate/affiliation fees on time.

I assume that you mean a mixed team can happen re the Men's ?? I do not recall that it had to be purely men in the Men's Team ?

There will be no Ladies Team from Hants. There will be a Hants Team to play in the Men's, thought it was Open County Championships Team ( albeit men/ladies ).

Happy to be corrected if I have this wrong.


Many Thanks
Chris

[JB]

Sussex will have a men's and ladies team and a B team if invited

[NigelS]

Aug 1, 2017 20:05:59 GMT Chris said:

Cambs, Jersey, Guernsey and Yorkshire are not associate members Nigel only Suffolk who paid £20 associate/affiliation fees on time.

I assume that you mean a mixed team can happen re the Men's ?? I do not recall that it had to be purely men in the Men's Team ?

There will be no Ladies Team from Hants. There will be a Hants Team to play in the Men's, thought it was Open County Championships Team ( albeit men/ladies ).

Happy to be corrected if I have this wrong.


Many Thanks
Chris

Hi Chris yes Senior has put his foot in it there, they are of course open teams not mens teams, so a lady can play for the open team, but she then cannot go on to play for that counties lady side if in a different division.

Thanks for letting me know re the affiliation fees, teams were not expected from those counties anyway but a shame they have not paid their fees.

Nige

[Coleman Jnr]

Northants will send an open team

[curtd]

Kent will send an "A" side on 17th Sept ( Div 1)
B side to be confirmed for 24th

[daveuk1]

I would love to say Suffolk will enter a team but unfortunately as always it is hard to get our players interested in playing three pin when we all know we will get thrashed, I would be more than happy to come along if I can get six others. all I can do is ask around.

[NigelS]

An update………………
Division 1 is now finalised with the teams to play on the 17th Sept to be

Sussex A
Kent
Oxon A
Northants
Surrey
Sussex B

Division 2 is looking like this at the mo (24th Sept)

Hants
Bucks
Oxon B
Sussex Ladies
Oxon Ladies

(Waiting confirmation re Surrey Ladies/ Ladies select side)

["Silent"]

Disappointing to read about the absence of Berkshire this year. They managed two teams last year, but none this?

Aug 15, 2017 12:15:44 GMT "Silent" said:

Disappointing to read about the absence of Berkshire this year. They managed two teams last year, but none this?

Anyone know if it is by way of a protest ?

[barbelman]

Aug 17, 2017 23:43:59 GMT tommo III said:

Aug 15, 2017 12:15:44 GMT "Silent" said:

Disappointing to read about the absence of Berkshire this year. They managed two teams last year, but none this?

Anyone know if it is by way of a protest ?

Yes....    ...and no-one can blame them tbh.

[JB]

I find that really disappointing. A Protest!
I can only assume that Berkshire are quite happy that the Ladies County Champs would have disappeared from the calendar and no longer be held.

Last year there were 2 Oxford teams & 2 Sussex teams. Both said they struggled to get 2 teams so would be down 1 team this year.
Oxford & Sussex are the only Counties who have supported this competition every year. Personally I was not going to play this year if it was the same. The expense of travelling to Oxford just to play a Sussex v Oxford game. (Not exactly a County Champs)

Pauline & I put in this rule change to try and save the Ladies game. If I remember at the AGM there were only 3 people who voted against.

A protest can only be about the rule change so I assume a proposal will be put forward at this years AGM to change it back and kill off the Ladies game.

I'm wondering if it's more to do with the prospect of their B team being left in the cold (as will Kent B if the remaining vacancy is filled).
Trouble is, those few Berks guys who use the Forum tend not to get involved in discussions, so we may never know.

It will be interesting to see how the Ladies fare in the Open competition this year. Much thought has gone into the planning and it is probably as well that this is being tried as an experiment. Hope it proves to be a success, but I also hope that Berks can be welcomed back in 12 months time.

[JB]

It's not an experiment it is a rule which was proposed and seconded by myself and Pauline and passed at the AGM

It will be seen to have been an experiment if this happens:

Aug 18, 2017 9:56:11 GMT JB said:

A protest can only be about the rule change so I assume a proposal will be put forward at this years AGM to change it back and kill off the Ladies game.

........which if all goes well I sincerely hope it doesn't !

[NigelS]

Who can blame them? Well I for one can!

I too, like Jean, find this extremely disappointing. I fully supported this rule change from Jean and Pauline last year and helped Jean word it in particular thinking of how this could work with the other teams currently involved. The situation prior to this year was that any county could enter a B side and this has led to farcical situations in the past, in one case Dave having to run a division 3 county champs on a separate weekend for two B teams (ie 14 players) to play each other 7 times over. So with this proposal there was an opportunity to tighten the rules regarding number of teams invited especially given that if a similar situation occurred it would be the two ladies teams possibly playing on their own in division 3 as they were the two newest teams to the competition and would have to start at the bottom – which sort of defeated the objective!

This rule was discussed and past with a significant majority by 8 votes to 3 at last years’ AGM. The rule was carefully thought out and once discussed most people were clearly on board. One person clearly was not in agreement and he and his wife made up two of the votes against. It was clear to me by his argument that he had misunderstood the purpose of the rule change and thought there was some kind of ‘stitch up’ going on against his county. I have heard murmurings since Bournemouth that Berkshire would not be submitting teams this year and now those murmurings have become a reality.it makes me wonder what message has been passed on to other players in Berkshire regarding this rule change – remember this went through 8 votes to 3.

What really irritates me about this is that we democratically voted on the rule change, what should therefore happen after that is that we “suck it” and see how it works out and give it a chance, if it works great if not the rule can be refined or go back to what it was before. What shouldn’t happen is a “backlash” or “protest” if a rule change has not gone your way, which sabotages it to stop it from working.

The irony here is of course that Berkshire have been invited to this year’s county champs to submit 3 sides, an A side, a ladies side and a B side (after Kent’s withdrawal) – an chance for 21 players from their county to represent Berkshire. So although they have harmed the AEBBA with their actions they have mainly shot themselves in the foot…..

[barbelman]

For goodness sake everyone.  Just because some-one disagrees with something it doesn't mean they are against everything else!  NO-ONE has done more for the ladies game over the years than the two people you are referring to, and they have always supported ladies BB both locally and nationally.

All they were fed up about was the fact they felt Berks B (or any other team that happened to come bottom last year) had been totally disregarded in the formulation and application of this new rule.  Of course it's excellent that the ladies have a place in the competition but much more sensitivity and logic could have been applied about possible consequences for 'lesser' teams...

[NigelS]

Tony,
I agree that the 2 people referred to have done a lot for bar billiards. And I agree that they are entitled to their opinion. My beef is that on the strength of that opinion a whole county has been pulled from the championships. I was at the AGM last year and they made it clear they felt the lesser teams were being disregarded which absolutely proves that the rule was being misunderstood and misinterpreted. Pass that info on to your county and it has very damaging effects. They also made it clear they thought a stitch up was going on and they would do everything to ensure their county would not be present at next year’s champs. They have got their wish.

The FACT is that every county is invited 2 teams to the county champs regardless of being better or lesser. So it also is a FACT that every player has an opportunity to qualify for the county championships (albeit limited to 98 places - you tell me an open bar Jersey that gets that many entries). So to me every county has been treated equally and every player, seems fair to me…..

[neilh (R.I.P.)]

I can't believe what I've been reading! The rule change was drafted and published well before the AGM, as it should be. If the Berkshire committee/members can't be bothered to get off their a***s and attend, then they have no right to complain after the event. It's not as if they had far to travel and it would have only needed 6 to turn up and the proposal wouldn't have succeeded! Seems to me that apart from Dave Alder (who is a Trojan), there aren't too many Berkshire players willing to get their hands dirty. Didn't the Berkshire Open almost get forgotten until Dave took it on again?

[NigelS]

Aug 18, 2017 15:21:50 GMT neilh (R.I.P.) said:

I can't believe what I've been reading! The rule change was drafted and published well before the AGM, as it should be. If the Berkshire committee/members can't be bothered to get off their a***s and attend, then they have no right to complain after the event. It's not as if they had far to travel and it would have only needed 6 to turn up and the proposal wouldn't have succeeded! Seems to me that apart from Dave Alder (who is a Trojan), there aren't too many Berkshire players willing to get their hands dirty. Didn't the Berkshire Open almost get forgotten until Dave took it on again?

Yes Neil, I do want to make it clear that Dave Alder has done everything he can do possible to raise a side, and I am sure event though he is not playing will run the day for us all on both weekends. He must feel like he is banging his head against a bar billiards table!

[barbelman]

Aug 18, 2017 15:21:50 GMT neilh (R.I.P.) said:

I can't believe what I've been reading! The rule change was drafted and published well before the AGM, as it should be. If the Berkshire committee/members can't be bothered to get off their a***s and attend, then they have no right to complain after the event. It's not as if they had far to travel and it would have only needed 6 to turn up and the proposal wouldn't have succeeded! Seems to me that apart from Dave Alder (who is a Trojan), there aren't too many Berkshire players willing to get their hands dirty. Didn't the Berkshire Open almost get forgotten until Dave took it on again?

The trouble is Neil, that no-one anticipated the eventual outcome of the proposal (including the proposers I would guess) and so there was no need to turn up mob-handed at the AGM.  Not my geographical area but I know there is a hard-core of players (including DA) working very hard to keep BBs going AT ALL in Berkshire and affairs like this don't help.

I am beginning to sound like an apologist for Berks but of course they have to accept the AGM decision however this is the UK and people have a right to disagree and protest.

Let's hope that they will rejoin next year and once more unicorns will prance merrily across the plains of Southern England....  

[JB]

As the proposer of the rule change I just want to say the reason I was disappointed and upset at Berks pulling out over it is that it was never our intention to upset Counties so much that they boycott the competition.

I spent a lot of time with Nigel looking at all sorts of formats. Obviously the amount of teams in each division is limited due to time.
We came up with the format (that was passed at the AGM) as we were 99% sure all teams that had previously played would be invited to play this year.
I do wonder what Berkshire players have been told what the reasons are for this rule change.

The only reason for this rule change was to try and give the ladies some kind of competition.
Over the last 5 years there has only been 3 counties represented in any one year. In 2016 only 2 Counties. Some people had a 4hr round trip to play 1 County! Is this really a County Championship? Would many people be happy to do this? Would it be run with only 2 teams? I think most people's answer would be no.
Once a competition is lost it very rarely gets re-instated as we found out with the internationals.
The special ladies is in danger and possibly even the Individual as last year only 4 Counties were represented.

A lot of thought went into this and if you look on the AGM 2016 proposals thread it was all explained yet no-one put forward any amendments or other ideas.
As I said I am disappointed and upset as the only reason for this was to try to save the ladies game. Because this was the reason by boycotting the competition it makes it feel as if people are not bothered whether the Ladies competitions survive or die. Hopefully this isn't the case.

[bigtj]

Jean I am sure the majority of people do not want the ladies game to disappear and I for one think that their are a lot of ladies that do a lot for the game, by running leagues in one capacity or another, along with running county and national events. They deserve the respect and status that they deserve in our game.

There is a general problem with lack of support for local, county and national events but this is highlighted in ladies game, and it is indeed a ridiculous situation to consider a competition that only involves two leagues is a true county championship. I hope this new format works and is ongoing and that a ladies team thrives within the format. There is a chance for I believe for a mixed ladies side and that ladies could even play within a mixed team ( please correct me if I have misunderstood this ) and this surely is a good move to help the game as a whole to survive.

Perhaps maybe benefit some of the Berkshire ladies who struggle to raise a team for the ladies competition, and also give the ladies that do want to play and represent their county a fair crack of a competitive competition to play in. I feel from previous ladies county championships that counties individual struggle to field a team will now be given a chance for the ladies that did want to participate a chance to do so.

Also maybe there is that old chestnut of being beaten by a woman involved, and a bit of chauvinism involved, I hope not in this enlightened age, please those ladies that are going to take part in the new format come along and enjoy and forget all the politics that seems to raise it`s ugly head, when it should be all about letting people play this great game.

Also as Jean says once competitions disappear it is hard to get them up and running again. As a bye the way I have no qualms about the ladies joining the competition and n fact I think they will enhance it and also give those playing a true competition to show their skills.

[Chris]

I do not see one post from a Berkshire player about a boycott or a protest?

Whatever their reason(s) is their reason(s) it is not for us to assume.

As Tony W alluded to, we are as a sport losing numbers, this being clearly reflected in County Open numbers.

For me it is not about men or women, it is about players. There will always be changes in rules that I for one personally may not agree with, it is then my right to decide what I want to do.

Let's not assume anything and just work towards keeping the game alive and preferably growing.

[Martin Pellett]

Sorry to say there will be no Surrey Ladies team, we have several ladies away on holiday and can't raise a team of seven, I know we have quite a lot of lady players but most play in our B League and our fun competitions and would not feel comfortable playing in this kind of competition. The Redhill league is mainly made up of players who play for fun and a good night out, we would love to support these competitions more but we have a small pool of people who are able or willing to compete at this level.

Aug 20, 2017 8:47:18 GMT Chris said:

As Tony W alluded to, we are as a sport losing numbers, this being clearly reflected in County Open numbers.

You're not kidding, I've done an analysis on this, going back on the last 10 years of National events and recording the number of entrants.

NationalStats.ods (30.13 KB)

Click on the tabs beneath and you can see the entries to Opens in graphic form. The situation does not look healthy, with entries to Oxon, Surrey, Sussex, Kent, Bucks and Berks all taking a big dip this year.

Don't shoot me as I'm only the messenger..... I do feel, however, that we should recognise that the alarm bells are ringing to a problem.

[barbelman]

Aug 19, 2017 23:16:42 GMT JB said:

A lot of thought went into this and if you look on the AGM 2016 proposals thread it was all explained yet no-one put forward any amendments or other ideas.
As I said I am disappointed and upset as the only reason for this was to try to save the ladies game. Because this was the reason by boycotting the competition it makes it feel as if people are not bothered whether the Ladies competitions survive or die. Hopefully this isn't the case.

Absolutely and unequivocally NOT the case Jean! 

["Silent"]

Aug 15, 2017 12:15:44 GMT "Silent" said:

Disappointing to read about the absence of Berkshire this year. They managed two teams last year, but none this?

They are absent no longer