|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2006 9:30:19 GMT
......................to have the break every time ?
Just been looking at the new Worthing b/b site (from the link kindly provided by Lord Cheeky) and had a squiz at the Performance Tables. There are an impressive array of scores, and on the face of it Barry Holt is top dog with 16 league wins out of 18 and an average of 9000-plus.
But there is another column headed "breaks" which would seem to suggest that he had the first break every time, whether home or away. Don't get me wrong, Barry is a great player, as witnessed by his recent appearance in the final of the Kent Classic. But does he really need to have the break each time he plays ? Does he need that comfort zone ? And yet somehow he managed to lose 2 games.
If you look down the list, the aspect changes when you get to Steve Mariner: Played 16, won 12, lost 4, average 11,000 plus but only had the break 6 times. Only my humble opinion, but surely that is the better performance of the two ?
Reason I point this out, not aimed at the Worthing League, none of my business how it's run. But the home/away Sussex Interleague is on the same basis where the captain decides when you play, who you play, and whether or not you have the break. Having things pre-destined in such manner detracts from the event itself and makes a slight mockery of the performance figures as described above.
Level playing fields have been discussed before on this Forum. SCBBA Home/Away Interleague is not one. No I am not going to propose a change for the County AGM on 21st August. Guys, for the sake of your own reputations over your egos you've got to want it yourselves !
(I've no axe to grind over the One-Day Interleagues by the way, as breaks are shared out evenly and performances entirely credible).
|
|
|
Post by SirKT on Jul 25, 2006 10:21:34 GMT
Good point Clive. Every League i have played in for the last 33years has always had drawn breaks so i`ve got to get used to this new system. But i can assure you, i wont be giving myself the break very often, i`d rather share them between the team.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Jul 25, 2006 11:10:21 GMT
Apart from the complication of actually doing it, I remember having a similar discussion with KT back in Wallingford about using the 'same order' in the return legs of league matches. So if the same player plays in the second half of season in the return match then he has the break if he never had it in the first fixture. If a reserve plays instead of one of the players then the order would be as it would have been if the original player plays. This way assuming everyone played the return games then 50% breaks are achieved for all AND you get to 'get your own back'.
Problem comes is captains would have to keep a copy of play order from the first half of the season, and we know it is hard enough to get a captain to even have the 'player cards' with them :)
I dont want drawing into the local system their though.
EDIT: My words don't seem very clear even to me ! Simply the same play order is reversed for the whole card in the second half of season.
|
|
Mark James
Distinguished Member
Mark James
Posts: 595
|
Post by Mark James on Jul 25, 2006 11:19:17 GMT
tommo, leaving aside for the moment your question "is it fair?", I can at least give some information as to why the match formats are as they are, both for Worthing league, and also Sussex interleague.
Both were prevously done on a "played as drawn" basis, which randomly determined each player's position in the order, and whether with or against the break. However, there were constant problems on occasions when teams had players who arrived late, or had to leave early, or who didn't turn up and had to be substituted.
The rules & procedures necessary to deal with this were simply too much hassle. There were even examples (no I'm not going to mention any names) of teams who deliberately put absentees in the draw so that they could then manipulate the substitution rules to get the playing order as they wanted it!
I know all this because at the time I was an administrator both for Worthing league & S.C.B.B.A. When the system was changed to captain's nomination, these particular problems disappeared overnight.
However, notwithstanding these practical considerations, to answer the question you asked, "is it fair?", yes I think it's perfectly fair.
The competitions under discussion are team events, and as such it is the success or failure of the team itself which is of paramount importance, and statistics of individual players within that are peripheral.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2006 12:04:19 GMT
Mark, thanks for providing a response, I am fully aware of why the rules were changed, I was there at the AGM when they were passed, and I thought it "bizarre" at the time and opposed it.
I was talking to Steve Mariner at the Kent Classic and he explained the same logic as you mention. Probably the reason for change was indeed a "noble" one, in the interests of efficient progress of the matches, without any waiting around for someone to turn up, changing the order of play once it's been drawn, etc etc.
But you cannot seriously say you think it's fair to have a system where one of you is more or less guaranteed a win before you start - home player with the break on the Stadium or the Windmill, which you know like the back of your hand.
Okay you say - you can do similar back - get a table in your own area as good. Well, in Redhill we've now got the Old Oak which will provide an equally good challenge for the away player drawn against a "habitual" home player.
But it doesn't make it right. The game should be a pleasurable experience. I gain pleasure from winning away from home, or from winning at home when I didn't have the break. I get no pleasure whatsoever from winning at home with the break, nor from losing away to some greedy b*st*rd who always has the break on his own table.
All this aggro could be overcome by a simple addition to the rule - that "the number of times a player is allowed first break at home shall not exceed 50% of the total games possible on the fixture list, likewise away break shall not exceed 50%". Then you'd have more of a level playing field. But I'm not going to propose it at the AGM because I know what the reaction would be.
|
|
Mark James
Distinguished Member
Mark James
Posts: 595
|
Post by Mark James on Jul 25, 2006 13:55:34 GMT
Hi again tommo. We don't say "I" very much at all in the Stadium team, "we" tends to be our pronoun of choice :)
As individual players, some evenings our task is to play with the break, sometimes it's to play against it, sometimes our role actually means not playing at all on a particular evening (yes, that applies to every squad member). But whatever it is, it's all done for the purpose of the team being successful. That's the sole object. Individual accomplishments can be achieved in individual competitions.
To illustrate my point, would you think it unfair that, in a cricket team, it's the same players who get the opportunity to bat first in every innings? Or that, in football, a disproportionate number of goal-scoring chances fall to the centre-forward as opposed to the full back? I'd suggest not, because in each instance the individual player is making the most appropriate contribution, based on their range of skills & aptitudes, in order to achieve the collective success of the team unit.
If you don't agree, tommo, and you really don't enjoy winning at home with the break, you should try playing for a team in the Brighton Premier Division, you won't have to worry about it then as all games are against the break ;)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2006 14:39:04 GMT
I can't argue with that any of that at all, Mark. It's obvious that we see the game a different way.
In Brighton, the "Team" is all-important, building the best possible, most successful one. Even if it means taking the best players from other Leagues such as poor old Horsham which is now almost dead on its feet (forthcoming season down to one division only, the first time in living memory).
To me, yes, the team is all important, in respect that I play for the good of the team, won't play risky shots that could be to the detriment of the team. That includes (in rare scenarios) not going on too far for personal glory having passed what could be the winning line.
I have been impressed more with the attitudes of Sir KT and Sav on this site : Sir KT will be depriving himself of the break more often than not at Interleague, and sharing it fairly around his new team, whereas Sav claims to hold back in his Dover and Deal league from meting out thrashings to ordinary players who are there for a jolly night out.
I will be taking up a fresh challenge to raise the profile of my game for next season, but it won't involve deserting my local league(s) to plough a furrow in Brighton. (Apologies for not using the royal "we" b.t.w.) ;D
|
|
|
Post by Lord Cheeky on Jul 25, 2006 16:02:34 GMT
Right i will keep my opinion short and sweet. I am currently playing three leagues, Worthing, Littlehampton and West Sussex and of these three leagues two are playing a drawn system which i think is by far the best and fairest way to play the game. I have only been playing Worthing for two seasons and the only rule i dislike is the nominated player, i am in total agreement with everything Tommo says on this one i think it is unfair.
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Jul 25, 2006 16:49:05 GMT
In Brighton, the team; is all-important, building the best possible, most successful one. Even if it means taking the best players from other Leagues such as poor old Horsham which is now almost dead on its feet (forthcoming season down to one division only, the first time in living memory). Tommo I will respond to this part of your post as you must be referring to Gareth Lloyd as he is the only player to have come from Horsham, in recent times, to play for our team in Brighton. Gareth had been a servant to Horsham bar billiards for many years, captaining their inter league team, winning their singles many times. He had been there and done it all in Horsham - their was nothing left for him to acheive and he actually gave up the game. My team persuaded him to play in Brighton, the prospect for him of playing in a team that could win the league and go on to maybe play in the nationals one day brought him back into the game. Horsham used to be the strongest league in Sussex - look how many times they won the inter league, but times have changed and they need to encourage new players into the game to survive, but Brighton cannot be blamed for this. With regards to the is it fair?, I agree that Barry's performance is no better than Steve's overall, and I have never agreed with giving out trophies for most wins in the league. If I was Barry's captain he would probably play against the break at home, because to win at home you must win against the break once to win the match so I would be putting him on first. To limit the breaks to all players would be just impossible to manage - captains would make mistakes and what would happen in the final analysis if someone had inadvertently broken this rule? In Brighton, of course, we always give the break away to 1st Division teams meaning the very top players will not have all the breaks and it works very well. I would like to see similar in Worthing, and that would stop the likes of Barry having the break everytime. I also prefer the nomination of player, when I was captain it gave you a lot more influence over the game and tactics came into play a lot more. In the end I agree with Mark in that everyone in a team has their own role. In ours I often have the responsibility to have a break and usually have to win to ensure the teams success - that has its own pressure, which Barry has to go through every week, if he loses he puts the rest of his team under terrible pressure. By contrast, our weakest player, Marcus hardly ever gets the break and often plays the other teams best player, but his role is equally important as a win by him often guarantees victory for the team. In our team it is the teams result that takes the most importance, not the individuals who win or lose.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2006 18:09:01 GMT
Ok Nigel, Your answer is a bit predictable, I would expect you to back Mark up as a colleague, but at the same time you are a fair man and have mentioned points both for and against my argument.
Firstly, Gareth is a personal friend, and I don't really blame him for bettering himself by playing in Brighton, any more than I would the Dewdneys for venturing to the coast for a better standard of game. You could even say it has worked the other way round, with Terry Race playing three seasons in Horsham in the late eighties, and Jean Over having a similar adventure a few years later.
It's just that I seem to be the sole voice speaking out for for the minor leagues of Sussex: Brighton have benefited over the years by gaining 3-times-champ from disbanded Portslade, and I know for a fact that RW started his career in Mid-Sussex. Now wee Henry has joined your summer league. Nothing wrong in that of course, but it seems all to be one-way traffic to the coast.
But wait ! Lewes have benefitted with the addition of a strong contingent from Brighton. Good for them. But in the north of the county the game is dying on its feet. The people who run Sussex need to encourage the game more in its outposts rather than, as they do at the moment, indulge in Nepotism - or, very soon, only the coastal leagues will exist - or maybe thats what you want ?
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Jul 25, 2006 19:37:28 GMT
Tommo I know we are getting a bit off topic but I think your points about how certain leagues are dying within the county are interesting and important, but I do want to add a couple of points of my experiences to give a different side to the story But wait ! Lewes have benefitted with the addition of a strong contingent from Brighton. Yes, it was my dad who started a team in Lewes and I agreed to play as 1) it was the first time me and my dad would be teammates, 2) he did not have enough players and 3) it would I thought be good for a small league to have a new team. I played Lewes for 3 years and gave up 2 years ago and am now just reserve. I would say the reception of my team was mixed to say the least. One section welcomed us and wanted to learn from us as we were at the time the only team in that league to play the split shot. The other section were less welcoming calling us 'pothunters' and indeed before my first league match someone asked me "why I was joining as sureley I win enough things in my own league as it is". Overall, I think Lewes benefitted, they reached the top flight in Inter League for the first time ever and also the emergence of players like Rich Wooton and Henry Brooks. I think you will find that, if you ask RW and HB, although they have moved to get a better standard of game, that as they have improved so have comments from their Lewes teamates and opponents that they are getting too good for their league and not giving their opponetns a fair go! I am glad I learnt to play in Brighton, I always got encouragment from the likes of 3 times champ, Steve, Tupps and always got given opportunities to play at Inter League and then for Sussex. I am not speaking for all leagues here and hope thet if I played in your league, Tommo, that I would be as welcome as you would be in mine. But I find that some of these 'minor' leagues do not really want the top players to come in and win all their trophies, they do not want the competition and therefore they are partly to blame themsleves when they find their league struggling. There are some,shall we say, who like to be a "big fish in a small pond"
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2006 22:26:56 GMT
Fair comment Nigel, and I trust that Littlehampton will also enjoy a renaissance under the influence of KT. (Although things have unfortunately got off on the wrong foot: Let's hope it can all be sorted out amicably. I'm sure with Jean in command it will.)
I hope you will take my little barbs at Sussex as if they were from an impartial observer. Since Interleague got too cut-throat I have only really played for fun, in the lower divisions, to help certain captains out, really. I've been just a "driver" for Horsham A (but long before that had two separate three-year stints as Captain under the 'old' rules) and I've made the numbers up for Horsham B as favours for first Neville Edwards then Tony Francis (both sadly no longer with us) - and more recently for Mid Sussex B for Bernie. When offered the choice of whether or not I want the break, my reply is inevitably "I wouldn't mind having the break away but don't give me it at home".
Anyway, as you know I've been around a long time and can remember as if it were yesterday that Racey and Tupps were just starting out. I have made the following observations about how the interests of the smaller leagues appear to have been swept aside in the last ten years : 1. The One-Day Interleague. This used to be an Open competition for the Sussex Leagues to send along its best teams, all to play against each other in one competition. It is now in divisions, and has evolved so that there is one Prime section for the best four teams who go round twice in a round robin, and separate divisions for the also rans and then a separate competition for B C and D teams. Not knocking it, it's structured in the best interests of having a successful and efficiently-run competition, but it would be very difficult for an up-and-coming player like Kevin Hall (who regularly returns five-figure scores in the Mid Sussex league) to earn sufficient Sussex Ranking Points to put him into contention for the Sussex team. 2. The discontinuance of the Individual Champion-of-Champions competition. I've said this elsewhere and received an answer back in defence from Mark James. But I reiterate : this used to be an opportunity for the Individual Champion of each League in the county to showcase their talent in a knockout competition. It started off as an midweek evening event in a pub, then it all got serious and was switched to a Saturday all-day event at the Downview. Inevitably support dwindled as not many liked to give up their Saturday just to go down and support their mate in it. So that was used as an excuse to hit it on the head. But it would not take much organising to reinstate it, I for one would travel to wherever to see our local champs Graham Daniels (Mid Sussex) and Dick Dewdney (Horsham) pit their wits against the Champions of the coastal leagues Eastbourne, Brighton, Worthing, Littlehampton, West Sussex with Lewes and Billingshurst also thrown in. You could even ask Tarratts to sponsor it ! Okay we all know that the champion-of-champions is likely to come from Brighton or Worthing, but surely this would be a great opportunity to regenerate some interest around the other leagues.
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Jul 25, 2006 23:34:37 GMT
Tommo, If you remember Racey and Tupps starting out you have been around a long time! ;)
I understand what you say about the one day inter league but I am sure you will find people who like it as it is now as do teams from Mid Sussex want to take heavy beatings from Brighton and Worthing. At the end of the day promotion is possible if they play well enough. And we all get 8 games now instead of 4 - but I am also sure many preferred the old format as well!
As Sussex captain i do not use Sussex Ranking points as the only way of judging someone making the Sussex team. But there is a big difference from knocking 5 figure scores in Mid Sussex (and Brighton for that matter) to playing for your county. If Kevin or anyone had ambitions to play at that level they need to play in national tournaments and impressive performances in those combined with good inter league form may eventually lead to selection. Looking at Kevin's inter league form this year he won 2 out of 9 in Div 3 at an average of 2,600. Clearly he is comfortable at local league level but is finding inter league a lot tougher. County level is a further step above inter league as I am sure you know. Kevin has plenty of time to improve and if he does it won't go unnoticed by me and the fact he plays in the Mid Sussex league will not be held against him
There are many, many good players across the county but to be picked for county you really need to show you can perform at a National level, but I assure you as long as I am captain, selection is open to every county player across the whole county and I look at National performances, both inter league comps, and Sussex Comps (singles and masters). Now if Kevin won the Sussex singles he would be in with a very good chance.....
Interesting you should bring up the Champion of Champions as I played in the very last match of this compeition in the 2002 final when I lost to John Slee,of Horsham, (I put the break down 4 times - not a very good start!). I agree it is a real pity that this event died, it was a great competition with a very long history back to the 1970's, but in the last event only 6 champions showed up out of the 10 - I can't remeber the guilty leagues but not be able send one representative from their league was a poor show as the eveent needed their support. I would love to see this event back on the calender, but who would organise, hire tables etc - not sure about that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2006 8:03:03 GMT
Interesting you should bring up the Champion of Champions as I played in the very last match of this compeition in the 2002 final when I lost to John Slee,of Horsham, (I put the break down 4 times - not a very good start!). I agree it is a real pity that this event died, it was a great competition with a very long history back to the 1970's, but in the last event only 6 champions showed up out of the 10 - I can't remeber the guilty leagues but not be able send one representative from their league was a poor show as the eveent needed their support. I would love to see this event back on the calender, but who would organise, hire tables etc - not sure about that. Thanks for your reply in the top bit about Kevin, Nigel. I agree that he had a poor Interleague One-Day event last year but you'll find that the year before he did very well if you look that one up too. Anyway, he's young and his time will come. From your assurances, though, sussex team selection is in good hands. Re the Champ-of-champs and your text above. I have qualified for that myself on a number of occasions and the routine was, you received a letter of invitation from the County Secretary. I have two from Jean which I have kept. But the last time when I could have represented Billingshurst it went wrong, no letters were sent out (different Sec from Jean by the way) and Gibbsey was supposed to let me know and forgot. So I was one of the culprits and missed it. I would have loved to have played too. If there is a breakdown in the line of communication to someone as keen and dedicated to the game as myself, then something is obviously wrong ! I'm not advocating a full-blown all-day round robin event on a number of tables, just an evening knock-out event at a suitable pub would do, so that people can come along and watch for a few hours and give the pub a bit of extra trade in the process.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Jul 26, 2006 9:39:16 GMT
If there is a breakdown in the line of communication to someone as keen and dedicated to the game as myself, then something is obviously wrong ! Just to come back in guys, it's all very interesting reading. The point above is where forums like this come in, 'additional info' to 'supplement' the traditional methods of contact. Any single method of contact is prone to error at time, by posting info (results, dates of events etc) means not only a wider audience sees the fruits of peoples efforts but also reduced chance of 'cock-ups', lost info. It should not replace the traditional or even more recent methods (email, mobile) though, but add to them.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2006 10:16:58 GMT
The circumstance I was discussing was an extenuating one : I was actually the runner-up in Billingshurst to Ray Burchell who soon after sadly died of cancer. I was entitled to a shot as the runner-up but this was only agreed as an afterthought, and by the time anyone said anything to me like "Why didn't you turn up ???" , the competition had been played.
This was only part of a chain of events that eventually led to the downfall of what started out as an important event on the bar billiards calendar in our county.
I do agree with your comment, though, Kevin, very relevant to the computer age of the the 21st century. Something like that is less likely to happen now we have this excellent Forum. :)
|
|
|
Post by Q on Jul 26, 2006 12:32:59 GMT
As Sussex captain i do not use Sussex Ranking points as the only way of judging someone making the Sussex team........ If Kevin or anyone had ambitions to play at that level they need to play in national tournaments and impressive performances in those combined with good inter league form may eventually lead to selection. ....... Now if Kevin won the Sussex singles he would be in with a very good chance..... Ok Nigel, Does that mean that having finished top 4 in Sussex singles & Top 8 in Sussex Open, that I stand a chance?? Only joking, I know that I'm not of that standard YET, but I am trying very hard to improve. My ambition now is to gain a few more Grand Prix points and (very) hopefully qualify for the Grand Prix Finals. I am concentrating on break building, but it seems that the more I try the smaller my breaks become!!!! but I'll get there. The ambition is there, I'm just not too sure about the talent. Going totally off thread (and on to another old one) surely the fact that we HAVE got so many good and upcoming players in Sussex would be a very good arguement for resurrecting the Sussex 'B' team? Bernie
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Jul 26, 2006 13:29:44 GMT
Tommo, I am sorry to hear of the circumstances of you missing the last Champion of Champions, I think we are both agreed it is sad that this event has gone missing from our calender. It is a real shame that a 30 year old great competition died off. Ok Nigel, Does that mean that having finished top 4 in Sussex singles & Top 8 in Sussex Open, that I stand a chance?? Bernie Well Bernie, that form does show consideration to be in the Sussex team. Everyone stands a chance but the thing is there are a lot of good players in Sussex - we didn't even pick England player Dave Reeves in the team last year! With regards to a Sussex B team, B teams are now allowed to enter. I, personally, don't agree with B teams being sent to the County Champs, and I will only pick the 'A' side. This is because I feel that B sides will be to the detriment of weaker county sides (Cambs, Northants) and they may give up if relegated to division 3. I don't like the idea of a future Division 1 with Oxford A and B and Sussex A and B. I would rather see more counties turn up than B teams. However, I know other 4 counties will be sending a B side this year, and if someone in Sussex takes up the challenge of captaining and picking a B side I suggest they need to be at the AGM to make it happen.
|
|
|
Post by Q on Jul 26, 2006 13:42:08 GMT
I see your point Nigel BUT it does mean that a LOT of our players are suffering to support your ideals!
Perhaps there should be a ruling that 'B' teams cannot be included in Div1, but I suppose that then means that Div2 would become 'locked' by strong 'B' teams.
MAYBE (diversifying into ANOTHER old thread) we should split Sussex into 2 leagues, East & West, it would really only be a 'B' team by a different name but it might pacify some of the 'lesser' leagues? :-/
I will be at the AGM (my 1st Sussex) should be interesting.
Bernie
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Jul 26, 2006 14:16:43 GMT
I see your point Nigel BUT it does mean that a LOT of our players are suffering to support your ideals! Bernie Bernie, I believe it is a great honour to play for Sussex and you have to play very well to get selected, which makes the acheivment very satisfying. I saw Kent B and Northants B turn up last year with very weak sides. I believe the County Champs is a top National Competition and should be the creme de la creme of the country's bar billiards players from each county. This probably sounds elitist but I firmly believe county bar billiards is not for everyone, you have to reach a certain standard to get picked. So I don't think it is anyone's right to play for Sussex, you need to be picked by reaching that standard. There are plenty of open competitions that anyone can enter, but to me the County Champs are a bit special which is why I would have kept it as it was. But the rules are that B sides are allowed so I am not knocking Kent and Northants for giving their players a chance to experience county level. So if someone stands up at the AGM saying their should be a B side and want to captain it then thats fair enough but I hope they pick the next best 7 players in the whole of Sussex as we should send as strong a B team as possible. As I said before, I do worry when the likes of Cambridge fall to the bottom of Division 3 will they still turn up? I hope so, but I did feel that including the B sides was the wrong way of going about ensuring the survival of the competition, it is more counties that should be encouraged to play (South Yorks, Wiltshire and Somerset disappeared about 10 years ago) not giving the strong counties to opportunity to enter more teams.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2006 14:37:36 GMT
Understandably Sussex having at last won the national county championship after a gap of 25 years are loth to water down the concentrate !
Sorry Nigel but your ideals smack of Nepotism. Even Surrey - with only the one league to choose from - have picked a 'B' team this year. Sussex is a huge county with nine (?) leagues, and if it can't find it in its heart to send along a second team - by whatever name it goes under - then the organisers should be ashamed.
There are a hell of a lot of talented players around Worthing for instance - there must be if they run 4 Interleague teams - who would be missing out on a golden opportunity to play for their county. And with such a plethora of administrators - there must be if there are nine (?) league committees surely someone could easily be found who is willing to take it on.
|
|
|
Post by Q on Jul 26, 2006 14:59:03 GMT
[ Bernie, I believe it is a great honour to play for Sussex and you have to play very well to get selected, which makes the acheivment very satisfying. ...... As I said before, I do worry when the likes of Cambridge fall to the bottom of Division 3 will they still turn up? it is more counties that should be encouraged to play (South Yorks, Wiltshire and Somerset disappeared about 10 years ago) Nigel I totally agree with all 3 points but it is hardly the fault of the 8 next best players in Sussex who deserve the chance, you never know but one player who you might not normally consider could suddenly raise their game when given the big stage. The more I think about it the more I beleive that the answer is to divide the county. or move.... Bernie
|
|
|
Post by Alan Messer on Jul 26, 2006 17:41:34 GMT
I have been following this thread with great interest. There seem to be several threads evolving within this one title
1. The desire by some to enter a B side into the County Championships 2. The possibility of a splitting up of Sussex to become regionally based East and West 3. The bemoaning of the passing of the Champion of champions competition. 4. Yearning for olden and simpler times. 5. A yen by some to berate committee decisions.
As a member of the committee for SCBBA for quite a few of the ten years which are widely quoted as the period when Sussex Bar Billiards has been changing dramatically for the worse I would like to add some of my own observations to the debate. They are maybe timely as in the Sussex AGM date and venue thread I have highlighted the fact that if elected for next season it will be my final one as an administrator for the SCBBA.
Taking the points in order:
It was debated at some length in committee the relative merits of sending a second string to the county championships. The belief was that county championships were actually the pinnacle of the team game in England and should not be allowed to be diluted in terms of prestige. There are many, many fine players in Sussex. We have a whole host of internationals, we are a great county. However, only one Sussex County team per year should represent us at the top level. There was a further belief that if the AEBBA wanted to support a secondary B competition then we as a county would be more than willing to support it. Cetainly the committe feel no shame in the decisions taken.
You may well ask why we feel able to send two ladies teams. Different circumstances and an agreement to try to safeguard a competition that was in danger of disappearing, this is not the case with the men. Another argument which can be fired at the SCBBA is why then do you allow 2 Worthing teams to be in the Home and Away Interleague Division 1. I have to concede that this is regrettable but inevitable if the free market is allowed to find its natural level. This could easily happen at County level and the less strong counties might be consigned to lower level opposition forever.
Splitting the county into smaller more manageable chunks would be a way forward and I would be in favour if a well thought out structure could be arrived at. But I can see lots of problems dividing east and west along the West Sussex East Sussex Divide. Two of our strongest leagues Worthing and Brighton sit either side. First thoughts might be that this is great and easily solves the problems. However the majority of the top players from these fine leagues play in both, decisions would have to be made by these players about what county that wished to represent- presumably based upon the inter league sides they were selected for. I only bring this up as a thought about what would happen to individual county champions. Players playing on both sides of the divide could enter both but if they won on the wrong side of the border would not be able to represent that county at national level. There are lots of other anomalies which would arise and I leave those of you with time and interest to ponder and discuss those further.
Just as a thought what would happen if we pursued a different sort of split – maybe a North South one. The bar Billiards world of Sussex seems in some people’s minds to have become divided between coast and country. Why not make the geographical feature of the South Downs the deciding criteria. West Sussex, Littlehampton, Worthing, Brighton, Eastbourne would form the Southdown’s. Billingshurst, Horsham, Mid Sussex, Lewes and Hastings could become the North Downers. Just an idea and would maybe halt the ‘rush of talent’ to the coast. It would certainly give a greater voice to those who currently for whatever reason feel disenfranchised. Lots of thoughts for the AGM there.
When I joined the SCBBA committee as secretary, I was part of a committee which had members from Horsham Worthing Mid Sussex and Billingshurst and consisted of 5 individuals. This team stayed together for several years and presented a balanced membership from the centre of Sussex but admittedly not the east west extremities. Certain people talk of a nepotistic attitude from the committee which has resulted in the collapse of certain structures. Taking the example of the Champion of Champions competition as a starting point. The competition was started in the days when perhaps other competitions of equal prestige did not exist. It ran for many years in a format which Clive describes as an evening pub knock out. I cannot talk with any knowledge of those days – I’m only a youngster really. When I was suddenly left holding this particular baby, it ran for a four years on a one day basis and was dying on its feet, we were putting tables into a pub, an giving the pub nothing in return by way of increased trade. The ladies competition was down to four players, and the men’s competition was being played for by runners up and third ?? places from various leagues. Finding scorers was a nightmare and casual observers could not believe that the rest of the Sussex Bar Billiard world did not care enough to send anybody to watch.
My point of contact in inviting players to attend was (a) directly by telephone and or (b) written contact with the league secretary. Even when people agreed to come they didn’t – it was nightmare. I won the Brighton singles a little while ago (I think everyone else forgot to enter) but the last thing on my mind was bringing back an event whose end result was finite and did not even provide a route to a national competition.
The rationalisation of the One Day Format into Div 1 Div 2 Ladies, and a separate competition for B sides and below is one of the more pleasing accomplishments of the committees I have had the pleasure to be part of. The changes introduced have allowed the original day to end at a realistic time rather that the eleven hour marathons of years gone by. The events are more competitive and nobody goes home with a whipping boy grievance anymore. And just as importantly looking at the title of this thread ‘is it fair’ – it is perfectly fulfilled within the formats employed. The only thing that might be unfair is that you might get all the best players in one slot all playing each other!!!!
I cite that as a pleasing accomplishment from my time as a member of the SCBBA administration, I have many other proud memories and all the people I have ever worked with to enable the ‘future’ of Sussex bar billiards have all worked positively to ensure that a future does exist. I am looking forward to sharing your views at the AGM and as I am sure that there lots of people out there who want to be part of the shaping of the future – or the restoration of the past whichever is for the best, by joining the committee.
PS if you want to divide the county into two you would have to submit a proposal for a constitutional change to be discussed at the AGM. The proposal would have to be received by me no later than the 7th August.
Best wishes Alan Messer SCBBA Secretary
|
|
|
Post by iang on Jul 26, 2006 17:44:13 GMT
Tommo Just read this thread & need to correct you on your comment re Horsham. We still have 2 divisions with hopefully the same anount of teams as last year all we are doing is combining them for the calendar so we dont play each other 3 times as per the previous 2 years we will still have winner & runner up & they will be promoted into division one at the end of season. I DONT consider Horsham to be dead on it's feet we are trying hard to keep it fresh. Ian
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Jul 26, 2006 18:27:58 GMT
I know Alan is right is saying that people did not turn up when they were supposed to for the last couple of Champion of Champions events. This really killed the competition off and I certainly don't blame the Sussex Commitee for dropping this event although I do think it is a loss to the calender. As I said earlier to revive it will take someone to organise tables, venue etc which I don't see happening.
I know Surrey will send a B team this year, which is fine, but I doubt they will be a strong side, like Kent and Northants the year before. My point is that playing for ones county is a high honour and should not be acheived through the addition of extra B sides (in my opinion) but by being in the top 7 players of your county. Now if the top 7 players are from Mid Sussex I would have no problem with selecting all of them, I have always said everyone is in with a chance of selection. To me this is not nepotism, elitist maybe but that is different.
I wouldn't personally like to see a split in the county, I would like to just send our strongest side out to Reading. In fact if we did split would we be sending East Sussex A, East Sussex B, West Sussex A and West Sussex B? I cringe at the thought and the poor sod who would have to organise schedules for that....oh bugger thats me!
I go back to the thought that I do believe the county champs is not for everyone, it is for players who play well and then get invited to play for their county. B sides, to me, make county experience more accessible to a wider range of players but that doesn't make it right. There is no doubt Sussex could send a very strong B side, stronger than some A sides but we shouldn't send one for that reasonn, I only think we should send a B team to support the competition if it is in trouble like the ladies did.
|
|
|
Post by Q on Jul 26, 2006 18:32:38 GMT
Splitting the county into smaller more manageable chunks would be a way forward and I would be in favour if a well thought out structure could be arrived at. But I can see lots of problems dividing east and west along the West Sussex East Sussex Divide. Two of our strongest leagues Worthing and Brighton sit either side. First thoughts might be that this is great and easily solves the problems........Just as a thought what would happen if we pursued a different sort of split – maybe a North South one. The bar Billiards world of Sussex seems in some people’s minds to have become divided between coast and country. Why not make the geographical feature of the South Downs the deciding criteria. West Sussex, Littlehampton, Worthing, Brighton, Eastbourne would form the Southdown’s. Billingshurst, Horsham, Mid Sussex, Lewes and Hastings could become the North Downers. Just an idea and would maybe halt the ‘rush of talent’ to the coast. [/size] What you're saying there Alan is that you want a strong team consisting of Brighton and Worthing players, then a lesser team from the rest.... 1. Brighton & Worthing alone have the talent to fill TWO first class teams. 2. Whoever has heard of North & South Sussex counties?? it has to be East/West, also Hastings is south of the Downs so how does that work? I'm not demeaning the committee and never have, I have only been involved in 'Sussex' competitions for about 4 years and I think I met you for the first time only 2 years ago. Sussex committee do a grand job, I am just asking the question "Can we do it differently to give more players the chance of having the HONOUR of playing for Sussex, beit East or West."??? Bernie
|
|
|
Post by Alan Messer on Jul 26, 2006 19:14:09 GMT
Hi Q
Geography isn't maybe my stong point but doesn't the South Downs way start in Eastbourne. Hastings is further east and is therefore not below the South Downs?
Not that it matters that much - with apologies to anyone who lives in Hastings
|
|
|
Post by NigelS on Jul 26, 2006 23:14:26 GMT
Hi Q Geography isn't maybe my stong point Alan, didn't you tell me once that you were a Geography teacher ;)
|
|
|
Post by Alan Messer on Jul 27, 2006 8:15:55 GMT
ah Nigel
you got me there
but it is special needs teaching
and Q, I know you have no axe to grind with the committee and just want to explore different ideas and ways of doing things
No problem mate - keep on sending
|
|
Richard
Full Forum Member
Posts: 371
|
Post by Richard on Jul 27, 2006 9:05:20 GMT
Hi Tommo
Like the RW you mentioned who started in Mid Sussex and then when to Brighton I did the same kind of thing, I started in Lewes ;) however I did not then change to the Brighton league only. I moved to live in Brighton so obviously the league to play in is the one where I live, but I continued to play in Lewes in fact for two seasons I was playing Lewes, Brighton and Worthing. This year I am playing Brighton and Worthing and I am still signed on as a reserve for the Black horse in Lewes, but 3 leagues is a bit too much to play and Lewes is the furthest to travel so that is the reason why I do not play Lewes every week.
I still do my best to support the league, I went to finals night and went to watch a few of the closer games. I played one game last year for the team also.
With regards to people having the break every week this is strange as being the captain of my team in Brighton and Worthing last year this is not something I would consider, I tried to give all the players in the Worthing team an equal amount of breaks home and way. Maybe a way around it would be to make Worthing like Brighton, the premier teams to give away all five breaks against div 1 teams .
It took a lot of persuasion to get Gareth to play bar billiards again as he took a year out because he lost interest, I am glad he did not pack it in all together. He has always been a great player but he is now even better as his past results show.
I think it is great to still have lots of leagues and teams, Myself, Nigel and Marcus do as much as we can to promote new teams, we got a new team set up at the Brewery tap last year and two new teams at the duke of wellington this year.
The other points mentioned with regards to Sussex teams and splitting Sussex in two is obviously a hot topic. I am going to do something that I am not used to and not say anything at all and sit on the fence. :) :) :)
|
|