---

unpredictables 1 patriots 6,
utter crap,only 5 players.(is this the end of the unpredictables)
last night it just seemed to me that none of the team wanted to be there,danny did not play due to being a poker junkie,terrys not playing due to poor form,like i said eariler UTTER CRAP.:no:

---

sorry to hear that Chris please don't do a drillers on us.

By the way at fortress Red Deer:Eagles 7 SAS 0 any body know any other results

---

Keep the faith Knocky. . . Will be just us and the Coney left at this rate!!!!!

Well done the Hounds, welcome to the Bonus Points Club.

Our game won't make any highlight DVD's, was as pretty as Nuttmeg in Suspenders. . . .
We'll take it though. All about results.

---

Ah.. Just realised there are different threads.
These are results so far then:

Blood Hounds 5 Cue Masters 2

Hot Shots 6 Coney 1

Unpredictables 1 Patriots 6

Eagles 7 S.A.S 0

---

Bloodhounds played well last night but we were spectacularly awful. Even the two who won should have lost and the last game summed our night up when our no. 7 who b & d'd last week managed to miscue this week's break off shot, moving the white about two inches.

The Bloodhounds are a pretty solid team, all seem to be of similar ability and they understand the tactics. The table is one that I wouldn't want to play on every week so they also have a bit of home advantage.

Reality check for us, it's all downhill from here on , a relegation struggle beckons.

---

RACK PACK V PROP RESULT?

---

Heard it was 3-4.

---

I can confirm the Prop beat us 3-4 (as predicted by me), it could easily have been the other way around.

---

As the tables arent updated I have used berties from last week.

Eagles W4 29
CM's 3 24
HShots 3 24
Prop 3 24
Coney 3 22
Patriots 3 22
Blood 1 13
Unpreds 1 12
Eden* 1 10
RRP 0 10
SAS 0 4

* Game Short!

---

RED DEAR EAGLES 29
BROMLEY CUEMASTERS 24
HOT SHOTS 24
PROPELLER 24
CONEY CUES 22
PATRIOTS 22
BLOODHOUNDS 14
UNPREDICTABLES 12
EDEN 10
RACK PACK 10
THE S.A.S 4
BYE 0

---

Eden in Relegation Zone again.

---

not really as Drillers will count as one relagated team, only 2 to go down this year

---

the Eden and the rack pack WILL definatly finish out of the bottom 3

---

At last, someone apart from me being positive about the Rack Pack.

Cheers mate :strip:

---

If two teams drop out of the 1st division,the next three should be relegated. It would make the season far more exciting for all the fans. Also,the only team that looks safe at the moment are the Egos !! By dragging some of the mediocre teams into a relegation dog-fight could prove very entertaining !!

---

I don't think you would be saying that if you were still in the first!

---

Of course I would !! Personal heartache wouldn't come into it !!

---

Its a personal opinion, but I see no benefit in promoting a team that cannot finish in a promotion position in a Division the standard is lower.

A play off maybe, but anything more than that may make Div 1 lesser.

---

Would it be a more acceptable alternative to have two vacancies in the 1st division next year. Four byes !! Now that would be popular !!

---

Berty,you can update your table now. The Farley Eden will get 3 points for last nights game. As that is probably more than they would have achieved by playing the match,the rules have worked in their favour !!

---

:O:

---

Aren't you on the wrong thread Patrick? I would concerntrate a bit more on ensuring you don't become the next Warbank and tumble two divisions in two consecutive winter seasons......:kiss:

---

by the way last night merv davis became the second OAP to slay the Halligan!!

only 2 teams should drop for div one you only have to look at the SAS to realise what the also runs in div two can offer the top flight.

having said that div two is pretty strong this year

---

Just so i understand this, normally 3 teams get relegated right?
but as the Drillers have dropped out, only 2 will drop.

So, if thats the case, if another team drops out, would only 1 team be relegated?

And if another dropped out, no one goes down?

---

It seems that way . . Everyone else would be shuffled up accordingly I think . .

---

i take your point dogger but I think that is no worse than offering promotion to a team potentiall finishing in the bottom half of division 2

---

Why should a team finishing 9th be relegated? And why should more than 3 teams be promoted?

---

I think the arguments are very similar in that mediocrity is being rewarded either way however there is nothing to say that the teams who dropped out would not have got relegated and on that basis alone it is unfair to relegate a team finishing 9th who may have spent several seasons getting to the top flight. As we all know in div one the margins between finishing 4th and getting relegated are slim anyway

---

I think 9 teams should pull out of the league and then with that logic the League Champions will get relegated, and all of Division 2 will become Division 1. Its obvious.

---

that was going to be my arguement as well

---

It's week four and teams are already talking about relegation :lol:

---

I was thinking that, when people were talking about it last week :wrong:

---

NEWS FLASH:)
MICKEY SAM AND JOHN HOY HAVE SIGNED FOR THE UNPREDICTABLES
HAPPY DAYS ARE BACK:clap:

---

Ok so you lot are are talking relegation already ... so just to put this to sleep :-
1 - 3 teams go down (which includes any withdrawn teams = BYE)
2 - To date 1 BYE will appear in Div.2 and so the 4th team from Div.3 will be shuffled up for 2008/09 season for that BYE to go.

---

we have signed Domonic Desouza he will never get a game but thats okay coz he don't turn up:lol: (we havn't signed him really)

---

I guess this pretty much means there are no Driller players left for the Rack Pack :(

---

Just for the record i didn't actually say anything about teams going up. And i didn't mention anything about 9th going down.

---

i wasn't actually making a point, i was asking a question lol!
i agree, there would be no point in promoting teams who can't finish in the top three. i personally think that only two should go up/down anyway!

---

The ":lol:Unpredictable Drillers" sound like an accident waiting to happen

---

Why don't all results against the Drillers become VOID & everyone gets a 7-0 for both fixtures against them :?:

Surely this is a fairer way to do it - As i reckon we would have got more than 3 against the shambles/joke that wss the drillers, also the poor bloodhounds played them (probably the only time they have been at full strength for years) & got a hiding & now the SAS who are awful will get an average - that doesn't really seem fair

:wrong::wrong:

Anyway Pat how is life in Div 2 - must be nice to get a few wins for a change :razz:

---

nor is frank bruno's r's but that's the rules... simple as that!!!

---

The SAS' average is going to be a 6-1 loss so that's about right . .

---

If teams did better, they'd get a better average result. The average result seem to be reasonably fair.

Scrapping results is unfair on teams who'd done well against them.

Anyway, if I was in a team outside the top 3 in Div 1, I'd take a 4-3 against the Drillers anyday. Even a five player Drillers team.

I find it sad that Ben Crompton hasn't been snapped up to play - he was THE most dedicated player in that team IMO.

---

I find it very sad that not one of the drillers has the decency to phone/come in to tell me that they have folded and to apologise for wasting my money. Especially as one of them was in here on Monday night.

---

I agree Hannah - maybe you should ban them from your venue until they bother to let you know.

I bet they were quick enough to come to you to see if you'd accomodate them for the season and let you pay for their entry fee. . . :(

---

im afraid if i do not hear from someone by sunday night then i will be left with no other option but to follow this route.

---

Personally I think there should be a rule for a minimum of 25% of league matches played before we resort to average points.

Can't say we were happy to be awarded 3 points against them let alone feel happy to only get 3 points against a top 3 side. You have to accept it but don't mean its satisfying to do so!

---

andye wrote:[/b]
[

[/quote]

nor is frank bruno's r's but that's the rules... simple as that!!![/quote]

Like the banner Andy

---

truey & the power(grrrr), as found with the croydon singles league... at the end of the season i suspect it will make little difference to your (or any teams) final standings however it's worked out... a 5 player drillers team would probably finish above the eden in the league so they've actually helped you in your relegation battle by pulling out and finishing last!!!

---

:lol:

---

The drillers 6-1 result against Bloodhounds should not stand.

One rule for one comes to mind.

Micky Samuel / John Hoy moves to Unpredictables, which I believe is against the league rules as any player in a team that folds is out for the season ...is that right?

So Blood hounds lose 6-1. Have to play the same player for three matches and the unpredictables (who are down there with us) who it appears were struggling for players now get a boost of two players.

When I hear you regulars giving it rules are rules. I find it all a bit of a nonsence.

---

What do you mean 'one rule for one' Bloodsport?

Also I think it is a little unfair to suggest John Hoy and Mick Samuel should sit out a season. It's just a pub league and a 'gentleman's' one at that. There is no suggestion whatsoever that this disbanding has been contrived boost the Unpredictables so surely a bit of common sense and sportsmanship can prevail?

---

Firstly, no one wants them to sit out the season. That was not the aim of the comment. it was used as an example of that rules can be bent on occassions.

However, you talk common sense, how is a team fulfilling three games and dropping out ending in everyone having average scores common sense.

---

I think you could argue that point bloodsport to be fair. Everyone involved has a certain bias one way or another though so it's best leave it to the neutrals imo. The league is run well after all.What would your view be if you had beaten the Drillers 6-1? Presumably that you had all given up a night and played well and the result should stand?

---

Bloodsport - if the ruling stated that a player was not allowed to transfer to another team after theirs disbands, then do you think Mark Halsey would have allowed it to happen?

Try reading through the threads. It may stop you making mad comments.

It has already been stated that the ruling about players not being allowed to transfer to other teams if for SUSPENDED teams. There is currently no rule in place for a team which disbands, therefore Mr Halsey has chosen leniency on the players. I do believe that people like Dominic D'Souza for example, who played a big part in the team not having the players to fulfil their fixtures (or DIDN'T play and that was the problem . . . ) should be allowed to now go elsewhere, but that's simply my personal view. I like Dominic but as a reliable pool player, you won't find a bigger wanker!!

I don't think I know you, but i'm pretty sure if your team had beaten the Drillers 6-1, you wouldn't be protesting against the points standing, so your reasoning is purely a selfish one.

I don't even play in Division 1 anymore so I couldn't give a shit either way! But if you'd played better, you'd have more points from it, irrespective of whether that team is now not part of the League.

I'm also pretty sure that an inclusion in the League rules and Constitution will be voted on at the AGM in February to cover such an incident should it occur again.

---

Just cos i am bored, i will make a comment on this.

What about if you play the eagles, Hot Shots & Prop in the first 3 games, get beat 6-1 in all of them & then get an average 6-1 defeat against the folded drillers the following week.

a 6-1 defeat will probably not be your average result at the end of the season, even if your average at the end of the season is a 4-3 defeat, this rule would have still cost you valuable points.

Can't the average be done at the half way stage & end of season rather than when the game is actually due to be played ?

---

I agree with Brooker.

We have had a terrible start, therefore we will be heavily penalised because of this.

---

I agree with Bloodsport to a certain degree and Mr Brooker has made a valid point.

Don't get me wrong, I tried to sign some of the disbanded Drillers, but if you take a long look at it, should these players be allowed to re-sign for a Division 1 side? Maybe the answer would have been to let them play in the league but not this season in Division 1.

Knocky has had a result, the Unpreds should not worry the bottom half of the table now, but is that fair for the current sides in the bottom half, the Bloodhounds, the Rack Pack, the Eden, the SAS?

We can make a mountain out of molehill over it, but if it comes down to 1 or 2 points between staying up and going down and those two points were lost to one the ex-Drillers then I am sure those affected will be the first to raise the subject.

Coneycueist, if you want to go and play in a 'pub' league the Bromley league is just around the corner from your home venue. The Croydon league in Div 1 & 2 is hardly pub league standard. Though you are correct in one aspect, the Poney have and will always where the tag of being a pub outfit.

---

I agree. 3 games doesn't give a true reflection of an average score. When the rule was written it probably wasn't envisaged that teams would pull out so early in the season. Unfortunately I think the League's hands are tied and they have to abide by the rules as they stand at the moment.

---

Of course they do, nobody is saying they should change them now, but it does need to be addressed because not only have some sides benefited now but they will do so again in the 2nd half of the season.

---

I think applying them at the half way stage, and end of season makes more sense than the current rule.

The Drillers pulling out has unquestionable worked in our favour, however we have had the Hotshots, Prop and Eden in the first three weeks, so if we had lost any of those we could have been the team feeling agreived.

The bottom line is the rules are there in black and white and until addressed should be adhered to.

---

If the rules can be changed at the half year meeting then they should be.

---

The rules couldn't possible changed mid-season to apply retrospectively surely?

---

I don't think that's what they mean Dan,you can't change this seasons rules but we can change it for next year to stop this stupid situation happening again.

---

Average rules is stupid full stop . . My thinking is that if 50% of frames haven't been played then they should be scrapped . . If 50% has been played then the first half results remain and the second half is scrapped . . That way it's in black and white and is on a level playing field . .

---

I don't think that is what Longshanks is suggesting. Just get something better in place for the start of the next season.

---

There's an echo in here . .

---

People read Nuttmeg's posts?? :winkgrin::elol:

---

:judge:

---

I think Alex was suggesting something could be done at the halfway stage so that the farce wouldn't continue longer than it needed to. The Eagles have gained out of it and the Bloodhounds will feel hard done by.

---

As will The Rack Pack

---

this is getting like the croydon singles league :lol:

rules this and rules that

ffs

dan matey

its time 4 the cramp and cueitis :elol:

---

Shhhh I'm finally getting rid of it . . I'll be thinking of nothing else now!!

Longshanks - I didn't think rules could be enforced mid-season? The fact remains that it's always been in our own hands and the average results reflect form so far so everyone has earned their respective result . .

---

if the rules says averages.....then so be it

but i dont agree with it

it would be much better and fairer if the results were scrapped and then everybodys got the same points off the drillers

i only say this coz.....it just dont seem right that teams will be playing the same players again 4 another team

in football.....its called being cup tied if u played 4 another team in the same comp

so scrap the points and let the drillers play 4 another team or in micky and doms case.....let them fail 2 turn up 4 another team

:bounce:

---

Probably not.

I agree with Cliff though, scrap the results and let the ex-Drillers not turn up for other teams.

---

There is little point in wasting our time pointing fingers screaming
"That's not fair...."

The rule is in place. Let it be.

Some will be deemed to have benefitted, some will feel very hard done by.

The rule in place, was put in place years ago when it was very rare a team dropped out, and if they did, it was always 70/80% of the way through the year.
The prospect of a team dropping out after 3 games would probably have been laughed at.

Fact is, you can't please all of the people all of the time, I know, I tried with the singles league, and it's impossible. There is always gonna be someone who feels like they've been f*ked over.

The only people who are at blame are the unreliable members of the drillers team.
Rainsy, Hoy and Samuels have been equally let down, and shouldn't be punished for other peoples lack of commitment.

It's only week 4. Everyone still has thier own fate in thier hands.
Factor in the averages, and go from there.

Let's play pool people.

---

I can understand boths points of view, but why should a team who have already lost get to benefit. At the end of the day, the Bloodhounds played and lost 6-1. Its potentially 2,3 or more points that other teams nearer the bottom end do not have the opportunity of gaining on them.

The midpoint is the way forward for applying those points though, because nobody can say they dint have the opportunity to get there average up, or that they had a harder draw etc.

---

Easy to say when you are top.

Because its currently all the top sides, most of which who had a piss easy opening 3 matches, that have and will continue to benefit from the Drillers demise....

I don't think its fair! :nerner:

It's also a bad call to allow ex-Drillers, reliable or unreliable to join another Div 1 team. You wait and see the turmoil this will be causing come relegation crunch time in April next year....

---

In my opinion, and this is not because we are having a bad time of it at the moment. I reckon that everyone should be awarded the same points.

All fair, and everyones happy....especially me :)

---

It's also narrowed the relegation crunch though....

Only 2 go down now.

As I said, impossible to please everyone, and I appreciate that it is easy said sitting in the position that we are, but I'd think the same regardless.

It will be debated the whole season long no doubt, but I think it will make very little difference in the outcome of things.

With regards to ex. Drillers playing, it's either let them play, or don't.
And I don't think they deserve to be black listed because of this, perhaps one for the future.
The Unpredictables have benefitted greatly, yes.
But if they had been allowed to join a struggling 2nd division side, The Maple Tree for instance, then the rest if Division 2 would be up in arms at the same ruling.

Mark has allowed them to play, there is no specific ruling in place to cover this eventuality so has made a decision.
I think it's the right one.

---

As Spud said earlier, I doubt the ruling will change the final league standings. The good teams will do well, the not so good teams, not so well.

I'd be very surprised if a relegated team would have stayed up if it hadn't been for their average points from the Drillers withdrawal, but at the end of the season, we can recalculate the League WITHOUT the average points and with all the Drillers results removed.

Until then, there's nothing else to do but play better.

---

Lets start a campaign....

We'll start with a peaceful march from Croydon to Halsey's house.

In fact no, thats even further than I travel each Tuesday night.

---

lets have a.....find a driller in croydon on a tuesday nite comp

much harder then walking to halseys house

:bounce: