---

Right . . It's time to give it a shot . . I'm going to draft a proposal for the match format to be changed for the 2008 Croydon Summer Pool League . .

This is my proposal . . Please let me know your thoughts and it will be adjusted where necessary prior to it being submitted . . CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM ONLY PLEASE!

Maximum of 10 players per squad
Reducing the squad size in line with the minimum number of players required to form a team

Matches to be played over 10 frames (2 sets of 5)
Giving scope for more frames per night and providing longer match durations to benefit venues

5 players to play first set . . Up to two 'substitutions' can be made in the second set . . Therefore up to 7 players can play in any one match . . Substitutions do not HAVE to be made so there is the possibility that 5 players can play twice per match.
Opportunity for players to play more than one per night . . Less players required to make a match will suit the Summer League where it is thought to be less 'important' than the Winter League and where unfortunately players tend to turn up less frequently . . Less commitment will be required to start and run a team . .

The away team's second set order to change so that no player to play the same opponent more than once per match . .
Suggested by Scottish-Hustler

Only a player's first frame counts towards towards Divisional Singles wins if they play more than one frame in any match
Makes it fair for teams with larger squads

Where a team turns up with less than 5 players, the picking a player again rule can only be used once with the remaining frames being awarded to the opposition. Where both teams are short of players and the pick again rule has been used, the remaining frames become void.
This still allows flexibility with regards to team numbers but at the same time provides fairness to those teams that turn up with adequate numbers

KnockOut Cup Semi Final to be played to 3 sets of 5 frames and the KnockOut Cup Final to be played to 4 sets of 5 frames . . The substitution rule is applied again with up to two substitutions permitted with the only stipulation being once a player is substituted they cannot be brought back in later in the match (as in football) . . If the final reaches 10-10 a player is picked by their own team to play a one-frame decider to decide the match outcome
To keep the format in line for both league and cup competitions

If the plate competitions remains in place for the 2008 Summer Season, a new Division One Singles KO to be introduced with matches being played to the best of 9 frames throughout . . To be played on Wednesday nights . .
This will attempt to redress the balance where by Division Two and below teams have the possibility of three extra competitions for the same team entry fee

To be in place for the Summer League only as a trial run
There are a lot more things to take into account with the Winter League and a lot more can go wrong if the format doesn't work out so the Summer League to be used as the test

---

I like the idea of having only 10 players per squad. That'll also make the teams more picky on who they have, which will have players to the teams standards.... if ya know what i mean lol

two sets of five is also a good idea. In the reigate league, prem div play 3 sets of 5 while the rest play 2 sets. maybe we could do this. Or, like I used to play up north ;) which i think was really good, 8 singles and 4 doubles, with 3 doubles in cup matches. This makes the game good to watch, especially at the end where not only are doubles matches more tactical anyway, they're the frames that can decide the win. Going back to the 2 sets of 5. If this happens it should be made when players can't play eatchother twice.

As the rest It doesn't really mean much to me.... I just turn up and play lol

Something which I think would be good to add and will give the players something to do during the week because, if like me, I get bored during the week with no pool lol. We could do a ladder for each division. This could be up to the players wether or not they wish to join, but there should be a limit to a minimum of 2 matces every 2 weeks and the challenging players is the away player. This way when someone is challenged they won't be put off with having to travel to the away venue.

If you think I'm talking nonsense, just rememebr I#m scottish. Don't pay attention :chair:

---

All suggestions welcomed and some good ideas there . .

The reason I didn't include doubles was mainly because it's the worst format of pool known to man but other than that the CDPL have notoriously not welcome drastic change and I've tried to structure the proposal so that it isn't overly different from the current format with only a couple of tweaks . .

The ladder is a good idea but I doubt would form part of the league . . There is nothing to stop either an independant and informal ladder league being set up or even taking part in the existing Surrey Ladder League . . Burn is the person to speak to either way . .

Regarding your statement about 2 sets of 5 . . Good idea . . As in the cup competitions, the away team's second set of 5 order would change so that no player plays the same opponent twice . .

---

Regarding the comment of the play again rule, would that apply only in the first set, or can it be used in both sets?

---

It would apply only once and in the first set (frame five) so the last frame of the match would be awarded to the opposition . . It's a balance of helping the team who are short but not overly penalizing the team who have turned up with the appropriate number of players . .

---

i personally like the set up the way it is,if it aint broke then don't try and fix it.do you not think the matches might go on too long with the extra 3 frames? i travel from mottingham on a tuesday so it takes me at least 40 mins to get home from most venues as it is.

---

I would have thought travelling from Mottingham you'd like the opportunity to play more than one frame a night?

Now that players are more familiar with the rules and the style of play generated by them, matches are finishing earlier and earlier and the extra frames would benefit both the venues and make more of a night of it . .

This is of course my own personal opinion and not necessarily the general consensus . .

---

I like the idea of playing more frames on a Tuesday. While many more players are more familiar with the rules and frames are finishing quicker, i still think there are too many who take far too long when they have a shot and there is a risk of matches dragging on. Is it worth thinking about including a time limit on shots in the proposal? Id personally like the standard 1 minute but im not sure if there is anything that says you cant have a 1min30 or 2 min limit?

Also - scrap the plate comps...

---

another think which would be good for a laught, and suzi's would be good for. a speed pool comp at the end of the season :D

---

As has been said on many previous occasions, 1 minute is plenty of time. Doesn't sound much but it's a long time to be thinking about a shot. (not sure Rob 'The Cat' will like it though.. :lol:)

---

My only fear of having the shot time limit in place is that it's taking it a bit too far and away from the 'pub pool' attitude . . The CDPL has always had a local pool feel about it and bringing in World Rules alienated enough people . . Imagine telling them that they have to play a shot in a minute to rules that they hardly know . . I can see a few people getting stopwatches rammed down their throats :lol:

How many matches are running past 11pm these days? It was a very regular occurence 5 years ago . .

---

An indivudual k/o comp per division to be played at suzis. 6 indiual weeks of comps so max 80 players each week. Make div 1 and 2 on non county/interleague weeks and the rest when ever. Probably get max of 32 in all divisions but worth a pop.


Accomodate this by playing 8 player knock outs at each singles and 4 at each doubles venue, 2 table venues have larger so more than one round of doubles and singles are played on the first couple of nights.

---

I think the proposal should be more centered around the actual format on a match night rather than adding more events (I know I added one in but that's more to prove a point than anything)

---

My thoughts are that if you're reducing the number of players required to play a match to 5 the pick again rule should go. As the rules stand you are giving away frames if you turn up with 5 - with the new rules 5 constitutes a team. If you turn up with 4 you should rightly expect to lose frames.

---

I totally agree . . The pick again rule allows teams to get away with murder and I have never been a fan of it but my thinking was to try and keep with the spirit of the game, the flexibility and relaxed attitude of the Summer League etc . .

. . if the consensus agree I'll amend the proposal . . I'm just worried that you'll get the other side of the coin thrown about in that if a team only have four they might not even turn up to a fixture knowing they're already 2-0 down . .

---

I get where you're coming from but it's probably worth pointing out that with the existing rules they would also have been 2-0 down.

---

I was looking at it form the other angle in that with the current format, with a player short you would only be 1-0 down where as with the new format you would be 2-0 down . . The reduction of the team size from 7 to 5 makes a little difference . .

. . Like I said I have never eben a fan of the pick again rule but I am worried that more fixtures would not be fulfilled if the rules were not so lenient . .

---

What happens when a team has less than 5 in terms of the wins counting towards the individual rankings?

Also, if a team has only 4 players presumably frames 5 and 10 are awarded rather than frames 9 and 10?

---

If these rules came in you would have to scrap the play again rule, if you can't get 5 players you don't deserve any help. Also only first game played only should count towards individuals singles.

---

Let's all just give up pool and take up ice skating :clap:

---

When a team has less than 5 the wins automatically go to opposition players concerned as they do at present . .

Erm . . Haven't quite thought about that . . If it was done like that and the away team are short, wouldn't the home #5 get two awarded wins?

I think it should be player #5 is the bye so if the home player is missing it would be frames 5 & 10 and if it was the away team it would be frame 5 and wherever player #5 is in the second set . . Maybe it should be that for format goes as follows so that the missed away team frames are low down the order . .

Home - 1,2,3,4,5 - 1,2,3,4,5
Away - 1,2,3,4,5 - 2,3,1,5,4

---

I agree . . Like I said, if the consensus thinks that the play again rule should be scrapped then I will included it in the proposal . .

Why should it be only the first frame that counts towards the individuals singles?

---

Was speaking to Saxton the other day . . He suggested an 8:15pm start to matches just to help out a little with the extended format . . What you think?

---

You potentially have a situation where the secretary or captain has to pick players in the second half of the match to ensure ranking / individual singles points ahead of giving everyone a fair chance of having a frame.

That might be fine in Division 1 but I can't see the lower divisions going for it and I'm not sure I could support it.

---

I see your point but that happens already . . By picking a player to be in the 7 you are not extending the same chances to up to 5 other players . .

My argument is why should one frame by a player be more or less important than any other frame they play?

---

That already happens with the 'pick again' rule.

I'd agree with you if every team had the same number of players in their squad. There will be some people who have zero chance of winning the rankings or divisional singles regardless of how they perform. simply because the size of the squad they play in means they will regularly only get to play one frame.

---

Just had the email from Mark confirming the Half-Season Meeting is on Thursday 14th February. Any proposals have to be submitted by Sat 26th Jan.

Being Valentine's Day, I can see a few secretaries either not making it to the meeting, or being in a spot of bother with the other half when they get home.. especially if the meeting's as long as the last couple have been.
:chair:

---

Just throwing this in....

Premier League in Guildford had similar issue with ranking points.

16 frame matches.

Previously a player could play up to 4 frames, and they all went towards ranking points.

In many teams of 5 or 6 players, the players only got 3, or less, frames each.

So this season just gone, they reduced it so only the first 3 frames played counted towards rankings You could still play a 4th, but it wasn't worth any ranking points.

So you could perhaps do that in this case: Your first frame played is your ranking frame. If you play a 2nd it is for the team score only, and carries no individual ranking points.

That deals with any disadvantage for bigger squads, and means even a team playing 5 players twice, or a team playing 10 players once, is still giving each individual player the same equal chance at securing ranking points.

The cream will still rise to the top anyway.

---

I thought meetings were usually on a Wednesday? Or am I just making that up?

What an odd date to hold it on. Will be a poor turnout, but you can bet your life Geoff Martensz will be there. No-one loves him. Not even God.

---

Ok I'll do it so that it's the first frame only . .

Holding it on Valentines Day is stupid . . Can't it be changed as there is always a poor turnout for these meetings as it is?

---

I've updated the proposal to read as follows . . Let me know your thoughts and unless anyone has any objections I shall get it proposed at the forthcoming AGM:

Maximum of 10 players per squad
Reducing the squad size in line with the minimum number of players required to form a team

Matches to be played over 10 frames (2 sets of 5)
Giving scope for more frames per night and providing longer match durations to benefit venues

5 players to play first set . . Up to two 'substitutions' can be made in the second set . . Therefore up to 7 players can play in any one match . . Substitutions do not HAVE to be made so there is the possibility that 5 players can play twice per match.
Opportunity for players to play more than one per night . . Less players required to make a match will suit the Summer League where it is thought to be less 'important' than the Winter League and where unfortunately players tend to turn up less frequently . . Less commitment will be required to start and run a team . .

The away team's second set order to change so that no player to play the same opponent more than once per match . .
Suggested by Scottish-Hustler

Only a player's first frame counts towards towards Divisional Singles wins if they play more than one frame in any match
Makes it fair for teams with larger squads

Pick again rule to be scrapped and the minimum number of players required to form an eligible team to be 4.
The format has been changed to aid smaller team/squad sizes and with the matches being played over two sets and a player playing up to two frames, the rule is open to abuse. The 'void' frames will be frames 5 & 10.

KnockOut Cup Semi Final to be played to 3 sets of 5 frames and the KnockOut Cup Final to be played to 4 sets of 5 frames . . The substitution rule is applied again with up to two substitutions permitted with the only stipulation being once a player is substituted they cannot be brought back in later in the match (as in football) . . If the final reaches 10-10 a player is picked by their own team to play a one-frame decider to decide the match outcome
To keep the format in line for both league and cup competitions

If the plate competitions remains in place for the 2008 Summer Season, a new Division One Singles KO to be introduced with matches being played to the best of 9 frames throughout . . To be played on Wednesday nights . .
This will attempt to redress the balance where by Division Two and below teams have the possibility of three extra competitions for the same team entry fee

To be in place for the Summer League only as a trial run
There are a lot more things to take into account with the Winter League and a lot more can go wrong if the format doesn't work out so the Summer League to be used as the test

Start time to be moved to 8:15pm
To aid the addition of 3 extra frames to a match just in case a match does overrun for any reason

---

I thought the general consensus was that the pick again rule should go? May as well go for what you want and have somewhere to negotiate from?

---

Ok have amended a couple of things . . How about this:

Maximum of 10 players per squad
Reducing the squad size in line with the minimum number of players required to form a team

Matches to be played over 10 frames (2 sets of 5)
Giving scope for more frames per night and providing longer match durations to benefit venues

5 players to play first set . . Up to two 'substitutions' can be made in the second set . . Therefore up to 7 players can play in any one match . . Substitutions do not HAVE to be made so there is the possibility that 5 players can play twice per match.
Opportunity for players to play more than one per night . . Less players required to make a match will suit the Summer League where it is thought to be less 'important' than the Winter League and where unfortunately players tend to turn up less frequently . . Less commitment will be required to start and run a team . .

The away team's second set order to change so that no player to play the same opponent more than once per match . .
Suggested by Scottish-Hustler

Only a player's first frame counts towards towards Divisional Singles wins if they play more than one frame in any match
Makes it fair for teams with larger squads

Pick again rule to be scrapped and the minimum number of players required to form an eligible team to be 3.
The format has been changed to aid smaller team/squad sizes and with the matches being played over two sets and a player playing up to two frames, the rule is open to abuse. The 'void' frames will be frames 5 & 10 (and also 4 and 9 where applicable)

KnockOut Cup Semi Final to be played to 3 sets of 5 frames and the KnockOut Cup Final to be played to 4 sets of 5 frames . . The substitution rule is applied again with up to two substitutions permitted with the only stipulation being once a player is substituted they cannot be brought back in later in the match (as in football) . . If the final reaches 10-10 a player is picked by their own team to play a one-frame decider to decide the match outcome
To keep the format in line for both league and cup competitions

If the plate competitions remains in place for the 2008 Summer Season, a new Division One Singles KO to be introduced with matches being played to the best of 9 frames throughout . . To be played on Wednesday nights . .
This will attempt to redress the balance where by Division Two and below teams have the possibility of three extra competitions for the same team entry fee

To be in place for the Summer League only as a trial run
There are a lot more things to take into account with the Winter League and a lot more can go wrong if the format doesn't work out so the Summer League to be used as the test

Start time to be moved to 8:15pm
To aid the addition of 3 extra frames to a match just in case a match does overrun for any reason

---

Surely no-one can complain about the earlier start time? All players should be at the venue by 8.15 anyway, to ensure time to fill out the scorecard, get their drinks and have a knock on the table.

It bugs me when teams turn up AT 8.30 and still want a practice after getting themseles comfy and sorted. The match is meant to START at 8.30.

Are you going to have a minimum amount of players to be at the venue before the match can start, or is it simply 8.15pm start time, the names are on the card and if the players are not there to play by the time it's their turn (or no other matches can go on at the other teams discretion) then those matches are awarded to the player who is there and waiting to start?

Sorry if it sounds like i'm trying to over-complicate things; i'm trying to play Devils Advocaat for the ridiculous comments that you know will spout out from the chasms of Messers Martensz, O'Donnell and Glass. It may spoil their fun somewhat, but it reduces the time people have to listen to their voices.. ;)

---

Top proposal Golden. I like everything suggested. We don't have a team in the summer though so won't be able to vote.

---

as i've said before i don't see the point in changing something thats not broken,also whose "fantastic" idea was it to hold the meeting on valentines night when anyone thats in a relationship surely shouldnt be at a meeting about pool.therefore those people whose life revolves around pool will no doubt vote it in and when others don't like it we'll have the same scenario we did with the plate i.e "you should have been at the meeting then"for some of us its about having a night out and a laugh,if the people whose life revolves around pool want it then why not form your own league on a wednesday.

---

Because if everyone adopted that attitude we'd still be playing Old EPA rules and playing with leather tips and ivory balls . .

Regarding the start time I don't know of any instances where frames have been claimed for late starts and X amount of players being there by 8:30pm in recent years . . The current rule is something like 3 or 4 people have to be there by 8:30pm and I can't see a reason why that can't still remain in place for an 8:15pm start . .

---

Have the dwindling number of teams in the league in the past few years escaped your notice?

I'm not into changing things for changes sake but something clearly needs to be done with the format to make the league more attractive.

---

Just had a thought Danny that it should be 3 players that constitutes a team as with 10 frames it's possible to win a match with 3.

---

Good point . .

---

I don't believe the format is to blame for the dwindling number of teams wanting to play in the Croydon pool league. The number of teams has always gone up/down over the years. I don't think the number games we play will change the problem. I believe it's the rules we play the game by. people are voting with their feet.

---

are we allowed to vote on the change of format even if we don't go to the meeting i.e by mail ,also if it is voted in what will we do if teams fold because they don't want to play 10 frames,whilst i'm all for making the league more attractive i fear we could end up defeating the object.

---

The fomart as it stands will destroy this league in 3 more seasons. Team numbers are dwindling because of the format not the rules, its stale at the moment and I can only vouch for Div 1, but if half of them can't be arsed with the current set up then there is a big problem looming for the Croydon league unless there is change.

Reduce team size increase match distance, introduce timing when sensible and drop that pathetic pick again rule. Its wrong and rubbish, and it has to go. Turn up short, you loose frames.

---

Just make sure Pedro vote to that effect ;)

---

No you have to be there in person . .

. . I fail to see why this format would do anything detrimental . . It will make for more teams turning up with adequate numbers, smaller squad sizes might lead to more teams being formed . . More pool for your night out . . I can't see a downside . .

---

Just had an email back from Mark Halsey confirming that the meeting date is being changed to Thursday 21 Feb, so that people can enjoy/endure Valentine's Day, safe in the knowledge that no proposals are being voted on until the following week.
:lovedup::chair:

---

Damn, that was my excuse for not taking the missus out.

I haven't had an e-mail from Mark yet :(

---

He'll be sending it out to everyone in due course, no doubt. I only got a reply myself as I emailed him specificaly asking to change the date, so that people can't complain about something being voted on by the dedicated minority, while they were out with their 'other half'.

---

So what are you and Billy upto on the 14th. :lovedup:

---

Well I'm not paying for his dinner, that's for sure..I haven't won the lottery..
:lol:

---

After tonight, I'd hope they'll be up at Suzys practising . . . :bite:

---

A point that was raised by Garry Rawlings this evening was that with this new format being proposed, he thinks that teams should have the choice of playing up to ten different players if their squad numbers allow them to do so.

This then gives the larger squad a chance to play the majority of their players to encourage people to sign and not have to necessarily sit on the bench, waiting to try to break into the top seven.

---

I agree . . In addition, I would propose that the KO Cup Semi-Finals and Finals are played over 20 frames with a single frame, three man playoff should the score go 10-10 . .

The longer distance matches would be treated as two seperate league matches so it could be either 4 sets of 5 or 2 sets of 10 dependant on the number of players taking part . . No one player can play more than 4 frames excluding the playoff . .

Any takers?

I will be finalising the proposal and submitting it later this week so if you want your say then here's your chance!

---

What do people think regarding a proposal for a Division One Singles KO? can be held either on Wednesday Nights or over a couple of Saturdays/Sundays?

Best of 5 frames up to and including the Last 16
Best of 9 frames Quarter-Final
Best of 11 frames Semi-Final
Best of 13 frames Final

---

if you made it best of 7 in the early rounds then that'd be good.
the only problem is having more than 2 matches in some venues but if suzy q's are sponsoring the league then i'm sure any match clashes could be played there!

10 frame league format is a great idea and one i've done before.
you can play 5 or 10 players and cuts down un/lucky wins as you have to win by 2 frames rather than 1!

---

It is likely that Rileys would sponsor the event and therefore all fixtures could be played at Purley Way . . An advantage to that is that there would be no table fees and plenty of tables so there would be no problem with best of 9's from the outset . .

---

I think that only a players first frame should count towards individuals & rankings, even if they do play twice.
This is becasue, if both frames counted, a lot of people would be reluctant to put they're subs in, so that thier main players can get a stab at the title.
Eventually, maybe a couple of seasons after the 10 frame format has been in play, you can start tweaking the rankings system.
For now, let's not run before we can walk. The main thing we want, is extended matches, thus giving more opportunity for players to play, and more hope of survival for teams on the brink of disbandment.

---

The proposal (which you are seconding by the way) now includes this :)

---

I think too much emphasis is being put the pro's and con's of the ranking/divisional comps. If you take the ranking comp for example re the main singles & doubles comps, there are 50 points available in these comps and if you fall at the first hurdle then you have lost the opportunity to secure another 45. I put up a proposal the other year that at the 2nd stage of the league cup then ranking points should be available for the participating players as all match were being played which was subsequently voted out. The current ranking system has not changed since being devised. I think players should have every opportunity to secure points and if that means that they have 2 cracks at the whip then sobeit. There is an opportunity here to reduce squad sizes which in turn would reduce trohpy costs but moreso with the reduced squad sizes it may in fact generate more teams. This is a massive format change which has had solid comments re the pro's and cons but you are never going to know until its tried. The Plate comps were a change from last season which has had problems in its first year but tweak it properly at the half season meeting and the problems will be corrected. I see no reason why a version of this proposition will not be voted in.

---

:bow:

---

Ok . . The proposal has been passed on to the people who are going to propose and second it . . The final version reads as follows . .

PROPOSAL ONE ? Summer League Format Change ? To take effect from the Croydon Summer Pool League 2008 Season and every Summer Season thereafter:

Maximum of 10 players per squad
Reducing the squad size in line with the minimum number of players required to form a team

Matches to be played over 10 frames (2 sets of 5)
Giving scope for more frames per night and providing longer match durations to benefit venues

5 players to play first set . . Up to five 'substitutions' can be made in the second set . . Therefore up to 10 players can play in any one match . . Substitutions do not HAVE to be made so there is the possibility that 5 players can play twice per match.

Opportunity for players to play more than one per night . . Less players required to make a match will suit the Summer League where it is thought to be less 'important' than the Winter League and where unfortunately players tend to turn up less frequently . . Less commitment will be required to start and run a team . .

The away team's second set order to change so that no player to play the same opponent more than once per match . .
Self-Explanatory

Only a player's first frame counts towards towards Divisional Singles wins if they play more than one frame in any match
Makes it fair for teams with larger squads

Pick again rule to be scrapped and the minimum number of players required to form an eligible team to be 3.
The format has been changed to aid smaller team/squad sizes and with the matches being played over two sets and a player playing up to two frames, the rule is open to abuse. The 'void' frames will be frames 5 & 10 (and also 4 and 9 where applicable)

KnockOut Cup Semi Final to be played to 3 sets of 5 frames and the KnockOut Cup Final to be played to 4 sets of 5 frames . . The substitution rule is applied again with up to two substitutions permitted with the only stipulation being once a player is substituted they cannot be brought back in later in the match (as in football) . . If the final reaches 10-10 a player is picked by their own team to play a one-frame decider to decide the match outcome
To keep the format in line for both league and cup competitions

To be in place for the Summer League only as a trial run
There are a lot more things to take into account with the Winter League and a lot more can go wrong if the format doesn't work out so the Summer League to be used as the test

Start time to be moved to 8:15pm
To aid the addition of 3 extra frames to a match just in case a match does overrun for any reason

Knockout Cup Semi Finals and Final Format to change to the following:
20-frame matches, played to two sets of 10 (as in two league matches in one) where a player can play up to 4 times in the match but not more than once in any set of 5. If the match is tied at 10-10 the match is to be decided by a single frame, 3-man playoff.
This will keep in line with the format changes outlined above.

The following advisory to be added to help aid these rules take effect:
?Players are expected to try and play their shots within the 1 minute per shot time frame allowed under World Rules?

PLEASE ALLOW THE POINTS LISTED ABOVE TO BE AMENDED ON THE NIGHT WHERE APPROPRIATE



PROPOSAL TWO ? Plate Competition Amendment? To take effect from the Croydon Summer Pool League 2008 Season, to be applied to the Croydon & District Pool League Winter 2008/2009 season and every Summer and Winter season thereafter:

Amend the existing Plate Singles, Doubles and KO Cups to include 1st Division players.
With every team paying the same entry fee, each team should be entitled to enter the same amount of competitions and not be excluded from any part of the league.



PROPOSAL THREE ? Division One Singles KO? To take effect from the Croydon Summer Pool League 2008 Season, to be applied to the Croydon & District Pool League Winter 2008/2009 season and every Summer and Winter season thereafter:

Should the above proposal not be voted in, the following competition should be added to the league schedule to compensate for being excluded from the Plate competitions:

Singles Single Elimination KO for 1st Division Players Only
Matches to be played to the best of 9 frames up to and including the Last 16, Best of 11 frames Quarter-Final, Best of 13 Frames Semi-Final and Best of 15 Frames Final.

---

Is there any reason the member pole for the format change has not been published or was it for your eyes only? Maybe scared it will influence Thursdays 1/2 year meeting?:mouthshut:

---

Its under "polls archive"

---

The polls show the results once you have posted them . . Below the current poll there is a link to the poll archive where, as the title suggests, you can view the results of all the previous polls . .

In case that's too difficult for you I can tell you that the poll 79% in favour of the change and if you still require confirmation then you can find the results here

---

Which reminds me. We could really do with a new poll. Any ideas?

---

Am i being really thick, or is the Knockout cup mentioned twice above, with slightly different variations? First saying the semi is 3 sets of 5, then the second version saying its 20 frames (2 sets of ten). And also the 3-man playoff bit in the 2nd version??

I probably am being stupid, its been a long day.. lol

---

You're right . . The first part doesn't apply . . It's the second part that applies . .

The first one was based on up to 7 players playing where as the second one applies when we changed it so that up to 10 players could play . .

I'll email Halsey to let him know of the amendment . . Thanks for noticing it . .

---

No worries.

God, I must be so busy at work to sit there, read it all and notice that....

---

I am in favour of most of the proposed changes but i can see a possible downside. Most people are voting FOR the changes to try and get more players to play, or give a greater opportunity to more fringe players to have a game, BUT at present we guarantee to give 7 different players a game, given the new rules we are only guaranteeing 5 players to get a game based on the teams managers choice over who plays. I can see the more competitive teams just fielding their best 5 players twice to try and get the best results.

This could work against what a lot of people are voting for. I am sure some teams will have more players and will try and spread the games around but i would bet that some of the teams that have been struggling for players over the past few seasons will just field the same 5.

What we are doing is saying that a team of your best 5 players is better than a team of 10 different members of your team, as there is always going to be a big difference between the best and worst players in each team.

We could end up alienating all the 6th/7th/8th/9th/10th players. We could eventually just end up with lots of teams of 5 players which would not do the venues any good either as less people equals less money for them.

I personally would still vote for the rules as a change is what the league needs but we will need to properly evalute the effect of the changes before voting them in on a perm basis.

---

I personally would pick every player available to play, maybe even me on the odd occasion. I know some teams could just play their best 5 twice, but eventually they would only have that 5 players giving them no margin for error. More importantly this rule change could stop some famous names and some not so famous from going out of business. Like pint cans of Fosters this is the future.

---

I'd do the same. Everyone would get a game and 2/3 players would get two based on the first frame performances.

The upshot of all this I guess is that over time players 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10 will form new teams which is what is needed.

---

There are a lot of different reasons why this proposal has been submitted, some of which are:

1)Squad size reduced to possibly encourage the entry of further teams.
2)Team size reduced to reduce the possibility of teams turning up short.
3)More frames per night to give players the possibility of a second frame per night and to keep teams in the venues longer benefiting venue operators.

The list goes on . .

I can see where Sting is coming from and this is IMO the only argument against the proposal as it's come up a few times . . The way I see it this happens already where by a captain could have a squad of 12 players but only ever plays his strong 7 . . There is no obligation to play weaker players just because they're there . . If we played 15 frames you may well still see the same 7 playing two sets . .

The reason this has been introduced for the Summer League is so that we can gauge it's success in an informal environment . . If it works then we'll roll it out for Summer 2009 & Winter 09/10 onwards and if it doesn't we go back to how it's been for the past 30 years and carry on where we left off . . The best bit is that there's no harm in trying and if the league members are willing to give it a go it could possibly be the biggest change to the league since it started . .

Maybe if it isn't ideal then it could stay just as a Summer format, reverting to the Winter format for what is considered to be the 'important' league . .

---

Reverting back to the old system may not be an option at all. The teams with a strong squad,10-12 players, are going to have to tell the players that are surpas to requirements that they are no longer needed. If at the end of the season the new format is voted out, how many of the players you've just told to bugger off are going to want to come back.
I understand that the league needs more teams, but in the long run these format changes could have the opposite affect.

---

Tell me one team in the league that has 11 or 12 strong players who all play regularly . . I'll tell you a few teams who struggle to get 7 out every week and I guarantee you they'll outweigh them . .

---

sorry if im thick or something :eek2:

but as this been decided yet ?

r the changes going 2 happen ?

if not.....when will we know ?

by the way.....i like the proposal.....bout time we might get more then 1 game on a tuesday

---

AGM tonight Cliff.

---

WE might get more than 1 game....i thought you had retired, AGAIN?

---

Rare a team has more than 10 regular players.
And even rarer that team in the Summer league.

Cue sports as a whole are not as popular as 10 years ago. Fact.

I think it's important to address that fact, and adapt accordingly.
The summer league, seeing as though it's a very simple format, and a lot shorter in duration, is the ideal ground to try out a radical change.

It will hugely benefit teams struggling with numbers (Which there are loads).
It will hugely benefit attracting more players with the oppurtunity to play 2 frames a night.
It could give birth to more teams, with only 5 required for a legal line up.
It's win / win the way I see it. A positive step to ensure we keep afloat teams that are on the verge of folding, whilst also making the format more attractive for potential teams.

Any new team thinking of starting up will find it considerable easier to get 5 / 6 players than it will 7/8.

---

what time does the meeting start tonight

---

Starts from 7:45 at South Norwood Liberal Club

---

Ooops. Sorry I was late!

Main news from the meeting was that the proposal to extend the match format to 10 frames was passed with an amendment for the squad size to remain at 12 players.

---

Fun was had by all.

---

iv gotta say i had alot of fun last night on my birthday at this meeting:lol::chair:

---

I couldn't make it....Did it get heated?

---

Same shit.. Different fly.

---

The main proposal was passed with a majority of roughly 20 to 8 . .

Last night was embarrassing for a handful of individuals who felt the need to argue for the sake of arguing . . Someone pointed out after that you generally find people swear when they know they are beaten and that was ever so apparent towards the end of the night . . People seemed to forget that we were doing this for the good of the league and it's members and it didn't sink in to certain selfish individuals . . Never the less, common sense prevailed and we can look forward to what is the biggest change to the format since the league began . .

In addition, the following also passed:

T. Jackson Roofing Services (Tony Jackson) are sponsoring the Singles KO for 3 years (6 seasons) with the Semi's & Finals being played at the Thomas Farley.

I.C. Cool (Steve Rowlerson) are sponsoring the KO Cup for 3 years (6 seasons) with the Semi's & Finals being played at the Thomas Farley.

Paul Saxton was voted onto the Committee.

The plate is now open to ALL first round losers including Division One. As a result of this, Heritage Roofing (Martin Pantony) withdrew their sponsorship of the plate events.

---

I would just like to say that I was there as I didn't get a chance to sign in. :strip:

---

Which brings me onto something else . . There were thirty secretaries there at the most last night in a league of 58 teams . . That's an absolute disgrace and maybe stricter rules or bigger penalties need to be introduced?

---

I did send my apologies early on, saying that I would try.

As much as I love pool, work unfortunately does come first now and then.

---

And I am sure there were others who were in the same boat but I find it hard to believe that HALF of the league's secretaries had prior engagements . .
You will find that those who piss and winge about the new format will be those whose teams had no representation at the AGM . .

---

Mark came out with a gobsmacking stat last night, which underlines the need for change, which thankfully got voted in.

50% of result cards across the board come in with "Picked Again" players.
So HALF the teams turning up on a tuesday are short of players!!!

This STILL wasn;t good enough for some, who as Danny said, just seem to argue for the sake of arguing.
Shame really.

The worst thing is, that there is this general consensus that we (division 1) are simply trying to get our way, but it is however the complete opposite. We care about the league as a whole. I've got friends in every division FFS!!!
When will some people see, we're not trying to rob you!!! We're trying to help you. . . .

---

Whether it was voted in or not made very little difference to the Eagles. We have 8 or 9 every week, and usually a player volunteers to be rested. I suppose it does now mean that everyone can get a game, because I severely doubt our captain would go down the route of playing 5 twice and dropping the others.

However, it has become noticable in recent years that the majority of teams in Div 1 are struggling to get players. Being able to fulfil a fixture with just 5 players must be a good thing. If one team stays in the league when they would have folded its done its job.

---

:no:Top div 1 teams bullying the rest of us into changing the format for their own selfish needs :no:

---

Were you there??? :?:

---

That's a wind up right?

---

No its a copy of the minutes, Paragraph 1, of the previous 400 AGM's.

---

:thumb: Yes sorry. These rule changes might just have saved the Coney. Nice one. :judge:

---

Thank god for that . . I was preparing a speech for you :lol:

---

Does this thread title still need ***CAPS AND ASTERISKS*** ? :D

---

I'm guessing that the pick again rule has gone? (apologies, I've not read the full rules). Otherwise if we turned up with 4 :saxton: would get 4 league frames per night which seems a bit unfair really. He plays enough pool as it is lol.

---

Yes it has gone and the minimum number of players required to constitute an eligible team is now 3.

The proposal was amended to retain the maximum squad size at 12, rather than 10 as originally proposed.

---

The pick again rule has to be scrapped otherwise its a nonesense.

---

Danny, there were 45 teams represented last night.

---

Danny for Treasurer !

---

I'm not sure I understood what was happening with the plate competitions.

Mark Halsey made a proposal which was passed to put everyone into the first round of the cup competitions and because Div One players were not allowed in the plate the draw would be seeded so that they would not meet in the first round. This was to ensure that one player (partnership or team) isn't automatically going to be out of both comps. Byes would then be entered into the second round of the main comp (and the first round of the plates) to even up the numbers and mean that there would be no byes in later rounds.

Later in the meeting a vote took place which allowed Division One players to enter the plate and the plate sponsorship was rescinded as a result.

What I want to know is does this mean that the first round of the knockouts now be an open draw or will the division one 'segregation' (for want of a better word!) still apply?

---

If I said 50% cos I think I mentioned 30% then I think I was wrong but nevertheless I've done a comprehensive table of actual stats of short fielded teams and they are :-

Div TEAM TO DATE
3 FARLEY LOYALISTS 11 65%
1 RILEYS UNPREDICTs 10 59%
1 BROMLEY CUE MTRS 8 47%
2 FARLEY DUKES 8 47%
5 KELLY's BAR 8 47%
2 PAWLEYNE ARMS 8 47%
4 RUSKIN HOUSE CLUB 8 47%
5 SUZY's FLOOZIES 8 47%
1 CONEY CUES 7 41%
1 THE S.A.S 7 41%
3 FORUM 'A' 6 35%
4 GOODFELLAS 6 35%
1 HOT SHOTS 6 35%
1 THE RACK PACK 6 35%
5 W'HAM WANDERERS 6 35%
2 MAPLE TREE 5 29%
2 THE ADDICTS 5 29%
3 ROYAL OAK 4 24%
4 THE GOAT SPECIALS 4 24%
1 THE PATRIOTS 4 24%
3 THE SEAMEN 4 24%
5 BEECHTREE CROWNS 3 18%
1 BLOODHOUNDS 3 18%
4 FORUM 'B' 3 18%
3 IMPERIALS 3 18%
2 LONDON SLATES SNKR 3 18%
5 PENGE TRADES 3 18%
2 POND Q's 3 18%
5 SPOOFERS 3 18%
3 SURREY 193's 3 18%
3 THE DUKE of GLOUC. 3 18%
4 THE ELMER LODGERS 3 18%
4 THE FOLLY 3 18%
3 THE GOODIES 3 18%
3 THE WARRIORS 3 18%
4 THICKET TAVERN 3 18%
4 CHOPPER SQUAD 2 12%
3 JOLLY SAILOR 2 12%
5 POTTY's CONS 2 12%
2 THE MANOR 2 12%
1 THE PROPELLER 2 12%
5 THE VALLEY 2 12%
2 COACH & HORSES 1 6%
4 ELMER CUE MTRS 1 6%
5 FARLEY LOYALISTS 'B' 1 6%
2 MAGNUM FORCE 1 6%
3 PENGE CON.CLUB 'A' 1 6%
1 RED DEER EAGLES 1 6%
4 THE WADDON WZDS 1 6%
5 YOUNG GUNS 1 6%
5 ADDISCOMBE SPORTS 0 0%
2 BRITISH LEGION 0 0%
1 FARLEY EDEN 0 0%
2 FLYING MACHINE 0 0%
4 LANGLEY SPORTS 0 0%
4 THE BETTER HALFS 0 0%
3 THE SHIP 0 0%
2 THE WARBANK 0 0%

Which is a 29% weekly average of teams turning up short.

---

Nah, lost me Sass, too many long words for a Friday afternoon! :?:

---

It will be an open draw and everybody entered will play in the 1st round and then BYES will be entered into the 2nd round of the main comp and ist round of the Plate comp to even up these rounds. No further BYES from thereonin.

---

We;; where were they all when votes were carried out? When the last vote was taken there were considerably less than 45 . . Either that or I was too busy watching certain individuals close to tears :lol:

---

Obviously there was those that chose to abstain from voting (or had gone home b4 the end)

---

Pussies the lot of them :lol:

---

Its their democratic right.

---

Thanks. Just wanted check as the proposals overlapped and I didn't think the issue was specifically raised.

---

nice, 0% for us. always got a full team.

now we just gotta learn to play pool...

---

just a little concern if a team has 8 strong players just say for instense hotshots or eagles then they can play 8 players and 2 of them can play again wouldnt this cause arguments
this is just a point

---

I think Mark's figures show why it was essential that this motion was passed.

I'm not surprised that we are one of the worst offenders.

---

I think in a case like that, who ever performs best on the night gets to play again,

But that is my opinion.

---

Like with any sport with team selection, you respect the captains decision. That's why he's captain.

We have 8 strong players as it is currently, every single week we have to drop someone, but that's healthy, a little competition for places keeps everyone on thier toes.

---

their

---

:clapping:

---

good answer spud

---

good thing about our team is the captain doesnt have to worry about who to drop.! as were always short.!! would be a nice problem to have tho. being 3rd in the worse turn out league does not make nice reading but in our case its unavoidable.

---

Yeah, but you are 4th in the league, which is very good going!

---

We're top of the poor turn out league!!! :clap::one::clap:

Do we get a trophy for that one?

---

No, but you do get a badge..

---

:elol:

---

I couldn't understand the attitude last night from Jeff,Pat or the bloke from the Folly, they thought we were doing it to benefit the first division, when we play lower division teams we always put out a weaker team, we are not going to play 5 players twice in the first div so we definately wont do it in the league cup or ko cup. My selfish reason for argueing for the change was I now don't have to drop anybody and teams that I like in all divisions don't have to fold.

---

I also couldn't understand Martin cancelling his sponsorship of the plate just because players from the first division were allowed in the plate, I can assure you the top players would not want to be in the plate, for some players in the first div they have no chance in the singles but would do well in the plate. Pram toys:lame:

---

The bottom line is, there is always going to be caution with change and people will look to find faults, as they have a right to do, and voice their concerns. My concerns as the League Secretary have been in recent years the dwindling player registrations cos as a whole the league is operating with some 120-150 players less than a few years ago. The days of the majority of teams registering the full 12 players are fast disappearing and if things had continued as they were under the same format then you would have been operating the League with 3 - 4 divisions instead of the current 5 and the odd 6 that we have enjoyed. Its my impression that with smaller squads it will open the door for more teams to come through, I don't think it will happen overnight but in three to four years you might have the situation where you are operating off 7-8 divisions and with the influx of the added funds you will then be talking about reducing the fees to a lower level. There is spin-offs with change but it has to be in place to see if it has its benefits. Te summer league will be an indication but you have to remember that it is only one season and I don't think all the concerns will be answered in a solitary season. What it will prove is whether the current trend of short fielded sides stays the same or improves.

---

It's the constant referral to giving lower division teams a 'chance to win something' . . You have a chance to win the division you are in . . The better players win things because they're better so why on earth should allowances be made?

The plate excluded Division One players so that automatically makes the Division Two players favourites which in turn will piss off Divisions Three and below who then vote Division Two out to the point where there is 6 players allowed to enter the plate who aren't worth a rub of my little ginger cock!

Incidentally who proposed same sized trophies at the last AGM?

---

The proposal to switch to same size trophies was submitted by Chris Wright from Waddon Wizards. Perhaps,now that we will have five-a-side teams,we might be able to afford larger ones again !! :lol:

---

Noooooooooo!!!! If I'm lucky enough to win the Summer singles again I want another smaller one as it's cheaper than buying my daughter a set of those Russian dolls . . . :D

---

Yes Nuttmeg you are just a selfish so-and-so for not wanting teams to fold.

I entirely agree with your post about the plate. I don't normaly enter the singles, because I play snooker on a Monday night and because it's only best of 3, but if I did and lost in the first round I would not want to be entered into the plate. I'm sure it's only a minority but there are some members of the league who are very anti Division 1 and I think that's a great shame.

---

I don't think that there was very much anti Division One sentiment at the AGM. I still maintain that a set of rules that could enable three players to beat a ten man team are basically flawed.Welcome to Evans world of mathematical conundrums !! Most of the so called "pissing and whingeing" came from the Division One representatives who felt really aggrieved about not being allowed into the plate competitions. I felt so sorry for them that I personally voted to allow them in. Anything for a quiet life !! :wall:

---

3 players can currently beat 7 so it doesn't make that much difference Pat and if getting beaten by 3 players worries you and the Pond Q's that much then the format is the least of your worries ;)

I sometimes wonder if it is the same person who posts on the website as to the one who turns up at the AGM as if you didn't pick up on any of the 'us and them' drivel from Jeff Martinez & Co. then you either weren't there or you need to get your ears syringed . .

---

I found it really quite funny that the main opposition for the format which made smaller teams/squad size the same chance as everyone else to compete was from people who have had trouble fielding the full seven players in the past . . .

And one person even gave the argument that they didn't like the format because "now they don't have an excuse to drop their weaker players." :elol:

The way I see it, if as Captain you can't tell someone they're not getting a game because they don't feature in your top Ten that week, you're clearly in the wrong position and need to grow a pair of nads.


The same people pissed and moaned about World Rules being adopted, yet now we have more Croydon representatives playing for their County, two Interleague teams and the best pub team in the Nation competing in our League.

Not too bad really.

---

does this change come in this summer ?.....or was it submitted too late and will start next year ?

coz im not getting any younger ffs.....i might not see next year

:bounce:

---

This Summer you old codger :)

---

Coming out of retirement Cliff?

---

by wot ive been hearing dan the man

the prop will need me

:winkgrin:

---

I wasn't at the AGM but the fact that sponsorship was withdrawn for the plat because of the inclusion of Division 1 players does suggest that there is some feeling of 'them' and 'us'.

---

why don't they just have a seperate k.o. cup for each division... seems a no brainer to me!!!

---

Because that creates seperation between divisions which is exactly what we're trying to avoid

---

not really, you have the usual one for everyone then instead of the plates have division comps... then div 2 aren't complaining about div 1 being in it, div 3 aren't complaining about div 1 & 2 in it etc etc...
so it's no different to the individuals we have now!!!
personally i rarely do plates as it's just a losers comp to me, i only really do them for the money or if i've driven a long way!!!

---

That was another comment that made me giggle at the AGM; Being told that if Division One players had their own plat comp, then that is 'dividing the League'.

Ummm . . After the Division 2 and below had their own 3 comps that Division 1 weren't allowed in last year (but had to pay the same League entry fee for less comps) . . Wasn't THAT dividing the League? And wanting equality in trophy size because 'we all pay the same entry fee so it's not fair that some should get more for their money' and then having 3 extra comps than Division One . . . :ohmygod:

Note to self: If wanting to be hypocritical, try to be consistent.

---

Ah I see what you mean now . . This will be in place as One-Day events held at Rileys Purley Way towards the end of the year . . Each Division will have their own KO . .

---

The minutes of this meeting can now be found here

---

just a quick question
so if u win 10 0
do u still get two bonus points for the win

---

There aren't any bonus points in the summer

---

I can understand it. What is so wrong with the lower divisions having a competition to them selves without the first division. It keeps them playing longer and gives them a chance of a trophy that they wouldn't have a chance in otherwise. I agree that the majority of first Div players wouldn't want to enter the plate, but there will be some that will lose there first round match, or not even turn up for it, just to have an easier time of it. We'll just have to wait and see how many first div players enter the plate this summer and how many are still in it by the semi's, and if a first div player wins it.

---

Any player/team failing to arrive and play in the first rounds of any of the main comps WILL NOT be entered into the Plate comps.

---

Because that creates the 'us and them' culture that we're trying so hard to eradicate . .

The lower divisions are lower for a reason . . Because they're not the best . . They'll just have to deal with it . . Why should everyone be catered for because they're not good enough . . It's pathetic . .

Remember when World Rules was voted in? The proposal was to put it in Division One only but it was amended n the night of the AGM because the lower divisions didn't want to be left out and therefore create an 'us and them' situation . . They can't have it both ways . .

---

Any player/team from any division who enters a knock-out competition will automatically be entered into the relevant plate competition, following a 1st round defeat . If they choose not to play their match,the correct etiquette must be followed or a massive fine will be imposed. Non payment of the fine would lead to suspension. If a team only has five registered players,the suspensions could bite into their squad. This could result in somebody making a proposal to further reduce the team size . If this continued unabated ,we might eventually find ourselves with a singles league. Oh,we've already got one of those !!

---

:tumbleweed:

---

Danny,you're watching that tumbleweed very closely.Please make sure that you don't get pricked from behind !

---

:elol:

What world do you live in exactly?!!

Just who do you think would throw their match in the main comp to have an easier ride in the Plate?!! And with all due respect, it seems to me like you're trying to say that all Division One players have a superior game to those in Division Two and below.

Seriously; open your eyes and take a good look. There are probably 10 players at best in Division 1 that i'd say were pretty untouchable by everyone else over any distance, including the rest of Division 1. Luckily enough, this League isn't over distance. It's 1 frame pool.

I don't know of one person in Division 1 who would lower themselves to throwing a first round game in the main Singles to get the apparently 'easier ride' in the plate.

It's comments like this that cause a divide.

---

Presumably all first round losers are automatically entered into the plate. A lot of them won't want to play, will they be fined / suspended for not fulfilling the fixture (without notifying opponent first)?

---

The opportunity appears to have been lost. As a first division player I will have absolutely no interest in entering the plate so will be praying I get over the first hurdle. Once your out your out.

All this one extra comp for them and not one for us (Div 1) but we pay the same money is tosh. A seperate Div 1 knockout is what is really needed if it bothers the Croydon hierachy that much....not entering a plate competition that I guess most Div 1 players have no desire to be part of.....

---

I'd have much preferred a separate Division One Singles but that again creates an 'us and them' situation and contrary to popular belief from some people, we tailored the proposal for the masses and not just what suits 'us' . .

Had the proposal not gone through then we would have had a vote to bring that in . .

Incidentally Alex, there was no mention of your suggestion regarding a non-playing secretary :shag:

---

To whom it may concern.
Can anyone varify what the point scoring system is for the new proposed format for the summer is please.
I was on the understanding that it would be like the football league 3 for a win and 1 for a draw with frames being for and against.:winkgrin:

---

You were lead to believe wrongly Arthur I'm afraid . .

It is exactly the same as in previous Croydon Summer Pool League seasons where points are earned per frame won . . There are no bonus or 'team' points as such . .

---

led dan....its led matey

:nerner:

---

I'm speechless . .

---

Blimey, that is a first....Let me make a note in my diary!!!! :elol:

---

Blimey, you have a diary!! :bounce: