Nottingham Snooker Forum

[This topic was originally titled Eight man teams but was renamed after it developed into a discussion about a three man team format]

I think we seriously have to re-consider this rule.
The likes of Cotgrave, Wollaton and Oakleigh ? who WERE the most most likely not to raise a full team are now regularly turning up with 8 players and seen disappointed that We and Pegasus 'B' are struggling to raise SIX. The SIX man team gets manipulated (not just in Div 2) so that player 1 & 2 also play in the pairs, which, against 'lesser' teams gives them 3 frames AND if the same happens with the other half of the team gives them the chance of 6 frames.
We, at Arnold, I presume the the same for Pegasus, entered the 'B' teams to give other lads the chance to play competitive snooker. We have on occasions (twice this season) had to play an 'A' player to make up our 6 man 'singles' team - but unfortunately last night that player was also needed to play in the pairs.
Should we, next season, revert back to the EIGHT man team system and stop 'A' team players playing for 'B' teams. This no doubt would mean the scapping of our 'B' team or conceding a lot of frames or asking for matches to be cancelled or conceded.
We all could of course change to a straight 6 man team with no doubles

I see your point Alan and numbers do appear to be up this year.  I am starting to phone up captains in advance to find out how many players they have so i can play 4 singles if possible like we did last week at City Hospice.  Personally i would like a whole change to the league to get rid of half the team going away whilst the other half stay at home and reverting to the institutes format of home one week away match the next.  My ideal format would be as follows:

NHSL Elite League (Teams of 3 players, 2 frames each) - this would create a real super league for only the finest players.
NHSL Divisions 1-3 - (teams of 4 players, one frame each)

As it stands teams like Wollaton with only 1 table can only enter 1 team in the current format whilst with this they would be able to enter 2 sides ie: the A team would be away whilst the B team were at home.  If this format was used i would be able to probably enter an Elite team + 3 other teams from Pegasus. Whilst at Arnold with only 3 tables you could enter the same amount quite comfortably.

Mike

AT LAST, Whoopy dee, somebody on the same wave length as me. I have been envisaging this (Elite,Premier,Super League) for several seasons but have been shot down everytime, nobody wants to go forward. This would obviously mean that no higher grade player could play for a lesser grade team.
It would obviously cause problems when it came to Promotion & Relegation - as I have been told "we dont want a closed shop" - AND also with a blanket Nazareth House K.O. tournament, all the teams playing under a different format

Yep it would have to be it's own stand alone league with it's own cup competition. No promotion as such but teams could if they wish after winning the 1st division apply to join the Elite/Super League if obviously strong enough.   

Super League - 3 man teams. What a League. Bulwell 'A', Bulwell 'B', Arnold 'A', Pegasus 'A', Beeston should all be able to put 2 teams in followed by Mapperley, Stadium & Phoenix (all the current 1st Division) thats at least 13 teams, I'm sure we could find another 3 to make up 2 divisions of 8.
That would leave the likes of Arnold 'B', Pegasus'B', Wollaton, Cotgrave, Lenton, City Hospital, University using the 4-man-team system in Div 3

Hi Alun & Mike
Yes i can see where you are coming from but arn't you just creating another "institutes" league. I must say that i prefer playing home one week and away the next week. That's why i play in the institutes. If you play 3 players each playing 2 frames you would have to start at 7:30, not 8:00 as per NHSL. 3 frames at an average of 30 minutes a frame means that the matches wouldn't finish on one table teams till 11:00. Players do have work the next day and are not like you and me Alun. Retired! :sorry:
The reason the NHSL is unique is the format, and although it may be "tweeked" a little that's what it's all about.
I am pleased that the Rileys super league is starting up. It's not for me though as it's all about the money. Sorry but not interested as it's all about the game for me. I enjoy the playing of the game for the fun of it win or lose. When "money" is offered it distracts from the fun and after a few seasons where teams are winning everything and others not a bean teams will not enter as they haven't a chance of winning anything. It will be down to 3 or 4 teams and won't be worth running as a league. Isn't this what happened to the old super league.

Hopefully ! ! ! , what with the quality of the snooker, I would have thought 20 mins a frame, which would be only 2 hrs. ALSO the majority of the team would have access to 2 tables. BUT then again, changing the rules ?, we could make them 7.30pm starts.

I'm gonna change my mind.  The league is stronger than for quite a few years and to be honest we have 4 sides who are more than capable of winning it (not many leagues can say that!) and an Elite league would be exactly the same 4 teams.  My main reason for proposing an Elite league was to see players playing two frames instead of one as the biggest moan appears to be about turning out for just 1 frame.

My personal view is that if we get rid of the pairs frame (which is always the longest frame) we could play 3 x 2 frame singles matches no problem between 8-11pm (probably 10:30) in the 1st Division and probably in the 2nd as well (perhaps we could try it one week and see how it goes).  If it gets to 10pm and the final match has not started then that match should use just 10 reds for both frames to ensure a finish.

I also beleive it could be done it the 2nd division but would try just the top division to start with.

My other reason for changing my mind is that yes i would prefer to see 3or4 man teams playing home one week and away the next but it would mean more captains willing to give up their time and sadly i don't see many of them out there.  I would be fearful of losing more players rather than C + D teams being started up.


So i guess stick with what we've got as it works but i would love to see a trial of the 2 frame match in the top division.


Another idea to perhaps give the home leg - away leg format a bit of spice is to award points on how you do at each venue.  3 points for a 4-0 win, 2 pts for a 3-1 and a point for a draw.  So for instance the Pegasus Phoenix match the other night would have finsihed 4points to 1 in Pegasus's favour (1 point away and 3 from the home leg)

Just an idea

Mike

I'd still prefer to wave my flag and beat my drum and play the '3man x 2 frame' system - or keep the same number of teams as we have now '6man x 2 frame', home and way - AND get rid of the pairs.
If we are stick with the current format, players being allowed to play for each team, then they COULD be penalised with THEIR handicap

bin reading intently to ur alans, & mikes comments, i know what you mean bout 'the biggest moan being turning out just for 1 frame',once we've had our 1 frame we just then play amongst ourselves,and the 'competitive' side in me,would prefer 2 frames of snooker,and it would be a boon playing the 3 man 2 frames system,as at phoenix generally i have 6 players regularly,tho' to find a guaranteed 8 most wks proves a right struggle,as some work nights and can only get 2 out of 4 games,and the most annoying thing for me,is when 1 or two of my team dont ring to let me know they're coming,and turn up minutes before the matches start.and,by then the teams chosen already.
so very constructive comments from both mike and alun,
so theirs my 'two penneth' guys,i prefer the 3 man 2 frame system,as its just that bit more worth coming out the house for,tho' i still come out for just one. :happy:
i know like alun says, that he like a few other teams struggle to find players to make up a team some weeks,so that would suggest leaning towards the 3 man system,wouldn't you agree??

I think that I would be speaking for everyone at the Uni Snooker Club in saying that so far our debut season in the NHSL has been highly enjoyable. For us the best thing has been going to Snooker clubs all over Nott'm and playing frames in a competitive/friendly environment, meeting loads of great people. For example, some of us have gone down to Lenton Liberal Club and played there occasionally as it's easier to get to than our Sports Centre for most of us. We would never have known this place even existed without the league! I think this is the key feature of league and so any changes should not reduce the number of different clubs you get to go to. In our opinion there would be no need to change the format of the league as we can get the right number of people each week with little problem and having two tables in our Snooker room means the frames are all finished in good time (usually around 9-30). However every club is different (again this is the best feature of the league) and so I'd understand if not everyone agreed the league is fine as it is (like Alan!!). Another thing I would say is that a frame of snooker is a frame of snooker. Sure there is a small home advantage in knowing how your table plays, but it's not so great as to introduce an 'away goals' style rule. Away goals has got to be the worst rule in football and snooker would be better off without it!!

I agree completely with R Hicks.

(http://nottinghamsnooker.com/nhsl/Logos/NHSLLogo-nhslnet.png)

I was bored and started daydreaming again!

(http://nottinghamsnooker.com/nhsl/Emailed/new_format_1.jpg)

30 teams!

I bet this wouldn't get voted in at the AGM!

:laugh: :drink: :laugh:

I'D vote for it! whoops sorry i can't. :sorry: I would go even further and have 5 divisions of 3 players each playing 2 frames. That's a lot of teams.

Quote from: alancun on 12 November 2009
I'd still prefer to wave my flag and beat my drum and play the '3man x 2 frame' system - or keep the same number of teams as we have now '6man x 2 frame', home and way - AND get rid of the pairs.
If we are stick with the current format, players being allowed to play for each team, then they COULD be penalised with THEIR handicap

I agree with Alan but not just for the top division.  I bet you won't find many players who would not prefer to play 2 frames in a night, however that is worked.  Perhaps if you only have one table then keep the 3 plus pairs or 4 single frames for their home match, but the option of playing 3 players play 2 frames home and away (yes like the 6 red league)  makes it worth the effort.  You can also keep the 8 teams in a division then so we still get to meet lots of players/play at loads of clubs.

Failing that, I'd still be happy to play 3 players play 2 frames and have that as a whole team (3 men) and play home and away on alternate weeks.  In fact like R Wright says similar without mentioning the home and away element

I speak for myself, mick and dave salmon as we all hate the doubles and are thinking of dropping out next year altough
we do really enjoy the 6 reds league (3 man 2 frames home and away)

Steve, I think your dream might come true one day. Brilliant idea :bravo:

Thanks Jordan.  I'm glad you like the idea, although I believe the traditionalists won't!  They'll absolutely hate my other idea of having all 3-man teams with every player playing 2 frames each.  This one could give us 40 teams with the option of having 4 or 5 divisions!

(note that the formation of the teams and divisions are for illustrative purposes only!)

(http://nottinghamsnooker.com/nhsl/Emailed/new_format_2.jpg)

Wow....i go away for the weekend and come back to 4 divisions!!!!

brilliant mate but reckon they might string us up outside Lenton Liberal club if we try to explain this one at the next AGM  :laugh:

Yes Steve brilliant concept. I know we discussed this earlier today.  I only see one flaw. That is that a club like say Lenton Liberal Club who only have 2 tables couldn't put 3 teams in as, on an home/away basis, you would have 2 teams at home one week. If you could work the fixtures so as it's 1 home 2 away every week then this would work. How i don't know!
What do the BDSL (summer league) teams think about adopting this format next year as a trial? Could we get more entrants to the league this way? I'll have a look at the teams and see how it would work. I'll try and post my thoughts on at a later time.

Yes you're right, it would depend on whether the match could be played on one table in the time available.  I think we would have to bring the match start time forward to 7.30pm for sure.  We would need to do this for the clubs that only have one table in any case just so that they would be able to enter two teams.  The alternative is that they only play one frame each in one of the lower divisions.

It would be interesting to see it trialed in the BDSL summer league to see what time the matches finish (or indeed if some don't get finished!).  If it works well then a switch to the format for the NHSL & BDSL would open up the exciting possibility of interleague competitions.  That would be great!

don't think it could be tested in the summer league as they play down to the black in each frame.  although of course if they could do that in the time frame it would mean we would easily be able to do it.

As mentioned earlier and as i tell my guys in the lower division of the Pegasus league if you're struggling with time just play with 10 reds for the last frame....it makes all the difference.  Perhaps in the bottom two divisions the 2 frame matches could be made up of 1x10 red frame followed by a standard 15 red in the 2nd frame. (this would probably knock off at least half an hour overall).

Mike

Loving the picture steve, very creative. :thumbup:

If it were 3 players 2 frames each then it wouldn't be played down to the black. We would alter the rules so that you would get a point for each frame won. EG 6-0, 5-1, 4-2 and if it were 3-3 then it would stay as a draw. We used to do this in the summer league a few years ago when we played 4 man teams. If it was 2-2 then it stayed as 2-2 as there were no aggregate scores used in those days. We could of course add say 2 points for a win, 1 point for a draw and 0 points for a loss. then it would be 8-0, 7-1 6-2 and 4-4, but would that be going too far? At the end of the day it's down to the participating teams and what they want. I can only suggest different ways of playing. It's suppose to be democratic, so everyone has a say and it's not left to individuals to decide on what's relevent and what's not. I personally like the 3 man team idea, but if teams want to stay as we are i'm happy to do that.  :happy:

i guess perhaps a concern for Institutes or Bulwell league dropping from 4 to 3 player teams is that what do you to with the 4th player.  It's a lot more clear cut in the NHSL as we're kind of already in teams of three ie; home leg away leg.

Mike

Yes i agree with you it is a concern. A lot of the teams do have substiutes however and if they can form teams with the extra players then that would be good. Teams such as Phoenix have 7 or 8 players and could easily field 2 sides of 3 players. Others would struggle to field 2 teams. Eg Ruddington who only have 4 or 5 players. I will suggest it and see what teams think!

hi steve,mike and bob,yes loving the idea of 3 man teams also helps me no end at phoenix as i can usually guarantee 6 players ie 2 teams a phoenix A and phoenix B,and as we generally have at least a 9 man 'sqaud' then a phoenix C,too!!
so loving this idea,and 3 man 2 frames situation, gosh!! im wetting myself at the idea  :blush:  :blush:  :laugh:  :laugh:
please,lets trial this,by all means,but . . . what does other teams/team captains think on this???????

It certainly seems a popular idea...well on here anyway.  I guess in the NHSL the only problems i can foresee are at Oakleigh and Wollaton who only have 1 table to play on.  Think both Wollaton and Oakleigh have about 10 players signed up and as they'd only be able to have 2 sides they would have a few players left over.  The other problem would be willing captains from each team which could be helped by having a club co-ordinator to ensure all teams under that roof are represented at meetings and informed of changes and to collate and supply all results to the league secretary.

Well i for one like the idea with 2 frames a night the real carrot to dangle but we must be able to come up with some positives for the 6-8 man format we curently have in place?

*   I guess it allows players of lesser ability to play for a top team and perhaps win championships but i really can't think of anymore!

As Bob says it must be agreed and voted on before any change could take place.  And in this case with such a change in mind i would have thought it would need at least a 80% vote in favour of change to succeed and not cause friction between the members.

true mike,i agree,well we will all have to just wait & see,i guess!

Teams could be allowed to use any number between 3 and 6 players to complete the 6 frames(no player can play more than 2 frames but you could have 6 players playing 1 frame each, 3 players playing 2 frames each or anywhere in between) .

This would help clubs which sometimes have 10-12 players available but sometimes have only 6 or 7 players available. They could then enter 2 teams confidently knowing they are unlikely to need to postpone matches but they wouldn't need to leave anyone out of the team.

I think then teams like Arnold could enter 3 teams and be unlikely to need to postpone but still always give everyone at their club a game.

Of course it would have to be seen as the norm to have 3 players playing twice, so that you don't get people from the teams playing once each moaning, saying things like "it's not fair he shouldn't be allowed to play twice"

Quote from: Jordan on 16 November 2009
Loving the picture steve, very creative.

Thanks Jordan.  My captain, Pete Gormley, presented it to me last week to mark my 86 break last season.  It's really good compared to the dross he's bought me in the past (only joking Pete!) but my wife still says it stays in the cupboard until I get my snooker room built!

:angry:

Laurence - that's one of the things I've thought of too, having a flexible format similar to the one we have now allowing a team to play between 3 and 6 players to make up the 6 frames.  However, I think that by making it strictly 3 players, the other players are more likely to form another team which is what we all want ultimately.  I'm not sure either way really, which is why it would be good to get feedback from the teams it would affect most, eg. Oakleigh & Wollaton.

For what it's worth, I am completely for this idea.  Not sure about the 3 to 6 players idea though.  Then we're back to playing 1 frame each.

The biggest worry is definitely how it will effect the teams without much table capacity.  I can't see them buying it.

The potential for inter-league competition is also really exciting. :england:

I think we would need to make it playable on one table because otherwise:

a) the clubs with one table won't be able to take part;

b) the clubs with 2 tables will always be restricted to only entering two teams.

What we would need is a what if rule, ie. what if it gets to say 10pm and there are still 1 or 2 frames left to play.

Perhaps we could have a "10/10" rule:

The 10/10 rule
Any frame that commences after 10pm will be played with 10 reds unless both players and the club steward/manager agree to proceed with 15 reds.

I'm not sure what time most clubs close but I know that at Stadium Leisure you can play until midnight.  Therefore if it got past 10pm and there were still 2 frames to play, as long as both players were happy to play both frames with 15 reds then there would be no problem.  However, if another club closed at 11pm then maybe the players should agree to play both frames with 10 reds so that they should be completed before the club shuts.

I would hope that any rule like this would not need to be used because most matches, even on one table, would probably be into the last frame by 9.30pm - 10.00pm anyway so there should be plenty of time to play to a finish.  But, there would need to be a rule just in case.

We could go even further and make it a 10/6 rule:

The 10/6 rule
Any frame that commences after 10pm will be played with 6 reds unless both players and the club steward/manager agree to proceed with 15 reds.

Also, to make sure that every player played at least one full frame, we could make the playing order as follows:

1. Player A
2. Player B
3. Player C
4. Player A
5. Player B
6. Player C

That would also ensure that player C wasn't waiting around for 2 hours before they got a game.

yep that'll work as you're right we would definetely need a rule in place.

Like the term 10/10 ...clever that  :thumbup:

Id have no probs in trialing 3x2 in the BDSL especially if it gets more teams involved though unless i can persuade some more players at spot on bulwell to get involved i think you would still only get the 1 team from us.

I cant see why it cant work, im sure most players would agree they would rather play 2 frames rather than 1 gives you more to play for then.

Though can agree with mike on the fact of what do you do with the 4th player for those teams that only have 4 players (like my own team for example) though yeah you could alternate every week.

Quote from: james R on 17 November 2009
Though can agree with mike on the fact of what do you do with the 4th player for those teams that only have 4 players (like my own team for example) though yeah you could alternate every week.

If you split your team in two and each pair recruited just one extra player then you would have two teams.  There must be a couple of people in the club or a couple of mates that would come along for a bit of banter and a couple of frames?  You could advertise for a player in the local shop windows or better still on the notice board at the local secondary school.  Maybe I'm dreaming again.....

I've been doing a bit of research with other UK snooker leagues.  There are quite a few leagues that are switching to smaller teams in order to provide players with 2 and sometimes 3 frames each.

I have received some positive feedback from Jim Seaman, the Secretary of the Stafford & District Summer League, which trailled the 3-man 2 frames each format in the summer.  Here's what he said:

Hi Steve,
the format of our (newly created) Summer League was widely regarded as very successful by those that competed. It was seen as a pleasant change to our normal format of 5 singles matches and gave a chance for "revenge" for players that lost their first frame. Handicaps were applied at the start of frames but results were on frames only as if it was made into an aggregate score result, then matches could go on for too long when all balls are needed to be potted.

I personally took part in some matches where at a three table venue, all were put to use by mutual agreement, and those matches were finished within an hour. At two table venues, matches were finished within between 1 and a 1/2 hours and 2 and a 1/2. Some slightly longer but non past 10.30pm that i'm aware of. We did have a one table venue (Derrington, village side) and i've had it confirmed that the one extra match (as opposed to normal 5-a-side) made little difference in that matches were ALL completed by 10.30pm latest. And with respect, this was not always with the highest standard of players.

A draw scenario was new to our league and it was welcomed as a fair result if that's how it ended. The league was played in a very light hearted (and making a pleasant change ;-) manner. It could be regarded as a test case for the Stafford League that has received only praise from it's competitors and very much looking forward to next season.

The only thought expressed was that it "MAY" have been nice to play two different people on the night, but it was agreed in general that this would probably make matches longer.


;) :happy: :england: :happy: ;)

Yeah i guess you got a point there steve, spot on bulwell is bigger than what masters was so im sure i could track down some new talent,
guess ill have to keep my eye on some of the members then.

I do have plenty of contacts on my phone unfortunatly most of them either play pool on mondays aswell or wont comit full time to play snooker on a monday.

For what my opinion is worth... 3 players 2 frames sounds ideal. In my opinion...

Pros:
Many players dont like doubles (i certainly dont)
Hard to settle into just one frame (whatever your ability)
Might be nice to have closer matched ability to your 2 other team-mates
Added dimension of possibly moving up or down within your A,B,C etc team as well as usual division promotion/relegation
Possibly more flexible for players who may need to leave early or start later as don't have to wait around for the doubles

Cons:
Take longer but 7.30 start seems reasonable to me (a very big and busy league in Grimsby start at 7.00!)

I like the sound of all these new and wonderful ideas regards formats, i'm always in favour of longer matches as it SHOULD bring out the best in all players rather than having to play so tight in single frame matches. BUT just echoing a convo i had with a good mate of mine Chris Clarke after a match at City Hospital we both said it's a cracking idea being like the old super league format BUT it's the issue of Time and clubs who only have one table or clubs that only play on the one table! In my experience a single frame duration time can be down to 1001 factors! Take for example a match earlyer in the Nnia league between the My very own Bci Elites team And the mighty City Hospital team, it was a match between two Top Players Jason Bettridge and Chris Clarke, Jason openning up a good lead against ther dangerous Chris, Classy Chris Clarke coming back very well with some super snookers this fantastic single frame against these two awsome player believe it or not these two quick firing players tuck over an hour. Another match was Malc V Steve "they'll kill me for reminding them!" in last seasons Bdsl league, this good single frame 1hr 40mins.

So as you can imagine, if every match was like the examples used above there would not be enougth hours in the day to finish these matches, and at the end of the day the result is just as important as the first or the last frame. Every match is so different, i played a best of 7 in the last 8 in the City Hospital Archie Radford cup last monday and won 4-0 in under an hour! I think this 3 player 2frames format is a good idea and worked well in the Super 6 Reds because the frames were quicker to play, though i do recall one frame still taking an hour! But in general i can only see this work either in the Super league where you have a better standards of players or the 6 reds! Adjusting the match to the ten reds rule after 10 o'clock seems strange!

Maybe a New idea for the summer league, rather than the 4 man team and play for the 5th frame on points, What abpout a 5man team then every frame is just as important and the draw result now void! Whats your thoughts.......

Or somthing completely different like a Pairs league maybe...!

Don't think that a 5 man team would work as some teams struggle to get 4 players in the summer. I don't think a pairs league is worth running as most teams in the NHSL are complaining about having to play a pairs match.

I see your point about some frames being too long Kwok, but the Stafford League seemed to cope with the length of matches and apparently the standard isn't that high.  A couple of rule changes though can cover the difficulties.

1.  As already suggested, 7.30pm starts will help.  Remember even if this is a bit early for some players surely all teams have somebody available to start the match at 7.30pm and other players can arrive later to play their frames.

2.  In the unlikely event that a match is not completed then the match could be completed at a mutually convenient date.  There is already the facility to agree to postpone fixtures so it would be similar but simply agreeing to postpone only part of a match.

To be honest, I think matches would normally finish on time, especially with Steve's 10/10 idea.  Remember in matches of a lower standard the safety tends to be poorer and games often finish quicker that you expect.

Still no feedback on here yet from Oakleigh, Wolloton or several clubs.  Has anyone mooted the idea with anybody from those clubs in person of by phone so far?

The majority of feedback has been positive so far.  Everyone I have spoken to has said that they would prefer to play 2 frames and scrap the pairs.

We have had a bit of flack for changing some league rules at the AGM in September from the clubs that were not represented.  Whilst I always maintain that those who don't come to meetings are in no position to complain, I also believe that rule changes that are as fundamental as those we are talking about here would need to be voted on by every club.

I therefore propose to survey every team via their captains so that I can see what vote we are likely to get.  If the format is to be changed then I would need to convene an EGM around April/May so that there is sufficient time to prepare for the next season.  I think this is the best thing to do from now on anyway because the turnout at AGM's is not great.  With an EGM I can circulate the proposed new rules in the post and two representatives from each club can vote using a voting form, thereby not having to attend in person.

Once I have received the survey results back from every team I will make them public so that we can see what everyones thoughts and concerns are.

All great ideas kind'a brain storming at this stage! I think one of the main reasons why it's proving to be tricky at this stage is simply because Thanks to Steve Butler and Mike Langdon for the Nhsl league and Bob Wright and James Robinson for the Bdsl and the Nnia league we already have fantastic formats so to improve by implementing changes can only be very tricky!!! What ever happens, i personally would like to see a slight rule change, I think All teams that Only play on the One table or only has the one table option should Always play their home matches half an hour early in the Nhsl league, so for example If my Super Elites Team played Beeston, at Beeston they will break off at 7:30! and at Bci normal time 8pm as we play on two tables so therefore both venues will finish more or less at the same time. Just an idea, any thoughts anyone..........?

As for the issue of the pairs frame in the Nhsl league,  i think it benefits the better team because you can field a more stronger 6 player team rather than a 8 man team! The 6player team has it's advantages when teams are genuinely short of player however i feel it's implemented by many teams to strengthen teams. I personally whould be happy with either so long as it's the same rule and format for all teams! 

Just for a start I would like to thank all the readers and contributors of NHSL Forum for the response we have had to my original suggestion of '8-man-teams'. I would think this has perhaps caused more discussion amonst players and replies to the Forum than any previous subject (perhaps Steve could confirm this).

I think that now we ought to actually consider a 4-man-squad, initally each squad/player to be registered with the League, THREE of that 4-man-squad would then play 2 frames each (6 frames in all) so you would get 2 match points for a win and 1 match point for a draw. There COULD be a slight variation in this where players 1 & 2 definately played 2 frames each and the 3rd leg of 2 frames could be played by players 3 & 4 (if you see what I mean). The frames For/Against would total up at end of season and could be decisive. If a match was a draw I would NOT suggest adding up the frame points scored because that could extend the length of frames and time is important trying to get 6 frames in.
Players listed in the 4-man-squad would NOT be allowed to swap and change between squads and would be tied to that squad for the season.
Squads would not be allowed to cancel/defer a fixture unless EXTREME circumstances - power failure or flooding at the venue etc.
There would be no trivial excuses, if you didnt turn up you would lose 2 match points and concede the match 0-6. Out of your 4 man squad you could still go with ONLY 2 players and get a winning result. So, if necessary you could go with ONLY 1 player, at least he COULD win and that COULD addd up at the end of the season.
Just a couple of final observations and questions - all matches to start at 7.30pm (there was a 50 min frame this week). Should all players carry their handicaps into these frames?. Depending on how the night is going for time the 3rd leg OR the final frame COULD be reduced to 10 reds.

Sorry Alan i can't see the 1&2 playing 2 frames and 3&4 playing 1 frame working as it leads to arguments in the team of who plays 1&2 and who plays 3&4. I'm turning out to play 1 frame why is it they are playing 2. Why can't i?
Je ne Compend Pas- Why is it that all players in the NHSL have handicaps? All players in the institutes play off scratch. The best players will out as it goes. Sorry about the french. For those who don't understand it means i don't understand.

Quote from: alancun on 19 November 2009
Just for a start I would like to thank all the readers and contributors of NHSL Forum for the response we have had to my original suggestion of '8-man-teams'. I would think this has perhaps caused more discussion amonst players and replies to the Forum than any previous subject (perhaps Steve could confirm this).

You may recall that in February 2008 you started a similar discussion on the future of Nazareth House (see HERE (http://nottinghamsnooker.com/forum/index.php?topic=312.0)).  This led to a proposal being put forward at the 2008 AGM to have a premier division consisting of 3-man teams.  The proposal was rejected with the majority of people present at the AGM saying that they liked the existing format and also enjoyed playing the pairs.  The thread from 2008 received 17 replies but I can confirm that this current thread has received more replies from different forum members than any other thread.

Quote from: alancun on 19 November 2009
I think that now we ought to actually consider a 4-man-squad, initally each squad/player to be registered with the League, THREE of that 4-man-squad would then play 2 frames each (6 frames in all) so you would get 2 match points for a win and 1 match point for a draw. There COULD be a slight variation in this where players 1 & 2 definately played 2 frames each and the 3rd leg of 2 frames could be played by players 3 & 4 (if you see what I mean). The frames For/Against would total up at end of season and could be decisive. If a match was a draw I would NOT suggest adding up the frame points scored because that could extend the length of frames and time is important trying to get 6 frames in.
Players listed in the 4-man-squad would NOT be allowed to swap and change between squads and would be tied to that squad for the season.
Squads would not be allowed to cancel/defer a fixture unless EXTREME circumstances - power failure or flooding at the venue etc.
There would be no trivial excuses, if you didnt turn up you would lose 2 match points and concede the match 0-6. Out of your 4 man squad you could still go with ONLY 2 players and get a winning result. So, if necessary you could go with ONLY 1 player, at least he COULD win and that COULD addd up at the end of the season.
Just a couple of final observations and questions - all matches to start at 7.30pm (there was a 50 min frame this week). Should all players carry their handicaps into these frames?. Depending on how the night is going for time the 3rd leg OR the final frame COULD be reduced to 10 reds.

I agree with almost everything you have suggested there Alan.

Considering Jim Seaman's comments regarding this format being used in the Stafford League, I think that the instances of matches going on past 10.30pm would be few and far between.  The "10/10" rule I suggested would be there just in case it were needed but I doubt it would have to be used very often if at all.  It's just important to have it there just in case.

In fact, if you think about it, where 2 tables are used (which should be the majority of matches), it's highly unlikely that the match will go on much past 10pm.  It's only if 1 table is used that we may need the 10/10 rule.  I appreciate that if Arnold CD were to enter 3 or 4 teams then you may need to play your home matches on 1 table.  If you ensured that the playing order was Player A, Player B, Player C, Player A, Player B, Player C, then each player would be guaranteed one full 15 red frame and only player B and/or player C could be faced with playing a 10 red frame.  I'd be surprised if the players were upset by this because they are still playing more snooker than under the current format.

I don't think we should use handicaps because the whole structure should mean that teams are a lot more evenly matched than under the current format.  I think this was evidenced in the 6 Red league in the summer where teams were all capable of beating each other.

Here's an idea.  There are two blank weeks coming up on 22nd December and 5th January.  I think we should arrange a few friendlies using this new format on 1 table and make a note of the finishing times and how many of the matches have to use the 10/10 rule.  I'd be happy to sort out a team from Stadium to take someone on.

Quote from: R WRIGHT on 19 November 2009
Why is it that all players in the NHSL have handicaps? All players in the institutes play off scratch.

Every player now has a handicap because of the new divisional cups which will get underway in the new year:

Divisional Cup Format 2009/10
All teams in division one will compete against each other for the Division 1 Cup and all teams in division two will compete against each other for the Division 2 Cup.
A random draw will be made prior to each round and the team drawn first will be regarded as the "home" team.
Matches will be decided on frames won and lost, NOT aggregate points.
Matches will consist of:
   3 singles frames and 1 pairs frame at the venue of the "home" team.
   3 singles frames at the venue of the "away" team.
Thus, a total of 7 frames will be played ensuring that there is always a winner.
All players will use their individual handicaps during the match, eg. player A +7, player B +21 = player B receives 14 start.
In the pairs frame, the pair will receive a handicap equating to that of the better player.
Any player not in possession of an individual handicap shall play with a handicap of +14.
Team captains should contact the league secretary prior to the match if they require a handicap for any player not already in possession of one.
The final shall be played at a neutral venue using the format for play-off matches (see section F of league rules).

I cant see any problem for the trial 22nd Dec & 5th Jan. I'm sure WE could put TWO '4-man-squads' together.

As for Bobs (WRIGHT) query of the 3rd leg 3/4 player. You are obviously going to play your best TWO players at 1 & 2, one particular week you may only have 3 players so there would be no problem BUT if one week you have all four members of the squad available surely it would be better to give players 3 & 4 the chance to play at least one frame. After all it is a team competition and surely you are not going to play your No.1 at 3 or 4.  This would also encourage teams to revert back and play their players in order of merit.

We could, also consider a two tier Nazareth House.  Div 1 & 2 playing the new 3 x 2 frame system and Div 3 playing the current system

Quote from: alancun on 20 November 2009
We could, also consider a two tier Nazareth House.  Div 1 & 2 playing the new 3 x 2 frame system and Div 3 playing the current system

I can't see anybody wanting to play the old format if this one is introduced.  I know I wouldn't.  What's the point introducing a better format and then only some players getting the chance to play it?

The ideal scenario is to play at a venue where there are TWO tables available. You have to appreciate the lesser teams ( no disrespect ) where this is only ONE table.

One obvious solution would be to limit each frame to 30 mins, then with a 7.30pm start would definately be finished by 10.30. But I think that would put too much pressure on the frame referee and be TOTALLY unacceptable ! ! ! .

Three more leagues that are now using the 3-man team format are Westerham, Gloucester and Byfleet Snooker Leagues.  Below are extracts from their playing rules.  As you can see, a flexible format seems to be the preferred choice as this allows teams to play their reserve(s) should all players be available on the night.

Westerham
Matches in Division 1 and Division 2 are to consist of SIX single frames. 

Matches in Division 3 are to consist of FIVE single frames.

Before the commencement of the first frame, the captains or in their absence a player from each team, shall present to each other, a FULL list of players in order of play, this order cannot be altered once the match has commenced without the agreement of the opposing Captain.

A minimum of three and a maximum of six players can play. All matches shall start not later than 7.30 pm. Any team not ready to start by that time shall concede the first frame, if the second player is not present by 8.00 pm then the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth frames shall be forfeited.

Gloucester
Six frames are to be played in total with one point being awarded to the winner of each frame. The minimum number of players to be used is three and a maximum of six, or any combination in between. Both teams do not have to play with the same number of players. No player can play more than two frames.

The attendance times for the frames are as follows:-

1. 7.00 pm First player plus marker
2. 7.30 pm
3. 8.00 pm
4. 8.30 pm
5. 9.00 pm
6. 9.30 pm

Byfleet
A team normally consists of 3 players playing 2 frames against the same opponent i.e. 6 frames. However 4 players are allowed, 2 of the 4 only playing one frame.

The BYFLEET system seems to be the 'slight variation' that I suggested -
"There COULD be a slight variation in this where players 1 & 2 definately played 2 frames each and the 3rd leg of 2 frames could be played by players 3 & 4 ( 1 frame each )".

I think the 4-man-squad would definately work in Div 1 & 2 with a 7.30 start but I dont know about Div 3 - it would be good to keep all the Divs on the same footing, perhaps just change Div 3 to a 7pm start.   Or all to a 7pm start, surely a team could get at least 1 player, perhaps 2, there for 7pm

7pm for Division 3 could work (or Division 4 with enough entries,I think this format WOULD be POPULAR). To be even more flexible, maybe it could be on agreement that if you can't start until 7.30pm then frames starting after 10pm will be 10 reds.  What do you think?

Alan, for the record, are you against the 10/10 idea in principle?  I agree that if possible it should be 15 reds.  I think many club managers/stewards would let you play until 11pm at least if required.  Teams could always play a player like me last if the match doesn't start at 7pm, one who won't mind the odd late night I mean.

There are so many ways around making sure a match is completed I think the chance of a match running out of time, at most clubs, is virtually nil.

Steve/Alan, if you are short of numbers to trial the format let me know and I'd be up for playing.

I think 4 man squads is the way to go guys.  If we charge each squad an entry fee of £60 for the season then this would work out at just £15 per player or a maximum of £20 per player if the reserve doesn't pay/play which is fantastic value when you consider that each player will get:

1. 28 league frames
2. At least another 8-10 cup frames
3. Entry into the handicap pairs comp
4. Entry into the handicap singles comp
5. Entry into the Singles Championship

We would need to get 27 squads entering to keep match fee income on par with what we get now.  This is one of the reasons I need to survey every club, to see how many squads they would be likely to enter under the new format.

I recall speaking to John Cyrek last season, he said that some of his players at Cotgrave cannot get down the club before 8pm due to work commitments.  So there's a possibility that some players would not be able to start at 7pm.  However, the way around that is for the captain to list the playing order so that these players play at 5 & 6.

I think we could make it so that teams using one table (when at home) start their match at 7pm but teams using two or three tables start at 7.30pm.  However, I would like to see how the trials go on 22nd December first.  I know there are always a few frames that take 1 hour but in a match of 6 frames I would expect there to also be a few frames that take 20 minutes so it could easily even out.

Did you say you could get 2 teams together for 22nd December Alan?  If so, I would be happy to get 2 teams to compete against you at your club.  Would we be able to get two tables at your club Alan?  You can come and play for one of our two teams on that night as well Daniel.  It will be good fun!

Wow- I forgot about this thread and came back with it being massive!

I think 3 man teams would be great. As has been previously mentioned no one is going to complain about getting two frames. Although I quite like the pairs frame I know several of the guys on my team don't like it that much as you can't really get in a rhythm.

To me what would basically happen is the current format being cut in half- teams cut from 6 to 3 and so the number of divisions doubling. In terms of us although we always get our six it changes from week to week as a lot of our guys have other stuff that can get in the way. As a result a '4-man squad' idea would be bad for us. I also think it's a bit unfair that this system would stop someone who's playing well in a say B team switch up to an A team and vice versa. I would suggest there should be an unlimited number of players can be registered to either the  'A and B' squad list OR the 'C and (if there is one) D squad list'. This would allow for small movements between teams but stop players too good for a C team moving down and playing for them. Another negative for 4 men would be that new players wanting to join a team during a season (and the season is quite long) would not be able to as the 4 men are decided at the start of the season.

In terms of start time, we have three tables so we could have an A, B and C team playing simulataneously if all at home. Our Sports Centre closes on the dot at 10-30pm. I'm guessing only two teams would ever be at home so there would be a spillover table if struggling for time but a 7-30pm start time would be preferable. As already mentioned not everyone would actually have to be there for then.

If the tables are available count me in Steve.  :thumbup:

Reply to Daniel. No I'm not adverse to the "10 red" BUT I wouldnt like to see it come into every frame, the ideal situation would for it to be used in the last (6th) frame when time limitations are the essence. In EXTREME instances it could be used in the 5th frame.

As for the suggestion of the 7pm starts, or putting it back to 7.30, you have to take into consideration that IF you are away at a venue that has only ONE table and the match drags on towards 10.30 - example Cotgrave playing at Wollaton - the Cotgrave lads have a 30 mins travelling time. You MIGHT also find that teams from further afield, Newark, Mansfield or even Worksop MIGHT consider applying to put a team(s) in.

In reply to R.HICKS comments about cutting his team from 6 to 3 players. The suggestion of 4-man-squad was intended to mean a MINIMUM of 4 players to be registered, you could still register your 6 players - or even add more if necessary - and only use 3, because as you say, people have unexpected committments. This WOULD stop squads swapping players which is obviously causing a lot of debate and concern this season especially for us at Arnold and Pegasus

To Steve. Personally I cant see a problem with the 22nd, but they MIGHT only let us use ONE table. I know it is down as a blank week on the fixtures but will have to confirm it with the Committee. I am away from 5-19 Dec (winter sunshine) but will obviously let you know before then.

Ah that's cool- up to 6 man squads makes sense

Alan,

We can play one match at Stadium and one at Arnold if that's better for you.  I only suggested playing both at Arnold because they're better tables and the beer is cheaper!  ;)

That squad system would definitely work as long as there is the flexibility to add players to a squad during the season and transfer players between squads (as long as they haven't played). 

Stadium is a good example here.  Clary can no longer play for us due to illness, Barry is currently ill in hospital and we don't know when he will be back.  Pete was also ill with flu last night.  Mark Allen can no longer play for us due to his work commitments.  Mark Bradley and Lee Buckle has moved away.  Therefore we would need to be able to recruit additional reserves at short notice and maybe even swop one or two reserves from one squad to the other at short notice.

The other, perhaps simpler method, would be to just register 3 players in the team and then once a reserve is used that player can then only play for that team for the rest of the season.

Been keeping a keen interest with this thread and there definetely appears to be the support to put together a strong proposal at the next AGM.  It actually might be worth calling an EGM a month before the AGM to thrash out all the arguments and decide on the potential format which will then give everyone a month to chew it over before voting yes or no at the AGM.  I fear if we don't have an EGM we'll be stuck in the AGM for the rest of our lives.

For the record my squad ideal for clubs represented by more than 1 team would be as follows:

A Team....Straight 3 Man Squads which can call on anyone from a lower division team within the same club if needed. (if A+B team are in same division they would have to increase squad to 4 players)
 
B-Z teams...4 man squads that can call on anyone from a lower division team within the same club.

+ the ability to use guest players (ie if you're short on the night to be able to grab anyone from the club to play) or new players.....these players would then be added to the squad that they played the match for.

For the record Pegasus might line up as such:

A Team.....Wayne Martin, Nav Hussain, Chris Brooks (Jamie M if a 4)
B Team.....Jamie Mathers, Danny Castel-Nuovo, Zeb Ahmed, James Booth (Mike L)
C Team.....Mike Langdon, Ken Michell, Andy Orange, Steve Booth (Eric)
D Team.....Eric Towle, Daniel Norton, Chris Mathers, Danny Knowles (Brian Steeples)

Mike

Quote from Steve;- The other,perhaps simpler method, would be to just register 3 players and once a reserve is used that player can only play for that team for the rest of the season.The rule in the institutes is that any player, from the same club, can play for a higher level team twice. If he plays for a third time then he can only play for that team for the rest of the season. This rarely happens. I have only known one occasion when it has. The reasoning behind this that if he normally plays for a say division 2 team and is recruited to play for a division 1 team and plays. He can then revert to his former team under no penaty. If he plays for a higher division team for one match and then can only play for that team he may not get a match for the rest of that season. His former team lose out in not having a player and maybe can't field a team. Hope you can make sense of this drivel but that's the rules.
I have had to rethink the position of 3 man 2 frame teams for next summers matches as i have a couple of teams that are totally against it. We will stay as we are now and hope we get some more entrants to the league.

Alan, it sounds like we are on pretty much the  same wavelength about the 10 red.  Thanks for that.

Bob, Steve and Mike , all of you have ideas about movements between squads/substitutes etc.  I like the sound of the institutes rule that Bob mentioned (3 times as a substitute and you have to stay in that squad.  It would stop teams from relying on a strong lower division player from another team more than twice (i.e. too heavily) but they could still use a different lower division player if requires allowing them to field a side if short of players.  A player would be reluctant to play the third match unless guaranteed regular games.

Maybe a player could transfer PERMANENTLY (no going back) to a lower division team if their teams squad got stronger and they would no longer get a game.

I was up for doing a summer team if you made the switch to 3 man 2 frames BOB.  Think I'll see what the options are now, as I just think 2 frames for each player makes it worth the effort.

The EGM really makes sense.  I WISH more people wanted to contribute on here as it's a perfect way to thrash things out and clarify your position.  Meetings are notorious for people leaving not understanding each other.

Hi Daniel
Sorry i can't put 3 man 2 frame teams in as i can't go against the wishes of the teams in the league. As i say to all the teams "It's your league i just administer it for you". If i had 100% support for going to 3 man 2 frame teams then it would be possible to do it. As it is i haven't. Therefore can't do anything but proceed with the usual 4 man 1 frame format on a home and away basis. I would like a team in the leagues from Pegasus, but can only proceed with the usual. If you wanted to put a team in on that basis i would be more than happy to accommodate you.

Nazareth House Snooker has been running for 'God knows' how many years and it was always the 'tried and tested' 8-man (4 at home & 4 away) format. This system allowed for a lower Division player to substitute on 2 occasions etc. This was supplemented by the Team K.O. and the Team Plate.

At the turn of the century (it sounds terribly ancient) when snooker was on the decline and Institutes/clubs deminished and the younger snooker players absconded to the Pool bars something needed to be done to revitatize the local snooker scene. I think it was Paul WILKINSON (Spider) who came up the the six-man team, where, if you couldnt get 8 players you could just use six - that meant 6 single frames and 2 doubles. In time, this progressed but it was also easily manipulated where you could just play with 6 players - 3 at home and 3 away - but with the best 2 players playing the pairs. This meant that the stronger teams, unless they were playing each other, were virtually guaranteed winning 6-2. But, then came the change of rule where a player could play for more than one team (not different clubs) a night providing that he was qualified by his handicap.

This is why I have suggested the MINIMUM of the 4-man-squad where 3 of them would play 2 frames OR 2 of them would play 2 frames and the other 2 could play one frame each. You could still go just with 2 players and win the match 4-2 and get 2 pts. Even just going with 1 player you could get frame(s) on the board and no points for a win but not get docked 2 pts for not turning up. I think with this system there would be no need to make substitutes during the season

But where it has been pointed out that if a player is surplus to requirements to one particular squad (perhaps they have recruited more players) then I cant see a problem with him being permanently transferred, with authority of the League Secretary, to another squad for the remainer of that season.

Remember, what is being suggested here is not written in stone, its good to hear other peoples thoughts and ideas and to get the rough edges knocked out before we go to EG meeting before the A.G.M. and New Season.

Yes Alan, I'm all for keeping it as simple as possible and I think your idea would get people out of the habit of postponing matches just because one or two players are missing.  2 players could still play all 6 frames with 2 not counting as this would give the opponents 3rd player a game.  1 player could also play 6 frames with 4 not counting, although I think the chance of a team having 3 of their 4 players missing would be slim!

I can see this working for Stadium:

Stadium A: Steve Butler, Bob Walker, Danny Di Folco, Barry Stark

Stadium B: Pete Gormley, Matt Hearson-Ellis, Ross Wilkin, Alan Ball

I can certainly envisage that for some matches Barry & Danny could be missing together, leaving just me & Bob playing and like you say we could still win 4-2 and would probably be delighted with a draw.  However, we would know in advance that this was going to happen and we could simply register another player to fill in (always a chance he could win a frame, even if he is the barman!).

I would like to avoid using players from the other team really.  Can you imagine if I needed to borrow Matt from Stadium B on a night when they had a really important match?  They may be doing really well in their division, challenging for the title - would Matt really want to miss out just to help out the A team?  I doubt it and I wouldn't blame him.  His loyalty would be with HIS team, Stadium B.

I think what I am saying is I'd like to see teams play with less players rather than postponing.  The number of postponements we currently have has forced me to incorporate loads of blank weeks and this extends the season and also reduces the number of matches I can fit in.  If we can avoid postponements except in exceptional circumstances (bad weather, whole team has flu) I can fit more matches into the fixture list.  If we have 3 or 4 divisions then there will be a lot more cup matches to squeeze in so this would be very important.

One more thing, I noticed in another league that where a team only has 2 players available, those players play 3 frames each and they all count, ie. they can win 6-0.  However, they incur 2 penalty points.  What this does is prevent the opposition from simply receiving 2 frames for nothing, they still have to work for them.  Therefore it penalises the team who have a player missing, but it does not automatically benefit the opposing team.  Don't know what people think of that?

One more thing (I've edited this post half a dozen times now!).  As the teams would be a lot smaller, it opens up the option of a rule like this:

Postponements
If a team is forced to postpone a match due to exceptional circumstances, they must give at least 48 hours notice of the postponement.  The offending team's captain must then make arrangements for the match to be rescheduled and played within 21 days of the postponement on a date to be mutually agreed by both team captains.

This would then not impact on the fixture list!

Steve, just wondering but are all the clubs going to get a vote or something about the league changing :question:

Yes, everyone will get the opportunity to vote.  Each club is allowed 2 votes.  I will send voting forms out so that people who can't attend the meeting can still vote.  This will happen in the new year at an EGM.

If you fancy trialling the 3-man team format you can play for one of my teams v Arnold on 22nd December.  We'll be playing all 6 frames on 1 table to see how long it takes.  This goes for anyone else who fancies it?

i think this is the best solution to have a 3 man team, people will not cancel on a regular basis. When you have 6 man team, there is a greater chance that someone will not be available and cause problems. We have not had a problem so far but have seen other teams struggle to get their players together for a few hours.

Will see what happens with vote !!! :england:

Steve, I dont fancy your 2 man playing 3 frames, I know you say it would incur 2 penalty points but what total would they come off. Surely that is opening the system to manipulation again where the 2 best players would play 3 frames each.

As for a postponement being rearranged within 3 weeks. As the postponement will have been reported to you surely YOU would be able to dictate when the match WILL be played on an appropriate blank TUESDAY.

I agree with Alan, 2 players playing 3 frames each is wide open to perhaps even worsening the 'problem' we have now.  A team becoming a pair but gaining an advantage in a team sport makes no sense. 4-0 (with the penalty) is better that 4-2 if you follow my reasoning... (see steve's idea).

You should always have a better chance of winning with a your best 3 players in a 3 man match or best 4 in a 4 man match (or 8 in an 8 man in the current format).  That is not the case now and you can have 8 men available at the moment and the other team turn up with their strongest 6 while 'resting' players and be more not less likely to win.  If you want the team spirit, a full team of players should be stronger that a team short of players.  Simple really or am I mad?

I like the idea of having two frames per player, however I think the problem with three man teams is that there will be certain players within the teams that want to play with eachother rather than against eachother. What I mean by this is that there are 8+ players in a team, so there could be possibly 2-3 new teams per old team so to speak. So lets say the three best players in that team join up, the not so good players might not be happy with that and could cause aguments or some sort of conflict if you know what i mean. :thx:

Jordan.

It's unlikely they will be playing against each other.  You will probably find the stronger half of your team will be in a higher division than the weaker half.  Don't forget that this should give is 4, possibly 5 divisions.  That effectively gives City Hospital two chances of winning a trophy/prize instead of the one chance you get now.  The current format for most teams is effectively like having two teams anyway, one that usually plays away and one that plays at home.  The new format would simply mean that those two halves will be competing for points seperately rather than together.

The way I see it going is:

Arnold - 4 teams
BCI - 4 teams
Beeston - 2 teams
City Hospital - 2 teams
Cotgrave - 2 teams
Lenton - 2 teams
Mapperley - 2 teams
Nottingham Uni - 2 teams
Oakleigh - 2 teams
Pegasus - 4 teams
Phoenix - 2 teams
Stadium - 2 teams
Wollaton - 2 teams

TOTAL: 32 teams

However, based on the number of (NHSL) players at each club, there is definitely the potential for:

Arnold - 4 teams
BCI - 6 teams
Beeston - 6 teams
City Hospital - 3 teams
Cotgrave - 3 teams
Lenton - 3 teams
Mapperley - 3 teams
Nottingham Uni - 4 teams
Oakleigh - 2 teams
Pegasus - 4 teams
Phoenix - 3 teams
Stadium - 3 teams
Wollaton - 2 teams

TOTAL: 46 teams

46 teams could equal 6 divisions

Wouldn't that be worth a few arguments?

Yep i think we'll definetely be looking at 4 divisions at least (hopefully 6 as i really want to see the look on Dave Buckley's (treasurer) face when you submit the invoice for new cups  ;)

I also think by having more league's you allow players to find their level and will enjoy playing against similiar standard opponents week in week out.

It's also going to be so much easier for new teams to form.  I think that sometimes, especially the teams that have played together for years become a bit of a closed shop and perhaps seem a little unapproachable especially to the younger players who perhaps would love to have a go at playing league snooker but maybe doubt if they're good enough. With a new format of 3/4 man teams a few mates who play snooker together will hopefully think why don't we become a team.

if i had to be honest, I rather like this existing Nhsl format it's become rather traditional good well known and unique format! I do have my doubts about this new format of 3 man two frames! As i mentioned in one of my previous posts, I thought it worked well in the 6 Reds league because of the nature of the game. This New format is prity much the same as the old Super league format! I think it worked for the Super League because a better standard of play which always helps. If the 6 Reds was anything to go by, you will still get many postponed matches as teams will be reluctent to play a fixture against a Top team unless they had their Top 3 players available rather than using their so called 4th player!

Two frames are good, but it has it's problems too! Because of time and the one table problems we have, then you'll tend to get people turning up later in the night to play their match which is good for the one or two who may finish late, but i feel it will miss the great team spirit we have in this existing format. If we all just turned up played and went after our individual frame/frames then it will just be like an individual match rather than a great team effort as it is now. Mixed views, i don't know! Trial and error i suppose, as i'm sure i mentioned already once before, the main reason why it's proving very tricky to implement new changes is simply we already adopt a great working format!

Two excellent posts there Mike & Kwok which highlight the potential pros & cons of the 3-man team format.

It will be good to see how the trials go on 22nd December.  We'll keep a note of how long each frame takes and provide some feedback on the forum.

A simple rule can help promote good team play:

Players 1 & 2 must be present and available to play at 7.30pm.  Player 3 must be present and available to play at 8.30pm.  Any player not available to play at these times will concede one frame.  If players 1 & 2 are not present at 8.00pm then the match will be conceded 6-0.

A rule like this will be needed anyway to ensure that all 6 frames get played in a reasonable time on the night.  We can't afford to allow teams to turn up late when we have to fit 6 frames in, particularly if there's only one table to play on!  I would imagine that a team playing at home will usually arrive before 7.30pm so that they can get some practise and make the most of the home advantage.  A team playing away will most probably travel away together from their home club having had some practise.

This rule is also needed to ensure that there are players available to referee the frames.  How many times have you heard people moaning about players that turn up, play their frame and then clear off without reffing a frame?

As a captain, if you have a player who regularly just turns up, plays his frames and clears off, do you really want them in your team?  I can understand it happening occasionally due to work or other commitments getting in the way but if a player did this every week he wouldn't be much of a team player would he?

I'll try and sort a trial match between Pegasus 'B' & Oakleigh Lodge for the 22nd which will give a good pointer for the lower division teams.  Will also be good to guage Spider's views on the subject as he's never on this forum and is one of the most out-spoken at the meetings.

Mike

That would be great Mike.  When I was there the other night he mentioned the idea of a friendly on the 22nd so he would definitely be up for it.  The beer there is very cheap too, £1.60 a pint I think we paid!

No doubt about it, between 4 and 6 divisions would be worth a few arguments.

Kwok, you mentioned what's maybe the biggest con with this idea - that some of the team spirit might go being in a smaller team.  However you will definitely get to know your team mates very well in a 4 man squad which creates a different kind of bond.  You are also still playing for a club too so that element remains.

Something else  you mentioned was teams being likely to postpone as they can't field a full strength team against a top team.  Remember, with more divisions you are unlikely to be playing 'top' teams unless you are one.   More divisions means teams should be closer in ability level to other teams in the same division.  I can see there being a few seriously one sided cup matches though.

Alright Daniel,

I have a great bond with my Bci Super Elites team, like all great successful captains should have. I think it is very important to have that kind of relaionship I have the greatest respect for all my players and in return I get great support and backing for being the team captain organising and making those decisions and every now and again putting in a key performance of my very own!

The Bci snooker club can field either 8player, 6player or even 3player formats! Talking from experience regarding postponed matches Top flight snooker tends to be far more competitive and there for inorder to get the edge player selection is far more an issue than in the lower leagues where it is more "fun!" for example if based on this new format

Pegasus team
1) Chris Brooks, 2)Wayne Martin, 3) Nav, 4)Mike Langdon
if Pegasus was playing another top side like Beeston if one of the first 3 players was missing that day, even I can't blame them for postponing that very Big game against agains Beeston as they are an very very tough side to beat! I'm Not saying for one min that don't play Mike! This was just an example "my apologies Mike" I'd have you in my team any day Mr lucky Langdon! "Mike's a great player to have and will compliment any team! But it's just tha Edge I'm talking about! Not as important in lower leagues!     

Kwok,

Thanks for getting back to  me.

I see what you mean what you mean about players selection and maybe postponing matches to get an edge.  However, I just think that surely even in an 8 man format this can happen anyway if a couple of strong players are missing.  It might be slightly more likely in a 4 man squad but not much more.  There is the same chance of 2 players being  unavailable for a 8/6 man match as 1 player being unavailable for a 3/4 man match.  Having said that, I have to admit, you are a team captain and I'm not.  You have a better idea of what is likely to lead to a captain wanting to postpone a game than I do so your opinion is more important than mine on this.

What do other team captains think?  Would you be more likely to postpone in a 3 play 2 frames than with the current format?

:question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question:

Can see both the arguments displayed about postponing games. We have 3/4 players who are that bit better than everyone else so if a couple couldn't play the best team would be slightly weaker. And the higher up the league pyramid you go the more important that slight edge could be. However we'd never postpone in those circumstances as at the end of the day it's for fun. If you win great  :happy: but it really doesn't matter. Postponing as one or two people can't play also devalues the other members of your sqaud as they're there to step in if. If I was one of them I'd be - :angry:

Hi Daniel,
As captain of Phoenix,the 3 man 2 frame,would be great! As,i've always the 3 available anyway, so we wouldn't need to postpone,even if 1 or 2 of our best players weren't available,i have other 'squad' players to select from, (they know they mite not always be selected, when the better players are available).
As, (i think) most teams have a 'squad' to select from,then there should be no!! need for postponing,(solely just because their better players aren't available)indeed,if they 'have' the,said 'squad' then they're there to be 'selected',and 'should' be used,no postponing should be allowed. If no 'squad' players available then that's fair enough!
In any case,what's the point in having a 'squad'  to select from,then not playing them until your better players are available,makes the other team players feel 'worthless i'm sure.
I think i have made a very valid point!

No offence taken Kwok....it was quite nice to see my name next to those cracking players.

For me it's quite simple NO POSTPONEMENTS unless adverse weather conditions in which case the league should call a blanket postponement of that weeks fixtures.  If your missing your best players hard lines but a title is won over a whole season not just one match. The current 24 hour rule gives teams a loophole to get out of playing matches and that needs to be closed to manipulation.

Teams would soon find an extra player or two for the match rather than concede the result.

I also feel that we could avoid walkovers being awarded if we allowed players from B,C or D teams to fill the gaps as the 4 man squads would allow flexibility.

for instance....The A team has only 1 player available on that particular night.  They could take 2 from the B team to make 3.  The B team would then take 1 from the C team to add to the 2 remaining players to make 3 and the C team would be left with 3 = All matches played with no walkovers.

Perhaps the B team might have a really important match so they might just allow the 4th player to play for the 1st team and take 1 from the C team....it's flexible.

You could also add the only teams who are only allowed to turn up with just 2 men are the last team from a club or those with only 1 team who would incur the 2 point penalty for 2 players playing 3 frames each.

I understand the view that it'll be really annoying for a B team to lose perhaps their best player on occasions but it doesn't have to be the best player they let go....i guess it depends on the clubs ethos.  My ethos at Pegasus is that the A team comes first and that the B team is there to support the A team and to allow players the chance to gain experience, improve and hopefully get to the standard where they're knocking on the 1st team door.  

Hi Steve...think i posted at the same time as you but couldn't be bothered to review it.  Think we're along similar lines especially on the No postponements.  :thumbup:

I personally also would prefer no postponements.

I thought I would list some of the other UK league rules concerning postponements so that you can see just how strict some leagues are compared to ours:

POSTPONED MATCHES
Any postponements must have the permission of the league secretary with at least 7 days notice and have the agreement of both team captains. Any league match postponed for any reason must be played within 14 days of the original date.  All rearranged league matches must be played before the last league match date.

Postponement of League Matches
1. Due to the fact that teams can register as many players as possible, postponement at very short notice is not allowed. Any offending team will be fined 6pts.
2. Any team committing this offence more than twice in a season will be expelled from the league and will not be allowed to compete the following season or their registered players.  Also all players concerned will not be allowed to play for anyone else during the current season. So even if you only have one player available it would be in your teams best interest to attend the match and forefeit any frames left over.  Exceptional circumstances will be left up to the committee`s discretion.
3. Matches may now only be postponed through the match sec. giving at least 14 days in advance of the match in question. A team can only postpone a match if their opponents can mutually agree on that match being played within a calendar week of the original match date.

POSTPONING A LEAGUE MATCH
13a ONE match per season may be postponed if notice is given in writing at least two weeks before the game to the opposing captain/contact and the Fixture Secretary. Any extenuating circumstances with regards to further postponements will be dealt with by the Committee.
13b A postponed match must be played within 21 days. The home team to give 3 dates to play. These dates must contain 2 different nights of the week, and must not clash with any match being played by their opponents in the WARRINGTON SNOOKER LEAGUE. If the away team cannot agree to any of the date's given, then the League will decide the date of the rearranged match. Failure to play the match, (decided by the council) will result in the NON OFFENDING team will be awarded the match (7 points) and the OFFENDING team fined £10.00.
13c No league match to be played after the end of the season without the permission of the Fixture Secretary.

Match Postponements
A game can be postponed if both Captains are in agreement, but must be played within 14 days of the original fixture date, failure to do this or if the opposing Captain is not in agreement, then the team who forced the postponement will forfeit the match 3-0.

Postponements
A minimum of 24 hours notice must be given, except in the case of severe weather conditions. Failure to give the correct notice period will incur a five point deduction. All postponed matches from the first half of the season must be played within one week of the half-way point of the season. All postponed matches from the second half of the season must be played within one week of the end date of the season. When a match is postponed, both team captains must notify the Match Secretary in advance of the date on which the match was to be played. Any postponed matches should be re-arranged as quickly as possible. Failure to play matches within the given timescales will result in the postponing team forfeiting all five points to the opposing team.

Great views Everyone :thumbup:


I do like the sound of this new postponement rule! personally i like to just get on with it, i can't even remember if i have ever had to postponed a match as i'll try everything in my powers by calling upon my super reserves! Obviously if i had to, i'd give plenty notice as get the match re-arranged asap! Sometimes because of many postponements you can have quite a few blank weeks! I remember my first match this seasons Nhsl league it was after the charity match at Bci when i spoke to Steve Butler and Mike Langdon saying i am very short of player for my first match against Phoenix. On the night itself we played Phoenix i only had 3 of my regular players, but rather than postponing the match i made endless amounts of calls and managed to get 3 reserves in so the match could go ahead. My reserve players still gave me 110% and we needed it against Steve's Super Phoenix team! I agree with Mike, if the rule was no postponements! then you'll see teams take a chance and play their reserve player more rather than concede their match on the night! Obviously sometimes postponements can't be helped, i do recall still alot of postponed matches in the 6 reds we had and that's 3-4 players too!

In the 6 Reds for the Bci we had 4 teams!  Two teams in division 1 and Two in division 2! In division 1, The Bci teams was split we had a strong team to challenge for the title and we had a powerful fun Giant team which produced some Giant results against some top teams, same in division 2. I believe we had a team that won division 1 & division 2! and the other two teams in a good mid table position. Great Fun the 6 Reds, i think most people liked it a great success thanks to Steve and Mike! This as i mentioned was a fun league after the main Nhsl league. I think if we did this as a pilot test in the Bdsl league after the main Nnia league we could give it a fair go to see rather than changing this great successful unique Nhsl format. To all those who want to try it can contact Mr Bob Wright who is always looking for new players and teams to enter his great leagues too!

Hi Mike,
Yeh our two great minds are thinking alike!! :thumbup:
Obviously,in certain circumstances,postponments are occasionally,gonna' crop up,but as a 'MAIN RULE' we both agree 'NO POSTPONMENTS'!
I think 'ALL' teams should they not have a 'squad' should!,set about drumming up some 'spare' team players to call upon as 'reserves',indeed,some players are happy to help out,but also may not want to play every week,this is 'perfect! for a tream with only a few players,who occasionally find themselves 'stuck' when first team players are: ie: on holiday,ill etc!!
cheers all!!
:thumbup:

My sincere apologies if I come across like a Party Pooper regarding the New 3 Player team format! That's Not my intention! I think everyones opinion is equally as important "Danile!" regardless if your a player or captain. It's great to listen to all people concerned, their views so you get the better representative random sample of peoples thoughts! I like the two frame idea alot, my main concern is that Will it lose the great united  team effort that exists in this fantastic current system we have already! Two leagues, one goal and a united team effort. Or 3players In a 4,5 or even six different leagues, Will you get the same impact? Another point is because it's a 3 Player team, even if clubs played on the two tables because 3 being an odd number it'll still take the same time as if you had a team of 4players on two tables! In the current Nhsl format we use, I play players 1&2 First on two different tables, then players 1&2 join to play in the pairs on one table and my player 3 plays on the other table. I find alot of teams still haven't adopted this simple formation when they play on the two tables and end up still waiting for a player just about to break off their singles frame to finish so they can now suddenly play pairs!
I do think the current system is great and it'll be sad to see this unique system go....

But looking at it from another angle, if you never try then you'll never know! I'm 100% sure whatever system we next adopt I'm ver confident that both Steve & Mike will continue to do a fabulous job!!! Keep up the awsome work  :thumbup: :thumbup:           

Thanks Kwok, Mike, Steve, Steve and Robin,

There is nothing I can add to your thoughts on postponements.  :thumbup:

I completely agree with most of your comments.  It should be really tough to postpone as that is the best way to make sure we get through the fixtures and minimise manipulation.

You don't come across as a party pooper, Kwok.  It is a massive change so any objections need to be heard.  I just hope that there aren't people reading this who agree with you or have other objections but are staying silent.  Steve, do you know how many members have viewed this apart from those posting comments?

Unfortunately I think Bob has already considered trialling the new format in the summer but can't.  Some BDSL clubs/teams are against the change.

One worry is that if the 22nd December trials go well, there isn't really a lot of time for further trals.  When were you planning to call an EGM?  In  an ideal world most teams will have experience of playing the format at least once before they vote.  Is there some way we could arrange for teams not in the Knockout Semis, on the 19th January, to play matches using the new format instead.  I know it might be difficult to arrange but would give people the opportunity to make a more informed choice when voting.

with regard the 3 man team playing two frames sounds a move in the right direction in terms of raising the standard of the snooker being played, you will see better snooker being played and players will be able to relax more knowing one shot wont cost them the match. I would look forward to a two frame game .

Steve, I'm going to share my apinion and say that I liked the idea of the 6 man teams that you stated earlier on in the posts. But I think that the three man teams are just too small and that format should just stay with the 6 red ball league.

Sean :thx:

I've spoken to quite a few players now (including some that don't currently play in the NHSL but want to) and I can honestly say that the majority of them are in favour of switching to a 3-man team format.  The main reasons being that:

1. They want to play 2 frames
2. They don't want to play pairs
3. They would prefer to have all their team with them at the same venue
4. They want to enter a team but cannot raise the 6 players needed under the current format

Like Bob Wright says though, the league belongs to everyone who plays in it and NO rules will get changed unless the majority of clubs vote for the changes.  The current format has been successful and the league continues to attract new players all the time, however that doesn't mean it cannot get even better.  To me, "better" means more players, more teams, more revenue, more money donated to charity.  Whilst we have succeeded in doing this so far using the current format, I think we have just about reached the limit.  I think that to continue to grow we need to adopt the new format so that it is easier to attract new players and teams.

The strategy going forward will be:

1. Trials of the new format to take place in December/January.

If trials are a success:

2. Survey every member club to see how they are likely to vote and how many teams they are likely to enter.

If survey indicates majority of clubs will vote in favour:

3. Set up a working party to write new league rules

4. Call an EGM in May 2010 to vote on acceptance of the new rules for the 2010/11 season.

Kwok: Your comments are important.  When (if) we get to the survey stage I will be asking you to speak to your players to see how they feel.  BCI will be entitled to 2 votes at the EGM so if you and your club's players prefer to keep the format as it is you should vote to reject the new format.  It's important you make your votes count.

Sean: I will be asking Rob Wallace to speak to you and your City Hospital team-mates to see how you wish to vote.  City Hospital will effectively get 4 votes because two members of the Committee (Dave & Dennis) play for you and they get to vote as well.  If your team wish to keep the current format then you should make your 4 votes count and vote to reject the changes.

In total there will be 26 votes available to clubs (13 clubs x 2 votes each) plus 6 votes for the committee (Don, Pete, Me, Mike, Dave & Dennis).  So that's 32 votes in total meaning we would need 17 votes in favour to ensure that the new format was adopted.

Trials of new format on 22nd December
So far I think we have arranged the following trial matches which will be played on 1 table:
Stadium v Arnold
Arnold v Stadium
Pegasus v Oakleigh

If anyone else wants to arrange a friendly trial match on this date let me know.

Alright James! Welcome to the Snooker forum matey  :thumbup:


I totally agree with you James! Don't anyone get me wrong, I'm No (party pooper) "Cheers Daniel!" I Do like the idea of two frames, more the better! It Should improve the standard as players will relax more rather than in the one frame! This new 3player system also has many pros, I'm all for changes and new formats if it improves a already successful system who wouldn't!!!  I was just trying to point out some cons too as every system No matter how good it is, has it's drawbacks too! Better we try and establish any possible problems now we are at this early brain storming stage so we can address and resolve them asap rather than in "mid flow season hey!" I do sincerely wish this new system every success if it is adopted for the Nhsl season! It has been a successful format in the 6Reds and the super league. I just questioned if it was successful for the Super league because the better standard of players in general, and 6Reds for the nature of the game, speed if that's why it was successful!!

James is a "Top Player" defo a Super league player without any question! A genuine "Bci Legend!" if every player in the league was in his class, we'd have no problem playing more than two frames each, take my word for it this guy is seriously good! My Tip, I'd back him to win the premier league singles this season he's the man to beat  ;)             

Quote from: Steve on 30 November 2009
The strategy going forward will be:

1. Trials of the new format to take place in December/January.

If trials are a success:

2. Survey every member club to see how they are likely to vote and how many teams they are likely to enter.

If survey indicates majority of clubs will vote in favour:

3. Set up a working party to write new league rules

4. Call an EGM in May 2010 to vote on acceptance of the new rules for the 2010/11 season.

Following the success of the trial matches in December we are now at the Survey stage.

I have sent surveys out to a representative from each club either by email or snail mail (see bottom of post for list of recipients).

I have asked the representatives to consult with their club's players and answer the following basic questions before 11th February (date of next league meeting).

1. Will you vote in favour of changing the format to three man teams playing two frames each?

Vote 1: YES / NO
Vote 2: YES / NO

2. If the three man team format is introduced, how many teams will your club be entering?

3. The matches will need to start at 7.30pm to allow time for 6 frames to be played.  Will this cause you any problems?

Please ensure that your voice is heard.  Seek out your representative and let him know how you feel.  If you have any concerns or suggestions let him know what they are so he can feed them back to me.

Distribution by email:
Alan Cunningham (Arnold Civil Defence)
Kwok Yip (BCI)
Dave Gibson (Beeston Snooker Hall)
Rob Wallace (City Hospital Leisure Centre)
Adam Goodall (Lenton Liberal Club)
Don Merry (Mapperley Community Centre)
Robin Hicks (University of Nottingham)
Mike Langdon (Pegasus Snooker Club)
Steve Howard (Phoenix Cue Sports)
Distribution by Post:
John Cyrek (Cotgrave Welfare)
Spider (Oakleigh Lodge Social Club)
Jack Packer (Wollaton RBL)

2 FRAMES PER PLAYER ----->>>>> FUTURE OF NHSL

Yes . . . i totally agree with you Nav . . . i hope that others once they've given it some thought,will see it is a step in the right direction,
especially as far as more teams is concerned.
Also . . with more teams comes the very real posssibility of adding more divisions
This can only be good for Nottingham Snooker and would raise more money for Charities too!
:thumbup:

Definately Steve, there are more benefits that will come out of the 3 man team in my opinion. More snooker clubs would be involved in providing half rate or even free tables such as Spot on Sneinton, Pegasus etc.. There will be more teams due to 2 frames per player and its something to give time to, rather than just 1 frame shoot out. Im sure if Barry Hearn was in charge he would go for this, probably also have music at the end of each frame and spinning bow ties !!  :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

Some thoughts.....

1. Think it should be a minimum of 3 players.

By this I mean allowing subs at half time. This allow clubs that have 8 players most weeks to give all those players a game. What we don;t want is the 7th player to stop turning up because he is never getting a game, and then obviously not being there when one of the other players is on holiday. Most of the more serious pool leagues have adopted this approach ( Notts supreme pool league - 2 sets of 6 frames- so you can play 6 players twice, or 12 different players as appropriate)

2. 6 frames at one table venues.

a)To be honest, phoenix will probably be playing most of their matches from now one on one table, as for the last few months all our other tables have been used by paying customers.

b) Single table venues will just not be able to get this done. 4 frames at Wollerton for example normally takes over 3 hours, so how the other two frames are going to fit in is a mystery.


3. only 3 players does not make a team.....

a) The best format I've ever played is the 5 players , 1 frame each on the long eaton league, it is after all a social evening out. Has anyone got their number? (He He)

b) if there are only three players, will fees for the teams be reduced? Will we end up raising less. Phoenix currently pay the entry fees for our 1 team (and cover table costs) into the NH league, with two teams this becomes even less economical, as we all know, snooker leagues are for fun, not to make money for the venues!

Do we start charging the away teams for tables? Maybe we make the away players pay our normal sign in fees, that we have untill now waivied for visiting teams.


Tried to give some honest views from the venues point of view.. hope this helps.

Hi Stephen. I think the idea is that Phoenix would create two teams not stay as one big team.  If sides are just going to stay the same there is absolutely no point in changing.  You kind of have two teams each week all ready ie home & away legs.  The entrance fees will be less for each team (probably half of what they are now) and as long as each team mutates into 2 their will be no loss to takings for the league.

re 3 players don't make a team...i disagree as a team is a team and the fact you'll all play at home together and the following week all travel away together will only make those bonds stronger and the night will be much more exciting as the result will be won, lost or drawn all together on the night.

re 1 table venues...yes this is a concern but the trials went well and we will have the 10/10 red option if time gets tight (ie once the clock hits 10 only 10 red frames will be allowed + we plan to start the matches at half 7.

I also believe that by hopefully moving from 2 divisions to hopefully 4 divisions it will also become a lot more competitive as well as creating a super league for the top top players.  It should also be a lot easier for new teams to get up and running. 

welcome to the argument as there is a lot to thrash out and as always any change will be down to the vote.

Cheers

Mike

Like Mike says, your comments are welcome Steve.  This is what we need from every club because IF the survey indicates that we will get a majority YES vote on the new format, we will need to sit down and draft a set of rules which take into account everybody's thoughts and concerns.

I would like to comment on your queries as follows:

Quote from: phoenixcuesports on 27 January 2010
1. Think it should be a minimum of 3 players.

By this I mean allowing subs at half time. This allow clubs that have 8 players most weeks to give all those players a game. What we don;t want is the 7th player to stop turning up because he is never getting a game, and then obviously not being there when one of the other players is on holiday. Most of the more serious pool leagues have adopted this approach ( Notts supreme pool league - 2 sets of 6 frames- so you can play 6 players twice, or 12 different players as appropriate)

As has been mentioned before in this (long) thread, we may go for 4 player squads.

Should all 4 players be available on a match night a team may play all 4 players as follows:

Player A: 2 frames
Player B: 2 frames
Player C: 1 frame
Player D: 1 frame

Therefore every player can be guaranteed at least one singles frame every week (unlike the current system which only allows your extra player to play a pairs frame).

Quote from: phoenixcuesports on 27 January 2010
2. 6 frames at one table venues.

a)To be honest, phoenix will probably be playing most of their matches from now one on one table, as for the last few months all our other tables have been used by paying customers.

b) Single table venues will just not be able to get this done. 4 frames at Wollerton for example normally takes over 3 hours, so how the other two frames are going to fit in is a mystery.

I haven't played at Wollaton for a few seasons now, but do four frames really take over 3 hours?  Perhaps other teams who have played them this season would like to comment.

As discussed, all matches will be starting at 7.30pm instead of 8.00pm and any frame commenced after 10pm will use 10 reds.

We held four trial matches in December and all of them were completed within two and a half hours.

If you are playing two frames instead of one and you are getting spanked in the first frame, wouldn't you be more likely to concede earlier knowing you will have another frame to make amends?

Quote from: phoenixcuesports on 27 January 2010
3. only 3 players does not make a team.....

This season Phoenix have played 12 matches so far.  In every match except one on 1st December, you have had either 3 or 4 players at home and 3 or 4 players away.  In my eyes, these two sets of players are two different teams anyway.  I know they are playing for a combined cause but they don't exactly get to socialise with each other do they?  By simply creating two teams of 3/4 players out of these two halves, your club will have two chances to win a league trophy if they play in two different divisions.  Also, the new divisions will be far more evenly matched so they will both be more competitive.

Under the current format, division 1 has Beeston, BCI, Arnold and Pegasus who are far superior to Stadium, Phoenix, Mapperley and BCI Braves.  However, I am unable to create two divisions as each division would only have 4 teams in it!  Under the new format we would have 4 or 5 divisions and this would allow the new teams from Stadium, Phoenix, BCI Braves and Mapperley to actually challenge for a league title for once!

Quote from: phoenixcuesports on 27 January 2010
a) The best format I've ever played is the 5 players , 1 frame each on the long eaton league, it is after all a social evening out. Has anyone got their number? (He He)

I agree!  The most popular and successful format in snooker leagues across the UK is 5 players playing 1 frame each.  However, I actually suggested adopting this format in the NHSL at one of the league meetings and it was greeted with a resounding "NO".

However, having listened to players views over the last few seasons whilst I have been Secretary, one of the most common requests is "we want to play two frames each".  This is one of the main reasons for the proposed change to 3 man teams (it would be impossible for 4 players to play 2 frames each at one table venues).

Quote from: phoenixcuesports on 27 January 2010
b) if there are only three players, will fees for the teams be reduced? Will we end up raising less. Phoenix currently pay the entry fees for our 1 team (and cover table costs) into the NH league, with two teams this becomes even less economical, as we all know, snooker leagues are for fun, not to make money for the venues!

Clubs who pay team's fees for them will be no worse off under the new format.  My preferred idea would be a fee structure that would provide an incentive for clubs to enter more teams, such as:

1 team = £60
2 - 4 teams = £50 per team
5 or more teams = £40 per team

Clubs such as BCI who I expect can easily enter 4 teams would then be encouraged to enter a 5th team as there would be no increase in match fees overall.

If you enter two teams, I will create the fixtures so that the teams are never playing at home on the same night, so you will still only have to use one table.

Another point regarding the level of match fees in the NHSL.  The fees are fairly high compared to other leagues such as the NNIA, but this is because it is written into our constitution that we aim to raise money for charities.  Despite this, I am always looking at ways I can make the league as good value for players as possible.  Up until a couple of years ago the average match fees per season per team was around £120 but it is now £100.  Players also used to be charged £1 to enter each singles and pairs competition but entry is now FREE.  Players also now get subsidised entry to the end of season golf day and presentation dinner.  Furthermore, under the new format each player can expect to play 2 frames every week instead of the current 1 frame.  All this for £10 - £15 per player based on a four man squad!

Quote from: phoenixcuesports on 27 January 2010
Do we start charging the away teams for tables? Maybe we make the away players pay our normal sign in fees, that we have untill now waivied for visiting teams.

Some clubs pay their team's match fees for them but charge the teams a reduced rate for the tables.

Other clubs provide the tables free of charge but expect the players to pay their own match fees.  Stadium does this - we each pay about £15 each per season towards the match fees.  How much does it cost Stadium in electricity for the table light?  How much do they take at the bar from our team players and players from visiting teams?  Are Tuesday's traditionally busy nights in snooker clubs?  Most clubs state that a Tuesday is their slackest night of the week!

Alternative?

If there are a sufficient number of clubs that want to retain the current format, we could always have a mixture of both to keep everyone happy.  For example:

(http://nottinghamsnooker.com/Images/Clipart/3-man_team.jpg)

The teams I have used are purely for illustrative purposes as at this stage I have no idea which way all of the above clubs would prefer to go.

Clearly we would have to think how we could work the cup competitions.  I am sure we could make it work somehow though.

:england:

From the players point of view:-

When we played at Beeston a few days ago we talked about the 3 man teams and Beeston players were 100% with the idea of having the this format. They were happy that finally a player has at least 2 frames to play and gives them a better chance to get into the game. From what i have seen over the last 2 years is alot of players want to win and not just a night out and this is shown in the amount of breaks being hit in Div 1. There are players who want to play high standards and this is the only way the league will improve and generate more interest.

Nottingham league from my opinion is growing and getting stronger and have to move to the next level, the 3 man teams would be ideal and also less hassel in making sure you have the right amount of away and home players. We have to move to the next level !!!!

I understand where Steve from pheonix is coming from, but as an example, we spoke to Tom from Spot on Sneinton and he wants a Snooker Team to be formed at Spot on so he can get people into the club and see what happens from there. In return he would provide FREE tables, FREE Membership. Thats just one example, another one woud be Pegasus who are already providing the half rate tables plus free snooker on league match nights.

how awesome might the top division look next season?

BCI Ultra Elites....Jamie Moore, Jason Bettridge, Keith Holgate, Tony Collins
BCI Super Elites...Jonathan Mason, Kwok Yip, Neil Elliott, Paul Bell
Pegasus A..........Chris Brooks, Wayne Martin, Jamie Mathers + B team sub
Arnold CD A........Chris Winter, Gary Spencer, John Fountain + B team sub
Beeston A..........Neil Jones, Tom Walters, Clint I'Anson + B team sub
Spot on Sneinton..Nav Hussain, Stewart Crosswell, Zeb Ahmed, Yas Abbas
Sherwood............David Singh, Lee Crombie, Bash, Wayne Bilbie
Stadium A...........Barry Stark, Danny Di-Folco, Bob Walker + B Team sub

mouthwatering...i might actually stop playing and just start going and watching some of these top flight games.

Mike - don't get too excited -your our Sub  :blush:

Don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but I also think its good that with more smaller teams, its more interesting to see B or C teams improve over seasons and maybe rival their A teams and vice versa. For Example there might be a B or C team with 3 promising younger beginners who you see move through divisions, I think this would be more interesting for everyone than if they happened to join a 6 or 7 squad under current format (and they'd still benefit from any tips, advice etc from their clubs senior players).

Ultra Elites Mike?  :laugh: What about their C and D teams? Elites and Lesser Elites?

Hmmm, perhaps Stadium could go with Stadium Kilo Bytes, Mega Bytes, Giga Bytes and Tera Bytes? ;-)

What about the micro and mini bytes?

Quote from: mr147 on 28 January 2010
When we played at Beeston a few days ago we talked about the 3 man teams and Beeston players were 100% with the idea of having the this format.

Nav - you say they were 100% for it, but I have received their survey result back and it was a 50/50 split so they will be casting 1 vote FOR and 1 vote AGAINST.

I guess talk is one thing, but actions are another!

That suprises me Steve, because at the time it was the 3 man team. They have a decent squad of 8 players , so may be its due to that some players went against it. Even then it would be good to have 2 teams, it would be more competitive... I hope the 3 man team goes forward !!!

looks like one of the main concerns about this proposed new format is the time issue.  The trials ran without problem and we finished both trial matches at Pegasus by half 10 even though we didn't start until 8pm (this was our B team against Oakleigh, both Div 2 sides).  However I fully understand the concerns of many of the division 2 clubs especially those with only one table who foresee time problems.

The majority of division 2 matches tend to go right down to the final colours with a lot more missed opportunities hence the longer frames whilst frames are often conceded in the top flight before the final colours even come into play. If the voting went for the new format and we ended up with 4 divisions perhaps.

Division 1 & 2 could play 6 frames of 15 reds with the 10/10 rule to fall back on when play on the night is slow and tactical.

For Division's 3 & 4 where the standard is lower the following format would get around the time issue. 

when only 3 man teams:

Player 1 (frame 1)......10 red
Player 1 (frame 2)......15 red
Player 2 (frame 3)......10 red
Player 2 (frame 4)......15 red
Player 3 (frame 5)......15 red
Player 3 (frame 6)......10 red

when a team has 4 players on the night:

Player 1 (frame 1)......10 red
Player 1 (frame 2)......15 red
Player 2 (frame 3)......10 red
player 2 (frame 4)......15 red
player 3 (frame 5)......15 red
player 4 (frame 6)......15 red

I think it should also be pointed out that 10 red is nothingy like 6 red and plays much more like the traditional 15 red format.  Even John Higgins uses it in his World Series event for the early group matches.

The other misunderstanding about the new format is that teams with only 1 table would only be able to enter 1 team therefore freezing out many of their players.  The fact is that teams with only 1 table would be able to enter 2 teams as we would ensure with the fixtures that when the 1st team are at home the 2nd team would be away.

Mike

(http://dansemacabre.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/flogging-dead-horse.jpg)

Hi Mike,
I agree with what you have just posted,though i think,as long as we do form 4 divisions,(as there used to be back in the 90's),then i feel that in Divisions 1 & 2,you would be able,i think,to keep the full 15 reds, as i expect the 2 top divisions to be able to complete all frames in the allotted time.
May occasionally have to have 1 or possibly 2,(at most) frames with just the 10 reds.
May also benefit the 3rd and fourth div's if they are so worried of the time,and not completeing all their frames,then they could play ALL their frames with just the 10 reds?
Or a 'mix & match' obviously as they see 'fit' of 10 & 15 reds,it would be at their discretion,depending on how that team is doing for time?
I don't forsee ANY problems for any team with so much scope to fit in their frames,wotsoever,1 table venues,only have 1 team there on the night,whilst there other 'b' team and even 'c' teams would be away!

ON a final note:

Why don't we all just trial it for the 1 season,i think then teams/players will have much more idea as to it working or not?
It's the only REAL TEST as far as i'm concerned,you have to put "IDEAS INTO ACTION" then people can have their say,but with so many ways of 'fitting in' the frames, i don't think there will be any prob's at all,i think far too many are too sceptical of change,i think that's what it boils down to,some people just don't like change,and i'm afraid to point out that,it's the way of the world today.

I think we've 'thrashed' this out long enough now people,don't you?,we've looked at all the endless possibilities there's nothing left to 'thrashout',so come on i say . . let's just get the votes in now,and let's vote 'for change',otherwise we get 'STALE' & 'STAGNATE' don't we!!
Remember . . .

Change is not a bad thing,for some though,it just takes time to get their head around it,that's all . .

Steve Howard,signing off . . .

You talk a lot of sense Steve - fancy coming to the league meeting a week today?

Whilst you're on, are you able to fill in the blanks on THIS POST (http://nottinghamsnooker.com/forum/index.php?topic=1895) ?

"JUST DO IT" - (NIKE)

(http://www.10chancerylanegallery.com/artists/images/medium/000000679_0.jpg)

Thanks Steve,i do like to think i have my head screwed on when it comes to snooker,but . . .

i have remained unbiased in my 'open way of thinking',there should NOT be any more quotes of: 'what if . . . etc! until all the teams have actually experienced it for 1 whole season,then after all the thrashing out of this subject,you simply can't reject it in it's 'INFANCY' until everyone's played it . . .too many are quick to jump on 'THE BANDWAGON' and say . . .Oh! this won't work etc! This is totally ludicrous!,there should be no qualms until all teams have 'trialled' it in an actual 'season',before ANY critiscisms are even made of whether it will work or not!

There are people who think a 3 man team doesn't constitute a team,of course it does,anything above 1,is classed a team,for example:
the cox's pairs in rowing . . . what are they if theyr'e not a 2 man team,working together,so lets not have any more of the 3 man team,not being a team,getting confusing now  :laugh:

I think as i've already highlighted,too many have gotten used to the 4 man team,and are thinking 'prehistorically' to inject some new life into snooker,and indeed any sport,eventually you have to move forward,no more backward thinking!
This sport,has lost 2 divisions in our leagues, since the 90's, what more of an indication do people need, as A WAKE UP CALL,to realise creating more div's and thus creating more teams,is what were all thinking of achieving! You'd ALL be soon moaning if there wasn't enough teams to even make up any div's wouldn't you? . . .i rest my case . . .

Can't add to the Phoenix scores,as i wasn't there tues night steve,i woulda' thought, in my absence, that someone woulda gotten the scores and particulars, like i would usually do myself . . .oh well . . does anyone at arnold have them?

If i can get on the 11th steve,is it,i would love to come to the agm where's it at?

Steve Howard,once more, signing out . . .

The meeting is 8pm at Lenton Liberal Club.  I'll buy you a pint if you turn up!

There is always the option of trialling the format in the summer in the Nottingham 6 Red Super League.  A bit crazy considering the name of the league but at least then we could trial the format prior to the start of the new NHSL season so that we can iron out any issues.  We still wouldn't be able to guarantee that it would be voted in at the AGM but at least then we can say we tried it!

Just to further add to my last 2 posts and my 'open views & way of thinking',i have already stated that to really see how the 3 man 2 frame proposals will work i have stated that the ONLY way to know for sure,is for us all to have 1 complete season playing this new system. . .

Well . . further to what i have already put forward,which i do consider the ONLY WAY in which we will 'ever trully know' for sure how this proposed system will work is . .

To have a MINI-SEASON just a short-ish series of matches, (for all teams),so no need for my original complete season and then we can revert back to the 'Mainstream Season' should we so wish . . .

The real beauty of my way of thinking is . . .

If for the 'SCEPTICS' out there, they realise it really IS working,(contrary to what they originally thought),then my proposed Mini season can then revert to a 'complete full season',and . . .it will have proved to the
'sceptics' that as i've  always  'concerred' . . .

That you can't dismiss something until it's been tried and tested . . .

Yes,i know there's been a few teams trial it already,but i'm talking of ALL TEAMS in my proposed 'mini-season',for a SHORT TERM ONLY for all teams to trully find out for themselves,that it can work for all . . .

And that includes 1 table venues also . . .
Now let's get something sorted . . .

And no more 'sitting on the fence' with this subject . . .

This has been Steve Howard,

Thanks for reading . . .

(http://nottinghamsnooker.com/nhsl/Logos/NHSLLogo-nhslnet.png)

We have decided to scrap the plans to change to 3/4 man teams next season.  With the likes of BCI Super Elites and Beeston Snooker Hall against the change we will not be able to achieve our goal of making all divisions more competitive.

We will still be holding an EGM on 8th April 2010.

Having listened very carefully to everyone's thought and concerns we feel the following proposal will give everyone what they want:

Division 1
The pairs frames will be dropped altogether.
At each venue (home/away) 6 singles frames will be played.
A total of 12 frames will therefore be played in a match.
Teams can use between 6 and 12 players in a match (no player may play more than 2 frames).
Matches will still start at 8pm but two tables must be used.

Example Match

BCI Super Elites 6-6 Beeston Snooker Hall

At Beeston
Neil Jones 1-1 James Moore
Andy Spicer 2-0 Jonathan Mason
Johnny Kareer 0-2 Cpt Kwok

Beeston 3-3 BCI SE

At BCI
Jason Bettridge 1-0 Ant McMahon
Tony Collins 0-1 Ant McMahon
Tony Collins 1-0 Clint I'Anson
Paul Bell 0-1 Tom Walters
Paul Bell 1-0 Shane Kidd
Sam Haugh 0-1 Chris Hodgkinson

BCI SE 3-3 Beeston 

Division 2
This will continue using the current format.

---

In both divisions there will be NO POSTPONEMENTS except in exceptional circumstances (bad snow etc.)

The rule allowing the use of substitiutes will be scrapped.

The format for KO cup, divisional cup and play-off matches is likely to remain unchanged (ie. pairs frames will be played) but this is open for discussion.

We accept that we may lose one or two B teams if this new proposal is approved, however we feel the team spirit and sense of fun that is so important to many of us will be retained.

As I have mentioned previously, I had a couple of new 3/4 man teams waiting to join the league next season.  Clearly these teams will not be able to join us now so I will put them in touch with Bob Wright so that they can play in the Institutes league instead.

Your thoughts and comments please?

:question:

I have to say that I'm deeply disappointed by the final outcome of this whole saga.  I kind of feel like I did back in 1992 when somehow the Tories retained power when all exit polls suggested otherwise :angry:.  I wrote on this forum several months ago for people to seriously consider the bigger picture when voting on this issue, sadly it would appear that these words fell on deaf ears.

Had we been able to push this through with all the clubs on board we would have had at least 4 maybe 5 strong divisions. We are now potentially, without being overly dramatic in serious danger of only having 1 and a half divisions next season (8 & 6).  Arnold Civil Defence look unlikely to be able to raise 2 teams next season and if Gary has ended his successful time at the club it will probably mean the B team losing Sean Kelly further reducing their already wafer thin squad.  I also understand BCI Braves have some inner turmoil at the moment which must also raise a question over their ability to enter a team next season whilst Mapperley are also finding it tough.  It also ends Sherwood's hopes of returning to our league whilst you can forget new teams we had lined up from Spot On Sneinton, Rileys and an unnamed team that was guaranteed for next season.

It is so difficult to get new teams to enter when you need at least 8 players to form a team...still it should be good news for the Notts Institutes League who may pick up where we miss out.

I urge all members to support our new proposal of at least getting the 12 frame match format in place for the top division from next season which I think is a fine compromise on the argument.

With regards to the new rules proposed I applaud the new rule of no postponements.  Am sad to see the unpopular Substitutes rule go (bigger picture again guys).

Would prefer to see just 6-8 players rather than 6-12 allowed to play in a match, as I don't think this encourages teams with a decent number of players to set up a B team and for those Greenies out there it means 2 cars travelling to a match.... Think of those Polar Bears!!!

I also can't help feel we could have saved ourselves a lot of time and energy if some captain's could be bothered to represent their club and turn out to the odd league meeting or two.

Therefore I would like to propose that failure to attend at least 1 in every 3 meetings would see the guilty club punished by the docking of 2 points.  

Mike Langdon (NHSL Tournament Secretary)

This being my first input on this subject i would like to speak on behalf of Sherwood social now known as (the club) now speaking with the lads they seem to want to play in the nshl league next season. Regarding 6/12 man team totally think this is a bad idea think we may be able to put one team in BUT talking with them i know we could put in at least 2 teams to the proposed 3/4 team so hopefully the 3/4 team is not dead and buried yet so i will there at the next meeting (lee crombie)

 :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:  AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

:sorry:  Had to get that out.  :sorry:

I had a bit of faith that after all this debate current teams would decide to look forward.  That faith was completely misguided apparently.

NHSL had an opportunity to be a more interesting and varied league, with lots of divisions, very high down to low abilities having suitable opponents, a number of new venues to play at, many new players getting the chance to experience real competitive club snooker and players being rewarded with 2 whole frames of pleasurable match play every time they made the effort to turn out for their team.

If I have to describe how I feel, disappointed would be an understatement. :sad:

I would have thought if you can't be bothered to turn up to meetings or have your say on here (you know who you are) then you could at least have some trust in the likes of Steve and Mike when they advise a course of action.  The people who care passionately enough about Notts snooker to dedicate hour after hour of their own time and do a FANTASTIC job have every right to be disappointed.  I know  I haven't been around NHSL for long, but thats what I think.

I know the league is about the current players and teams and I understand that you have the right to look out for your own interests.  Steve Howard has commented on how things can and have declined in the past.  Imagine if every team under this new proposal lost say 2 players.  What would be left?  I hope the short term interest of teams doesn't cost NHSL too dearly in future years.

I still  hope going to the EGM might not be a waste of time.   I guess we'll have to wait and see....

Quote...still it might be good for the institutes league who may pick up as we lose out.

Sorry Mike, but it sounds like you think that the institutes league is inferior to the NHSL. THe standard of play is as good, but you may have some of the better players???????

I don't really want to pick any team up, because the NHSL can't get a format that suits them all. I don't want to pick up teams that would sooner play in the NHSL, but can't due to not having enough players will settle for the institutes. I know i picked up Sherwood social Club this season due to lack of players. I was hoping that it would be a one off. Steve and i have a gentlemans agreement that we will not poach teams for each others leagues. Most of the teams play in both leagues anyway.

I would also like to point out that i am all for the "underdog". That is giving the teams that play for the enjoyment of the game, not just to win everything, some chance oif winning a trophy. That's part of the reason i introduced the divisional cup matches, as Steve has too. To give the "lesser" teams something to have a chance of winning.  Lets face it it isn't all about the BCI 'E'lites, super Elites, Pegasus, Arnold CD, Beeston SC and Sherwood SC's of Nottingham. There's also room for other teams to play and maybe improve their standards. If it were all about the top teams then there wouldn't be any leagues, because no other teams would enter.

Sorry Bob haven't got a clue where you got the impression that i think the Notts Institutes league is inferior to the NHSL from  :question: :question: :question:

The quote you highlighted doesn't suggest such it just states that they won't be able to play in the NHSL now that we're sticking with the minimum 6 man teams whilst they could if we had chosen to go with the new format.  All i said was our loss will probably be your gain, quite where you got the inferior from is beyond me.

I also dont appreciate your misguided view that all i care about are the big 4 teams in our league and care little for the other teams and the players of lesser ability of which I am one.  For the record I have taken time out to help some of our younger players with their game and to get them involved in Nottingham Snooker and have campaigned for a more structured and fair handicapping system.  I also objected to a motion to just allow one team up from the second division and came up with the idea of play-offs to allow more teams a chance to have a succesfull season!!!

Mike

"CALM DOWN DEARS, IT'S ONLY A COMMERCIAL!"

I know this is a very heated ongoing debate, but let's try and keep focus on the issue and whats important!!

Firstly, as a player & captain of Bci E'lites & Bci Super Elites the  Winners of league and cup for both leagues i would like to say both leagues are terrific and doing Nottingham snooker priud!!!

Seconly Steve, Going back to your original point Personally speaking as Player/Captain for the Bci Super Elites i like your new idea i think it's far more practical!!!

I think the idea of playing two frames is great, and now with you new great plan we have the option of still playing two frames plus the great option of playing one frame also still! Genius Steve! This will also give teams and captains far more options!!  "best of both worlds!" I pesonally think if you went ahead with the other idea it'll cause a great big divide and dilute the quality of the terrrific Nhsl league which is at it's best!! I say best because, for years Arnold Cd have dominated now the quality of the league is that good now there are many teams challenging for the title!

Finally just touching on the issue of Nhsl Meetings! As i have already mentioned in one of my earlier posts, due to the nature of my work and it's commitments that follow i am unable to attend these meetings, however i will be having word to see if i can find another rep for the Bci snooker centre Asap!!!!

Regrads Cpt Kwok  :smokey:       

That'll be good Kwok as I can't actually remember the last time BCI were represented at a meeting...tut,tut  ;)

Glad that you're happy with the new proposal but i must confess to being concerned with the impact of staying in large teams with regards to our numbers for next season (I can't see it being 16 teams again).

Still it's time to move on and start pulling in the same direction again to ensure a healthy future for our league.

Cheers Mate

Mike

Kwok, you are a superstar mate but I do have to differ with you a teensy bit.  (Here he goes again I anticipate you all thinking). :sorry:

This is NOT the best of both worlds for everyone if you think about it.  Only teams who can consistently turn out 6 players will get the chance to play 2 frames.  In fact even if you can turn out 6 players, unless they are all playing snooker to a fairly high standard you will have to enjoy being slaughtered regularly to bother entering in division 1 (where you can play 2 frames).

It's almost sneaking an elitist 'super league' in under the radar from where I'm sitting.  It looks to me like the big 4 (or 5 with Sherwood) plus Nottm Uni, Phoenix, Stadium and maybe a 'B team' (if they are STRONG it MAY be worthwhile).  A lot of the other teams who have one table cannot, even if they do have several great players, enter the top division any more!  Not fair.  A lot of the players (myself included) will almost certainly be excluded from playing what many players agree is a better format.  This certainly discourages players hoping or expecting to improve (again including myself) and hoping to play in the top division from playing for a small club with 1 table  or even a club with 6 or seven strong players already as there is little hope of playing at the top level anymore. (B teams will only be in top division if your club provides 4 tables now).  I know the intention was not to be elitist but it is the outcome nonetheless.

For this reason, the compromise is basically great for the current strongest players but only if they play for certain clubs.  It also suits clubs who want to play the current format but only if they are happy to have no hope of playing the in the better division.  It discourages so many other potential future clubs and improving players and is NOT forward looking to my eyes.

Sorry to be the Victor Meldrew of the forum.  I love you all really. :blush:

However, I'm not going to pretent to be pleased... :sorry:

Mike. Sorry mate i was just feeeling a little down at the time, am having alot of work done on the house and it was getting me down, and as for the inferance, it looked to me like oh! we can't have them in the NHSL so we'll dump them on the Institutes. I wasn't trying to cause any i'll feeling as you know my efforts are to move forward in the game for all teams and all leagues. I'm sure most of us on the forum feel the same.  :sorry:

Daniel. Kwok will always be a superstar! I do agree with you a little on what you say about elitist teams. Yes there will always be the better teams and some who have 2 or 3 good players that can't reach the higher levels because the haven't got a squad that is fully strong. In the institues you are suppose to play your stongest player at number 1 and so on to number 4. BCI 'E'lites have a number 4 player that could easily play at number 1 and win, having said that i've beaten him this season. so how good is the number 1 player? Yes most of us not so good players would give him a game, but our chances of winning are minimal.  :thumbup:

All cool mate.   :thumbup:

In fact looking at one of the comments below., it looks as though even Sherwood cannot re-enter the top level with the new format without difficulty!  I think it's unnacceptable if even the likes of Oakleigh and Wollaton will not even have the option of 2 frames per man.  Under what was previously proposed there was the possibility of them playing 2 3/4man teams with one in the top division.

Bob, the use of Elitist might have been an unfortunate choice of words because of the name of one of the teams (sorry BCI).  I'd better qualify what I said I think.  You're right in what you say.  My point though was not so much about playing your best players, as that's what you have to do to try to win.  My point was that many clubs and players will be excluded.  If you play for a club with one table, no matter how good you get/are you will be excluded from playing the best teams and your development halted (e.g. Wollaton, Oakleigh).  You could form a new team (as some players had planned to) but need to have at least 8 players (if you need reserves) and 2 tables available regulary realistically so it's really tough to do that too.  Even for say Arnold CD who have 3 tables this is just a short term compromise.  They only have 3 tables so if they had the numbers to field a B team again that team would still be excluded in the long term from the top division as you would need 4 tables.  It simply is not fair in my view...

The 3/4 man team format meant so much more flexibility and allowed EVERY team to at least have the option of playing the same format as the top players.  It was easier to form a new team too if your own club decided not to play the new format for all of their players/teams. In terms of attracting new blood this is also a backwards step.  It's too hard to form a new teams so closes off the league to new  competitors.  My guess is that clubs who have 4 or more tables like BCI and Pegasus and Stadium (if they had the numbers of players) will only consider letting new or developing players play the old format.  This means that the better/established players will always get more team match play and are likely to stay stronger.

I've gone on enough but I HOPE that some readers will understand me.  I've rattled on because it really isn't easy to get across why I'm so unhappy.  I think it won't be obvious to all teams how excluded they are initially so hopefully this will get their notice.  I can also completely understand why Steve probably wants closure on this and I'm probably becoming the irritating but hopefully forward looking voice of reason.

Thanx for the sudden overnight Superstar status guys  :laugh: :laugh:

This has clearly been an on going heated debate on the forum for a while, with plenty of great pros and cons put forward, so without beating around the bush again!! In a nut shell the votes "that count" finished almost equal with a very close split for the change! So putting this into perspective the split for the two formats will result in weakening the Nhsl league and make it far less competitive!


Had it been a landslide result in favour of the new format who am i or anyone else to say any different! Never say never, it's a great idea that we should not ignore and look further to develop in the very near future!! I think if the Nhsl league had been a disaster for all these years everyone including myself would off voted for the new change immediately!!!


Daniel - The truth is, you'll Never Ever please everyone, had the results been reversed or there was no choice, with the Nhsl taking charge and making a uniformed decision for everyone we would just give it a trial for one season and see after that!!! I hear what your saying mate,  league snooker has always been the same for years! Back in my school days, many moons ago i started playing in the institutes league in the lower division to gain experience and there was always better teams and players far ahead of you dominating the league. Personally this has always inspired me to improve, i always loved playing the top teams and players! I believe "What don't kill you will make you stronger!" Believe and achieve, there is no short cut to success, plenty of practice and hard grafting " no substitute for experience!"


You get alot of good what i call Yo Yo teams in the leagues, good teams with great players but for some strange reason or other not get the results and end up going up and down the league now thats frustrating! But credit to the teams battling on and getting back up there, season after season! There was No guarantee my team winning the league this season, plenty of tough competieion out there, plenty of hard grafting and i think we just gelled well as a team! It's great that we can all put our thoughts across on the forum anyway respect to you for putting you thoughts across so changes can be brought to the table!  I think teams like Sherwood or "The Club" will surprise you with the new takeover, and looking forward to the new Nottingham Uni team next season!     


Regards Cpt Kwok :smokey:   

Quote from: laylie on 18 March 2010
This being my first input on this subject i would like to speak on behalf of Sherwood social now known as (the club) now speaking with the lads they seem to want to play in the nshl league next season. Regarding 6/12 man team totally think this is a bad idea think we may be able to put one team in BUT talking with them i know we could put in at least 2 teams to the proposed 3/4 team so hopefully the 3/4 team is not dead and buried yet so i will there at the next meeting (lee crombie)

Kwok, my point is that many teams can't even be a yo-yo team now.  Above is a problem for Sherwood.  Others can't have 2 tables or get 8 players so are excluded.  One minute we had a set of new teams/players able to enter but now less than ever can ever play in the top division. If there was only 3 tables at BCI then BCI braves would excluded as you need 2 tables for each team then.  Would you think that was fair mate?  You were inclined to keep the league as it was if I remember.  At least that way every team could hope/dream of playing the best (in the top division) or even do what your team have.

Of course the league has not been a disaster though.  But looking to the future is vital.  Playing 2 frames however is something I'm guessing those of you who do get the chance to will be delighted about.  the rest will have to look on with envy...

Daniel just a quick reply matey to your post!

Your correct, I was against the format change, for two reasons...

1) Breaking down team from 6/8players to 3/4players reasons already covered!

2) The issue of two frames reasons also covered!


My reason I said in one of my earlier post "best of both worlds" is because alot of people was for the format change because of the two frames each! I thought it was a great compromise for the same number of players for the two or one frame each!!!
I see what your saying regards the table issues matey! I don't thinks nothings official yet mate that's why I agree with you, we should all speak now or forever hold your peace at this stage and then leave it to the great organisers Steve, Mike and co to continue to do what they do best and decide the future or best direction for the Nhsl league as it's getting all a bit too political! Too many cooks spoil the broth an all that...!   

 

I think the 2 tables requirement for a team perhaps doesn't equate to needing 4 tables for two teams.  You would in fact only need 3 tables for 2 teams.

8pm Table 1 - A team match 1
8pm Table 2 - A Team match 2
8pm Table 3  -B Team match 1
9pm Table 1 - A team match 3
9pm Table 2 - B team match 2
9pm Table 3 - B team match 3

This works out to exactly the same time as would be used if each team had 2 tables each.  In fact if both teams used 2 tables each then 2 of the tables would not be in use use come the 3rd and final matches in a leg.

I do however see your point about it being unfair to exclude teams with only 1 table from playing the 12 frame format. Perhaps those teams with only one table (Wollaton & Oakleigh) could start their home legs at half seven with the back up of the 10/10 rule to ensure a finish.  I can hear the arguments now how it will be too confusing having some venues start at half seven whilst all others are 8pm....nonsence!!! it's no different to knowing and remembering you need to leave the club earlier to travel to Cotgrave than you do to get to Arnold Civil Defence.  It certainly won't come into play next season anyway as neither Wollaton or Oakleigh will be in the top flight. Unless of course we end up with only 1 big division.

Mike

I give up !!!!. No substitutes ??. Arnold will be reduced to ONE team next year. Wish I hadnt even suggested the "6 frame, 4 man squad" format to move forward with snooker and the Nazareth House Snooker League.

Quote from: alancun on 22 March 2010
I give up !!!!. No substitutes ??. Arnold will be reduced to ONE team next year. Wish I hadnt even suggested the "6 frame, 4 man squad" format to move forward with snooker and the Nazareth House Snooker League.

You had two teams before the substitutes rule came in this season so I don't see how you can suggest that the withdrawal of that rule will force you to only enter one team.

I also recall at one of the league meetings you said you were against the substitutes rule.  You need to make your mind up!

Judging from what you have been saying about struggling for players (and the potential loss of Gary Spencer) you were heading towards one team next season anyway.

If you really want to continue with two teams perhaps you should look at recruiting a few more dedicated/reliable players!

Happy daze.....

:england:

I AM against the substitute rule under the current variation because it has been abused too much and was being over used.
One player could actually play a singles and pairs for the 'B' team and the same for the 'A' team, making a total of 4 frames in one night ! ! ! .

As for Arnold only having ONE team next season, this is most likely being forced on us by your recent proposal that the home team shall have 2 tables available to play 6 frames of snooker. Assuming our 'A' team enter the Div 1 they will occupy 2 tables. There will be no table for the 'B' team because I am told we always have to leave 1 table available for other club members. Under the current system they used 1 table for each team, then if there are no other members in the club, they use the spare table to speed-up the match. Thats why I was more towards the 4 man-6 frame, 7.30 start, format.

:blush:

Quote from: alancun on 24 March 2010
I AM against the substitute rule under the current variation because it has been abused too much and was being over used.

I'm not sure it was abused Alan or even used that much.  At Pegasus it was only B team players standing in for absent A teamers which hardly gave the A team an advantage whilst the B team used James Booth just once in the whole season  :question:

I must confess to be puzzled by the Arnold A team postponing matches when they had the option as we did to use B team players.  I was hoping that this rule would (Should) have stopped postponements where clubs had 2 sides and ensure both sides completed the season with the confidence that they could so with the smallest pool of players possible hopefully encouraging other teams to enter B teams.

I presume you would be more happy going back to the old substitutes ruling which offered absolutely nothing to the B team and was rarely taken up by the A team anyway.

To be honest we'll probably end up with exactly the same format next year as it appears impossible to change anything without upsetting someone......It's Draining

Hi Mike & Alan,

I know that over at Arnold,Alan's correct in saying that they usually only have 2 tables to play matches on,as like Alan says it's only fair 2 leave 1 table for fellow club members!
But . . .they will then open up the third table once they know that members are no longer wishing to use it.So that in itself seems reasonable and only fair to me.

Re-Arnold A not using the subs from their B team Mike, i totally agree,it's confusing why they wouldn't use them . . .
The only real conclusion you can possibly draw from this is that Arnold would rather postpone matches rather than play their B team as subs,possibly their thinking is that their B team subs could possibly lose them vital frames? . . .But Mike . . .we both agreed in earlier posts that there shouldn't be postponements didn't we . . .other than inclement weather conditions for example!

As for the whole issue,of the 3 man 2 frames,it's amazing how many were for it,isn't it? . . then when the votes were counted it was clear that what people actually said they wanted before the votes,was actually NOTwhat they wanted in the end!
A quote from an earlier post from Steve Butler sums it up when he says 'actions spoke louder than words'

In the end after all the drawn out debate,nearly everyone seemed to want the new proposed system,who wouldn't have wanted to turn out for 2 frames? Tho' when the votes were in,it was a different story,so i agree totally with you Mike, it's been a draining amount of time, and progression hasn't really been made,for the good of snooker in general,more divisions and teams was what it is all about,nothing more,nothing less!!!!

Hi Steve, Hope all is well.  I don't think we'll ever please everybody which is why as Steve & Daniel have stated before, a democracy doesn't work when running leagues!  Should have just changed it to the 3/4 man teams playing 6 frame matches and been done with it.  Everybody would probably of signed up, some may have grumbled a little but would have got on with it anyway and we would have had a strong 4 divisions with some new teams in a much more competitive league.  As it was the whole thing was derailed by a couple of mutterings about team spirit being lost (unproven and to be honest pretty small fodder compared to risking losing some of our teams next season and putting an end to the new teams we had lined up to join)..oh well

I must confess to just feeling like dropping the whole idea of 2 frames per player (that was only ever the carrot, the real issue was ensuring more teams in our league, creating more divisions and protecting the sides we already have that are stuggleing to put out 6 players each week).

Anyway, if the 12 frame format for the top division does go ahead...but even I'm having doubts about it's suitability within the 6-8 man team format as I'm worried about it expanded the gap between the teams in the top half and the teams in the bottom half. (Thought the individual handicaps worked well in the divisional cups by the way)

So what I'm gathering from all the recent posts is that teams with only one table should be able to play in the top division (don't see it being a problem especially with the 10/10 option).
substitutes - yes, but not playing for 2 teams on the same night.
No Postponements

Mike

I'm with you Mike.  I'm fed up of the whole saga and just want to move on now.

I think we should just scrap the whole format change idea and leave things as they are.

As you know I won't be at the EGM.  Perhaps you could just try to get agreement for the no postponements rule.  This is important because it frees up a lot of "free" weeks for extra cup matches which would be great because I think the KO Cup group matches and the new divisional cups have been a huge success this season.

Regarding subsitutes, I agree with what you say and I think substitutes would be used more often if we don't allow postponements because teams will be forced to use them.

Good luck at the EGM!

:thumbup:

To Lee Crombie
I was looking forward to welcoming your team back to the league under the 3/4 man team format and it's a shame that you may again have to miss out due to lack of players.  Your club have been very supportive of the NHSL over the years, no more so than at the golf days where you have turned out in large numbers on both occasions.  I know you are also planning on bringing a large number this year even though you don't have a team competing which is fantastic.  The fact that you intend to come to the EGM on 8th April when so many team captains haven't been to a single meeting this season says a lot!

hi Steve

It was a shame this year that SHERWOOD had to drop out with mick running things for us last year he never said that he was not going to run things this year so it all went tits up but that's the past. watching our things have been going this year with (nshl) Sherwood as kind of missed it all so i have taken it up on myself to try and get Sherwood snooker back. And with new owners now they want to move sherwood forward and i want to help. Reading all the forum comments over the last few weeks about the new season ahead i feel a little confused about what is happening.
lee crombie 

I'm not surprised you are confused.  There has been a lot of talk on the forum about what may change but the fact is that no rules can change unless they are voted for at an EGM or AGM.  The results of my survey showed that the league was split right down the middle with half of the league wanting to stay exactly as we are and the other half wanting to change to smaller 3 or 4 man teams.  Because of this split we have decided there is no point trying to force the changes through even though both Mike and I believe it would be best for the future of the NHSL.

So the current situation is that things will stay exactly as they are now as far as the team format goes, ie. a minimum of 6 players is needed every week to play in the NHSL.

As far as "The Club" goes, if you want to play in the NHSL next season you need to try and get a pool of 8 to 10 players together.  If you can do this we would welcome you into division 1 no problem.

;)

As there are no radical changes being made for next season is it necessary to have an E.G.M.
Surely the minor issues, ie substitutes - if being used and playing for a lower side then they could concede their handicap ? AND needing to stress the importance of no postponements. These could be adjusted by the Committee and confirmed at the A.G.M.

That's what i thought was happening but the sooner things get sorted the better but i think EVERYBODY from every club who wishes to play in the nhsl league need to be at the next meeting (easy said then done) lol but lets see what happens only time will tell.     lee 

Yeh agree with Lee,re-all players who wish 2 play in next seasons nhsl shud turn up and voice their opinions.Though doubt you'd have much breathing space if everyone did turn up at Lenton Liberal Club . . .
Packed like 'sardines' springs 2 mind,lol! . . .

Of course it's never gonna' happen in reality,everyone wont turn up.I hear so many players saying this wants changing,that wants changing,but only amongst themselves and their fellow team mates.If you feel SO strongly on an issue then turn up at the meetings,2 voice & air your own specific grievances . . .
Or how else r u gonna get heard . . . ?
If u don't want it 2 fall on 'deaf ears' turn up and speak ur mind . . .

At the very least 1 player  representing each team should turn up,much more 'do-able',i would turn up if only 2 listen in 2 what's on peoples' minds . . .

firstly on the substitutes situation mike, we as arnold A cancelled matches when we had more than 2 people missing from our team and we did use sean kelly as substitute when we were 1 player down, our B team were constantly taking our players to help them out as a result of there lack of players, so with this it would not have been fesable to take players from the B team when they were CONSTANTLY struggling for players themselves , anyway its not an issue now for me as i am no longer playing for arnold A as of  the end of this season. i hope this clarifies why ARNOLD A cancelled games.

As per YOUR imput 0958/25.03.10 - YOU wont be at the meeting ??. Do we need to continue with the E.G.M. considering that there are to be NO drastic changes for next season ( perhaps next ! ! ! ).
'Spider' is most concerned because he hasnt been advised.

Alan,

Everything that is said on this "discussion forum" is just that - discussion.  I know that not everybody who attends the league meetings reads this forum, eg. Jack Packer, Spider, Jim Wright.

It's what is said and agreed at the league meetings that matters.

At the February meeting it was agreed that the April meeting would be an EGM.  I do not have the authority to change that decision.

I won't be at the April meeting because I can't get the time off work.  Those people that turn up at the meeting on 8th April can therefore discuss the important issues and reach an agreement on what happens next, particularly regarding rule changes.  If no rules get changed then so be it.

I have asked Mike Langdon to take the minutes for me.

I hope this clarifies the position.