Future of Nazareth House ! !

[Alan Cunningham]

Could this be the future of OUR Tuesday evenings -  the  "Nazareth House Premier ( SUPER ) League". Teams consisting of just 4 players, 2 playing away and 2 at home with each player playing TWO frames, each player paying ?1, ?4 per team - not as much revenue but would perhaps encourage more teams to enter. Perhaps each player could referee/mark for ONE frame instead of the home players being responsible for all.
If, I'm sure it would happen, a club has two teams in the Prem' Div they will lodge the names of each squad of 4 players with the League Secretary.
The lower Divs would continue with the 6? man teams as of present and these could supplement the Senior squads.

[phoenixcuesports]

I think this just multiplies the problems in the league as I see it.

If you're only going to have 4 players, why not go back to the much more straight forward home one week, and away the next.

Presumably, you'd need subs as all 4 players wouldn't be available every single week. We have 9 players this season, and with holidays etc have only had a bare 6 for a couple of the fixtures. Would you be allowed only one, or even up to four subs?

The two venue approach of this league does little to encourage team spirit, Tuesday nights from my point of view, is a social event, a couple of beers with a few mates, while playing some snooker. Again the teams in the top division may see it differently.

Have you considered the environmental issues. By only having 4 players, you're effectively doubling the number of car journeys.

Having two separate formats, one for the premier division would also cause problems. Does that mean being promoted means you have to split your team in half and enter two teams, and what happens if only one of the teams from the top division get relegated. Does the other 4 man team also get relegated to rebuild a team for the second division format?

Personally, I'd prefer to go to playing at home one week, and away the next but I know this causes time issues for teams with only one table.

Just a few thoughts.

[Mike Langdon]

It's an interesting proposal and the quality of the 'super league' would be of a greater standard.  It would suit teams such as Peoples Hall who have 3 excellent players but perhaps don't have the strength in depth of the likes of Arnold, Pegasus and BCI to challenge.  If this does get the nod I would prefer to see 4 player teams alternating home and away matches due to the fact this will allow clubs who don't have many tables the chance to have more teams (4 single frames per match?).  If there was a 4 player team format we at Pegasus would probably field 3 teams and I'm sure a couple of the other clubs may do this as well possibly creating 3 or 4 divisions of 8.  Of course to really expand the number of teams from each club we would probably have to have 2 nights of matches ie, Super League, Division One play on Tuesday night and Div 2 and perhaps a 3rd Div play would play on a Wednesday (or a night that doesn't clash with the institutes league - which I think play a 4 player format so perhaps the leagues could merge).

Mike

[Alan Cunningham]

I can see I've opened a hornets nest with this one. If we were to go with a 4-man team at home one week and away the other we might as well amalgamate with the Institutes League (no disrespect).
My original thoughts were based on the fact that the stardard of our league is so much stonger this season that the majority of players would prefer to play 2 frames, again no disrespect, but travelling all the way to Cotgrave and likewise them coming to us, to play one frame of snooker ? ! !. 
I would further suggest that each squad could be made up of 6 players - 4 regulars plus 2 others - then, if that team were to be relegated they were have the 6 ready to rebuild.  As for the changing of nights to play matches I would suspect that this would open the door for players to be swapped about in other squads at the same club.
I also take on board the comments by Phoenix that we have reduced the teams down from 8 to 6 players and to reduce it further down to 4 WOULD perhaps take away and destroy the socialising side of the events. This might drive the small clubs away.

[Mike Langdon]

You're right Alan this is going to create a few differing views but overall i think it is a really good idea that should be looked into seriously. I guess firstly there needs to be a vote of interest (this weeks meeting perhaps?) and then if the feeling is positive we would then have to have a (long!) meeting to thrash out format etc and then in all probability another vote to implement it.

see you Thursday

Mike

[Robert Wright]

On reading your ideas on your leagues future i like the idea of players playing 2 frames. The only reason we don't implement this in the institutes is time. If ,as we do , you start at 7:30 8 frames on one table is going to take till midnight to complete. players still have to go to work the following day. Midnight is far to late to be finnishing a match. This was happening in the pool leagues a few years ago. They have now changed their rules to compensate for this. I don't think you should change your format as it is unique in Nottingham. I do agree that playing on a Home/Away basis does mould team spirit and pushes players on to better things (If they are capable of them). If you want to know how the institutes league nowdays go to rules in the league forum. I am hoping that some of the teams that play in the Nazareth house want to put teams in 'The Summer League'. This is run on a similar basis and would show how the Winter one is run. 

[Steve Butler]

not as much revenue but would perhaps encourage more teams to enter.

Two seasons ago we nearly dropped down to 10 teams.  Then Spider had the great idea of the new flexible format.  This bumped numbers up to 14 teams.  After a bit of marketing in the last close season we then increased this number to 18 teams (ok, one has now dropped out!).  I therefore think we are doing ok.  With a bit of stability and more effective marketing we could get even more teams next season and perhaps expand to 3 divisions.

However, after hearing what various people have been saying for the last couple of years, I believe the best players want to play 2 frames and almost everyone would prefer not to play doubles.

As you are aware, it has always been time constraints that has prevented us moving to two frames per player across the board, because the lower standard players can take up to an hour (sometimes longer) to complete just one frame.

I?ll throw this idea into the pot:

Premier Division

Arnold Assassins
BCI Bravehearts
Cotgrave Cougars
Lenton Liberals
Pegasus Pirates
Peoples Hall Potters
Sherwood Sharks
Stadium Steelers

(I know the team names are rubbish but it's a chance for people to get creative!)

PREMIER DIVISION FORMAT
Teams of 3 players (3 best at each club), each player playing 2 frames, all matches start at 7.30.  All players play either home or away.  Teams to play each other 3 times during season.  Cost = ?1 per player per week.  Total cost per team for season = ?63 (plus KO Cup fees)

Division 1

Arnold A
BCI A
City Hospital
EMI
Lenton A
Mapperley A
Oakleigh Lodge A
Pegasus A
Phoenix A
Sherwood
Stadium
Wollaton

DIVISION 1 FORMAT
Teams of 4 players, each player playing 1 frame, all matches start at 8pm.  All players play either home or away.  Teams to play each other 2 times during season.  Cost = 50p per player per week. Total cost per team for season = ?44 (plus KO Cup & Plate fees)

Division 2

Arnold B
BCI B
Cotgrave
Lenton B
Mapperley B
Oakleigh Lodge B
Pegasus B
Peoples Hall
Phoenix B
Rutland Club

DIVISION 2 FORMAT
Teams of 4 players, each player playing 1 frame, all matches start at 8pm.  All players play either home or away.  Teams to play each other 2 times during season.  Cost = 50p per player per week. Total cost per team for season = ?36 (plus KO Cup & Plate fees)

NOTES

No offence intended with regard to placement of teams within divisions.

Teams such as Pegasus, Arnold, BCI & Lenton could be good enough to have two teams in the Premier division!

Clubs with 1 table can only have maximum of 2 teams ? fixture list will ensure that when 1 plays at home the other will play away.

Clubs with 2 tables can have a team in all three divisions if they wish.

The standard of players in the premier division teams must be high enough to ensure that 6 frames can be played within 3 ? 3.5 hours.

Premier Division to have its own KO Cup, with divs 1 & 2 playing for the current KO Cup & Plate trophies.

If I've made any mistakes it's because I'm still in bed with flu!

[Mike Langdon]

Reckon you've cracked it Steve....i think the format of a three man super league would allow for 6 frames to be played in a night and with the 4 man teams to make up the other divisions playing alternate home and away matches it would allow for all players at each club who want to play league snooker to be catered for.

I would like to see a registration process for the Super League players rather than having a squad (who would want to be the 4th man) ie 3 players to be registered for the 'Super League' team who cannot then play in a lower division for the rest of the season. However any player from the b or c teams can be called up to play in the super league when required as many times as needed without losing their right to play for the B team.  In this way the unlucky 4th man can happily play each week for the b team and then be free to play if the super league team are short which hopefully will stop postponements.

The only problem i see in having 3 and 4 player teams is what to do about the cup competitions? will the super league have it's own knock-out? or perhaps cup matches could be four frame matches (3 singles and a doubles frame?)

overall i think it would be great though - can you imagine how many high breaks would be knocked in by the top players in two frame matches - double the amount i guess.

Mike

[gary spencer]

good idea for the 4 man team, but rather than play it during the winter months when nazareth house normally runs what about having the league run through summer ,im sure some of the teams would still be interested to play during this period as most of us still practice through the summer, after all the format for nazareth house at the moment i believe is fine and there is no real need to change it, there is an institutes summer league so why not a nazareth house smmer league. it could start 2 to 3 weeks after nazareth house has finished . i know of a few people that would still like to be playing matches when the winter league has finished.

gary

[Robert Wright]

Hi! Gary, Firstly there isn't an institues summer league. Secondly in the summer the league is The Bulwell & District snooker League. It just happens that i am the league secretary of both, and a lot of the teams in the institues play in the Bulwell one as well. They are distinctly different leagues. They are run on a similar line however. I am already being asked by Nazareth house teams if they can enter teams in the summer. So why not come and join us and have the one league during the summer. It seems silly to me to have two leagues in the summer when one well run one is a better option. How do Nazareth house teams feel about this? Maybe Steve Butler and i could become joint league secretaries. There will be an AGM in May If any teams wish to join us.

[Steve Butler]

I don't mind helping Bob to run the league.  I'm going to be doing the website anyway.  I agree that one league in the summer would be better - it would certainly cut down on administration.

Am I right in thinking your club can't play on Mondays Gary?  I think that was the problem with a couple of clubs but I'm not sure.  If there are any clubs that would like to enter a team in the BDSL that can't play on Mondays perhaps there could be a Monday division(s) and a Tuesday division?  They do that in some other leagues around the country.  If me and Bob were to split the workload, I could take care of the Tuesday games and Bob could do the Monday games?

[Mike Langdon]

Hi Gary - You're more than welcome to join our singles league which runs through the summer if you're looking for some competitive snooker. Would be good to have a player of your quality in as we currently only have Jamie as realistic challenger to Chris Brooks for this coming season.  You would be on the same handicap as Jamie (+14).

Cheers - see you Tuesday

Mike 

[Pete]

Alan
It wasn't that many years ago when Nazareth House Snooker League nearly folded,
only through dogged persistence in the face of adversity by a few die hards managed to
resolve the situation.
At the moment: funds are strong, we have high calibre players, EXCELLENT SANDWICHES provided free at
one club, an influx of young players, a high quality website, trophies, cash prizes, novelty prizes, a professional
coach (buy the DVD),we are supporting a wide variety of charities, you have access to my sense of humour,
significant, democratic changes made after each AGM and you can purchase a watery pint of orange at the Pegasus
for only ?1!  What more do you want?

As far as I am aware the former Nottingham Super League folded after a shortage of cash through lack of sponsorship
and too few people being involved behind the scenes leaving the bulk of the work to 1 or 2 individuals.  Why change something
that is successful?

Pete
Chairman of Nazareth House & Responsible forTea,Coffee and biscuit fund at work.   

[Mike Langdon]

In defence of our watery pint of orange squash for only a quid....The pint in question that Pete purchased was perfectly fine until he lost on the black....whereby the tears that rolled down his face found there way into the glass therefore diluting the concentrate to an unexceptable level. 

I think the point that Alan was making was that the top players would perhaps enjoy playing two frame matches of snooker rather than just the one and with the 'super' teams being made up of the three best players this would perhaps make the top league more competitive (ie Peoples Hall, BCI and Lenton would probably come into the equation) and then by having 4 player teams in the next division this would perhaps encourage more teams to enter and by having all the top players taken out this would create a very open division.

Mike

[Steve Butler]

  Don't you just love the banter!

I agree with Pete that the league has made great strides over the last few years and we are in a healthy position both financially and with regards the quality of our league players.  We are also giving more money to charity and more regularly than for a long time.

I also agree with Mike that the league could be even bigger and better if we were to reduce the size of teams, separate the top players from the rest (league matches only, not cup) and give the top (if not all) players 2 frames each week rather than just one.  I certainly think that the top 3 players at Lenton, BCI, Cotgrave, Pegasus, Arnold, Sherwood, and even Phoenix (they had 3 great players at the Eastwood Open) could all give each other a run for their money.  It also stands to reason that if these "top" players are taken out of the current 6 man teams to leave the same number of 3/4 man teams, those teams will also be a lot more competitive.

There have been quite a few postponements this season due to teams not being able to find 6 players and Sherwood A had to pull out of the league for the same reason (they finished last season with 2 games unplayed as well).  So I do think that 6 players in a team is still a little too many.

I'm currently speaking with Secretaries from other leagues and researching all the different formats that are played thoughout the UK.  When I've finished I'll put together a little report suggesting ways that the league could be improved, based on what works well in other leagues.  I appreciate that tradition plays a part and we wouldn't want to make changes for the sake of it, but I think our league has to keep evolving and adapting, not just to survive but to grow and improve.

As ever, any changes must be voted in at an EGM or AGM.