Using Substitutes

[Mike Langdon]

After last nights meeting I am concerned that the new rule about using substitutes will be thrown out at the next AGM due to it's so called 'unfairness to other teams' which I do not agree with (The rule has been changed to allow any player with a 14 handicap or higher to play for both the A + B teams on the same night providing both sides are in separate divisions)  I urge any member who is thinking about voting at the next AGM to revert back to the old system to seriously consider the potential knock on effect of doing so.  I personally have not heard one strong argument for abolishing this rule and outline these arguments below:

·   It gives an unfair advantage
·   Players are already warmed up before playing for the other team
·   A team players are too good for the 2nd division.
·   Where is the benefit for teams with only 1 team

1.   OK I concede that 'it gives an unfair advantage' would be a strong argument if it was true. But surely this argument is only dependent on the ability of your squad anyway.  The only A team player at Pegasus who could play for either team is James Booth who is a 14 handicap (I am actually yet to use him in a B team match). Our B team already consists of three 14 handicaps (Myself, Steve Booth & Andy Orange) so you are only facing the same standard of player anyway!
2.   'players warmed up' - I'm sorry but this is crazy.  It's entirely up to the individual how warmed up you are. Some of my guys get to the club at half six others roll in at 8pm - that's their choice.  As an away player you always turn up to the sight of the home team practicing on the table getting warmed up....is that an unfair advantage? NO it's called home advantage!
3.   'Too good?' - The rule states only players with a 14+ handicap can be used as subs....trust me as a 14 handicap myself, I can assure you we really aren't that good.
4.   'where is the benefit for us?' - Why are you looking for a benefit from it?  Here's the benefit - extra teams in the league, far less postponements, not turning up and finding out you have nobody to play against as the team is a man short.

We need to look at the bigger picture here guys rather than some ill-informed whisper that the rule is biased towards clubs with more than one team.  I firmly believe that had this rule been in place in previous years we may still have 2 sides from Lenton and Sherwood.  It also really helps teams to enter a B-team with confidence with less players than what they would have needed in the past (with this rule you can enter 2 teams with just 12/13 players, where as before you would have needing at least 16).  I hope to see B teams from Stadium, Beeston and perhaps Phoenix in the near future further strengthening our fantastic league and these teams will be formed because of this rule.  I Very much doubt that they will form if we revert back to the old system.

Mike Langdon

[Nav Hussain]

I think the current system in place should stay, else most matches will be cancelled due to lack of players and this has already happened with a few teams and one team dropping out of the league.

I think the solution to this problem is having the meeting with most people attending and the case being heard.... As steve butler says "if you dont come to the meetings, then dont bother complaining about the rules" . He is right !!!

[Daniel]

Great Post Mike  :welldone:

I did not attend the meeting as I was playing but I completely agree with Mike and Steve Butler in other postings, that the rule is a good one.

How can it be an advantage to substitute say Nav Hussein (handicap -7) with Mike Langdon or Steeve Booth (or another +14) rather than postpone a match as they are down to play in a B team match?  The argument is absolute nonsense.

Clubs need to give developing players or  players like me returning to snooker after a long break the opportunity to play in matches. Division 1 is not an easy place for those players.  This rule allows increases that possibility by making it easier to form a B team.  Think about it people.

If the rule stays, I would not bet against the possibility of an extra division appearing, if not next season then the season after.

I just hope people think about the bigger picture and snooker as a whole when voting on rules.  I think it's quite narrow minded to vote to change the rules in the knowledge that less young players will get a chance.  Older players should consider how many years of pleasure they would not have had if somebody hadn't given them a chance to play.