THREE man teams (2 frames each) - Proposals Scrapped!

[Steve Butler]

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.

[Mike Langdon]

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

[Robert Wright]

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.

[Daniel]

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.

[Robert Wright]

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.

[Alan Cunningham]

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.

[Steve Butler]

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!

[Jordan]

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

[Steve Butler]

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?

[Nav Hussain]

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:

[Alan Cunningham]

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.

[Daniel]

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?

[Jordan]

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.

[Steve Butler]

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?

[Mike Langdon]

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.