|
|
Post by Bryan on Jun 3, 2014 23:33:05 GMT
Gazduke - the big problem with your idea is "policing" this issue - and would give a very difficult job for the PGL Hon. League Secretary - or even a "Competitions Committee" if it was established.
We looked for a LONG time as a Sub Committee at the Midweek issue and as Brian Leonard says we had the big problem of the difference in attitude between those Clubs WITH a "junior" team and those without. Those without could ONLY field "Senior" players as they obviously dont have any Juniors. Many of the other Clubs wanted some "Junior" players involved but not any "Seniors" from the SAturday Clubs with TWO teams.
IF Clubs were not so competitive and after silverware - or boosting their teams when under relegation pressure, the "spirit" of the "open" rule allowing anyone to "help out" would be ok, but it has been blatently abused (outside the "spirit" of what was intended - but NOT "broken"!
We have proposed the 2 Leagues under different regulations to try to sort out BOTH sides of the equation and therse leagues would be fairly well balanced if our suspicions about Junior Clubs maybe not finishing THIS seaason works out.
For the life of me I STILL can't work out or understand WHY Clubs want 16 players (4 full rinks) when there are only about 4 or 5 of the 30 odd teams can consistently do this EVERY WEEK! Many Midweek games are being played with 12,13,14 or 15 players at best - one team has ALREADY had to fold (Ballymena Park) - how many more will follow in the next 2 or 3 years because they cant get 16 players on a regular basis!!?
PGL Midweek IS a problem, but I hope Clubs will look at our 2 League proposal seriously - otherwise, as has been stated, the sub committee CANNOT "circle the square" and it will be up to Clubs to bring something NEW to this years AGM that they feel WILL work - but good luck getting agreement there!! The alternative if NOTHING is done is to allow the Midweek League to slowly descend into further problems and farce - a situation maybe in a year or two that COULD NOT be fixed and Midweek as we know it could disappear!
|
|
|
|
Post by dj2012 on Jun 4, 2014 7:57:09 GMT
I wonder Bryan if in addition to the Sub Committee's proposals at the November AGM, there are another couple of NOMs from clubs on changes to the Midweek,, whether they will be looked at together so that delegates can vote on what they believe is the best option of the three rather than have a repeat of the 2011 AGM. In that instance there were three proposals that were on the Agenda separately and after the first one was passed the other two were withdrawn as irrelevent. If I'm not mistaken the one passed was from Cavehill and has turned out to be the cause of the current mess. Theres no point in club's submitting proposals if they are not going to be considered properly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bryan on Jun 4, 2014 8:43:27 GMT
I agree. But if Clubs DO want to put something forward.. get it ON THIS FORUM asap.. so as other Clubs CAN SEE what is being proposed and therefore maybe not complicate the issue further - instead maybe a few Clubs need to sit down together and come up with a communal one? I'm not saying sub committee have got this perfectly right - we just cant see ANYTHING ELSE acceptable to a majority - even if this proposal would be??
|
|
|
|
Post by gazduke on Jun 4, 2014 12:52:02 GMT
One of the major problems faced by a lot of clubs is that some of their midweek bowlers are novices or (not to be impolite) of a low standard and rely on the Jun/Sen combination to encourage the novices, add a bit of competition, etc. If some clubs were to put out a team with no Jun/Sen players I would hazard a guess that many would fold within a season.
Why not restrict players who have played at representative levels for a start ?.
One reason to keep the current 16 man format is that the Midweek league would lose further credence if it were to follow the Vets format.
As I've previously stated if clubs wish to keep their members they try to facilitate everyone with a game albeit Sen/Jun/Midweek or Vets, if silverware however is their aim then they continue to load their rinks and run the risk of losing the members who cannot get a game.
Has B/Mena Pk folded because they try to use midweek only players or because their Sen/Jun players refuse to play midweek or another reason alltogether ? The reasons for teams folding must be looked at in an attempt to adress the issues.
In some cases it would appear that the midweek league is just an extension of the Sat league with a few novices thrown in to balance it out
|
|
|
|
Post by gazduke on Jun 10, 2014 23:29:55 GMT
For all the cases around how much the Midweek means to players once again it is playing second fiddle to a PGL TRIAL of all things. The PGL under 25 trial has been arranged for the 19th June, the same night as the PGL Midweek Cup. Already one match has been cancelled because one team has a number of Junior/Midweek players involved in this trial. How can this happen  ? |
|
|
|
Post by Bryan on Jun 10, 2014 23:47:19 GMT
I honestly think the PGL calendar is way overcrowded in May and June... with all the postponements of League and Cup games due to the poor weather there is hardly any dates within 28 days to rearrange a game. That is insane!
The PGL Championships in my opinion need spread out a bit more - and the semis and finals moved back a week or two which would give time to, for example, play the quarter finals in late July? If less league games for everyone in new setup next season... could at least one Saturday date be found for, say, the second round of the PGL SEnior/Junior Cups?
This needs looking at by a sub committee or a group of interested parties ASAP and try to spread things out. At present there is simply no alternative to have things like the U25 trial and midweek Cup "doubling up" - there are no dates left in this present VERY crowded calendar.
Should PGL Singles and Pairs be played right through early on... and the TRiples and Fours (with smaler entries) start later in the season?
Answers on a large A3 page with suitable diagrams and notes to erxplain your ideas please!!  Who is prepared to grasp the nettle and come up with a good solution to dig us out of this current hole!!??
|
|
|
|
Post by gazduke on Jun 11, 2014 23:43:00 GMT
Do the rules allow teams to cancel a match due to a trial or is it only for representative games ?. Surely if a team cancels a game on this basis, and it is within the rules, it is up to the home team to supply 2 suitable dates and not for the team cancelling to pick a date that they are available.
|
|
|
|
Post by winkers on Jun 12, 2014 0:35:43 GMT
Looking at the IBA book there do not appear to be any specific rules governing the cancellation of PGL Cup games. There are for League matches. In the circumstances it would seem that if a team cancels, they forfeit the game. No doubt they would protest and the GP Committee would have to make a ruling.
|
|
|
|
Post by santa2012 on Jun 13, 2014 14:45:22 GMT
I honestly think the PGL calendar is way overcrowded in May and June... with all the postponements of League and Cup games due to the poor weather there is hardly any dates within 28 days to rearrange a game. That is insane!
The PGL Championships in my opinion need spread out a bit more - and the semis and finals moved back a week or two which would give time to, for example, play the quarter finals in late July? If less league games for everyone in new setup next season... could at least one Saturday date be found for, say, the second round of the PGL SEnior/Junior Cups?
This needs looking at by a sub committee or a group of interested parties ASAP and try to spread things out. At present there is simply no alternative to have things like the U25 trial and midweek Cup "doubling up" - there are no dates left in this present VERY crowded calendar.
Should PGL Singles and Pairs be played right through early on... and the TRiples and Fours (with smaler entries) start later in the season?
Answers on a large A3 page with suitable diagrams and notes to erxplain your ideas please!! Who is prepared to grasp the nettle and come up with a good solution to dig us out of this current hole!!?? |
|
|
|
Post by santa2012 on Jun 13, 2014 14:49:58 GMT
Don't think you can move Association finals much later as there is an IBA rule that its Hon Sec must be advised of each Association's winners by 10th August so nationals can be arranged.
Did u not restrict triples entries at one stage??
|
|
?
Who is prepared to grasp the nettle and come up with a good solution to dig us out of this current hole!!??