Yo. On the timing issue. You said we have consistently ignored complaints were a timer was not used. This is relatively true. We, as a committee believe that if you are not following the rules then you are partly to blame yourself. This is a precedent we have set over the last couple of years and we do not want to change mid stream unless told to do so by the members at an AGM/GM. However, even if you don't have a timer and a dispute arises during a match you can request that the referee takes guidance from the captains and div sec. Please see section 31 point 5 of the constitution.
Lastly, coaching did occur in the recent cup match. The captain even admitted it in his email. The level of coaching was disputed between the two sides and in most situations like this the truth is somewhere in between. Perhaps we will never know. We did not order a replay or reinstate the offended team because they did not follow the rules and time the match.
I hope that explains our reasons and please feel free to keep the debate going. I sometimes think Steve (like Orrible) says things just to get a bit of a debate and interest in the forum going.
Monkey, small point, but what I actually said was "the committee/secretary can use the lack of a timer as a reason for not trying to settle a dispute" I try not to excite people by using phrases like "have consistently ignored complaints where a timer was not used" even though it doesn't always work lol.
Ok, for what it is worth, hoping to encourage some debate, here are my personal views - I don't expect everyone (or even anyone!) to agree, but hey, that is what debate is all about!
Since I started playing in the league 3 years ago, I have been mightily impressed by many things, and overall it is a briiliant and brilliantly run league. No matter how good an organisation though, there are always things that could be done better or differently.
Some say that "rules are rules" and must be enforced, whatever level the competition. I am with Craig Benstock on this one - as he points out, the snooker league relaxes some rules at the lower levels. We have the option of using discretion. Common sense.
Of course we must all follow the basic rules, but to think that all the rules and guidance are as appropriate to a Div 8 game as they are to a major tournament is mistaken. To claim that they are all applied/enforced throughout our league would be ridiculous. To try to do so would be impossible.
Some are so "anal" to use the popular phrase, that they are breached at nearly every match - i.e. the rule that if the ref calls after the break "yellow potted" that this is coaching! Who thought of that one - Professor Anal?
(No. 5 in the DVD series)
As members of the committee have pointed out on here in recent posts, common sense should be used when to call a foul and when not to, even though it is actually a foul. The reality is that this happens all the time, in all divisions.
So lets start by accepting the biggest reality - that well over 50% of the teams in CAPL do not use, or want to use, timers. The rest do, but I suspect a number would prefer not to - although I could well be wrong there. This situation should be formally accepted, even welcomed, not begrudged, by the committee.
Of all the rules to be applied to our league, to me, timing every single shot is THE most anal. Can you imagine Phil Taylor, about to throw his last dart for his out shot in a major final, and the scorer bellows down the mike - "THIRTY SECONDS!!"
It is a gimmick for TV to keep matches fast and within their time schedules. It is used at Yarmouth, so it is useful in the Prem division, and arguably in the First Div, as they may move up to the Prem.
For the rest of us it is a waste of time. Very rarely is the time exceeded, and when it does, it can mean a key match is lost, not because the victor was a better player, but the loser was a few seconds too slow. I have seen a very good Prem player lose a key frame in this manner - he argued that he hadn't heard the timer, which is a fairly common complaint, and one you don't get without a timer!
I personally don't buy the second ref is better argument - how do you have two refs, who may totally disagree with each other's decision? Simple maths says that you either need one ref or three, to prevent deadlock! And one is busy looking at a stopwatch anyway! If 2 refs ARE better, then both teams should ref each match, but without a stopwatch to distract them!
In terms of "a second pair of eyes" there is usually no shortage of these - there are both players watching (or should be) and other players too - as captain, I watch every frame. Disagreements are only rarely not settled amicably, as virtually everyone accepts the ref's decision is final, even if they disagree.
The reality is that without a timer, everyone does not take 10 minutes per shot, and matches don't last until 1 o' clock in the morning as many who are used to timing may fear. If a player is taking too long, his/her team mates are usually the first to shout for them to get a move on (as I know from receiving such "advice" occasionally!)
Monkey (are you still awake at the back there?) I hear what you say about precedent, and would not argue with leaving it 'till next season before changing anything.
So, my personal view is that:
1) The committee should formally accept that not all matches should be timed, and rule which ones should be.
2) The Prem (and Div 1?) should be timed
3) The rest of the divisions should not be timed (or unless both teams agree? or unless the home team chooses to?)
4) Cup matches and CAPL competitions should not be timed. (I think very few are anyway!)
5) I had better take cover before the missiles rain down.
6) I hope Steve hasn't taken umbrage again.
(n.Umbrage - an unusual form of porridge, found mainly in the Highlands)
Sorry for the length of post!
