Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: Absentee players

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,178
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 62/17
    Given: 2/2

    Default Absentee players


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Interested to know how other clubs handle this problem in team games,recently we had a situation in club triples 1/4 final where a team turned up a player short, and the game was played the team a player short won, but were disqualified by competition committee when it came to there attention, which is the correct proceedure.The confusion arises because they allow teams to play short in internal leagues, Law 39.1 is quite specific in its meaning,Many problems arise because players do not understand the difference between a team and a side, interested in views ,The team playing a player short did not have extra woods.
    No Grey Areas

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    4,934
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 115/13
    Given: 33/5

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Nothing in the competition rules (and I bet nothing in the league rules) therefore default to the laws and forfeit the game
    It's a simple game really!!!
    Commonwealth Games Technical Official - Manchester 2002, Melbourne 2006, Delhi 2010, Glasgow 2014, Gold Coast 2018

    www.allanthornhill.com or Contact me directly @ Ask Umpy

    Any comments made by me on this Forum are my personal opinions only and not those of the World Bowls Laws Committee or the English Bowls Umpires Association

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,178
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 62/17
    Given: 2/2

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Umpy View Post
    Nothing in the competition rules (and I bet nothing in the league rules) therefore default to the laws and forfeit the game
    Thanks Umpy in fact the league rules do give permission,and also allow extra bowls, But nothing in competition conditions of play,can they in fact have a local rule to allow it for competition play,it seems a nonsense to me to allow it
    No Grey Areas

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    4,934
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 115/13
    Given: 33/5

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I agree a nonsense to allow it.
    Such an advantage to one side
    It's a simple game really!!!
    Commonwealth Games Technical Official - Manchester 2002, Melbourne 2006, Delhi 2010, Glasgow 2014, Gold Coast 2018

    www.allanthornhill.com or Contact me directly @ Ask Umpy

    Any comments made by me on this Forum are my personal opinions only and not those of the World Bowls Laws Committee or the English Bowls Umpires Association

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    472
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 27/3
    Given: 0/1

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    A variation on that theme:

    Our Over 60's League is played between 2 clubs over 2 rinks of triples, which under CM3 would be treated as a 'Side Game'. Under League rules/COP:

    "Each Team shall consist of TWO rinks of THREE players" and "Any Team failing to arrive within half an hour of the time fixed shall forfeit the match .... Unless the Home Captain agrees to play the Match"

    The League rules do not themselves cover individual absentee players from any rink etc. In reality, it seems only to provide for delayed arrival by the travelling club.
    In one game last year, the away team (us) arrived timeously and complete. The home side lacked one player in one Triple. They did eventually manage to get hold him, and, as he lived locally, he arrived just in time, and the game was played.

    Meanwhile, some discussion was held as to what should happen if he did not so arrive within the time limit, although it was clear that the home captain would have allowed the match to be played if he arrived 'late'!

    Both 'teams' (in the sense of 2 rinks' players) were there (with one a player short on one rink in the case of the home club) on time.

    Looked at purely under League rules, one could argue that the home club should forfeit - as the whole Team (two rinks) wasn't entirely there. But this seems harsh, as the complete rink, at least, could have played and might have garnished some points to add to the 0 for the 'short' rink. In any event, should the absence of any particular League rule on anything other than the 'Team' make a difference - 'allowing' CM3 to come into play as for a side game?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Guildford Surrey UK
    Posts
    1,890
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 38/4
    Given: 13/7

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    NO argument. In a triples game, only two teams of three on a single rink, if one team is a player short then they forfeit the game, UNLESS the COP for the competition says different. If the COP say different then I personally would not enter that competition. No difference indoors or outdoors.

    Indoors in England the EIBA has the Vivienne and club U25 double rink which play triples and the COP says that if a side is a player short then they forfeit the game. In the EIBA Top Club failure to field 11 players is a forfeit.

    At my Indoor Club, Wey Valley, we have an awful lot of Internal triples leagues. The club COP here says that if one team is a player short they each have four bowls and the skip of the team which has three players turn up plays only two bowls with the lead and second playing three bowls. This ends up with one skip having four bowls and one skip having only two bowls and in my opinion the team that has turned up with three players is totally disadvantaged. The team who are a player short lose 25% of their shots on the first occasion and if they turn up short again then lose 33% and then 50%.

    This makes the game a complete abortion and having played like this already once this winter season I have decided that if happens again I will go home.
    Last edited by astolat; 10-01-2020 at 09:53 AM.
    World Bowls International Technical Official
    EBUA International Umpire
    EBUA Surrey County Co-ordinator

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,178
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 62/17
    Given: 2/2

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by astolat View Post
    NO argument. In a triples game, only two teams of three on a single rink, if one team is a player short then they forfeit the game, UNLESS the COP for the competition says different. If the COP say different then I personally would not enter that competition. No difference indoors or outdoors.

    Indoors in England the EIBA has the Vivienne and club U25 double rink which play triples and the COP says that if a side is a player short then they forfeit the game. In the EIBA Top Club failure to field 11 players is a forfeit.

    At my Indoor Club, Wey Valley, we have an awful lot of Internal triples leagues. The club COP here says that if one team is a player short they each have four bowls and the skip of the team which has three players turn up plays only two bowls with the lead and second playing three bowls. This ends up with one skip having four bowls and one skip having only two bowls and in my opinion the team that has turned up with three players is totally disadvantaged. The team who are a player short lose 25% of their shots on the first occasion and if they turn up short again then lose 33% and then 50%.

    This makes the game a complete abortion and having played like this already once this winter season I have decided that if happens again I will go home.
    My thoughts exactly,in fact my club are looking at ignoring the law next year for club competitions,so i will certainly not be entering any,just imagine mens pairs 1player playing against 2???he would have to lead?
    No Grey Areas

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    472
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 27/3
    Given: 0/1

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Yes, it seems entirely wrong that the team that is wholly compliant is put at a disadvantage.

    In the case of the pairs, it would seem more than silly - the single player having to do everything!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,178
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 62/17
    Given: 2/2

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by corptaxman View Post
    Yes, it seems entirely wrong that the team that is wholly compliant is put at a disadvantage.

    In the case of the pairs, it would seem more than silly - the single player having to do everything!
    why do you say they are disadvantaged, nobody said anything about extra bowls,Law 39.1 says in a team game if a player short you are disqualified,if they are going to ignore that law and play ,where does it say they have extra bowls
    No Grey Areas

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    472
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 27/3
    Given: 0/1

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Referring to comments in other post eg:

    See Post 4 where Alan says: "Such an advantage to one side" If one side has an advantage, the other must be at a disadvantage.

    or Post 6 : "This ends up with one skip having four bowls and one skip having only two bowls and in my opinion the team that has turned up with three players is totally disadvantaged." This post elicited a response: "My thoughts exactly"
    Last edited by corptaxman; 10-01-2020 at 07:08 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •