Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Jack movement

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,473
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 72/18
    Given: 2/2

    Default Federation Bowls


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I guess 90% of players will not know what federation bowls is
    No Grey Areas

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,473
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 72/18
    Given: 2/2

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by fed4ever View Post
    Yes, I did leave it out as I didnít think it was relevant, as the original post said a player did not move the jack, therefore there was no need to include it. However, thanks for reading the whole Law.
    90%of readers will not know what federation bowls is
    No Grey Areas

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    55
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 3/0
    Given: 0/0

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Let’s take this from the start. The Yetton as you say is not a Federation competition, it is however a game of bowls and that’s all it is. I merely quoted an applicable rule to that situation that had a different and I think a more sensible outcome. As for the agreement part, I have seldom seen players agree to the replacement of a jack to its original position, so it would always result in a dead end.
    You do yourself a dis-service. As you well know, there are thirteen counties in England that play under Federation rules and also play under EIBA, so to make a statement that 90% of people don’t know about Federation Bowls is at best a bit misleading. I also get the impression that it’s tantamount to treason to forward an alternative to EIBA rules. Laws and Rules are always subject to debate and in some instances change, and this is a case in point.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,473
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 72/18
    Given: 2/2

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by fed4ever View Post
    Letís take this from the start. The Yetton as you say is not a Federation competition, it is however a game of bowls and thatís all it is. I merely quoted an applicable rule to that situation that had a different and I think a more sensible outcome. As for the agreement part, I have seldom seen players agree to the replacement of a jack to its original position, so it would always result in a dead end.
    You do yourself a dis-service. As you well know, there are thirteen counties in England that play under Federation rules and also play under EIBA, so to make a statement that 90% of people donít know about Federation Bowls is at best a bit misleading. I also get the impression that itís tantamount to treason to forward an alternative to EIBA rules. Laws and Rules are always subject to debate and in some instances change, and this is a case in point.
    The outcome was that they should have continued with the jack in its new position, You must remember that apart from the UK there are many bowlers reading posts who will not be aware of Federation bowls, in fact it means different things to our Aussie friends.In Suffolk There is far more Federation Bowls played, I happen to think Federation Bowls is popular because many small clubs (25-40) members have difficulty maintaining the green to a level which used to be demanded when we use to inspect greens, and since that stopped clubs rightly so have stayed with Fed Bowls, so sorry if you think I do myself a dis - service but I am just expressing my opinion
    No Grey Areas

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    196
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by john haydock View Post
    No the umpire stated the measure should continue ,the jack was not moved by player or by a neutral object.that is what should have happened
    The jack moved so something must have moved it, only two options are a player or neutral object. In either case there is a rule to apply, neither of which results in the jack being left where it is.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    733
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 44/3
    Given: 0/1

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    'The jack moved so something must have moved it' ... not necessarily, act of God through gravity or wind for exemple could do it. However, the question effectively said that both sides accepted that it was the positive movement by the player that indirectly cause the jack to move: it was unlikley to have moved if they had not. It's therefore whether or not the phrase ' is displaced by' can include indirect as well as direct cause. To me, it makes more logical sense that it should as that results in the least harm being done through replacement - although that may well prove problematic, it doesn't mean it should not be tried.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    196
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by corptaxman View Post
    'The jack moved so something must have moved it' ... not necessarily, act of God through gravity or wind for exemple could do it. However, the question effectively said that both sides accepted that it was the positive movement by the player that indirectly cause the jack to move: it was unlikley to have moved if they had not. It's therefore whether or not the phrase ' is displaced by' can include indirect as well as direct cause. To me, it makes more logical sense that it should as that results in the least harm being done through replacement - although that may well prove problematic, it doesn't mean it should not be tried.
    How can you say "not necessarily". The jack moved so some outside force acted on it. I can find no rule concerning jack movement that doesn't result in either jack replaced or end replayed. I don't think the player can be said as the cause unless he/she was deliberately jumping about! It is John Haydock's statement that the jack should be left where it is that I am disagreeing with.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    733
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 44/3
    Given: 0/1

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I say it because 'things happen' - ie 'Act of God' for which no-one is responsible. Wind causing a jack, or bowl, to move would not result in replacement, and rightly so. Even if the floor was adjudged the sole and independent cause, I cannot see it being a player, neutral 'object', or anything else that might be covered by the rules and so give rise to a replacement

    Where we do agree is that 'replacement' is the most natural and neutral thing to happen. The only way I can see that happening under the rules is if the disaplacement was ultimatley caused by 'the player'.

    If matters are left as they lie - ie the result is counted after the jack has moved without replacement, then the player, whether or not intending it, has benefitted from their action. This could lead others who favour the opposition for shot to ask for a measure just in case movement to do so results in things changing - they cannot lose, and could gain. This should be avoided, in my opinion.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    suffolk
    Posts
    2,473
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 72/18
    Given: 2/2

    Default


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by johnboy48 View Post
    How can you say "not necessarily". The jack moved so some outside force acted on it. I can find no rule concerning jack movement that doesn't result in either jack replaced or end replayed. I don't think the player can be said as the cause unless he/she was deliberately jumping about! It is John Haydock's statement that the jack should be left where it is that I am disagreeing with.
    The umpire on the day agreed with me too
    No Grey Areas

Posting Permissions

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