Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tom Woods on July 8, 2010 at 7:01am

Not me Ken, I don't know how to do that...

Having only just seen it, I think it may be a bit of a wind up anyway though!

I thought we had a good evening and enjoyed playing some different people, we did have 5 players but a reserve at 5 ourselves so not really an issue you having 4 to be honest.

Our number 5 was a little put out he was dropped and only found out at about 3pm as he could have played at lunch time, so I guess as you told someone at 8:40am the message got forgotten or lost our end.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by HS on July 8, 2010 at 7:13am

Ken, It was me who put the note on the web site and stick by it. Your voice mail to me (at 9.42am) was that you can't get there till 8.00 and you will probably only have 4 players, not much you can do about it they don't want to come down to Rodmersham, if you are unsure of what you said I will keep the voicemail until we meet, it is still on my phone. There was no mention of disrupting other teams! Not aware of any rules saying you have to give a weeks notice as we have given notice a lot shorter than that due to difficult availability this Summer.
When I spoke to you later in the day you again reiterated that players did not want to come down to Rodmersham just to get beat and you could not blame them, this is a poor excuse, the whole point of playing better players is to improve your game, I have not heard that excuse before and, as a squash player, would be embarrassed by it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Creek on July 8, 2010 at 9:30am

HS, you are right (I think) about nominations. I believe rule was left at the AGM that as long as the 'Committee' is informed beforehand and has no objection, new players can be added as late as kick-off (but preferably only at 5th string).

This is an example of the confusion from the AGM (does anyone have an amended copy of the rules - or even a copy of the minutes?). For example, someone suggested last week that the 'Played twice for a higher team' rule had been amended to allow 'twice in each half of the season'. Not sure what planet they on - or was I asleep when it happened?

Also, copy of minutes might clarify the PAR 11 debate slightly - Is it 'trial in Div 1 for the summer, then Div 1 Captains only to vote via the Committee on whether to continue in Winter' - or something else?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Phill Crane on July 8, 2010 at 9:36am

Hi John,
I think that you'll find that it's the OK Rules that allow for twice per half season.

John Creek said:

HS, you are right (I think) about nominations. I believe rule was left at the AGM that as long as the 'Committee' is informed beforehand and has no objection, new players can be added as late as kick-off (but preferably only at 5th string).

This is an example of the confusion from the AGM (does anyone have an amended copy of the rules - or even a copy of the minutes?). For example, someone suggested last week that the 'Played twice for a higher team' rule had been amended to allow 'twice in each half of the season'. Not sure what planet they on - or was I asleep when it happened?

Also, copy of minutes might clarify the PAR 11 debate slightly - Is it 'trial in Div 1 for the summer, then Div 1 Captains only to vote via the Committee on whether to continue in Winter' - or something else?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Creek on July 8, 2010 at 9:42am

That may be so - but there was some talk of it at Priory and I have no idea what was recorded.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Terry Easton on July 8, 2010 at 10:09am

John the playing up twice in each half rule was put forward and agreed. I think with all the discussion over PAR trials it became insignificant.

I e-mailed Graham earlier this week for a copy but he has just returned from America so is trying to get the minutes and revised rules out shortly.

John Creek said:

That may be so - but there was some talk of it at Priory and I have no idea what was recorded.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Creek on July 8, 2010 at 12:13pm

No, I think you are wrong Terry. I shall await confirmation from the Secretary.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ken Cotton on July 8, 2010 at 9:00pm

To HS whoever you are:

I was under the impression that Tom wrote the match reports, I have no idea who you are and we told your team when we got there the reasons. It seems to be total miss understanding mainly arising from people not signing their names after the report. I would like to agree with Tom's posting , the match was interesting, when we lose like that it makes someone like try even harder. "We realise the standard we have to achieve and you can be sure that one day we will achieve it".
Ken Cotton

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive London on July 14, 2010 at 11:14am

Sadly John, your earlier post was accurate. You must have been asleep (though judging from the amount of talking you were doing there that's hard to imagine). I've had email confirmation from Graham that it was put forward and passed at the AGM that two up per half was voted through. A first for you to get a rule change wrong!

P.S. Ken - It's Dave Lamb

John Creek said:

No, I think you are wrong Terry. I shall await confirmation from the Secretary.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Creek on July 16, 2010 at 1:35pm

Clive, unfortunately my copies of the minutes and the rules show no evidence of my having spoken at all. A harsh libel - and a rather liberal rule, considering the first half is only 6 or 7 matches - still, anything we can do to help out the clubs running 5 teams with only enough players for 3;)

Any thoughts about the par 11 vote?

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion