Thread subject: The Scottish Pool Association :: 2017 Sept. & Dec. Meeting Minutes

Posted by FCBash on 03-12-2017 22:03
#1

All,

Gillian has emailed the Reps a copy of the 2017 September and December Meeting minutes, if you feel you should have received a copy and haven't please contact Gillian and provide her your email so she can add you to her mailing list.

A copy of the above minutes are now available online, either using the links below or going to 'Meetings' on the left hand of the website.

2017 September Minutes: http://www.scotti...tember.pdf
2017 December Minutes: http://www.scotti...cember.pdf

Regards,
Michael

Posted by Drover on 03-12-2017 23:52
#2

Gillian ur in box is full and can't send u a message

Posted by scottishslack on 05-12-2017 19:36
#3

Glancing at Dec's minutes it would indicate that if a match is 2-2 after 1 hour then it will be cut by two frames?

Seems harsh on the slower guys out there.

Edited by scottishslack on 05-12-2017 19:36

Posted by Cyclone on 06-12-2017 03:18
#4

scottishslack wrote:
Glancing at Dec's minutes it would indicate that if a match is 2-2 after 1 hour then it will be cut by two frames?

Seems harsh on the slower guys out there.


Very harsh, voting went 8-8 against status quo with the chairman having the casting vote

Posted by FlyingScotsman on 06-12-2017 10:37
#5

Well I think players have to understand that there are players out there taking over 4 hours for match's, not once or a couple of times but nearly every time they play, why because that is the way they play?

Some will come back on and say that's unfair on the opponent but the SPA have to do something, otherwise the match's go on to long and we do not finish the tournament.

Also these players will again be timed , why because their opponents ask for it straight away.

Posted by Cyclone on 06-12-2017 14:19
#6

I know what your saying Ross, but if it's 2-2 and the 5th frame is a tight one, not by anyone fault, then the match gets cut to first to 5. That makes a big difference to the state of the match after the 5th frame.

Even better, you go 2-0 up and shut up shop until the hour passes.

Posted by scottishslack on 06-12-2017 18:24
#7

There's nothing I hate more Ross than intentionally slow players and we should be doing all we can to minimise their impact on our events.

However, as an extremely fast player myself, it only takes one "Sandy Tong" to slow a match down and it may be unfair on the faster guy.


Posted by knowledge on 06-12-2017 19:21
#8

FlyingScotsman wrote:
Well I think players have to understand that there are players out there taking over 4 hours for match's, not once or a couple of times but nearly every time they play, why because that is the way they play?

Some will come back on and say that's unfair on the opponent but the SPA have to do something, otherwise the match's go on to long and we do not finish the tournament.

Also these players will again be timed , why because their opponents ask for it straight away.


I've said this before at a meeting but there was a guy played in Glasgow, notoriously slow. Always held events up and his half of the draw was always behind. In one club they just stopped accepting his entries for tournaments.

Now that took balls but it eradicated the problem without unfairly punishing non-offenders.

Posted by The Fox on 07-12-2017 00:43
#9

knowledge wrote:
FlyingScotsman wrote:
Well I think players have to understand that there are players out there taking over 4 hours for match's, not once or a couple of times but nearly every time they play, why because that is the way they play?

Some will come back on and say that's unfair on the opponent but the SPA have to do something, otherwise the match's go on to long and we do not finish the tournament.

Also these players will again be timed , why because their opponents ask for it straight away.


I've said this before at a meeting but there was a guy played in Glasgow, notoriously slow. Always held events up and his half of the draw was always behind. In one club they just stopped accepting his entries for tournaments.

Now that took balls but it eradicated the problem without unfairly punishing non-offenders.


Let's use the minute rule then .. everyone will have equal time

Posted by FlyingScotsman on 07-12-2017 10:51
#10

Dennis , you know very well that players can take one minute per shot and do nothing, so that match goes on and on, the SPA had to do something and unless they stop taking entries from these players as John has pointed out, what happened to one guy in Glasgow, we will never finish tournaments.

A decision has been taken and again if players do not like that, then they have a choice to enter the events or not.

Posted by Fruits on 07-12-2017 17:27
#11

FlyingScotsman wrote:

A decision has been taken and again if players do not like that, then they have a choice to enter the events or not.


Players have a choice not to enter? That's great Ross, so letting them know that the rules are changing after you've taken their entry fees for the IMs doesn't exactly align with that does it?

Posted by FlyingScotsman on 07-12-2017 21:22
#12

On your bike son, i was not there when this decision was taken, i did not know even that it was going to be raised.

So don't come on to me here and say its to late, a load of crap.

Reps make decisions and a lot I don't agree with but I have always gone with what the majority want and that is what i am saying here, so don't come on with its to late etc, there are lots of other SPA events we do each year other than IMs.

Edited by FlyingScotsman on 07-12-2017 21:22

Posted by Fruits on 07-12-2017 22:14
#13

I'm not blaming you for the decision Ross, I'm merely stating a fact. Only reason I'm addressing you is because you are defending the decision.

I'm pointing out to you that a fairly large change to the IM competition has been agreed, which nobody was aware of when we are trying to collect entries for the Series. Why i am using the IM as an example is because With this new rule potentially you could have someone travelling halfway across the country to an IM to play a 1st to 5. It's hardly encouraging is it?

So, what I am saying is not 'a load of crap' it's 100% fact!

Edited by Fruits on 07-12-2017 22:17

Posted by secretary on 07-12-2017 22:52
#14

One player has to have amassed 3 frames in first hour or the
match will be reduced by 2 frames. Proposal carried. 10 votes to 9.

This was a casting vote

Note: the following voted against - i,e, for status quo
and they are the persons running the events


David Duncan
Suzy Smith
Yvonne Ewing
Michael Bastow
Gillian Hayes
John Reid

Shows what reps are listening to at meetngs

Posted by weeksy on 11-12-2017 18:09
#15

Cut there shot time to 30 seconds rather than cut there frames

Posted by alligator on 11-12-2017 18:33
#16

secretary wrote:
One player has to have amassed 3 frames in first hour or the
match will be reduced by 2 frames. Proposal carried. 10 votes to 9.

This was a casting vote

Note: the following voted against - i,e, for status quo
and they are the persons running the events


David Duncan
Suzy Smith
Yvonne Ewing
Michael Bastow
Gillian Hayes
John Reid

Shows what reps are listening to at meetngs
. That's an outrageous post David

Posted by alligator on 11-12-2017 18:38
#17

Fruits wrote:
FlyingScotsman wrote:

A decision has been taken and again if players do not like that, then they have a choice to enter the events or not.


Players have a choice not to enter? That's great Ross, so letting them know that the rules are changing after you've taken their entry fees for the IMs doesn't exactly align with that does it?
. Fruits this was always the rule mate but someone changed it without going through the proper procedure and the body of the hall have changed it back to what was always in the constitution.

Posted by smarties on 12-12-2017 14:26
#18

secretary wrote:
One player has to have amassed 3 frames in first hour or the
match will be reduced by 2 frames. Proposal carried. 10 votes to 9.

This was a casting vote

Note: the following voted against - i,e, for status quo
and they are the persons running the events


David Duncan
Suzy Smith
Yvonne Ewing
Michael Bastow
Gillian Hayes
John Reid

Shows what reps are listening to at meetngs



Proposal brought to the September meeting by the secretary David Duncan;

6.2.4 Time: One player has to have amassed 3 frames in first hour or the
match will be reduced by 2 frames,

Then he voted against proposal...Eh!

Posted by secretary on 12-12-2017 18:13
#19

smarties wrote:
secretary wrote:
One player has to have amassed 3 frames in first hour or the
match will be reduced by 2 frames. Proposal carried. 10 votes to 9.

This was a casting vote

Note: the following voted against - i,e, for status quo
and they are the persons running the events


David Duncan
Suzy Smith
Yvonne Ewing
Michael Bastow
Gillian Hayes
John Reid

Shows what reps are listening to at meetngs



Proposal brought to the September meeting by the secretary David Duncan;

6.2.4 Time: One player has to have amassed 3 frames in first hour or the
match will be reduced by 2 frames,

Then he voted against proposal...Eh!


OK lets get things right here Malky -The above was NOT my proposal but YOURS.

I voted against it in September and I voted against it in December.

Just setting the record correct


I made a proposal and you made the above one and had a vote to see which went against the status quo.

My Proposal
4 frames in 60 minutes, 8 frames in 120, 12 in 180. 2 frame reduction frame reduction -2 for each

which was an extension of the status quo: the completion 4th frame has to be concluded within 60 minutes or a reduction of 2 frames.

My reasoning was: when two players were reduced by 2 frames they played even slower in the next 60 minutes.

Posted by smarties on 12-12-2017 18:31
#20

.

Edited by smarties on 12-12-2017 18:34