FORUM CLOSING ON 14th JANUARY

Milhouse · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

Rumour ?

hulio · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

Milhouse wrote:

I have just heard a rumour that Tom Weeks has been given a wildcard into the county team, can anyone from the county committee confirm this ?

What??????????????????????????????????????

If this is true i can see some very unhappy people out their

Let the fireworks begin

Cue_Isty · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

Milhouse wrote:

I have just heard a rumour that Tom Weeks has been given a wildcard into the county team, can anyone from the county committee confirm this ?

And, your point is?

Beefy · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Wooden spoons are dangerous on here !

They should be kept in the kitchen draw and not put into a mixing bowl............ you never know what is going to come out of it !

Barney · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Surely there's no problem whether this is a rumour or not?

hulio · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

Beefy wrote:

Wooden spoons are dangerous on here ! They should be kept in the kitchen draw and not put into a mixing bowl............ you never know what is going to come out of it !

So What

This is a forum where people will express their veiws

i for one went to trials did not qualify so therfore have to accept it but when you hear people getting in the back door it does smell a bit

Their are quite a few people who did not qualify who have been playing the last few years at county level who are probably going to be a bit pissed off.

Trials are their for a reason i can mention a few people who did not qualify and in my opinion have proved themslves at this level.

Dont get me wrong the person in question is a very good player his record on a thursday proves this and will be a good addition to the county team.But what about players who have qualified in their own right are they going to be happy when someone who did not qualify gets put in the a team instead of them i doubt it ?????????????????????????????????

Maybe beefy you should give up your place

i think not?

Milhouse · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

Barney wrote:

Surely there's no problem whether this is a rumour or not?

How can you say this is not a problem ? If this is true, then this means the county are going back to where they were 4 years ago when people just got their mates to play and people got in through the back door.

This is wrong. As hulio has pointed out, everyone went to trials to get in, people have not and have accepted it, just because he is a good player - like a few others, he should not be let in through the back door.

Does this mean other good players who went to trials like Shaun Taylor, Pete Timms, Graham Hornblow, Julian Wood are all going to be given backdoor tickets aswell ?

MING · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

milhouse wrote:
I have just heard a rumour that Tom Weeks has been given a wildcard into the county team, can anyone from the county committee confirm this ?
Liar, you haven't just heard it. That said i can confirm that you are correct.

hulio wrote:
i for one went to trials did not qualify so therfore have to accept it but when you hear people getting in the back door it does smell a bit. Their are quite a few people who did not qualify who have been playing the last few years at county level who are probably going to be a bit pissed off.
No smell, the decision was made within the guidelines of the OCPF Constitution which states "the Committee shall have full authority, to make any decision that, in their opinion, is deemed necessary or beneficial to the OCPF." With that in mind the rule regarding Wildcard places was revised to "that the County Squads may contain up to 4 "WILDCARD" places (2 Men, 1 Lady & 1 Youth) to be awarded by the relevant Team Manager prior to the date of the County Trials. Additionally, Team Managers may apply to the committee to award post trial "Wildcards" where failure to do so would be considered detrimental to the County."

That said, it doesn't mean that we can do anything we like without justification and i'm quite happy to explain why the said decision was taken.

hulio also wrote:
Trials are there for a reason
It is our wish to field the best county side possible within the constraints of the rules, however we have to accept, and I think we all do, that trials are not necessarily the best way to achieve it 100% of the time, especially playing 1 frame matches. Unfortunately lack of tables and time were against us at this years trials. Hopefully, after the planned refurbishment there will be more tables, best of 3 matches which will automatically suit the better players.

A lot of other County sides hand pick their A team and hold trials for their B team only. If we did this there would be no arguement. I'm of the opinion that of appox 29 players, 20 of them would honestly admit that they wouln't be good enough to be in our A team if we did this.

i can mention a few people who did not qualify and in my opinion have proved themslves at this level.
If that were true they wouldn't have had to trial

milhouse wrote:
Does this mean other good players who went to trials like Shaun Taylor, Pete Timms, Graham Hornblow, Julian Wood are all going to be given backdoor tickets aswell ?
No offence, but what exactly have they done that puts them in the same bracket as Tom? C.V's please.

Finally there will always be problems when wildcards are awarded to anyone, whether it's before or after trials or whatever. Some will say, that if he's that good, why not give him the wildcard before the trials. Fair point, but Tom had never trialed for us so it was as much to see his commitment as his ability. Some players have a "Prima Donna" attitude and believe that they should be picked without showing that they're committed to playing. I don't know of anyone who can say that of Tom, who was quite happy to wait and trial again next year.

No one has lost their place to him, we added 1 place to the squad for this season.

People who know their pool, will know how good Tom is and what he's won and done at local level, County level and above. That's the standard of players we're looking for and should you acheive that standard, you may just catch the eye of the captains. Finally, some moans apart, I'm sure most people will welcome his addition. The snipers will no doubt be hoping he has a bad season, personally i don't want to be playing with those players at anything.

Would those of you who will complain use the same arguements against Pistol Pete if he performed below par at the trials. Afterall, reading the report of his weekend expliots, he's ****, ain't he.............................

At the end of the day, we must be doing something right if we've 50+ men turning up for trials.

Cue_Isty · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

Milhouse wrote:

If this is true, then this means the county are going back to where they were 4 years ago when people just got their mates to play and people got in through the back door. This is wrong. As hulio has pointed out, everyone went to trials to get in, people have not and have accepted it, just because he is a good player - like a few others, he should not be let in through the back door. Does this mean other good players who went to trials like Shaun Taylor, Pete Timms, Graham Hornblow, Julian Wood are all going to be given backdoor tickets aswell ?

With all respect the players you've quoted aren't in the same league as Tom.

It was inevitable he was going to play, a player of his standard needs to be representing his County.

And I fully understand why you're soo frustrated over this because he is a threat to your own position. But IMO (in my opinion) by letting him play will only make the County Team stronger, surely that's what we all want to see?

PS Ming - Just so you know....I'm free most Sundays for the next 6 months

Barney · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Cue_Isty wrote:
PS Ming - Just so you know....I'm free most Sundays for the next 6 months

Nice use of your wooden spoon there Isty!

Barney · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Milhouse wrote:

If this is true, then this means the county are going back to where they were 4 years ago when people just got their mates to play and people got in through the back door. This is wrong. As hulio has pointed out, everyone went to trials to get in, people have not and have accepted it, just because he is a good player - like a few others, he should not be let in through the back door. Does this mean other good players who went to trials like Shaun Taylor, Pete Timms, Graham Hornblow, Julian Wood are all going to be given backdoor tickets aswell ?

Mill House, are you on the County Committee? Who exactly are you complaining about?

Milhouse · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

MING wrote:

No smell, the decision was made within the guidelines of the OCPF Constitution which states "the Committee shall have full authority, to make any decision that, in their opinion, is deemed necessary or beneficial to the OCPF." With that in mind the rule regarding Wildcard places was revised to "that the County Squads may contain up to 4 "WILDCARD" places (2 Men, 1 Lady & 1 Youth) to be awarded by the relevant Team Manager prior to the date of the County Trials. Additionally, Team Managers may apply to the committee to award post trial "Wildcards" where failure to do so would be considered detrimental to the County." That said, it doesn't mean that we can do anything we like without justification and i'm quite happy to explain why the said decision was taken.

Please do...........................

i can mention a few people who did not qualify and in my opinion have proved themslves at this level. - If that were true they wouldn't have had to trial

So are you saying that Tom hasn't proved himself at this level because he trialled ?

milhouse wrote: Does this mean other good players who went to trials like Shaun Taylor, Pete Timms, Graham Hornblow, Julian Wood are all going to be given backdoor tickets aswell ? No offence, but what exactly have they done that puts them in the same bracket as Tom? C.V's please.

What has Tom done thats so special ?

Finally there will always be problems when wildcards are awarded to anyone, whether it's before or after trials or whatever. Some will say, that if he's that good, why not give him the wildcard before the trials. Fair point, but Tom had never trialed for us so it was as much to see his commitment as his ability. Some players have a "Prima Donna" attitude and believe that they should be picked without showing that they're committed to playing. I don't know of anyone who can say that of Tom, who was quite happy to wait and trial again next year.

Just because he showed up at trials doesn't show he's committed. I know of a couple of players who trialled but had no interest in playing county.

No one has lost their place to him, we added 1 place to the squad for this season.

But is has still cost somone their place, for every game he plays, if he wasn't given this wildcard, someone would be playing instead of him!

People who know their pool, will know how good Tom is and what he's won and done at local level, County level and above. That's the standard of players we're looking for and should you acheive that standard, you may just catch the eye of the captains.

I am not doubting his ability - he will be an asset to the team. The argument is why he should be singled out for special treatment where other players are in the same boat as him and have not.

Milhouse · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

Barney wrote:

Mill House, are you on the County Committee? Who exactly are you complaining about?

No i'm not on the commitee, isn't it obvious who i'm complaining about ?

The Chin · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

If there is a question of commitment, just watch this space......

Obviously I am please to see him in the team, for a number of reasons:

a: He is a good mate and I enjoy playing along side him in any event.

b: I want to play in the best standard of team that is available, and without doubt he improves the current squad

c: He is a great player and having represented the EPA at England Under 21 level (and finishing top of their averages), in the same season Captained the England Universities team, I think he more than justifies his place.

d: I think he should of been given a wild card before the trials.

The players that were mentioned as "Good Players not qualifying" are "Good Players" but we are talking a different meaning of "Good" in this instant.

I look forward to hearing the moans after this weekend when neither Myself or Tom will be there for the practice day due to other commitments.

We WILL however be there for the first match!!

Beefy · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Warned you about wooden spoons on here didn't I - look whats started now..........

MING · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

Milhouse wrote:

Please do...........................

Read the last bit again

i can mention a few people who did not qualify and in my opinion have proved themslves at this level. - If that were true they wouldn't have had to trial So are you saying that Tom hasn't proved himself at this level because he trialled ?

No, what i'm saying is that if the people Hulio said " had proved themslves at this level" had done so, then they would have attained the required mark for retention and wouldn't have neede to re-trial. Tom will no doubt prove his ability at this level during this season

What has Tom done thats so special ?

As i said, those with their ear to the ground will already know this, but at the top level, he's played for EPA England under 21's and we're taking proper standard not the EPCF bollocks (those who've watched them at Gt Yarmouth will know what i mean) Anyway, my response was to you nominating 4 people who you said were of the same ability......so?

Just because he showed up at trials doesn't show he's committed.

Correct, but having played and spoke to him at length, i am satisfied of his commitment.

I know of a couple of players who trialled but had no interest in playing county.

So, name and shame

But is has still cost somone their place, for every game he plays, if he wasn't given this wildcard, someone would be playing instead of him!

With approx 29 players at least 9 won't get a look in in the first match. Therefore 1 extra player won't make much of a difference as everyone will get equal chance to stake their claim.

The argument is why he should be singled out for special treatment where other players are in the same boat as him and have not.

See answer to "What has Tom done thats so special ?" Also, most of the County squad aren't in the same ocean as him, let alone boat. Or perhaps their just all in the Cambridge boat.................................................

MING · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

Beefy wrote:

Warned you about wooden spoons on here didn't I - look whats started now..........

The more spoons the better...............................................save on the winter fuel bill

Milhouse · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

The Chin wrote:

If there is a question of commitment, just watch this space...... Obviously I am please to see him in the team, for a number of reasons: a: He is a good mate and I enjoy playing along side him in any event. b: I want to play in the best standard of team that is available, and without doubt he improves the current squad

So are you saying someone like Shaun Taylor would not improve the squad ?

c: He is a great player and having represented the EPA at England Under 21 level (and finishing top of their averages), in the same season Captained the England Universities team, I think he more than justifies his place.

Why ? EPA / BAPTO ....... Just because you are good at one set of rules, doesn't mean you will be good at another.

d: I think he should of been given a wild card before the trials. The players that were mentioned as "Good Players not qualifying" are "Good Players" but we are talking a different meaning of "Good" in this instant. I look forward to hearing the moans after this weekend when neither Myself or Tom will be there for the practice day due to other commitments.

And what are those "other commitments" ? Playing for the EPA County team ? So who will you both choose if the games clash ?

We WILL however be there for the first match!!

MING · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

Milhouse wrote:

So are you saying someone like Shaun Taylor would not improve the squad ?

There's about 10 players who'd improve the squad, so lets pick them and get rid of you shall we.

Don't ask questions before you answer previous ones:- "what exactly have the 4 players you mentioned done, that puts them in the same bracket as Tom?"

I notice you've quickly dropped reference to the other 3 in your question, why's that?

The Chin · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

Milhouse wrote:

So are you saying someone like Shaun Taylor would not improve the squad ?

Like Kev said, I think there are a lot of players who could strengthen the squad including Shaun, however if the committee are offering a wild card then I certainly wouldn't pick any of those you mentioned over Tom.

Why ? EPA / BAPTO ....... Just because you are good at one set of rules, doesn't mean you will be good at another.

You seem to forget that the rules have now changed to Black Ball making them even closer to World Rules. Correct me if I am wrong but did Tom not finish top of the BAPTO Rules Thursday Night League Averages????? Yeah, you are so right Millhouse, he must be S**T!!!

Playing for the EPA County team ? So who will you both choose if the games clash ?

Actually yes we are playing an EPA County Match. The reason being is that the EPA is a MATCH and FEDERATION is a PRACTICE DAY.... What will we chose when they clash?, that is for us to know and for you to wait and find out.

nobrain · Occasional Poster (Racking up the balls)

Are there any wildcards left?

Seems a shame not to award a wildcard if everyone agrees that Shaun would strengthen the team

pots · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

nobrain wrote:

Are there any wildcards left? Seems a shame not to award a wildcard if everyone agrees that Shaun would strengthen the team

thanks for your support nobrain but as i said to kevin tonight i wasnt that botherd about getting through i just went along for the practice and as for those who did get through i would have put tom well above most of them it was just bad luck he didnt get through just like me everyone has their off days ,ive only seen tom play a few games but what i have seen i was very impressed so if he is in the squad good luck to him i dont hold any grudges theirs always next year ,ive been in the game to long to worry ,its just like snooker if you had to pick steve davis or ronnie who would you choose to be in your team

MING · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

Milhouse wrote:

And what are those "other commitments" ? Playing for the EPA County team ? So who will you both choose if the games clash ?

Perhaps you need to spend your spare time on the uk8ball site where they spend most of the time harping on about this EPA V Fed, to give it it's proper title, arguement.

This County was set up to be inclusive to all players regardless of their afiliations or other commitments. If it's considered necessary, we may re-arrange our matches to avoid clashes with the EPA matches because:-

(1) Both EPA and Fed teams are at home

(2) When the EPCF was formed, everyone was assured that it's matches would not clash with EPA matches (EPA publish their calendar by December so plenty of time exists to ensure this)

Unfortunately, at the moment the EPCF couldn't run a piss up in a brewery. Lets face it who else could arrange the opening county weekend for the same date as their very own World Championships. At present all we can do is use our common sense to ensure that we have, and field the best sides possible.

If you can find 9 players better than me, then i'll gladly play for the B team and collect an easy 7 points.

And remember, if players like me end up in the B side; where will you be then?

hulio · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

MING wrote:

. And remember, if players like me end up in the B side; where will you be then?

We would have a good A side kev.

JFK · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

I can see how the wildcarding of Tom Weeks will grate with a few people and justifiably so. Things is, though you have to be as fair and open as possible, we are also here to get the best side possible out for Oxfordshire and WIN. It is a balance of the two - I happen to think the balance is right. We have open trials, open retention levels and a scope if required for managers to ADD to the squad in EXCEPTIONAL circumstance. In the last 3 years no-one has been wildcarded in this way and it may not happen again.

The fact is, this is supposed to represent one of the highest levels of pool. It's tough at the top and hard decisions have to be made if you're going to get anywhere. Tom Weeks is a hell of a good player, proven at the highest levels and is a definite asset to the team - before trials his commitment was not known. Now it is. Have any of these other players got a similar record? If so please tell me.

Hulio: "I for one went to trials did not qualify so therefore have to accept it but when you hear people getting in the back door it does smell a bit. Their are quite a few people who did not qualify who have been playing the last few years at county level who are probably going to be a bit pissed off."

As for recent regulars not making it back in; well it's sad yes, but also tough. If you are to succeed at county you need to improve. Too many players are comfortable at B level and just happy to retain their status; not improving enough to make A and stay there. This year's A side at nationals had 4 players that started the year in the B's. They've improved and that’s what’s needed. If people do not make retention levels then you have to enter the cauldron of trials and take your chances. Survival of the fittest. As for smell and back door, sorry but it's all in black and white. Anyone can change the rules by suggesting new ones/changes at the AGM and have them to the vote. As for pissed off ... well like pool ... if you don't take your chances ....

Hulio:"But what about players who have qualified in their own right are they going to be happy when someone who did not qualify gets put in the a team instead of them I doubt it "

Rubbish: Everyone is a member of the squad. You lose you're at risk, you win you stay in. Tom has been wildcarded into the squad, not the team. He will have to wait for his chance just like anyone else and take it just like anyone else. This is squad selection NOT TEAM selection.

Milhouse:"I know of a couple of players who trialled but had no interest in playing county. "

How stupid do you think I/we am/are? I know exactly who you’re talking about. In some cases they didn't even stick around to finish the trials!! Trials are for everyone; what do you propose ... a lie detector test and an oath of allegiance? That’s life!

Milhouse: "So are you saying someone like Shaun Taylor would not improve the squad ?"

Tom's Wild card is no reflection of Shaun or anyone else. It's about Tom. Shaun is a good player and to be frank, looking at his post above, understands the game and situation bloody well. Fair play Pots!!

Milhouse: "And what are those "other commitments" ? Playing for the EPA County team ? So who will you both choose if the games clash ?"

That’s their business and their choice. If they choose EPA then fine they take the consequences following match/ rest of season.

Milhouse: "But is has still cost someone their place, for every game he plays, if he wasn't given this wildcard, someone would be playing instead of him!"

It'll only cost someone their place if Tom is playing better and getting better results. It's called competition and is great for the county.

Milhouse: "How can you say this is not a problem ? If this is true, then this means the county are going back to where they were 4 years ago when people just got their mates to play and people got in through the back door."

The county is nothing like it was 4 years ago ... don't be so melodramatic. For starters I proposed the wildcard and no offence to Tom but he's not a mate .. I hardly know the guy on a personal level!! This decision is about pool and what’s best for the county. If at the end of the season I'm wrong and this wildcard has been detrimental to the county then I'll be standing down / voted out. Simple. Sometimes you have to take a risk. Personally, I don't think it will be a mistake.

As for 'other people' being 'pissed off'. I'm happy to explain myself or any committee decision to anyone at any time. If these pissed off people want to put their views across to me or anyone else on the committee then great ... if they're just happier feeling pissed off then so be it ... not my problem.

-- Edited by JFK at 01:11, 2006-04-04

The Chin · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

Couldn't agree more John.

Why don't you make it easier for everyone then Millhouse and tell us your selected team line up ??

Milhouse · Ultimate Poster (2-0 up in a best of 7)

The Chin wrote:

Yeah, you are so right Millhouse, he must be S**T!!!

Why are you getting so upset ? I have never said he is **** nor have i said his inclusion would not benefit the county. The point i am making is the way he has been selected !

JFK - As for smell and back door, sorry but it's all in black and white. Anyone can change the rules by suggesting new ones/changes at the AGM and have them to the vote.

Rubbish - Ming has said that you have changed the rules to allow him in !!!

The Chin · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

Why ? EPA / BAPTO ....... Just because you are good at one set of rules, doesn't mean you will be good at another.

No you didn't say he was S**T, you just suggested that because he was good at EPA didn't make him good at BAPTO.

The point I made is that he has justified his ability at both.

JFK · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

Milhouse wrote:

Rubbish - Ming has said that you have changed the rules to allow him in !!!

Sorry Milhouse your the one talking rubbish. Yes, we changed the rule; to make it clearer. The rule already in place meant basically managers could take who they want, when they want and for what ever reason they wanted them. We could have taken Tom under the old rule. Now it's not actually that easy. Post trial wildcards now have to go before a committee vote and it only takes 1 objection from any member of that committee to stop it. So as for mates being picked ... they'd have to be very good mates of a wide range of people. Get your facts straight

-- Edited by JFK at 09:34, 2006-04-04

hulio · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

nobrain wrote:

Are there any wildcards left?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Graphic-novel-Wildcards-1991_W0QQitemZ6618138185QQcategoryZ3954QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem