FORUM CLOSING ON 14th JANUARY

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

RE: Rumour ?

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

hulio wrote:

Any chance of a retrial

now ................................................................. Go Away

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

hulio wrote:

Any chance of a retrial

8ball · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

The Chin wrote;

Is it just me, or has no one else realised that the decision is going to stand, so move on.

The problem being, the people who run things basically do what they want, a few people moan about it but in the end it all goes away and it`s back to normal. The trouble is the so called lesser players who do / could make up the County squad get a bit disillusioned and don`t bother any more possibly due to the fact they are treated as not good enough or not as good as.........

The Chin wrote; I think next year Oxford should adopt the Berkshire selection method.The Team Manager selects his A team. Then everyone else trials out for the B Team etc.

That seems to be the way it`s being done at the moment.

The Chin wrote; Just out of interest, will 8ball and hulio go to trials next year? Will Millhouse play county?

I can`t speak for Hulio but my decisioin would depend on who was running it and how they intend to work it.

Ther are a few questions being asked on here that people either can`t or don`t want to answer.

PoolQueen · Ultimate Poster (1-0 up in a best of 7)

MING wrote:

hulio wrote:
8ball wrote: So being the top player from previous seasons is also a reason to be given a wild card. If Thats the case Surely my record at bridlington in 2003 must warrant me a wild card played 8 won 8.

Get the grammer right...................
"If Thats the case Surely my record at bridlington in 2003 must warrant me being considered for a wild card played 8 won 8"
But shirley you where a youth, that long ago

Get the spelling right then, it's grammar not grammer.

Luckylewis · Even if you beat me I’m STILL THE BEST ;-)

The Chin wrote:

I think next year Oxford should adopt the Berkshire selection method.

The Team Manager selects his A team.

but I don't like HIM

then there's always the "B" TEAM

hulio · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

8ball wrote:

Ther are a few questions being asked on here that people either can`t or don`t want to answer.

yeah

come on tell the truth or forever hold your piece

Or are you all a bunch of cowards

Better still dont tell the truth then we can all still have a laugh.

Luckylewis · Even if you beat me I’m STILL THE BEST ;-)

hulio wrote:

8ball wrote: Ther are a few questions being asked on here that people either can`t or don`t want to answer.

yeah come on tell the truth or forever hold your piece    Dirty bas**************d

Or are you all a bunch of cowards   Fighting talk

Better still dont tell the truth   then we can all still have a laugh.

That’s all folks

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

8ball wrote:

Ther are a few questions being asked on here that people either can`t or don`t want to answer.

Such as...................................ask away!

8ball · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

MING wrote:

8ball wrote: Ther are a few questions being asked on here that people either can`t or don`t want to answer. Such as...................................ask away!

jfk wrote; 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

1/ Are the minutes from the meeting (that should have taken place as mentioned above) available to look at ?

2/ Did such a meeting actually take place ?

3/ Why wasn`t Tom Weeks given a wild card pre trial ?

4/ Where has JFK gone.

The Chin wrote;

Is it just me, or has no one else realised that the decision is going to stand, so move on.

I don`t thing anyone is trying to get the decision reversed, that would not be fair on the players who have been given the wild cards, people would just like to know that the right people are doing the right things in the right way. The more they try to avoid answering questions or merely passing people off as moaners / players that are not up to their standards, the more of a badly run thing it looks.

It would be good if at least something good came out of this for future years of the O.C.P.F. and how it is run.

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

8ball wrote:

1/ Are the minutes from the meeting available to look at ?

The vote as such took place via email, minutes have not yet been typed up, but i will gladly furnish you with a copy when they're done

2/  Did such a meeting actually take place ?

See above. No physical meeting was needed, all committee members have email access, were asked for their opinion/comments, and voted...............

3/ Why wasn`t Tom Weeks given a wild card pre trial ?

As he had not played for us before, the Team Manager, who's job it is to grant wildcards, felt that it was better to make him trial.

4/ Where has JFK gone.

He was shot in 1963, Dallas, USA............................oh not him. Spoke to him today, so nowhere

-- Edited by MING at 20:49, 2006-04-07

Luckylewis · Even if you beat me I’m STILL THE BEST ;-)

Gonna miss all this, just popping along to the WORLDS, keep it up, as I want to read lots lots more when I get home in around a week.

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

MING wrote:

3/ Why wasn`t Tom Weeks given a wild card pre trial ? As he had not played for us before, the Team Manager, who's job it is to grant wildcards, felt that it was better to make him trial.

So what is the point in making someone trial if they are going to be given a place anyway ? The point is, that he could have knocked out a good player along the way, and that would not have benefitted the county. Just the same as Nathan Ball, if he didn't qualify, would he have got a backdoor ticket aswell ? As it happens, he did knock out a good player who is good enough to play county !

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

The Chin wrote:

89 posts now on this topic. Very good going! Is it just me, or has no one else realised that the decision is going to stand, so move on. I think next year Oxford should adopt the Berkshire selection method. The Team Manager selects his A team. Then everyone else trials out for the B Team etc. Surely that is even worse??!

Only if people are given backdoor tickets after the trials if they don't get in first time

Just out of interest, will 8ball and hulio go to trials next year? Will Millhouse play county?

I will play county as i am committed, unlike some people. As you have pointed out you would prefer to play a match rather than some practice, that is fine, but why didn't you answer my original question of if both games clash, which code are you going to play ?

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

A further question for the committee, or mainly Beefy.

Anybody not pay their subs yesterday ?????

JFK · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

8ball wrote:

1/ Are the minutes from the meeting (that should have taken place as mentioned above) available to look at ?
2/ Did such a meeting actually take place ?
3/ Why wasn`t Tom Weeks given a wild card pre trial ?
4/ Where has JFK gone.

Ming has already answered questions 1 and 2.

3. Not giving Tom W a pre trial wildcard was a risk and maybe a mistake. A risk i took. To be honest though, i have heard so much crap over the years about who is coming to trial ect i've learnt never to listen to it. Since Tom has never trialled i didn't think the question of committment was answered and fealt that it would be unfair to give him a wildcard straight out. Would he have even turned up would have been my worry? Well he did, and after failing said he'd be trialing next year. My mistake, he clearly was committed to playing. He had no idea there may be a post trial wildcard so the trial was fair. I'm simply correcting a mistake; why should Oxfordshire lose out on a valued player coz i messed up. Honest enough for you?

4 JFK hasn't gone anywhere. Since alot of my spare time revolves round organising pool I'll be dammed if i'm going to spend the little spare time i have on here!! Sorry do have a life outside pool.

8 Ball; you seem to think that the system is unfair; we pick who we want and only who we like ect. Well that's your oppinion and of course you're entitled to say what you want. However, we've added 1 player to the squad (that has been widely agreed as a huge benefit to the county), all other 28 members have been selected fairly through trials or through players reaching retention levels ect, as laid out in the county constitution. Does that really justify your comments? Or is there more to your comments than a matter of fairness? You be honest!!

Milhouse; on the matter of subs everyone has either paid yesterday in person, got someone else to pay in their absence, or has spoken to me prior to sunday about getting it to me next time we meet. Satisfied?

LuckyLewis;

The Team Manager selects his A team.

but I don't like HIM

then there's always the "B" TEAM

Love you too!!!:

-- Edited by JFK at 12:24, 2006-04-11

The Chin · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

Milhouse wrote:

As you have pointed out you would prefer to play a match rather than some practice, that is fine, but why didn't you answer my original question of if both games clash, which code are you going to play ?

I did answer your question by saying that when the situation happens, that will be between me and the Team Manager to agree how to deal with it.

I don't think it will have a massive effect on YOU either way.

As far as I am aware, and maybe Kev can confirm, ECPF or whatever they are calling themselves had agreed NOT to clash with EPA County dates, due to sharing of venues etc...

I think that the games that currently clash, have both county teams at home on the same dates, so they will be moved.

So hopefully I wont have to make that decision, as none of them should clash.

I would like to play ALL the games this year, for BOTH counties, as I know Tom would also.

I am committed to the Federation team as a player, just as I am committed to any other team that I play for, whether that is League, Interleague, County etc etc. And in my experience so is Tom.

I am also currently the Treasurer for the EPA County so obviously have that commitment to bare in mind and Tom is the current A Team Captian.

Is that enough commitment for YOU??

If you don't want us World Rules players coming over and joining your organisation Mark, just say so.

8ball · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

It seems quite obvious from previous post`s that the Secretary did not realise that a Committee meeting was required for a post trials wild card, but when pushed for the minutes of the meeting he answered that they "had not been typed up yet" If there was no such meeting then obviously no minutes would have been taken. Maybe he meant MADE UP rather than typed up.

As you have said you were not sure about Tom`s commitment until you spoke to him and he said he was going to trial next year, WOW, now that is what I call commitment. I would imagine that if you spoke to the other 40 or so people who took the trouble to trial and did not qualify if they were going to try again next year you would no doubt get the same answer, but I would imagine not the same result.

If a wild card was to be used and as you have said it could not be given to any one who was not proven or commited then surely the stats from last year should have been looked at. Keith Taylor finished with 28.86, only 1.14 short of retention. One wild card was given to a player who missed the 18 point retention level at the finals by 1 point, the other pre trials wild card was given to a player who having played only 2 games, finished last season on 7 points and at 24th in the rankings some 21 points less, and 16 places below Keith

According to your earlier posts it only takes 1 against vote to prevent a post trials wild card from being awarded, this seems strange because I spoke to a member of the Committee just after Tom had been eliminated and was saying it was a bit of a shock, I then said to them that he would be allowed into the squad in some way and their reply was "not as long as I`m involved he won`t" Would this suggest that not all members of the Committee were not contacted for their vote / opinion on this ?

The Committee as it is, seems to consist only of officers and there are no members who are on the committee to represnt the views of the rest of the players outside of the ruling body. I have never before known this on a Committee.

Whether or not my views are justified remains to be seen and I for one have been honest all the way through this topic. I have nothing to gain or lose by what I say, I just don`t like a system or set of rules / regulations being manipulated by a few individuals.

hulio · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

At last someone is talking sense well done pete.

Next year all ring up complaining of bad backs we all get wildcards job done

Barney · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

But I DO have a bad back! Lucky I was retained this year...

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

8ball wrote:

It seems quite obvious from previous post`s that the Secretary did not realise that a Committee meeting was required for a post trials wild card, but when pushed for the minutes of the meeting he answered that they "had not been typed up yet" If there was no such meeting then obviously no minutes would have been taken. Maybe he meant MADE UP rather than typed up.

eh, no comprende amigo. I think you'll find that we live in the 21st century. Meetings do not have to take place with people physically present as long as they have access via email or video conferencing. Also with various members of the committee working shifts or in different parts of the country, it is not always possible to convene meetings at short notice. Only one topic was discussed and all committee members were asked their views on the subject and whether they objected to the motions. Views were expressed and no objections were forthcoming.

So just for you is the important excerpt from the yet to be typed up minutes

Proposed Kevin McIlroy
Seconded John Kinsey
to amend the rules 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 (an unanimous decision must be recorded in this instance)"

Motion passed ...

Proposed John Kinsey
Seconded Marcus Guise
We would like to give Tom Weeks a Wild card. I believe it is in the both the short and long term interests of OCPF to do so. Under the new rule there must be no objections.

No objections received, motion passed ...

8ball wrote:

As you have said you were not sure about Tom`s commitment until you spoke to him

As John didn't know Tom, it was my assurances of his commitment that persuaded the committee to look at this matter

8ball wrote:

If a wild card was to be used and as you have said it could not be given to any one who was not proven or commited then surely the stats from last year should have been looked at. Keith Taylor finished with 28.86, only 1.14 short of retention. One wild card was given to a player who missed the 18 point retention level at the finals by 1 point, the other pre trials wild card was given to a player who having played only 2 games, finished last season on 7 points and at 24th in the rankings some 21 points less, and 16 places below Keith

It is down to the Team Managers to award wildcards, they must live and die by their decision

8ball wrote:

According to your earlier posts it only takes 1 against vote to prevent a post trials wild card from being awarded, this seems strange because I spoke to a member of the Committee just after Tom had been eliminated and was saying it was a bit of a shock, I then said to them that he would be allowed into the squad in some way and their reply was "not as long as I`m involved he won`t" Would this suggest that not all members of the Committee were not contacted for their vote / opinion on this ?

As all committee members were consulted in this matter, it could equally indicate that said person was persuaded to change their view after reading the various arguements for and against the motion

8ball wrote:

The Committee as it is, seems to consist only of officers and there are no members who are on the committee to represnt the views of the rest of the players outside of the ruling body.

As Secretary i endeavour to represent the views of all the players all of the time, arguing against, forcefully at times, motions or ideas that will only benefit a minority of players rather than the masses. I'm sure that if you asked all the players the majority would agree. Aditionally, Shelley White was elected as Player's Representative, through whom players can express their views on how the County etc is run.

8ball wrote:

I just don`t like a system or set of rules / regulations being manipulated by a few individuals.

I suggest that you or others turn up at the AGM and and change things. A number of positions are up for re-election next year. So as the saying goes; either Put up or Shut up

-- Edited by MING at 02:18, 2006-04-12

-- Edited by MING at 02:20, 2006-04-12

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

The Chin wrote:

As far as I am aware, and maybe Kev can confirm, ECPF or whatever they are calling themselves had agreed NOT to clash with EPA County dates, due to sharing of venues etc... I think that the games that currently clash, have both county teams at home on the same dates, so they will be moved. So hopefully I wont have to make that decision, as none of them should clash. I would like to play ALL the games this year, for BOTH counties, as I know Tom would also. I am committed to the Federation team as a player, just as I am committed to any other team that I play for, whether that is League, Interleague, County etc etc. And in my experience so is Tom. I am also currently the Treasurer for the EPA County so obviously have that commitment to bare in mind and Tom is the current A Team Captian. Is that enough commitment for YOU?? If you don't want us World Rules players coming over and joining your organisation Mark, just say so.

Of course you want to play every game, everyone does, but what i am saying is IF they do clash, which are you going to choose ? From the sound of it you would choose EPA ? I am not saying i don't want you to play, just asking a simple question !

The Chin · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

If there were two match clashes this year, I would play one of each.

If only one match clashes, I will see which game appears to be more important at the time.

With the EPA side struggling in their region, I would say that the FED game would be more important for the chances of qualifying for the finals.

That said, I would choose the FED match.

hulio · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

Millhouse Wrote

I am not saying i don't want you to play, just asking a simple question !

Liar?

JFK · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

8ball wrote:

It seems quite obvious from previous post`s that the Secretary did not realise that a Committee meeting was required for a post trials wild card, but when pushed for the minutes of the meeting he answered that they "had not been typed up yet" If there was no such meeting then obviously no minutes would have been taken. Maybe he meant MADE UP rather than typed up.

Your talking utter rubbish!! It was the secretary and myself that ensured that any post trial wildcards HAD to go before the committee and not just given by the manger(s). Start looking at facts not you're own theories. Do you also believe in UFO's and government cover ups too!!

As you have said you were not sure about Tom`s commitment until you spoke to him and he said he was going to trial next year, WOW, now that is what I call commitment.

Not exactly what i meant. Twist it how you like.

Keith Taylor finished with 28.86, only 1.14 short of retention. One wild card was given to a player who missed the 18 point retention level at the finals by 1 point.

Very different situations ... one was in qualifying (low standard) and he had ample oppertunity to get the extra two points, the other won 8/9 at the much higher nationals level of play.

According to your earlier posts it only takes 1 against vote to prevent a post trials wild card from being awarded, this seems strange because I spoke to a member of the Committee just after Tom had been eliminated and was saying it was a bit of a shock, I then said to them that he would be allowed into the squad in some way and their reply was "not as long as I`m involved he won`t" Would this suggest that not all members of the Committee were not contacted for their vote / opinion on this ?

Right name him/her or shut up. Since every committee member WAS asked and had the power to veto it either they're a liar or you are. If we look at facts like you do it must be you!!

The Committee as it is, seems to consist only of officers and there are no members who are on the committee to represnt the views of the rest of the players outside of the ruling body. I have never before known this on a Committee.

What are you on about? Every member of the committee has been voted in by the members of OCPF. You had your chance to vote (as you will again at the end of the year) but you chose not to use it. Every member of the committee is accountable for what they do. There is also a players rep for exactly this scenario ... oh but you wouldn't know that of course ... because you weren't at the AGM where she was voted in! One of only the few counties to have such a system. YOUR ignorence isn't my problem.

Whether or not my views are justified remains to be seen and I for one have been honest all the way through this topic. I have nothing to gain or lose by what I say, I just don`t like a system or set of rules / regulations being manipulated by a few individuals.

What is your solution .. make everyone a committee member? Make the whole squad vote on every decision to be made?

committee, noun (collective);
a small body of persons delegated or assigned to consider, investigate, redefine, act on , or report on matters for a greater body.

And what do i have to gain by this 8 ball? I can assure there were no cash bungs, brown paper envelopes or free weekends at top hotels!!! I hardly even know Tom. I've gone along with this simply as i genuinely think it is in the counties best interests ... exactly what i was elected to do over a year ago. There is no logic behind what you are insinuating.

-- Edited by JFK at 10:03, 2006-04-12

8ball · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

JFK Wrote; Not giving Tom W a pre trial wildcard was a risk and maybe a mistake. A risk i took. To be honest though, i have heard so much crap over the years about who is coming to trial ect i've learnt never to listen to it. Since Tom has never trialled i didn't think the question of committment was answered and fealt that it would be unfair to give him a wildcard straight out. Would he have even turned up would have been my worry? Well he did, and after failing said he'd be trialing next year. My mistake, he clearly was committed to playing. He had no idea there may be a post trial wildcard so the trial was fair. I'm simply correcting a mistake; why should Oxfordshire lose out on a valued player coz i messed up. Honest enough for you.

Explain just how I`ve tried to twist this, it seems quite clear to me. On the subject of who said what I`m not surprised you can`t remember.

JFK · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

8ball wrote:

On the subject of who said what I`m not surprised you can`t remember.

?? I'm a bit lost. What do you mean?

Barney · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

JFK wrote:

...after failing said he'd be trialing next year. My mistake, he clearly was committed to playing.

I think what JFK means is that Tom saying he'd be back to trial next year gives the STRONG impression he would have played THIS season's matches had he qualified.

As has been mentioned by several players there has been a worry that "top" players come to the trials, get in the squad but then don't commit to playing county matches. I don't get the impression from Tom that he is the kind of player who would do this.

8ball · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

I find it strange that when a question is being asked on this topic a lot of the time the reply does not always come from the person who should be able to answer it best ! ]

JFK wrote; ?? I'm a bit lost. What do you mean?

I could elaborate but it would only be denied and I would be accused of winging, lying, sour grapes, toys out of the pram....etc....etc....

-- Edited by 8ball at 11:37, 2006-04-12

Beefy · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

8ball wrote:

The Committee as it is, seems to consist only of officers and there are no members who are on the committee to represnt the views of the rest of the players outside of the ruling body.

There is now and like it has been said already on here it was discussed at the AGM and people voted for this position and Shelley was nominated and voted in. maybe you should take it up with her as the representative rather than on here.

Perhaps then we could all see the minutes of your meeting with the players representative afterwards - thought not.