FORUM CLOSING ON 14th JANUARY

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

RE: Rumour ?

Lofty · Occasional Poster (Racking up the balls)

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.

Surely that is even worse??!

Just to put the record straight, that is not how the Berkshire side has been picked over the last 4 years. It's changed now, as I'm not involved and the new management pretty much do what they like, but while I was running it all teams were picked entirely on performance. No wild cards, no manager picks, no picking your mates, purely on performance.

It is true to say that the trials have been for the B team only, in fact last year it was for some places in the B team plus a brand new C team. This year the trials were for C team places only. However there was a system in place to allow for promotion and demotion between teams, so the A team was most definitely not a closed shop as the above post might imply. At the start of a new season a minimum of 2 players would be demoted from the A team and replaced by the best players from the B team, based entirely on win average. No concessions were made for anybody, managers and captains had to following the same rules as everybody else.

Beefy · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Nice to have some comments Pete on this one and one would have to say that your system worked you had a fair bit of success at national finals using it but a system is only good if it is used without exception and everyone is told that at the start.

You had the luxury of getting a C side in to the area so I am sure that made life easier as you had more places to give. Having a retention system that looks on paper to keep players in providing they are winning is obviously easier to operate given this luxury, our retention system is a little bit tougher as you had to reach a certain number of points etc...

Lofty · Occasional Poster (Racking up the balls)

Beefy wrote:

Nice to have some comments Pete on this one and one would have to say that your system worked you had a fair bit of success at national finals using it but a system is only good if it is used without exception and everyone is told that at the start.

You had the luxury of getting a C side in to the area so I am sure that made life easier as you had more places to give. Having a retention system that looks on paper to keep players in providing they are winning is obviously easier to operate given this luxury, our retention system is a little bit tougher as you had to reach a certain number of points etc...

We only had a C team from last season and we only requested it becasue we were getting so many people turning up for trials and therefore a lot of players not getting in. We had over 50 players at the mens trails each year and the first couple of years we only had 6 places up for grabs. I think I read that you have a similar number of people turning up for your trials.

As you say it only works if it it used without exception and if the players are infromed in advance, and in Berkshire we did that. Nobody, and I mean nobody, was given any special treatment.

Perhaps your system is more complicated, perhaps it's better and perhaps not, but I still think players like to know what is expected of them and like everything to be above board. It's only players that think they are bigger than the team that will then complain. As I said the most important thing for the team is for a player to put wins on the score sheet.

Beefy · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Lofty wrote:

As I said the most important thing for the team is for a player to put wins on the score sheet.

I partly agree with this having wins is one thing but the player needs to show commitment as well. I have to say a player who gives 100% commitment but only gives 50% wins is better in the squad than someone with a 90% win record but is only 40% committed. Its a lot easier to pick a team if the players are committed even though they may not be winning all the time...

Lofty · Occasional Poster (Racking up the balls)

Beefy wrote:

Lofty wrote:

As I said the most important thing for the team is for a player to put wins on the score sheet.

I partly agree with this having wins is one thing but the player needs to show commitment as well. I have to say a player who gives 100% commitment but only gives 50% wins is better in the squad than someone with a 90% win record but is only 40% committed. Its a lot easier to pick a team if the players are committed even though they may not be winning all the time...

Yes sorry, of couse commitment is important, I took that as read. A player can be the best in the world but he or she is no good to the team if they are at home watching the TV when you are playing.

We based our system on averages but a player had to attend 50% of matches in order to qualify. We also worked a squad system but in reality we had 3 teams of 12 players, so we could afford for a few players to be missing in each match and still field a good team capable of winning. I'm all for a system that rewards commitment and winning percentage. I've seen some systems though that I think rewards attendance too much, or at least penalises players who cannot attend for good reason. You have to get the balance right.

The main point I was making is that I'm not keen on the manager having free reign to pick who they want because invariably it comes down to relationships or personal opinion of what constitues a good player. I have been a victim of this in my early playing days, many years ago. Malc Lewis was even a victim of this in the England squad, before I was appointed captain. I would much rather have a system in place, whatever that system may be, that everybody is aware of in advance and then everybody has equal and fair opportunity.

Barney · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Beefy wrote:

one would have to say that your system worked you had a fair bit of success at national finals using it.

Plus the fact that Berkshire have a lot of very good players!

Lofty · Occasional Poster (Racking up the balls)

Barney wrote:

Beefy wrote:

one would have to say that your system worked you had a fair bit of success at national finals using it.

Plus the fact that Berkshire have a lot of very good players!

They do, but so do Oxford. Somehow you need to get the players playing to their potential and committing to the team. As Beefy pointed out you need commitment and I don't know what it is about pool players but quite often the players that everyone considers to be good are not always reliable. Getting the right balance is quite tricky. One thing is for sure, you won't win anything while there is argument in the team and that is one of the reasons I'm in favour of defined systems, so that everyone knows where they stand and there's none of this I'm better than him nonsense.

I must say on the whole I was quite lucky with the Berkshire squad in that most of the players were reliable and were happy with how the set up was organised. I only had complaint from one person and that was because they took a few years out and then expected to come straight back into the A team. I made them play in the B team and they then missed half the games and didn't bother to go to the finals.

Centenary Bhoy · Regular Poster (Wins the toss)

Centenary Bhoy wrote:

LOFTY, Could i have your impartial view on my earlier quote below, as you see excuses from former committee members of ''i'm not on the committee anymore'' well i suppose at least he sort of replied, the then co-managers at the time (ie 2 automatics places) never replied back at all.

Not sure if i read a thread sometime back from you Lofty, regards the top players qualifying for the county on most wins in the premier section of the top league? i know some people will say ''i cant play on thursdays'' well i'm afraid thats tough, like the local football leagues in Oxford are played on Saturdays, if you want to play the best local footie you play saturday, if you work that day again its tough, we cant change the local footie league for you to play on your prefered day of say a tuesday, we all know THURSDAY is the best league so surely that would be the fairest way to select the BEST, would mean players having to turn up play regular to keep in the top of the most wins, not only that your playing against the BEST TEAMS week in week out keeping your game to the top level, obviously if players did not want to play county you pick the next one down the list? Millhouse you had a excellent record last year, exceptional in fact, but you wont ever do that in the big boys playground.

And have to laugh all this committnent stuff, i can remember Jimmy Millar failing to turn up for a county game, what was his reason for his non show? Wife ill? NO, Bereavement in the family? NO, Accident at work? NO............Answer he was pissed up from the night before, well i was told it was drink, but my former team member Brilllllllllllliant saw him in the toilets at the Fire Station, cant say what he was doing apart from having a piss but Brilllllllllllliant said it looked dodgy, thats committment then is it night before a County match and one of the better players setting them standards? i'm not saying he should of been tucked up in bed at 9pm but you know what i mean................Harry?

Well Well interesting topic this one, lets go back a couple of years or so when i trialled and failed, even though that current season i was in the top 10 of the best league in Oxford, i was also in the top 10 the following season, so i would say i had a hic-up at the trials, i'll be honest and say that i underestimated my opponents that day thinking i would qualify, although no one stood out whom i played won or lost against.

So forward on a couple of years and Tom Weeks attends the trials and a person who i rate as a quality player, but he fails as well, BUT he is offered a wildcard, i would of agreed if he could not attend trials because of work, bereavement or similar reasons then i would sanction a wildcard for him, but he failed like me and that should of been it for another year, not sure how Tom got on before & after trials in the Thursday league, but rules are rules, he had his chance as i did and failed. A clear case of 'one rule for one, one for another'........as i'd always thought.

So there were many 'B' team players the year i trialled that were retained on there previous seasons exploits reaching the required amount of points to be kept on, some will alway be 'B' team players, As well as 'Committee' & 'Capt' players who qualify to play because.......er there on the committee of some league & some who want to be Capt, Millhouse you told me that night in the Tandem you were upset because.....was it JFK had taken the captaincy from you? Then when Ash walked in you disapeared you obviously did not want to be seen talking to me. Also there was the 'Joint Managers' which i'd say qualifies 2 to select themselves!

And since Marcus has resigned as joint manager of the County, not sure what the reasons were, cant be bothered to trawl through posts to find out.

So Milhouse good topic you started here. maybe you may have an answer why i was not offered a wildcard?

-- Edited by Centenary Bhoy at 23:37, 2006-08-17

JFK · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

Firstly welcome back C'Boy - there may be life in the forum yet!!

For one I personally agree with your sentiments regarding places being available for people who do well in most wins. Top 2 of Thursday premier to qualify if they wish maybe. However, you cannot select a whole team based on that criteria alone. There are more than a few flaws. Just the Thursday League? Just the Premier Division? It is not easy to just come to the region and start playing in a premier Thursday side from the point of view of new players wanting to join county. Secondly, the team is Oxfordshire not Oxford (very common mistake!). You can make a good case for the Thursday League being the best league in Oxford (though i think the Monday is closing fast) but what about Abingdon leagues, Banbury leagues etc? Are you saying that if you live the other side of Banbury you really have to play every week in a league based up to 30 miles away if you want the best chance of playing for your County? Who decides the top league of the region for a given year?

The wildcard!! - You can just wade in and make the seemingly valid point of one rule for x; another for y if you want but if only it was that simple. How do you pick a successful county side for Oxfordshire? Yes Pete Lofts has (very interesting btw!) given an insight into Berkshire's (who ... let's face it ... have had a shed load more success than we have!) methods. There are however very different circumstances to Oxford's current position that makes replication of those methods no sure way of guaranteeing success. Just for starters, there are the forces within OCPF only too happy for it to fail and not to enjoy success. You only have to listening to some of the misinformation and wrong assumptions given by other counties / players/ officials of the state of Oxfordshire pool to realise we have a problem within!

Option 1 - You can hand pick a side. They all have places until they no longer want to play or someone replaces someone who is believed to be better. Trouble is who plays God?

Option 2 - Entirely Trial and result based. The fairest way. Sadly though, in 1 frame pool and in such a small number of frames you are never going to get all the best players through trials. You will always end up with some players that just had a bit of luck and a great day beyond their station

Option 3 - Slight Hybrid of the two. A clear open way for access to the County side, but also a little room for managers to manoeuvre a better side. (Again subjective - so open to criticism and personal view point!)

The previous 2 years saw OCPF operate on option 2. My personal view at the time was that was fairest and correct - trouble is, let's be honest, total fairness wins you f*** all. I think 3 is better. Several years ago, we operated more like option 1 and the A team collapsed when no one could be arsed to turn up any more. You can't make people turn up, nor can you make people play County. All you can do is find a balance of a fair system, one that hopefully gains the respect of players but one that might also win something. Chicken and egg; it is always easier to administer a winning team with success on your side. We have the players. We have the talent.

The wildcard was an attempt to do this. No one lost out. Everyone that trialled and was successful has played. TW was an addition, not a substitution. We felt we needed an extra option. As it happens it hasn't worked out that well - unfortunately the human race is not born with hindsight installed.

You always bring up the committee thing. Yes committee members are retained (Treasurer, Men's managers (2), ladies manager/captain, president, soc rep). These posts are 2 years and come with differing degree of problems/commitments. Just because a committee member is retained doesn't mean they will play. Playing as manager/captain etc does make it harder - retention is the only reward for what can be a hell of a lot of work ... cost ... general ball ache!

The real truth is there is no easy answer or solution that will satisfy everyone or every avenue. People have come up with very good suggestions for improving OCPF ... but come AGM time ... where are both the suggestions and those suggesting them? It is always easier to pick holes and criticise than to work on improving and finding answers

GOD · Veteran Poster (Pots the first red)

JFK wrote:

Option 1 - You can hand pick a side. They all have places until they no longer want to play or someone replaces someone who is believed to be better. Trouble is who plays God?

I do believe thats me!!!!

The Undertaker · Regular Poster (Wins the toss)

GOD wrote:

JFK wrote:

Option 1 - You can hand pick a side. They all have places until they no longer want to play or someone replaces someone who is believed to be better. Trouble is who plays God?

I do believe thats me!!!!

I also reckon you need me to deal with them when they fail GOD !

Minx · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Centenary Bhoy wrote:

...As well as 'Committee' & 'Capt' players who qualify to play because.......er there on the committee of some league & some who want to be Capt...

...Also there was the 'Joint Managers' which i'd say qualifies 2 to select themselves!...

Just to a brief observation to address a fleeting point in your post Centenary Buoy.

There may have been a problem in the past with people attempting to use a committe post to keep their squad place but not with the committee in place now.

Pleasingly, this year 7 out of the 8 current committee members qualified for retention in the squad by right through their team performance in the previous year. Infact, the majority of the committee make the retention mark year on year because they tend to be the county's most commited and enthusiastic players.

I am new to the committee and I wont be tagged with that label particularly if you consider my post [Social Events Rep] a 'weak' reason for retention. - my stats are nothing to be ashamed of anyway I'm on the committee for one reason only - because I want to make Oxford County Pool a great team to be involved with.

...Interestingly Malc is the only committee member who wouldn't have been retained anyway! ...

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

Minx wrote:

...Interestingly Malc is the only committee member who wouldn't have been retained anyway! ...

WHY Interestingly that’s beyond me another dig ?

But at last I can now bring up my point, that has always been overlooked.

I was and am still under the impression that internationals, (yes I’m still one of them even at my grand old age) ONLY had to play a certain percentage of matches/frames to be RETAINED for the following season, that is as long as their country that they are playing for in turn retains them. (please don’t forget this is NOT me but rules within their constitution)

I think a lot of the committee and older players know my feelings on playing county pool, and was disappointed this season when told that I now have to play 51% of the matches, (which is now 5 matches and 1 frame or 16 frames in total) compared to the previous 2 matches (6 frames) but I cant have everything …. can I

when representing the EPA international side “BIG HEAD” only had to be AVAILABLE for 50% of the matches and NOT PLAY at all.

P.S. John shouldn’t I be coloured in GREEN from the start of the season on the stats.

JFK · Senior Poster (Nominates their colour)

Must admit i didn't realise that the ECPF (or whatever their new name is) had the power to tell counties what to do in this way. If it is right then I'll whack out the green ink straight away!!

However, if you really don't want to play for Oxfordshire I'm sure we can come to some arrangement where we write you a sick note or something - better that than waste both our time and effort.

['and older players know my feelings on playing county pool'] Rest assured ... I know they do!

Undertaker - Do you take advance bookings .... I think I'm going to need a slot ... around say ... late March next year!

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

JFK wrote:

Undertaker - Do you take advance bookings .... I think I'm going to need a slot ... around say ... late March next year!

Going somewhere JFK

The Undertaker · Regular Poster (Wins the toss)

Well I have a problem at the moment with my work force, Grim has let some of them go to dig up lost records in the Pool world. When they return I am sure we can talk again hopefully should be soon otherwise I might just bury them as well ? How many plots do you need sir ?

-- Edited by The Undertaker at 14:48, 2006-09-22

The Undertaker · Regular Poster (Wins the toss)

Luckylewis wrote:

JFK wrote:

Undertaker - Do you take advance bookings .... I think I'm going to need a slot ... around say ... late March next year!

Going somewhere JFK

The last I looked JFK was safe and sound in the presidential area of the cemetary ? Are you saying he has escaped from his resting place where he has been since the early 1960's... I will get the brothers Grim on the case.

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

The Undertaker wrote:

I might just buty them as well ?

Beefy · Ultimate Poster (Breaks off in decider)

Luckylewis wrote:

P.S. John shouldn’t I be coloured in GREEN from the start of the season on the stats.

No I don't think so, I thought you had to retain your England Place at the end of the season before being gauranteed a county place. May be I am wrong but have to agree with the 51% rule though.....

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

Beefy wrote:

Luckylewis wrote:

but have to agree with the 51% rule though.....

I still liked the old EPA ruling of available rather than having to play 51% of the matches, of cause it all depends on the internationals frame of mind when playing their matches.

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

Beefy wrote:

Luckylewis wrote:

P.S. John shouldn’t I be coloured in GREEN from the start of the season on the stats.

No I don't think so, .....

Ok then, when would of MY name been coloured in in GREEN as a retained member of the county squad, and when ?.

YoungGun · Occasional Poster (Racking up the balls)

beefy i need to ask a favour, is there any chance that i could get a new shirt please, if so could u please contact me with the price an stuff please, much appreiciated, (cant spell lol) cheers mate

Centenary Bhoy · Regular Poster (Wins the toss)

Centenary Bhoy wrote:

Here it is 'Sammy'

Well Well interesting topic this one, lets go back a couple of years or so when i trialled and failed, even though that current season i was in the top 10 of the best league in Oxford, i was also in the top 10 the following season, so i would say i had a hic-up at the trials, i'll be honest and say that i underestimated my opponents that day thinking i would qualify, although no one stood out whom i played won or lost against.

So forward on a couple of years and Tom Weeks attends the trials and a person who i rate as a quality player, but he fails as well, BUT he is offered a wildcard, i would of agreed if he could not attend trials because of work, bereavement or similar reasons then i would sanction a wildcard for him, but he failed like me and that should of been it for another year, not sure how Tom got on before & after trials in the Thursday league, but rules are rules, he had his chance as i did and failed. A clear case of 'one rule for one, one for another'........as i'd always thought.

Again i had no problem at the time when i failed at the trials, but like TW at that current time i was in the Top 5/10 (which i remained both seasons before/after the trials) of the most wins but was not offered a wildcard, but for 'some reason' TW was.

The Chin · Senior Poster (Pots off the break)

I can't believe you lot are still talking about this!!

ilovethenewrules · Occasional Poster (Racking up the balls)

i once took a frame off mark griffiths at the kite is that good enough for a wild card?