Date: 31 Mar 2006 22:38:36
From: Blue 58
Subject: Thoughts on possible dispute
|
Center offered two leagues on our night.... turnout was low, so the
leagues voted to merge. However, the start dates for these leagues
were a week apart.
Our team happens to be in the group that started a week later, and
have bowled one series less than the other group. We also happen to
be in contention for first place.
I think most would agree that the most sensible solution would be for
the teams that were in the group that started a week later to bowl
another series to even things up... however, if it came down to a
vote, the possibility exists that the other teams in our group simply
wouldn't care because they're down in the standings, and the team in
first will surely vote go in the direction in which benefits them the
most, regardless of fairness.
The USBC rules don't exactly cover this exact situation, but has this
to say regarding postponed games that are not made up:
"When games are ruled null and void, the league secretary figures
final standings on a percentage basis, since all teams have not bowled
the same number of games."
Does everyone else agree that, while the above applies to postponed
games that were not made up, the same position standings should be
applied to our league in the event that we are not given the chance to
bowl a 35th series?
Obviously this should have been addressed when the leagues voted to
merge, but was more than likely something that no one thought of at
the time. Two ways seem fair to me... schedule the 35th series for
those teams that started a week later or figure the standings based on
percentage.... however, a third, but imho unfair, way could garner the
most support since the other teams in contention started the week
earlier and may try & say "No 35th series for you, standings by wins."
|
