Rules/Legal Lineup Question

Posted by: Mkirchie

Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/25/16 08:32 AM

Hey everyone, looking for some input here on a potential ruling that affects two teams in my league. It is a mixed league that requires at least one member of each gender on the team for a legal lineup and subs must keep the lineup legal. This is in our bylaws, the rule was just reinstated this season after a few years where it was mixed, but not required to have at least one of each gender. During the second week of league, there was one team with an incomplete lineup, 3 male, one female, and a vacancy. For that week, they had a male sub for the female bowler who was not there that week making their lineup 4 men and a vacancy. During the third week of league on Friday, another team was questioning the legality of that lineup and the team that had bowled the team with the lineup in question brought it up to the league president. There is now a potential forfeit for that week for the lineup in question.

This brought up an interesting debate to be resolved at a captain's meeting before league next week. What is the gender of a vacancy in a mixed league? Our league president believes that it isn't considered either gender. The woman who runs our desk on league nights, who has been involved in bowling for a very long time believes it is considered to be both genders and this shouldn't even be an issue. There is nothing about the gender of a vacancy in our bylaws. One of my teammates brought up the point that a team with four of one gender and a vacancy trying to find a fifth bowler of the opposite gender would not be able to compete until they found the legal fifth bowler, which seems extreme.

What do you consider the gender of a vacancy score? Is it neither or both? On a side note, this is a handicap league and not a money league. Not that it changes the answer about the gender of a vacancy, but I'm always amazed at the rules issues that we have in what is supposed to be a fun league.

Mark
Posted by: steveA

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/25/16 12:38 PM

Its an interesting question but i think its not the vacancy that's the issue, that can be any gender , but your bylaw as I read it , requires at least one member of each gender on the team for a legal lineup and subs must keep the lineup legal. So If a team has only one of a particular gender then that person must bowl each week or be replaced by some one of the same gender.
It's maybe a crazy rule for a fun handicap league but if its stated mixed gender then there's no way round it , unless you change it to any gender on the teams all handicapped which is what my two league nights are.Mind you top scratch scores are not dominated by one gender, they just can't win both scratch and handicap trophies from the same game or series.
Posted by: mmalsed

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/26/16 12:06 PM

so it sounds, to me, like this was a problem that came up in the past, and was abused.

A mixed league that stacked themselves using subs that made them an all-male team.

A league can be handicap AND money (we're in one now) and any league that has competitors in it can be very competitive, so rules help give everyone a sandbox in which to play.

To me, VACANT is gender-neutral (meaning neither) - it should not be considered for anything, and in fact should be penalized so as to encourage a team (or league) to find someone to fill it. It should definitely not be considered male or female to fit the legal lineup requirement. If so, this would enable an all-male team to be legal with one vacancy. That's not fair to the rest of a mixed league (when "mixed" is required).

And I don't think the subs make that much of a difference - as long as the minimum requirement is there. This means that if the solo lady has to be absent, then a female sub is required. If one of the guys is absent, either male or female sub would work. If both of the guys are absent, at least one male sub would be required.

I'm not hugely in favor of forced mixed leagues - I'm more in favor of a maximum entering team average as this encourages high average bowlers to get lower average bowlers to join them. smile
Posted by: Mkirchie

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/26/16 12:54 PM

I wouldn't say it was abused intentionally, but there were some occasions in the last 3-4 seasons while we had no rule for one of each gender that some teams did have an all male lineup. I personally never viewed it as an issue, the reason we changed to no requirement for those seasons was because we have been losing teams at an alarming rate. We lost around 2 teams per season for 5 seasons from a peak of 22 down to 12 last season. We have 12 again this season, but only because our secretary fought hard to get new bowlers to sign up for the league, otherwise we would have been down to 9 or 10.

There are certain circumstances that I don't want to talk about relating to the vote to change back to the current requirement. I will say that it occurred during a very heated league meeting at the end of last season with team composition as one of the issues. I don't see any possibility of a cap either, when we discussed going from a 5 to 4 person per team league entire existing teams that didn't want to break up threatened to quit the league all together.

I'm happy that none of this affects my team and that I'm not my team captain. It will be an entertaining meeting, I'd like to bring some popcorn and be a spectator. laugh

Mark
Posted by: goobee

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/26/16 01:23 PM

Yep, one of the things that discourage and break up leagues all too often. Controversy.
Posted by: steveA

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/26/16 04:13 PM

If the handicap is set right then discuss changing to a mix gender league but don't make it compulsory, it can still be fun and competitive and an all male team won't necessarily be top dog, sounds like you should go back to what you've had the last few seasons rather then push people away . Looks like some one is trying hard to encourage female bowlers , all good for the sport , but it seems the cost is very high.
Posted by: Mkirchie

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/26/16 06:03 PM

Originally Posted By: steveA
Looks like some one is trying hard to encourage female bowlers

I'd have no problem if this was the reason, I believe it is more due to someone who feels that their team doesn't have a fair chance. This someone is the same person who brought up the rule change in the meeting and is the same person who called out the team with the illegal lineup a week later.

Mark
Posted by: steveA

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/27/16 07:14 PM

Can't see why a team should say they don't have a chance if its handicapped properly , we did have the handicap set at 220 couple of seasons ago, mixed friendly league.One team ran away with the league won it 3/4 of the way into the season but they'd 3 players over 235 averages, their B game was wining against people scoring average we upped the start point to 250 , they haven't won since and haven't signed up this year for some reason. We've also implemented a rule that if a player averages above the start point, then it will be adjusted.
Posted by: 82Boat69

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/27/16 07:24 PM

USBC has shown that handicap needs to be around 113% of the highest average in the league to make it even. Those numbers say a good bowler shoots over their average more often than a bad bowler shoots over theirs.

The problem with handicaps that make teams even is there will always be those who want to take advantage. Sandbagging has always been a problem in bowling.

The rules that most leagues have in place calculate averages after the first 21 games and then an average is based on total pins for the rest of the year. This mentality is asking for problems.

Instead, average should be based on the last 21 games bowled starting with week 1. Except for obvious injury, a 5 pin drop rule should be added. These 2 rules remove any incentive to sandbag.

Getting them passed is the hard part.
Posted by: Mkirchie

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/27/16 09:32 PM

Originally Posted By: SteveA
Can't see why a team should say they don't have a chance if its handicapped properly

I'd agree that is one of the issues in the league. We've only ever used some percentage of the team difference for handicap, currently it is at 90% and it used to be 85%. Handicap is also a hot issue before the start of every season, but no one has ever suggested individual. I think once it was brought up to make it 100% of the difference, but it didn't get support and no vote was taken.

Originally Posted By: 82Boat69
The rules that most leagues have in place calculate averages after the first 21 games and then an average is based on total pins for the rest of the year. This mentality is asking for problems.

We're only the first 9 games before we reset, then updates based on total pins every week after that. We used to just reset bowlers with established averages after week 1. I agree, it can lead to problems even if maybe not intentional. Some of the better bowlers in the league don't touch their stuff over the summer, so they're a little rusty (supposedly). I like the 21 game idea better, it would have helped me and thus our team. I'm at 238 after the first 3 weeks, and that is most likely not sustainable for me.

Mark
Posted by: steveA

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 09/28/16 12:19 PM

Individual handicaps are good , means each player has some thing to work towards also depends on how you award points, we've player one v player one 1pt each game plus 1pt for the series;2V2 and so on. Team score each game and overall score. Plus bonus point for each team game 750 & above . Bonus point overall above 2250. Means there's always some thing to work for, you could lose all games and pick up bonus points. Not sure if its a common system but it works for us.
Posted by: BowlerBill

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 10/03/16 09:42 PM

In my opinion, if the bowler who can't make it is a woman, the sub should be a woman. That removes all controversy. Lot's of people sandbag on purpose and a lot of teams will bring in a ringer when the week they are going up against a strong team.
Posted by: Mkirchie

Re: Rules/Legal Lineup Question - 10/03/16 09:54 PM

The meeting was last Friday, it was voted that the team in question would be allowed to keep their points from the week where the lineup wasn't legal. I felt this was the right decision since no foul play was meant. It should have been brought up before league started the night it happened, not a week later. I believe we are keeping the rule that any subs must keep the lineup legal from now on, which I am fine with.

Mark