Shepley propose change to 50% rule
- Veterans League
- Sep 6, 2022
- 3 min read
League News
Shepley have forwarded a proposed rule change to the Veterans League as regards the 50% rule which is reproduced below. In essence this looks to delete the 50% rule and replace with an amended version of the previous Starred Bowlers rule. This change will be discussed and voted on at the Half-Year Meeting to be held at Meltham S&CC at 2 pm on Monday 17 October 2022.
Suggested rule change proposed by Shepley Bowling Club Seconded by Netherton Cons and Clayton West bowling clubs. Dated 25 Aug 2022
The current “50% played” rule was introduced to help limit clubs in using top level Div 1 & 2 10-man players in the 6-man competition. This has helped prevent clubs “parachuting” in some of their best players towards the end of the season to improve a 6-man team’s final position.
The 50% rule has however created a number of unintended issues:
Significant administrative burden for team captains
Exclusion of large tranches of players from 6-man teams beyond the mid-point of the season, many of whom are far from top level players.
An unlevel playing field as not all clubs entered in the 6-man league have a 10-man team.
Div 1 & 2 players with dual club membership escaping the rule and playing fully in both 10-man and 6-man competitions.
Too many walk-overs due to clubs being unable to find a full team. Points gifted, rather than gained on merit, skew the competition.
With the above in mind Shepley Bowling Club, seconded by Netherton Cons and Clayton West bowling clubs, would like to raise the following proposals to modify the HVBA rules ahead of the 2023 season.
To revert to the previous “Starred Player” system
Should 1. above be supported by the Council, it is further proposed to modify the “Starred player” system to account for clubs of different sizes. The original approach identified 5 starred players from every club regardless of club size. This makes it disproportionally harder for smaller clubs to maintain multiple teams and risks leagues shrinking.
The proposed modification to the original “Starred player” system is:
For clubs registering 10-man teams in Div 1 and/or Div 2 then:
Clubs with up to 30 team players registered have 3 players starred in each of their Div1&2 10-man teams. This to be based on the total number of registered players across all the club’s 10-man teams in all divisions. The players starred being 3 singles.
Clubs with over 30 team players registered have 5 starred players in each of their Div1&2 10-man teams. This to be based on the total number of registered players across all the club’s 10-man teams in all divisions. The players starred being 3 singles and 2 from pairs.
No starred player may play in a lower 10-man or any 6-man team. This includes starred players with dual membership who cannot play in a lower 10-man team or in any 6-man team for any club.
If a club’s number of registered players changes during the season, such as for player transfers and new players, then the number of starred players will, if affected, change with immediate effect. Clubs will not however be permitted to de-register players during the season for the purpose of reducing their number of starred players.
3. Regardless of the final decision on the rules to tie Div 1 & 2 10-man players, it is proposed that the prevailing rule should in future apply equally to players with dual membership, such that any player tied to a Div 1 or 2 10-man team cannot bowl for a lower 10-man team or any 6-man team of any club.
The Management Committee are also proposing their own change to this rule, along with a lot of others, which we will share with you later today. If you would like to add any comment about any aspect of this proposal then feel free to do so using the facility to comment at the foot of this posting either as a website member or anonymous guest.





It shouldn't need a rule change to stop dual membership players getting around the 50% rules. The Match Play rule 2b already says that once the season has started you need written permission from the Management Committee to transfer from one club to another. Looks pretty clear, the first club you bowl for you are tied to from the start of the season. So why hasn't the Committee acted when it is obvious some players are routinely swapping between clubs, such as Lowerhouses and Honley Con, on a weekly basis? It's even more surprising that no action has been taken for breaking rule 2b considering the constant flip flopping between clubs is being done to avoid complying with another rule.…