Veterans League
Last month (28 May) I reported on the last round of the Julie Fuller Trophy when there was some confusion about the result of the Brockholes 'A' v Thongsbridge 'C' tie. That report included notice of a heated exchange of views regarding the eligibility of one of the Thongsbridge team. This resulted in the League Secretary later amending the result on Bowlsnet to a 21-0 win for the Brockholes player.
This reversed the result of the tie and meant that the Brockholes team progressed and are shown on Bowlsnet as the team winning through to the next round. As forecasted the Thongsbridge team and in particular the League's Vice-President didn't take that reversal well and is expected to lodge an appeal against that result at the League's Management Committee meeting tomorrow (Monday 12 June).
That HuddWeb report of 28 May covered all the match reports and also said ....
There was some confusion in the Brockholes 'A' v Thongsbridge 'C' tie where Brockholes were belatedly awarded a 21-0 winning score in one of the games as Thongsbridge played a bowler who had not played the minimum number of qualifying League matches and was not even registered with the club. The reversing of the played result in that game affected the outcome of the tie which then saw the Brockholes team progress through to Round 2 by a 63-56 aggregate win score.
The losing team has not accepted this position. I can only point out that the League's Vice-President and the League Secretary were both present at the match with divided loyalties with the opposing teams. I don't think we have heard the last of this with a Management Committee meeting on 12 June the likely next stage which is only four days before the next round of the competition with Netherton Con awaiting the eventually declared winner.
Episode 3 of this epic thriller will appear here next week with Netherton Con waiting to learn which team they will face in Friday's Round of the Last 16. But will that be the final episode?
ok,lets have some facts. thongsbridge asked for dispensation to play a bowler who had not played any qualifying league games required to meet the criteria for the round of the julie fuller. i granted them dispensation, on the day of the match it was noticed that the bowler in question was not a registered bowler for 2023.he had been deleted off thongsbridge registered list (along with 16 other bowlers at the end of 2021. what amazes me is that the thongsbridge captain thought that the dispensation also allowed him to play a non registered bowler. he also stated that he ASSUMED that the bowler was still registered. as league secretary i cant believe that this is being brought to a…