Sub-Team KO shock and row

Veterans League

The last 16 teams in the Sub-Team Knock-Out competition played out this week to produce the winning eight teams who progress to the quarter-finals amidst a controversy about the eligibility of two bowlers in one winning team.

First the playing outcomes which saw just one underdog winning against higher-ranking opponents and the handicaps were not the dominant factor. New Mill 'B' are in the bottom three in Division 5 but they saw off Division 4 promotion contenders, Springwood, in convincing style by 140-113 and the scratch scores showed a 117-104 result in favour of the New Mill team. Well done to them.

The rest of the results followed expectations based on current league positions which did not always reflect the current status of all the teams. The pick of the quarter-final ties looks to be the Outlane v Lindley Lib 'B' tie which is a Division 3 team against the Division 4 leaders who have a four point handicap swing as well.

I understand that one winning team is under investigation for playing two ineligible bowlers in the opening two rounds of this year's competition. Both of these players played in the Thongsbridge 'B' team against Primrose Hill Lib and had already played twice for the club's 'A' team in the Team KO competition which is against the League Rules as below.

The bowlers involved played for the 'A' team in the Team KO on 4 May and 15 June. They then played both in the 'B' team in the Sub-Team KO on 27 June and 4 July where they helped the team reach the quarter-finals of this competition where they, presumably, intend to play these bowlers again.

They did not seek, and did not obtain, dispensation from the Competition Secretary to play the bowler in the Sub-Team KO teams. They did inform the Competition Secretary, on the morning of the first breach (27 June) that they intended playing these two bowlers after discussion with the President. Under the League Rules only the Competition Secretary can grant dispensation a fact reinforced by the Management Committee at their last meeting.

It is a dangerous precedent if League Officials are abusing their powers of authority for their own club's benefit but we have no expectation that the Management Committee will apply their own rules based on their record on enforcing their own rules especially when club loyalty comes into play. The League President has no authority to grant dispensation and why was he even approached about this? Why wasn't the Competition Secretary asked about dispensation - maybe because he would see no reason to grant it?

LEAGUE RULES

Team Knock-Out and Subsidiary Team Knock-Out

(c) Team Knockout. Any player(s) having played in the current season's Team Knockout cannot play in any team allocated to the Sub-Team Knockout in the current season. Any other possible player exclusion(s) to this rule must be referred to the Competition Secretary for a final decision.

(d) Sub-Team Knockout. Players will be allowed to move up to play in their clubs Team Knockout if required and move back down to the Sub-Team Knockout team if or when appropriate.

(j) Any team playing an ineligible bowler in a Knock-Out match shall be expelled from that competition for that season. Clubs and players transgressing this rule may be fined as determined by the Management Committee.

RESULTS FROM ROUND 1 (4 July) & DRAW FOR QUARTER-FINALS (3 August)