Rules & Changes

Let's get rid of the coin toss to determine who breaks first. Give the visiting team the option to break first or defer. Playoffs could lag for the break...

I think we should eliminate the coin toss, and have the visiting team choose which break they want!

Rick Delgado wrote:I think we should eliminate the coin toss, and have the visiting team choose which break they want!

Y'know, that's what we've done this entire season, seems to work out well and the visiting team appreciates the option.

I like the idea of eliminating the coin toss. It wastes time. We could have the the home team break 2 & 4 or 1 & 3.
Doesn't make any difference and everyone would have the same 50/50 breaks. This could be put on the score sheets so no one would forget.. If we want we could keep the the coin toss for the finals.. feel free to post your ideas....
Bill

While we are at the rules, why don't we change the rule about jumping object balls off the table. Right now the rules are:
Scratch on the Break
A scratch occurs when the cue ball is pocketed or hit off of the table. It is a foul to scratch on the break.
Scratch after the Break
A scratch occurs when the cue ball is pocketed or hit off of the table
Balls Hit off of the Table
If any of the shooting player’s object balls are hit off of the table, those balls will be spotted. However, if the shooting player hits any of the opposing player’s object balls off of the table, those balls will be considered pocketed and will stay down. It is a foul to hit the cue ball off of the table. Hitting a ball, other than the cue ball, off of the table, while simultaneously making the called object ball, is not a foul.

I am suggesting that we make it a foul to hit any ball off the table and the foul penalty would be ball in hand for the opposing player. this would put our league in the same game as the most of the pool world.

The BCA tournament rule is:
OBJECT BALLS JUMPED OFF THE TABLE
If any object ball is jumped off the table, it is a foul and loss of turn, unless it is the 8-ball, which is a loss of game. Any jumped object balls are not re-spotted

The APA rule is:
Balls on the Floor - If the 8-ball is knocked on the floor, it is loss of game. Object balls knocked on the floor are spotted. If the spot is taken, the ball is placed on a line directly behind the spot as close as possible. Knocking a ball other than the cue ball on the floor is not a foul.

So what do you think the BCA rule or APA rule for IEPL?
Let me know by your posts.
BIll

While we are at rule changes, what about legal play rules and adding players? The applicable rules now are:
Legal Teams
Each team roster may have 4, 5, 6 or 7 players

Substitute Players
Any team can compete with four (4) players and 1, 2 or 3 substitutes. To add or change players on a team roster, write the player(s) name(s) on the back of score sheet any time during the first three- (3) weeks of the session. Additional players may be added after the third week of the session in emergency situations only. After the third week of the session, The Chairman or Scorekeeper must be notified before a match begins for a new player to be allowed to play. If the captain of the team is unable to contact the Chairman or Scorekeeper before the match begins, another Committee member may be contacted. This does not mean that the new player will automatically be accepted. The Committee will review the circumstances of the emergency and the captain will be notified with the decision. A written request on the back of the score sheet must be submitted for all roster changes. If a team has six (6) or more players on the roster an emergency change to the team roster will not be granted under any circumstances. In order to qualify to play in the playoffs at the end of the session, substitutes must have played at least two matches during the session.

Illegal Players
It is illegal to use a player that is not listed with the Scorekeeper. Game points will be deducted for each game played by illegal players. If another team is suspected of using an illegal player don’t make a big deal of it. Play all of the games in the match. To prevent illegal players from playing, the score sheets are checked each week. If a name does not appear on the team’s roster and the player has not been approved to play, the games that were played by the illegal player will be automatically forfeited.

Many team captains have been in the position of not having enough players to fill their roster on game night.

I am suggesting:
1. Teams consist of as many players as necessary to have four(4) players shoot in one night. IMHO (in my humble opinion) it is better to play than win by forfeit. So bring on Fisher, Villarreal, Corr, Immonen, Thorsten Hohmann and Mike Sigel, I would welcome the chance to play them all.
2. That players can be added at anytime without board approval.
3. The only Illegal players are those who have been banned by the league for conduct or other serious reasons.
Let me know by your posts.
Bill

I like the BCA rule for the simple reason that spotting an object ball that has left the table could obstruct the opponent, who has ball-in-hand and doesn't really benefit from having another ball on the table that MAY get in the way.

I am for the BCA rule.

Rosters: Expand the rosters to ten players. The wide open approach would mean pulling someone off the bar to shoot because someone didn't show up. It's better than forfeiting but, I can see having to explain rules during the match and maxed time-outs.

Good teams that are managed right don't have problems with signed up subs. As a captain, if I had an ongoing problem putting 4 on the floor I'd consolidate with another team or just go to another team myself.

I am OPPOSED to the ROSTER RULE CHANGES other than expanding them to 10 players. It is a just shoot a match from the seat of your pants approach that dilutes the quality of play and compromises league integrity. There are solutions to being short players and it starts with being ORGANIZED and READY TO GO according to the calendar.

How about a list of subs that could shoot for any team during the season, i.e., a captain could telephone a shooter from the sub pool. Players who are already designated as substitutes on their respective teams would automatically qualify to be on call to shoot for ANY team. Captains could furnish their subs' names and phone numbers @ signups and for 3 weeks after that.

D. Obmann wrote:I like the BCA rule for the simple reason that spotting an object ball that has left the table could obstruct the opponent, who has ball-in-hand and doesn't really benefit from having another ball on the table that MAY get in the way.

I am for the BCA rule.

Rosters: Expand the rosters to ten players. The wide open approach would mean pulling someone off the bar to shoot because someone didn't show up. It's better than forfeiting but, I can see having to explain rules during the match and maxed time-outs.

Good teams that are managed right don't have problems with signed up subs. As a captain, if I had an ongoing problem putting 4 on the floor I'd consolidate with another team or just go to another team myself.

I am OPPOSED to the ROSTER RULE CHANGES other than expanding them to 10 players. It is a just shoot a match from the seat of your pants approach that dilutes the quality of play and compromises league integrity. There are solutions to being short players and it starts with being ORGANIZED and READY TO GO according to the calendar.

How about a list of subs that could shoot for any team during the season, i.e., a captain could telephone a shooter from the sub pool. Players who are already designated as substitutes on their respective teams would automatically qualify to be on call to shoot for ANY team. Captains could furnish their subs' names and phone numbers @ signups and for 3 weeks after that.

This is one good idea. maybe someone else will come up with another or something totally different. I hope so.
Bill

I agree with removing the coin flip and letting the visiting team choose the break cycle.

I have been pondering this rule since I started playing IEPL. The forfeit of a team gains the team 4 win for not showing up. I have a problem with this, only because if a team does show to play and losses 13 or 14 games the stats stay at 13-3 or 14-2 against that team. Why are we helping a team that has no interest in being at the table to play, with a 4 win "forfeit". In my opinion a forfeit is a forfeit, 0 wins. 0-16 should be the record for a forfeit.
I hope everyone that enjoys playing and improving the IEPL agrees.
Agree or disagree? Let's hear it.

Luke

Disagree because if a last place team decides not to show up against a first place team, then the first place team runs away with a 16-0, and backs into an advantage. It's bad enough with 12 wins.

Luke Routhieaux wrote:I have been pondering this rule since I started playing IEPL. The forfeit of a team gains the team 4 win for not showing up. I have a problem with this, only because if a team does show to play and losses 13 or 14 games the stats stay at 13-3 or 14-2 against that team. Why are we helping a team that has no interest in being at the table to play, with a 4 win "forfeit". In my opinion a forfeit is a forfeit, 0 wins. 0-16 should be the record for a forfeit.
I hope everyone that enjoys playing and improving the IEPL agrees.
Agree or disagree? Let's hear it.

Luke

Actual rule is: forfeit team 0 playing team 12...
It used to be 0 vrs 16 and then 8 vrs 8 .....
Rules Legal teams page 9
If less than two players from a team are present, the illegal team will forfeit the entire match and receive a twelve (12) to zero (0) loss. If neither team is legal, both teams will receive a score of eight 8 to eight 8 for the match. If both teams have players that are missing and the missing players are scheduled to play each other, both teams will receive ½ of a win for the games that aren’t played.

We, the board finally came to this decision several years ago.... It really dos not matter what is put on the team score sheets.... The scorekeeper.... should correct it to 0 vrs 12.... or 1/2 whatever is applicable.

I, of course being on the board, think this is almost fair to the rest of the teams in that division...
However, the forfeiting team still has the chance to make up the forfeited game. That would make everything right....
Bill[u]