Revised system has not satisfied all bowlers

Press, 27 January 1979, Page 12

Revised system has not satisfied all bowlers

By

KEVIN McMENAMIN

Lawn bowlers are traditionally a tnild-mannered breed, but when aroused .they can be just as outspoken as any other sporting group which hankers for change.

' The controversy a tew years ago about towelling hats — the wearing of on the green — showed that iowlers were prepared to 'challenge their governing body and this was a fight they eventually won. There were some strong words last summer when ■the New Zealand Bowling Association introduced a section qualifying system for the singles and pairs .at the national championships. Some centres, including Christchurch, followed suit in their tournaments. The system was so full of anomalies that something was dene, but to •many minds it was a palliative not a cure. This season, 't both national and provincial level, the system has remained, the main difference being that xount-backs have been dispensed with in separating players in singles, or teams in pairs, with the Same number of wins. » Under the revised system. entries with two .wins in a section which has no three-game winner 'all qualify. The number is usually two. although three is not unknown. Still, however, there is discontent. One man, with strong views on the subject is

the South Brighton skip, Bernie MacManus, a bowler of enough experience to be heard. MacManus, in a letter to “The Press'’ bowls correspondent, contends that it is about time that the N.Z.B.A. and the Christchurch centre “got their heads out of the sand and took a hard look at the ludicrous roundrobin system applying for the (centre) open singles and pairs.”

According to MacManus, it is simply a matter of luck whether players qualify by differential points or by being a two-game winner in a section which has no three-game winner. Luck may well be a part of bowls, concedes, MacManus, but this system only heightens the element.

MacManus champions the “good old two-life system.” If it was discarded in order to give all players more games (which the section system does) then why not. he asks, use the same system that applies for fours and triples. “Give all players four games on the first day with three and four winners qualifying.. That would be fairer,” he says. There was no reason why four games should not be played the first day, as it was under the two-life system.

What MacManus, and be is not without friends on

this question, is basically getting at is: why shoud some two-game winners qualify and others miss ctut? 'ft all depends on other results in the section, over which the player in question has no control. It is a valid point.

MacManus is not happy either with the practice used by the Christchurch centre of having eight qualifying rounds in triples and fours. Six are enough, he suggests.

His reasons are that eight places an unnecessary strain on clubs and when players are out of contention after the first day they do not mind coming back for a second day. But a third day is asking too much.

In commenting on these views, the chairman of the Christchurch centre’s match committee, Mr Dave Martin, said an attempt had been made this season to silence the criticism of the section system by eliminating the differential method of separating two-game winners. “And I would have thought most bowlers were now quite happy.” In any event, Mr Martin said he believed that from the outset it was only a small minority who were complaining. “Like in any movement, they seem to speak the loudest,” he added. Mr Martin said that to

his knowledge no bowls country in the world used the two-life system any longer. “In Australia and in the other major countries qualifiers are found by the section method.” In respect to MacManus’s proposal of four section rounds with three and four-game winners qualifying, Mr Martin said that while it sounded okay in theory it might not work out too well in practice.

The Christchurch centre was trying to move away from time-limit games, as it has for this season’s open pairs. For the open singles it has extended the time from an hour and half to two hours.

“I think most playe r s would like to see time restrictions done away with above all else,” said Mr Martin.

On the question of six or eight qualifying rounds in triples and fours, Mr Martin said it had long been the Christchurch custom to play eight. The number was reduced to six for the recent Christchurch fours only to give time for players to get to Wellington for the start of the national tournament. Mr Martin said that he and other national councillors were well, aware that the present systems may not be perfect, and that there was always room for improvement. “We will keep looking for a system that will please everyone, but. I can’t guarantee we will find it,” he concluded.