League changed from 4 person to 3 person teams

[Crawf]

One of my leagues has just reached the end of its season and has traditionally been a 4 person team league. During the course of this season, we've had a number of drop outs etc, leaving us with only 2 teams which have 4 members.

Rather than recruiting one new member for each of the other teams, the consensus seems to be that the league is changed to 3 person teams for the new season.

While I am slightly biased (I don't want to break up my existing 4 person team) I don't agree that the numbers should be reduced without even trying to recruit new people. I acknowledge that it can be difficult to recruit new players that will stick around for the whole season though.

Does anyone have any compelling arguments for or against? It just feels like the beginning of the end if we keep reducing the teams, rather than adding to them. Happy to be proven wrong though!

 

[Roysa]

hmmm tough one.... was it put to a vote? or was it just "decided"??

How many teams have 3 people only, surely if its less than half its easier to fill these teams than reduce the ones that still have 4 people?

 

[mb600]

i bowl in both 4 and 3 person team leagues.

its a necessary evil i think. teh most logical thing to do is go to 3 peopel per team.
but voice your opinion and ask them not to change it.

if it chanegs there will still be bowlers who drop out and teams will be not full.

but going to 3 peopel per team has one plus.
if the centre is full of league bowlers.
no pain in the butt social ones can come in and disrupt your night.

 

[grumpie]

You're not talking about Pacesetters by any chance? Sure do miss those good old days. :rockon:

I know we had the same issue in that league last time the economy was in a slump. We opted to have less teams but keep it as 4 person. The consensus was that it was harder to build back up to 4 person again. We made sure though that the teams that only had 3 bowlers were not penalised for having a vacancy.

Eventually the league grew again to the point where we just about doubled the teams!

It may not work in all instances but we had a lot of die hard bowlers who had 100% attendance for the season.

Liz

 

[Geoff300]

This is a problem in Bowling Centres for many years
We all need to get people to come and Bowl to join a league, which
does not happen very often
We need Bowling Centre Staff to do the same, which does not happen
Many moons ago I can recall being on a waiting list to join a league.
Not sure on how to fix it but I think it is everyones issue to address

 

[grumpie]

but I think it is everyones issue to address

So true !! That was the reason we were able to rebuild again as recruiting was a joint effort between the league bowlers and the centre staff.

Liz

 

[Tiger]

I've played in two leagues where the numbers of players in teams have been altered.
The first was Sponsors League, which ran as a 5-person team league from 1963-1999.
This used to be the biggest league in the state with the most high credentialled players but in the final year or so it was noticed that most teams seemed to be struggling to fill the fifth player (it was about 16x5 at the time), at the same time another league was offering a much bigger prize fund and the centre was very gung-ho on getting the league following Sponsors (DAP Computer League - whose president was none other then Mr Kelly's son off Hey Dad! ) on earlier to allow social bowlers on to the lanes.
Centre management decided that Sponsors would drop down to 4-person teams as of the start of the 2000 season, many were clearly unhappy with the decision commenting that they felt that the centre cared more about social bowlers than of the league bowlers and many walked out and never came back.
A number of others defected to Centre League where the prize funds were greater and the result of all of this was that Sponsors League started the 2000 season with only eight teams (many incomplete) and a vote was held as to whether the league should continue or fold up.
It continued (now in its 48th year), but has not got anywhere near the same level of competition, players, prestige or value as it once had as other leagues have gradually usurped it.
That move IMO killed what was once a great league but in the end it probably would've happened anyway with the numbers of players dropping each year and bigger prize funds wooing players to other leagues. Unfortunate, but times have changed.

The other was my current league on Sunday nights, this was a doubles league and was running quite successfully under that format and was quite cheap too, a little bit of politics started to creep in with the old power-struggles (as it always does in bowling ) and it was then decided to turn it into a trios league.
Now we have the unfortunate situation of more than half the teams struggling to fill all three spots, only turning up when it suits them, one or two habitually pre-bowling on the easier night leagues conditions during the week if they need higher scores to win.
That league was doing was extremely well for quite a long time until the politics crept in and they went to 3's - it really isn't much chop anymore (I find it hard to maintain enthusiasm)- only reason I play in it still is because the conditions are a lot more difficult and because it's my only free night of a week.

 

[Roysa]

You know its funny how you speak of politics, i bowl in 2 very friendly leagues and whilst there has been change in both wether it be in price or structure it has never been a problem as the president and treasurer of the leagues have always communicated well to the bowlers. Maybe thats what is missing causing some issues... a little communication goes a long way in removing the politics.